Teardown of Apple's new iPod touch finds 512MB of RAM, weaker home button than iPhone 5 - Page 2

This is garbage. Anyone that would pay full price for an iPod Touch now days is just clueless. My iPod Touch 4 is so laggy I can't stand it anymore. It was fine when I first bought it but as apps advanced and became more cpu/gpu intensive the device really began to show it's limitations. Didn't take long. I used to be under the impression that an iPod Touch was simply an iPhone without the phone. I couldn't be more wrong, as it's obvious that the iPod Touch hardware is gimped in comparison.

You can get an iPhone on contract for cheaper or the same price, with MUCH better hardware. I paid 400 dollars for a 64gb Touch and I sincerely hope they don't still charge this much for the device because that is way over priced for gimped hardware. The same thing will happen to the Touch 5 as the 4. The GPU is already only barely ideal for newer games and will fall behind before the end of the year. Anyone who says there is enough RAM because of no phone overhead is clueless too. Just own a Touch and find out, like I do. I can't even scroll through web pages without it lagging horribly. My Nexus One from Jan 2010 destroys my iPod touch 4 in responsiveness and with the amount of lag on every task except for 3D games, which I don't bother with on my N1.

Take a 100 dollars off every model of Touch and I'd say hey, not bad for the price. Sad thing is this is supposed to be the gaming device but the iPhone handles any 3D game MUCH better. Gimped hardware should come along with a gimped price, but that isn't the case with the iPod Touch. Just get rid of it Apple and replace it with the Mini. Problem solved. Can't freakin wait to get rid of this thing and get an iPhone.

 

For what reason?

 

 

So $2,200 = $299. Got it.

 

My first-gen on 3.1.3 does it perfectly. There is something wrong with YOUR device, not THE device.

 

Except the problem of putting it in your pocket, taking it anywhere, listening to music on it, and doing all the things an iPod touch is designed to do.

 

You can get an iPhone 5 for 400 on contract for 64gb with much better hardware than a 400 dollar 64gb iPod Touch. Or you can buy one at full price from AT&T for 850 and unlock it yourself and not have to deal with a contract. I'm not sure where the 2200 comes in.

 

Your first gen Touch doesn't have a Retina display, which is too high of a resolution for the GPU in the Touch 4. They should have thought about this initially. My friend's old iPhone 3g does everything smoother than my Touch 4 because her phone doesn't have a 640X960 display to render.

 

If you want a pocket device get an iPhone with better hardware for the same price (on contract). The Touch wasn't designed for gaming and that's apparent from my low framerates on a lot of 3D games compared to a iPhone 4s or 5. It does, however, play music just fine. If all you need to do is play music, the iPod Touch is for you as long as you don't mind paying more than what the device is worth brand new.

Speaking of overpriced -- Gizmodos got a teardown of the Lighting to 30-pin adapter in case anyone is interested ...

http://gizmodo.com/5950947/first-look-at-whats-inside-apples-new-dock-adapter-its-basically-impossible-to-mod

And here's the first review --

http://www.macworld.co.uk/ipad-iphone/reviews/?reviewid=3404608

How exactly does your brain work?  Buy the device on contract for the same price.  You just completely disregard the fact that you now have to pay out the ass per month for two years.  Okay look at the 850 price.  You are paying double for the device. 

 

This iPod Touch has a dual core processor.  Just the fact that it is dual core makes the work of difference.  You can buy two dual core computers one 2mhz one 4mhz you won't notice a ton of difference doing the basics.  Where you will see difference is if you compare it to a single core computer. 

 

Wow so this device won't play maybe the top 5% of graphics hungry apps.  You buy an ultrabook for 800 dollars it won't play heavy games.  You can get an 800 dollar Asus gaming laptop that can play tons more for the same price.  People will still buy the small ultrabook because they don't want a laptop that is three inches thick.

Key words: on contract. You don't get to ignore the cost of the contract, because the contract is used to subsidize the contracted device. You can't complain that a $400 device is worse than an $850 device and not look silly. It's supposed to be that way. Some of the draw for a Touch is getting an iOS device without service or a contract. They're not going to give you the same hardware without contract for the same price

 

Okay. You're missing something. Calling what you're missing 'something' and not 'everything' is difficult.

 

Funny, that… sounds like a larger number than $299. But that can't be the case.

 

Well, own a cell phone at some point and I'm sure it'll come to you.

 

Funny how that makes zero sense, given it's the same chip as in the iPad (higher resolution than the iPod touch) and the iPhone 4 (same resolution as the iPod touch) and it works beautifully in both cases.

 

YOU should have thought about this at all!

 

No, that's not the reason.

 

No, this isn't a valid rebuttal to my point.

 

Why would I click on a link to a Gizmodo property or care what they have to say at all?

I read the article, and they said 

 

 

They said it wasn't overpriced.  So.....

So .... See Tallest Skil's comment to me above.

I posted it because its the only tear down on the web at the moment. They don't even know what most of what's in it is! So ...

 

So your claim is that the new 5th gen iPod touch, the iPhone 4S and the iPad 2 is shitty and you might as well not be running iOS on it?  Really?  Because that's a really dumbassed thing to claim.

 

An A5 iPad Mini with 512MB RAM and 16GB flash is pretty much the same hardware configuration as all three of these devices and if it hits a reasonable price point (the KEY criteria) then I'm buying one.

 

$299-$349 seems fairish for a 16GB device.

You said it was overpriced.... then you posted an article to support your claim.... and the article said it was priced well.... which unsupported your claim.  I don't really understand your point.

 

I don't think he was posting it to support anything. He said, "Speaking of overpriced," which simply brings the topic back to the forefront, and then he posted content relevant to that topic.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, Mac_128.

 

The gen 5 with the A5 should be right up there with 4S performance so I have no clue why you are whining about 3D performance on your gen 4 which is 2010 hardware in comparison with 2011 and 2012 iPhones.

 

I have an old 3G and it does NOT run as well as my niece's 4th gen iPod Touch.  The 3GS may run better but NOT the 3G.  If my iPhone 4 runs better it's not much better.  

 

If the ipad mini wasn't right on the horizon I'd have bought a Touch 5. 

 

Actually, I didn't know that (because why would a full-screen mode be under a "font" button).  

 

It doesn't actually do anything but remove the skeuomorphic part though.  The text stays the same size and thus ... not much point, and also ... not properly named. It seems like a kludge to those whose blood pressure boils at the mention of the word "skeuomorphism."  

You're never wrong

Your comparison is flawed.

 

I agree the new 5th gen touch is lighter, faster, more capable and equipped with a real camera and real screen. The product you're comparing it to is 2 years old and was widely criticized for being crippled back then.

You're essentially putting a couch potato into the ring with a UFC champion and acting somewhat surprised that the professional fighter gets an easy victory.

 

It's also true that today's 32GB and 64GB models are priced the same as they were in 2010, but one could easily argue that's not really fair because the price of flash has dropped significantly. We should be getting more flash at the same price or the same flash for less.

 

After all that I'm going to say the new touch does hold a bit of appeal for me because of the camera. Reviews say it's on par with or better than the iPhone 4 camera. That's good enough much of the time.

I don't have a smartphone and can't justify $65+/month. My point-and-shoot isn't big or heavy, but it doesn't slide into a pocket so it stays home 95% of the time.

What should it be? 1GB so it will have made more usable RAM per apps that will then make the iPhone, the highest volume solid device, the low man on the totem? Bottom line is this is device will less demand and with less system resources overhead. I don't expect it to always be half of the iPhone but I also didn't expect it to always have a lesser display than the iPhone and that has been addressed.

How did you come up with that? What I mean is, why should the whole device be cheaper or have more NAND simply because it's been two years? There are substantial updates to other HW that have increased the prices. In some cases I'd say it's a substantial cost increase, like the iPhone-quality display for the first time (since at least the iPhone wet Retina).
Edited by SolipsismX - 10/11/12 at 4:21pm

 

For perspective:

 

Last Christmas our daughter asked if we would consider paying half to buy her hubby a Touch. She felt that since she had never filled her 8GB Nano in three years of owning it, 8GB was more than enough for his needs.

 

Since an 8GB Touch was $200 we bought it.  If our only choice had been a $300 32GB model, we would almost certainly have declined.  While 32GB for $300 is a better value than 8GB for $200, it's just more than we would have been prepared to spend.  I suspect that for most young people (the obvious market), a 50% increase in the price of admission will be a deterrent.

When I went to buy my iPhone I tried to get a 16GB. I've had the highest capacity every time but simply don't use that much even with my 1.6GB TomTom app installed. They only had 64GB models so I bought it. I've checked back periodically (I live pretty much next door to an Apple Store) and they have still been out. It's not been 3 weeks so I think I'll be stuck with the 64GB model but I really don't need it.

 

My daughter and her husband each feel comfortable with 8GB, you don't use even 16GB, while my wife and I can't seem to manage with 32GB.  I guess that's why they make more than one.

I agree completely. If it was $199 for 8gb- or maybe even $229- I'd buy one. $299- thanks but no thanks. Apple will be fine without my single purchase- but I am 100% and unequivocally a sale that could've been but now isn't.

But I thought you always bought the largest, simply because you've never cleaned out your iTunes library. I actually have to wait the whole 3-4 weeks for my 64 to arrive, which I choose because my 4 was always filled to the max with its 32GB.

"If that's what Apple has planned for a smaller iPad why bother?"

Because an iPod touch has better portability and is thus essentially always available. A mini tablet has a screen that works better for extended reading but you won't always have it with you. Of course there is also the one handed versus two handed issue but I would include that in the "always available" factor.

I guess an iPad mini announcement is possible, but I don't understand why.

 

Isn't the new iPod Touch already a mini iPad 2?