so why aren't there any issues with iphone 3GS cameras?
The iPod Touch is only about 2 mm thicker than the camera (at its thickest point) in the 3GS, sans mount. I suppose it is possible that they could somehow get the 3GS camera into the Touch, but I doubt they're going to try. They've probably attempted to use a different camera which better fits the iPod Touch's form factor, and if this is correct, something went wrong.
If it was last minute (within the last few months) then the main PCB is probably finished and you will likely be able to find footprints where either the camera sat or a connector would have sat to connect the camera module.
Its very unlikely at that late stage they would have changed their hardware design other than removing the holes on the casing.
With that in mind, if someone has a new iPod Touch 64GB, break it open and lets take a look
isupply, ifixit or someone else will probably have it up soon
In contrast to a Named and very Known party, Mr Jobs, stating that the company decided to take the direction of 'gaming device' for the Touch, which is in keeping with games being one of, if not THE, top category of apps in the apps store. the focus of many ads and even the focus of the screen savers Apple is running was and was running before their back to school period, on the computers in their stores.
maybe at one point someone had the idea to put a camera on the touch and maybe they did consider it. and then they got the math back which showed a better direction to take so they went that way and dumped the camera.
add also to consideration that they would not have announced their ipod event date without everything ready to ship because the standard (which played out yesterday as well) is to have everything on sale same day. so this whole "last minute issues" doesn't play
This is exactly as some of us have suspected. Makes a lot of sense.
Also, they want to re-ignite traditional iPod sales, in the meantime. A Touch with a camera will have sucked all the oxygen from the Nano.
Which is exactly why the current lineup makes so little sense. Apple would much rather sell you a touch than a nano because you'll spend more up front and then get hooked on the app store and spend even more.
Around my office, a place filled with people in the touch target market and more than a few touch owners, most of the discussion yesterday was about how appealing the new nano is.
When people start dreaming about mid-priced products you've done something wrong. Potential customers should always aspire to own the best and most expensive product you make.
Apple could cope with any thickness issue with the iPod touch camera by making the touch a bit thicker. To my eyes, it's thinner than it needs to be and I'd love to see that added space used for a larger battery.
It'd be relatively easy for Apple to add EL models to both the iPhone and the touch. Users would trade bit more thickness for longer life, a trade many would be happy to make.
Apple needs to get over its fixation with one-shoe-fits-all. They could have half-a-dozen touches and each would be selling more than their competition's best-selling models.
I still say AT&T nixed it and that its been manufactured.
Putting a mic in the Touch competes directly with their iPhone profits. A skype iPod Touch that acts as a phone would dent AT&T's sales.
There is absolutely no reason why there would be a "technological" problem as many have stated it already works in the iPhone. We shall see.
How do you managed to be wrong all the time? This must be some kind of record! Congratulations.
As someone who supposedly knows everything, you know that the iPod Touch is thinner than the iPhone. So it doesn't take a genius to realize that there could very well be a technological problem as a result.
Makes sense to add it as a minor update (Jan?) just on the highest-margin models. Leaving the entry-level Touch models as cheap as possible.
Meanwhile, I bet some Touch owners will surprise themselves by getting a Nano for the sake of the camera--especially if they were looking at an SD Flip anyway (which apparently doesn't take stills either--despite all the "shock and outrage" at the nano not having a still camera).
I'm sure that's what's going to happen. It is too weird that the 16Gb Touch went missing. I suspect a mid-year upgrade too.
since their production runs are in the tens of millions why not just use the same case for the Touch as for the 3GS to fit the camera in there?
There would be no reason to make the case thicker if the new camera would fit in the thinner iPod Touch. They obviously weren't counting on that camera being defective.
I only wish the iPhone were as thin as the iPod Touch.
I'm not a pathetic Apple fanboy like most of you here, but I'd have to say, Apple has made the right decision here.
After adding a camera to the iPod touch, what should be the next thing they add? GPS? They've already added Bluetooth and a Microphone. Suddenly there isn't all that much separating the iPod Touch from the iPhone. They are wise to keep these two devices apart.
The only problem is that Apple is not allowing people to buy the iPhone outright, rather couples it with restrictive plans on a single network in most countries. But that's typical Apple - anti-consumer with a "do what you're told" attitude.
It's most plausible Touch's HD camera didn't pass QA muster. Job's targeted Flip during his keynote and in the NYT Pogue interview afterward. A HD camera matching Flip HD's specs is clearly on the Touch horizon.
I think people are trying to read far more into this than there is.
My assessment is that they wanted a camera with the same functionality of the iPhone on the iTouch, but that would need to be a smaller (thinner) device due to the difference in form factor between the phone and the iPod, and for whatever reason, it's not been possible to get it in time.
In many respects, Apple are a victim of their own success here - they so infrequently fail to hit release targets for things that when they occasionally do, it's a news story. Unfortunately this is engineering - you can't always meet the deadlines you want to, no matter how hard you work. I'm glad Apple still seem to put quality so high up the agenda - other companies would have shipped something they knew was not 100% and dealt with the fallout later.
Kudos to Steve Jobs for trying to suggest this was all part of the plan, but for a company that has never really paid any serious attention to gaming, it's a hard sell.
Personally I expect we'll see an iTouch with a camera once they iron out the problems, and once another point comes to market it.
I'm not a pathetic Apple fanboy like most of you here, but I'd have to say, Apple has made the right decision here.
After adding a camera to the iPod touch, what should be the next thing they add? GPS? They've already added Bluetooth and a Microphone. Suddenly there isn't all that much separating the iPod Touch from the iPhone. They are wise to keep these two devices apart.
The only problem is that Apple is not allowing people to buy the iPhone outright, rather couples it with restrictive plans on a single network in most countries. But that's typical Apple - anti-consumer with a "do what you're told" attitude.
Is the mic now on the device itself or still on the cord only?
Which is exactly why the current lineup makes so little sense. Apple would much rather sell you a touch than a nano because you'll spend more up front and then get hooked on the app store and spend even more.
Around my office, a place filled with people in the touch target market and more than a few touch owners, most of the discussion yesterday was about how appealing the new nano is.
When people start dreaming about mid-priced products you've done something wrong. Potential customers should always aspire to own the best and most expensive product you make.
Most expensive does not always equal the highest margins. Whether we like it or not - and speaking for myself as someone who is torn, since I like it as a shareholder, but do not as a consumer - margins do matter. Because market valuations do matter.
At this point, I am quite OK with a few months of wait-and-see.
There would be no reason to make the case thicker if the new camera would fit in the thinner iPod Touch. They obviously weren't counting on that camera being defective.
I only wish the iPhone were as thin as the iPod Touch.
I'd prefer it slightly thicker with a kickass HD camera, flash, and zoom- and really take on the Nikons and Canons.
The 3GS camera is better than the 3G camera, which is better than the iPod Nano camera (which is VGA resolution only)
Yes! And it is reasonable to assume that a proposed iPod Touch camera would exceed the capabilities of an iPhone 3GS camera. Apple does this periodically-- like the larger capacity flash drive on the Touch.
Sooner or later, I suspect that Apple will offer a hi-res still/video camera with flash and physical focus lens on some device in its mobile platform. Because Apple can be more flexible (take more risks) with the touch than the phone, it makes sense to debut it on the the touch or a new tablet device.
I'm not a pathetic Apple fanboy like most of you here, but I'd have to say, Apple has made the right decision here.
After adding a camera to the iPod touch, what should be the next thing they add? GPS? They've already added Bluetooth and a Microphone. Suddenly there isn't all that much separating the iPod Touch from the iPhone. They are wise to keep these two devices apart.
The only problem is that Apple is not allowing people to buy the iPhone outright, rather couples it with restrictive plans on a single network in most countries. But that's typical Apple - anti-consumer with a "do what you're told" attitude.
TomTom's GPS car dock is going to have GPS and will work with the ipod touch when it's released next month.
There was a report a month ago that most flickr updates were from iphones. only reason for no camera on the Touch was cost
Comments
so why aren't there any issues with iphone 3GS cameras?
The iPod Touch is only about 2 mm thicker than the camera (at its thickest point) in the 3GS, sans mount. I suppose it is possible that they could somehow get the 3GS camera into the Touch, but I doubt they're going to try. They've probably attempted to use a different camera which better fits the iPod Touch's form factor, and if this is correct, something went wrong.
If it was last minute (within the last few months) then the main PCB is probably finished and you will likely be able to find footprints where either the camera sat or a connector would have sat to connect the camera module.
Its very unlikely at that late stage they would have changed their hardware design other than removing the holes on the casing.
With that in mind, if someone has a new iPod Touch 64GB, break it open and lets take a look
isupply, ifixit or someone else will probably have it up soon
people familiar with the matter
those familiar with situation
others familiar with the situation say
according to a third person
tabloid press tactics at their best.
In contrast to a Named and very Known party, Mr Jobs, stating that the company decided to take the direction of 'gaming device' for the Touch, which is in keeping with games being one of, if not THE, top category of apps in the apps store. the focus of many ads and even the focus of the screen savers Apple is running was and was running before their back to school period, on the computers in their stores.
maybe at one point someone had the idea to put a camera on the touch and maybe they did consider it. and then they got the math back which showed a better direction to take so they went that way and dumped the camera.
add also to consideration that they would not have announced their ipod event date without everything ready to ship because the standard (which played out yesterday as well) is to have everything on sale same day. so this whole "last minute issues" doesn't play
Probably a quiet update in about 6 months...long enough to not piss off anyone who does buy one today.
This is exactly as some of us have suspected. Makes a lot of sense.
Also, they want to re-ignite traditional iPod sales, in the meantime. A Touch with a camera will have sucked all the oxygen from the Nano.
Which is exactly why the current lineup makes so little sense. Apple would much rather sell you a touch than a nano because you'll spend more up front and then get hooked on the app store and spend even more.
Around my office, a place filled with people in the touch target market and more than a few touch owners, most of the discussion yesterday was about how appealing the new nano is.
When people start dreaming about mid-priced products you've done something wrong. Potential customers should always aspire to own the best and most expensive product you make.
I still say AT&T nixed it and that its been manufactured.
Putting a mic in the Touch competes directly with their iPhone profits. A skype iPod Touch that acts as a phone would dent AT&T's sales.
There already is a mic in the second gen iPod Touch (on the clicker). Skype works just fine.
It'd be relatively easy for Apple to add EL models to both the iPhone and the touch. Users would trade bit more thickness for longer life, a trade many would be happy to make.
Apple needs to get over its fixation with one-shoe-fits-all. They could have half-a-dozen touches and each would be selling more than their competition's best-selling models.
I still say AT&T nixed it and that its been manufactured.
Putting a mic in the Touch competes directly with their iPhone profits. A skype iPod Touch that acts as a phone would dent AT&T's sales.
There is absolutely no reason why there would be a "technological" problem as many have stated it already works in the iPhone. We shall see.
How do you managed to be wrong all the time? This must be some kind of record! Congratulations.
As someone who supposedly knows everything, you know that the iPod Touch is thinner than the iPhone. So it doesn't take a genius to realize that there could very well be a technological problem as a result.
Makes sense to add it as a minor update (Jan?) just on the highest-margin models. Leaving the entry-level Touch models as cheap as possible.
Meanwhile, I bet some Touch owners will surprise themselves by getting a Nano for the sake of the camera--especially if they were looking at an SD Flip anyway (which apparently doesn't take stills either--despite all the "shock and outrage" at the nano not having a still camera).
I'm sure that's what's going to happen. It is too weird that the 16Gb Touch went missing. I suspect a mid-year upgrade too.
since their production runs are in the tens of millions why not just use the same case for the Touch as for the 3GS to fit the camera in there?
There would be no reason to make the case thicker if the new camera would fit in the thinner iPod Touch. They obviously weren't counting on that camera being defective.
I only wish the iPhone were as thin as the iPod Touch.
After adding a camera to the iPod touch, what should be the next thing they add? GPS? They've already added Bluetooth and a Microphone. Suddenly there isn't all that much separating the iPod Touch from the iPhone. They are wise to keep these two devices apart.
The only problem is that Apple is not allowing people to buy the iPhone outright, rather couples it with restrictive plans on a single network in most countries. But that's typical Apple - anti-consumer with a "do what you're told" attitude.
My assessment is that they wanted a camera with the same functionality of the iPhone on the iTouch, but that would need to be a smaller (thinner) device due to the difference in form factor between the phone and the iPod, and for whatever reason, it's not been possible to get it in time.
In many respects, Apple are a victim of their own success here - they so infrequently fail to hit release targets for things that when they occasionally do, it's a news story. Unfortunately this is engineering - you can't always meet the deadlines you want to, no matter how hard you work. I'm glad Apple still seem to put quality so high up the agenda - other companies would have shipped something they knew was not 100% and dealt with the fallout later.
Kudos to Steve Jobs for trying to suggest this was all part of the plan, but for a company that has never really paid any serious attention to gaming, it's a hard sell.
Personally I expect we'll see an iTouch with a camera once they iron out the problems, and once another point comes to market it.
There already is a mic in the second gen iPod Touch (on the clicker). Skype works just fine.
On the cord, that I know. But on the device itself really makes it a non-carrier phone.
I'm not a pathetic Apple fanboy like most of you here, but I'd have to say, Apple has made the right decision here.
After adding a camera to the iPod touch, what should be the next thing they add? GPS? They've already added Bluetooth and a Microphone. Suddenly there isn't all that much separating the iPod Touch from the iPhone. They are wise to keep these two devices apart.
The only problem is that Apple is not allowing people to buy the iPhone outright, rather couples it with restrictive plans on a single network in most countries. But that's typical Apple - anti-consumer with a "do what you're told" attitude.
Is the mic now on the device itself or still on the cord only?
Which is exactly why the current lineup makes so little sense. Apple would much rather sell you a touch than a nano because you'll spend more up front and then get hooked on the app store and spend even more.
Around my office, a place filled with people in the touch target market and more than a few touch owners, most of the discussion yesterday was about how appealing the new nano is.
When people start dreaming about mid-priced products you've done something wrong. Potential customers should always aspire to own the best and most expensive product you make.
Most expensive does not always equal the highest margins. Whether we like it or not - and speaking for myself as someone who is torn, since I like it as a shareholder, but do not as a consumer - margins do matter. Because market valuations do matter.
At this point, I am quite OK with a few months of wait-and-see.
There would be no reason to make the case thicker if the new camera would fit in the thinner iPod Touch. They obviously weren't counting on that camera being defective.
I only wish the iPhone were as thin as the iPod Touch.
I'd prefer it slightly thicker with a kickass HD camera, flash, and zoom- and really take on the Nikons and Canons.
You can't assume they are the same.
The 3GS camera is better than the 3G camera, which is better than the iPod Nano camera (which is VGA resolution only)
Yes! And it is reasonable to assume that a proposed iPod Touch camera would exceed the capabilities of an iPhone 3GS camera. Apple does this periodically-- like the larger capacity flash drive on the Touch.
Sooner or later, I suspect that Apple will offer a hi-res still/video camera with flash and physical focus lens on some device in its mobile platform. Because Apple can be more flexible (take more risks) with the touch than the phone, it makes sense to debut it on the the touch or a new tablet device.
I'm not a pathetic Apple fanboy like most of you here, but I'd have to say, Apple has made the right decision here.
After adding a camera to the iPod touch, what should be the next thing they add? GPS? They've already added Bluetooth and a Microphone. Suddenly there isn't all that much separating the iPod Touch from the iPhone. They are wise to keep these two devices apart.
The only problem is that Apple is not allowing people to buy the iPhone outright, rather couples it with restrictive plans on a single network in most countries. But that's typical Apple - anti-consumer with a "do what you're told" attitude.
TomTom's GPS car dock is going to have GPS and will work with the ipod touch when it's released next month.
There was a report a month ago that most flickr updates were from iphones. only reason for no camera on the Touch was cost