Apple rumored to unveil 3G-capable iPod touch this month - Page 2

Doh. Still think that Apple won't release a device that won't accepted by carriers in US.

Separate points.

1st : waiting for a good workout ipod (running and mountainbiking) which can record my routes. An iphone would do it but is a bit too expensive (without a contract).

2nd: hoping to get rid off my cell contract and go fully skype/facetime/vonage/whatever . Got WiFi at work and at home but in between I could rely on 3G for communication.

Except, of course, that the wireless service would be provided by one of those same phone companies! But I see you are implying Apple might be getting into the wireless service business and competing directly with them. My opinion is "probably not."

at&t has a big wholesale business with devices like the kindle and nook. and texting is old news with imessage coming up. the new profit driver is billing for data usage overages and monthly charges for data only devices like tablets

Perhaps. I think if, true this may be just like nook and kindle, ie you can only access apple related features like iCloud, but you can't go into the wider internet as a whole. That would be a good way to tread the water and see if 3g touch could work out without hurting telecos or the iPhone.

Don't you people have pay as you go sims down there?

I think you may be right but if there is a way they can capture a market that is not yet ready for a monthly cell plan, and which when proven successful, will not cannibalize the cell phone market, then it 'could' happen.

But the only way to 'revolutionize' the cellphone industry would be to create an alternative ... which won't happen.

Doesn't matter. The carriers don't allow any plan but the iPhone's plan on an iPhone.

Dear Mr. Van Winkle! What a hilarious thought! However, while you were sleeping, the phones have actually already undermined the iPod industry!
Sweet Dreams-

I would assume they'd have to increase the battery capacity if they add 3G. they'd have to make the case bigger anyway to fit in the extera 3G components.


I look at it from a slightly different perspective. It's not the voice device that's "extra", it's the data device that's extra. If you had two devices, one voice and one data, and you could take one or both with your when you walk out the door, which one would you leave behind more often? For me, the phone is a must-have and the data device is the nice-to-have. (Especially since a voice only device would be much smaller than any data device.) But when they are combined it's impossible to leave the larger data device behind and still take your phone with you!

A small, ultra-portable, non-smart phone and a 3G iPod touch (with a little bigger screen, thank you) would be the best set-up. The phone would be so small that carrying this "extra" device is not an issue. No concerns about data usage draining my battery and preventing phone calls from getting through. And I can leave the bulkier data device behind when I don't want/need to carry it (running, biking, high-theft environments, etc).

BONUS: You can then talk and surf the web at the same time with Verizon!


If the data plan is a start-stop, pay as you go plan like the iPad, a 3G iPod touch would be a huge advantage over the iPhone. No forced $30/month data package like with the iPhone. A wi-fi only iPhone would be another useful product, but it wouldn't serve the same purpose as a 3G iPod touch.

This could make a ton of sense, provided that it still has a mic so you can do VOIP. I don't make calls often (and my GoogleVoice number is my main number so I can text over wifi) but it would be nice to still have the ability.

Apple has the clout to snub the current system of "voice+text+data" that current smartphones languish in. a push towards pure data would be Awesome.

If the phone cos would sell data only plans for iPhones that would be fine. I asked if I could get a data only plan if I purchased an iPhone 4. The company, Rogers, said no. The only way I could do would be to modify an iPad sim.


A 3G iPod Touch would be good for students. I'm not going to spend $80/mth for an iPhone for each of my children. If the data is the same as it for the iPad here, $35.95 for 5GB, then I would.

Right now I use about 10 minutes of paid voice minutes per month. Having a data-only phone, Viber or Skype, and that would eliminate that usage completely.

The thing is that neither Apple nor carriers do not want a VOIP substitution of iPhone.
If that happens, a lot of people would switch to prepaid data only plan with cheap phone # and service provided by Skype, Ooma, TextFree, GVoice, you name it...

Don't forget that even though it's all data at some level, it's not all given the same priorities. Voice data is given the best QoS to make the calls as useful as possible. Apple's FaceTime protocol suite does this for voice and data but it's still up to the carriers to enable those protocols on their ends, and they could still put their in-house voice server first or even bogart the fastest and best the for QoS throughout their network so that you'll want to pay them to have decent quality voice. I've seen this sort of thing in many areas of networking.

OR...it is just a gateway device to set kids and young adults on the path to owning an iPhone.

1. Sit it in a charging dock where your land line used to sit.
2. The battery life between wifi and 3g is only 10% shorter for 3g on my iphone, why would it be different for the iPod Touch?


Where do you come up with this drivel?

WHAT? I use Skype over 3G GSM every day here in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. Where do people come up with this incorrect information?

OMG. Stupid stupid stupid. You would think Apple would want to add capabilities and bring more people into using the Apple iPhone, not push them away with a gimped, wifi only model. Instead a 3G enabled Touch would be a great gateway device for younger people who are not ready or capable of getting a data plan with an iphone.

1. Because some folks don't want a 2-year commitment.
2. Some folks DO want a data plan and but NOT a minute plan.
3. With iMessage/Google Voice you can do all the texting you want with no texting plan.
4. Some folks want an overall less expensive (not I said overall) device

Just use Google voice with your data plan and you can text to any phone number.

A 3G enabled iPod Touch with ONLY a $25 a month data plan + $5 a month for a Skype number would allow for texting via iMessage/Google Voice, Data Use and talk via Skype.

You do not need a mobile device for that purpose. For instance, I have Ooma and it's a completely free service.


I guess you never owned one. It is substantially thinner and lighter mostly because of reduced battery. If you browse Internet on it or facetime, it dies much faster than the iPhone.

=

Then dump your texting plan and use Google Voice and iMessage.

On the iPhone, Internet use between 3G and WiFi is the difference of 6 hours and 10 hours, respectively. That's an 80% gain for WiFI. That's significant.

However, what makes it even more significant is that for the iPod Touch a data-only cellular service could be completely turned off if using WiFi Unfortunately Apple doesn't state how many hours of WiFI use you can get out of the iPod Touch which is suspect.

1. Yes, I have owned a 1st, 2nd and 3rd gen iPod Touch.
2. While the overall time might be shorter...the effect of reducing the battery life by 10% will be about the same...SO....(arbitrary numbers)

If the iPad normally got 10 hours it would get 1 hour less = 9 hours.
If the iPhone normally got 8 hours it would get .8 hours less = 7.2 hours
If the iPod touch normally got 6 hours it would get .6 hours less = 5.4 hours.

Yes, the time is less, but the ratio is the same, 9/10, hence about a 10% reduction in time.

Simple math...

Also, I gave the advice of using a dock to keep the Touch charged at all times when it is being used as a Skype phone. What does Ooma have to do with keeping the Touch charged when Skype is running?

Actually, that is more like a 68% gain between your 3G and wifi, or a 40% loss.

I don't see that kind of loss with my iPhone.

Your reasons are so, what's the word, above the board.

I had 4 kids in the house over the summer, 2 of mine and 2 nephews, ranging from 3 to 13. All them would rather use my iPhones than my iPod touches. Why? 3G access to Youtube, Internet, etc, for when we are out of WiFi range, and they happened frustratingly a lot.

An iPod touch 3G with data plans like the iPad 3G would be awesome for the kids. Parents would buy it for their young kids. Kids who really don't need phones. Since a 3G model would cost ~$100 more than a WiFi only model, Apple increases their ASPs on iPod or upsells to higher ASP iPhones or iPads. That sounds brilliant to many. They may downsell the otherway, but you can look at it as taking an Android, WP7, or RIM sale away too.

And why do people just read one word, 'GSM', and do not read the qualifiers like GRPS and EDGE, before lashing out?

When I said 'pure' GSM I meant the original GSM standard which had a data rate of 9600 baud (9600 bits per second), which was successively upgraded with GRPS (60 kbit/s), EDGE (about 200 kbit/s). 3G GSM is technically different enough from the original GSM (incl. its extensions) that it required completely separate hardware in phones originally.
Even in the rich world, not all of their GSM network is upgraded to EDGE and only a few GSM networks are even close to full 3G coverage or even have a timetable for full 3G coverage.

My point was not about 3G, it was about the older versions of GSM which still cover wide ranges of the total coverage. VoIP in pre-EDGE networks is pretty difficult and on a poor EDGE network (less than full bars) it can also be dicey.

You don't need a 3G iPod to buy an unlocked iPhone without a 2-year commitment.

You can turn off cellular data on an iPhone in the settings (since iOS 4). You can also turn off additionally the voice part and only have WiFi enabled.

Which is meaningless in the U.S. because no unlocked iPhone can be used on just any plan. You have to have an iPhone plan (unless you're with T-Mobile, then you get no 3G).

Unless you completely deactivated the 3G radio on the iPhone, this is not a valid comparison when trying to guess the addtiional power needed for a 3G iPod touch vs today's wi-fi only version. (I'm not saying you didn't do that, just pointing out that if you didn't the 10% number doesn't apply here.)

Also, it depends on what you are doing and the usage pattern changes that would result with having 3G in your iPod touch. Today, if you aren't using your touch it can go to sleep and conserve power. Or if you are away from a wi-fi network, you also save power. The expected usage pattern for a 3G touch would be that it's always in radio contact with a network, either wi-fi or 3G. Therefore, even if wi-fi and 3G used the exact same power, you'd be connected far more frequently with a 3G iPod, and therefore need more battery capacity to run the radios more freqently during the day.

A software unlocked iPhone 3GS with no warranty or ability to restore the phone via iTunes ($450- $550)... or factory unlocked iPhone 4 ($650 - $750) with warranty costs significantly more than what a 3G iPod Touch would likely cost.

The 3G radio in the iPad cost around $10. If Apple starts to provide iPod Touches with 3G they do not have to raise the price an extra $130 since that was a pure money grab. They can sell them much cheaper than an unlocked iPhone.

What part of saving money don't you understand?

Some countries have made the sale of SIM-locked phones illegal, it has not let to early onset of communism or even the delayed release of the iPhone in those countries. All it takes in the US is just a simple law that makes it illegal for carriers to refuse the use of any of their SIM cards (and the associated plans, pre- or post-paid) in 'non-approved' devices unless they can show clear technical problems. Competition in the mobile network provider is limited enough, you don't need additional limitations and market segregations imposed by the carriers to reduce competition further.

When I am out 3G is on and wifi is off. At home wifi is on and 3G is off. I have compare the usage and if I am using 100% 3G I lose about 10% of my battery time compared to 100% wifi with the same usage. I don't think I can be any clearer.

This could explain the conflicting reports about the shape of the new iPhone 5. I believe the iPhone 5 will retain the form factor of iPhone 4, while the new iPod touch will retain the current form factor.

And why does it cost more? Because Apple can charges the carriers these $650 to $750 for an iPod touch 3G + shortlist of upgraded components, display, compass, GPS, microphone, speakers, larger battery. And why can Apple charge these $650 to $750? Because the carriers make it impossible to buy phone and plan separately and can thus hide this huge markup compared to an iPod touch 3G in 24 monthly charges.


And does Apple have to charge $650 for 16 GB iPhone 4? No, they could charge $450 and still make $100 of profit per handest. So, you could just ask Apple directly to lower the price of the iPhone by $200.


The part where a company voluntarily lowers prices of their products when it hardly manages to produce enough to satisfy demand.

Yes, but why makes things more complicated than necessary, just compare the iPad WiFi and the iPad 3G. Same battery, similar usage pattern to a iPod touch 3G:
- Up to 10 hours of surfing the web on Wi-Fi (..)
- Up to 9 hours of surfing the web using 3G data network

I don't have the best tech chops in the forums, but I do believe the following has to be answered to take these notions seriously:

What's the screen res for either of these hypothesized devices? Has to be the same as iPhone or iPad - or a multiple - or the programmer's ecosystem breaks down. And if it's the same as the iPad which apps does it run? Pad or Phone? And if the res of the iPhone, it's either not retina or will require a very spendy double res screen.

who really needs 3g
let it be 2g works then on all carriers, a cheap phone doesn't need that kind of data speed
voice, sms, voip can all work on 2g right
cheap phone doesn't need gps
solves the battery issue

maybe apple worked a deal with virgin mobile or the deal to save sprint was a boost option
15/25/month data

don't think apple can pull this off, sprint and tmobile both want to sell iphone in the worse way....sort of like survival mode , iphone lite

apples solution to the prepaid market will be elegant, much better value to customers than that dingdong phone offered by straight talk (walkmart) iTouch2g would be a nice convergence item

maintains the connection with itunes, buy apps, keep apple in the family cheap

the other thing is this would be great for your teen, keep cost down, give to them the app store they sms 95% of the time well that doesn't need much data and speed does it.....no.....that's why telecos love them they buy a genius phone to do high profit sms

or apple becomes a type of mvno

keep it close to $200 (the high end cost of the straight talk, and other prepaid phones with touch screens) and it will explode. the other touch screen phones offered by boost, walmart, virgin, kroger, etc are just cheap wannabe touch screen phone for prepaid market. but make it an apple
and kaboom.

take a look at the offerings in the prepaid market.

this is what people tell me.....att, vz are just too expensive the smaller companies are offering 3-4 phones with unlimited text voice limited data for 45 each a month. many many many people want cheaper cost in this miserable economy....and they want touch screens, and apps

look at intelos, boost, net10, kroger etc

it would be perfect for a teen, an iphone like experience, they only text anyway which doesn't need all that speed or data, give them apple aps and keep it cheap and wow. parents would be happy and keep the cost down in this miserable economy

And I was somehow implying it was? All I'm saying is the U.S. has a li~ttle more sway than those countries, being the iPhone's home country.


You realize that law won't ever happen, right? It's not an "all it takes" scenario, it's a "hey, you telecoms. You're all forcibly disbanded. All your higher-ups are fired. You're split into constituent companies. And now we'll create this law."

Which is just as likely to happen as the law on its own.