I honestly think 95% of people with an iPod Touch already have a camera phone. I've got a great camera on my Elm. I don't need a camera on every device I own.
Facetime, however, is something that I have on NOTHING that I own. It would be a fantastic addition.
Yeah, but people who travel overseas don't bring their phone with them....but they DO bring their iPods. To have an integrated video still camera in their iPod would be an AWESOME tool...and would negate the need to carry a Flip or similar small video recorder.
No one seems to have said if this is a Retina Display. Or is it just the cover ?
I think they'll add both cameras. The new Iphone is very thin, if they can fit it in that they can fit it in the iPod. Carryover iPod design from the previous version must not be assumed.
Food for thought. I was constrained in thinking the $199 price point has to say. Apple can technically just move the current high end touch to $199, while pushing the redesigned touches with a higher price points (say $10-20 extra over what they cost now).
Although if I understand correctly, face time on the iPod touch will require a mobile me email account? If this be true, that's a brilliant move on Jobs part to increase Apple's revenue stream.
I think any email address will work. It would make sense to require MobileMe, if you wanted a proprietary solution. But Jobs wants FaceTime to be an open standard. I doubt the standards bodies would allow a MobileMe requirement.
Of course it will have the 2 cameras, it's the main FaceTime feature that differentiates from any other videochat device, in Apple they are not crazy to suppress that feature. That rear camera will record video too. Some people think that it will be too much similar too the iPhone, but it isn't a threat to the iPhone 'cause the phone part weights too much.
The only thing we should be questioning ourselves is: the rear camera will be 3.2MP or 5MP? I hope for 5MP but I really doubt it.
Although if I understand correctly, face time on the iPod touch will require a mobile me email account? If this be true, that's a brilliant move on Jobs part to increase Apple's revenue stream.
I already have a mobile me account, so I'm all set. But I wonder how many people who don't, will sign up for one just to get face time? Probably ALOT! lol.
But that's why, in the meantime I hope it gets a back facing camera too. Much more useful to me. I want to shoot video and then have a quick way to edit it on the fly and post it to YouTube or email it to friends. The iPod touch would be perfect for this. IMHO. :-p
Why would it require Mobile Me? It's not a requirement to run FaceTime on an iPhone over WiFi.
2. It will not have 3G. It then becomes an iPhone without a phone. Something AT&T would freak out over. More strain on their network, while only netting $15-25/mon, compared to iPhones total net of $80+/mon.
They did it for the iPad because it's an entirely different device category, different enough that people would own one as well as an iPhone or iPod touch. A 3G iPod touch is NOT something iPhone owners would be interested in, and would definitely result in fewer iPhone sales due to the lower cost gateway. Neither Apple or AT&T would want this, yet.
3. A back camera is less and less likely as space becomes an issue inside the iPod touch and Facetime becomes a priority. Also, further differentiation from the iPhone is a desire of Apple's. They don't need a back camera to sell the 4,1 iPod touch, with it's face time camera, retina display, a4 chip, 512 mb of ram, and possibly lower cost 32 & 64gb offerings. Look for the iPod touch to gain "3G" capabilities almost simultaneously with Facetime going live on "3G" (which will probably be 4G, when it happens).
Ok, so now I have to decide if I should get my old iPod Touch fixed and a new battery installed, or to wait until next month to see what's new That's a sad face because I won't have an iPod to use until then.
It comes with me every where. I'm an on the road sales man, and I use the iPod a ton. Mostly because the radio doesn't always work where I'm driving, and because there aren't many stations playing classical music on the east coast. Not to mention the stuff I have loaded to listen to.
Skip
I say wait. You'll be kicking yourself in the rear when the new ones come out.....that's why I'm waiting..
Shit, I guess they are not gonna give me the back facing camera, are they.
More importantly it means that this will be a video only cam, and will not take stills.
What the hell are you talking about? The iPhone 4 front camera takes still shots. Although it is only good for self portraits because it is very awkward to use if you want to use the front camera for anything other than face time or self portraits.
Obviously Apple will want to keep the iPod touch as thin as possible. A thin profile won't work with two camera lenses. It is however possible with the 1.3 VGA front camera that is in the iPhone 4. Just slap it into the next gen iPod Touch for face time.
EDIT: sheff, you are looking at an old design. They redesigned the iPhone so odds are good they might do the same with the iPod touch. The iPhone 4 front camera looks pretty small to me.
A lot of these posts assume rumor to be fact. I'm sure there are all sorts of prototype parts floating around Asia purporting to be the next iPod Touch enclosure. Until Apple announces them, it's pointless to plan according to rumor. My priority is 128GB of flash memory. Have the iP4 for FaceTime. Have 64GB iPT for music. Need more memory to store more songs and apps in folders. If the next iPT is still only 64GB - even with 2 cameras and Retina Display like the FaceTime phone I already have - I would almost have to pass. I would pay $499 for a 128GB iPT.
I will still buy the next one. But I won't be happy about it without the memory bump.
Number one Value Added for me is for Apple to double the RAM capacity for music, video & app storage not adding the same features that are on my iP4. Very disappointed I could only buy a 32GB iP4. Thought it would be 32/64GB For sure. Already up to 7GB worth of 415 Apps, 11 videos and 23 photos. Only 22GB of space left for anything else. Very weak capacity spec on the iP4. So easy to fill up if it weren't for the iPT I've always got with me as well. \
As I said earlier I am willing to bet that there won't be a back facing cam and the front facing will be vid only, no stills.
...the new touch would have to be square and thicker then it is now, which I doubt will happen. Plus it would explain why the previous Touches did not get a rear facing cam: it would be stupid to put a video only rear camera only to have to flip it next year to the front.
Quote:
Originally Posted by regan
I really can't imagine they won't find a way to squeeze a back facing camera in there. This is Apple were talkin' bout here! :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvidal
Of course it will have the 2 cameras, it's the main FaceTime feature that differentiates from any other videochat device, in Apple they are not crazy to suppress that feature. That rear camera will record video too. Some people think that it will be too much similar too the iPhone, but it isn't a threat to the iPhone 'cause the phone part weights too much.
The only thing we should be questioning ourselves is: the rear camera will be 3.2MP or 5MP? I hope for 5MP but I really doubt it.
Don't get bit by the laws of physics, but see below.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by applebjesus
What the hell are you talking about? The iPhone 4 front camera takes still shots. Although it is only good for self portraits because it is very awkward to use if you want to use the front camera for anything other than face time or self portraits.
Obviously Apple will want to keep the iPod touch as thin as possible. A thin profile won't work with two camera lenses.
With a 128 GB iPod Touch possible, the rationale for the Classic fades (assuming it can be used as a portable ext. HD by fotogs and such as now).
That leaves room for another SKU - so we could have a superskinny iPT with FaceTime added, and a iPod CamTouch on the iPhone 4 chassis (no new part required - just a little re-machining) - plenty of room for 5mp or more, room for chips to process the input as well as your average P&S, 720p, maybe even optical zoom.
And now, along with phone manufacturers, netbook makers, music retailers, etc. quaking, Apple's big in the P&S photo world. Look out Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, etc.
The internet, your library, your music and videos, your apps and games, navigation, FaceTime, Skype, your good quality P&S camera and vidcam in an iPhone 4 sized device whenever you're near WiFi. Whoa up! There's a value equation.
Add a tiny unsmart phone for calls and TXT's and you're a total pocket road warrior at under 8 or 9 oz. and no costly ATT data plan.
Add a 3G data model and what else could you need (except a big screen and productivity apps on an iPad or MacBook)?
Shit, I guess they are not gonna give me the back facing camera, are they.
More importantly it means that this will be a video only cam, and will not take stills. Since I doubt I would use Facetime more then once a month if that, that fron facing cam is basically useless to me.
Hopefully there will at least be a way to hack the cam to take stills. It would be an awkward operation, but if possible will at least give some reason for that camera to exist.
I?m not really sure how you have jumped to this conclusion on an article showing a front glass display with a front facing camera hole. The cameras on the iPhone 4 are offset so I don?t see why these can?t be offset, too.
I also can?t see why the WiFi antenna can?t be around a backside camera. Putting it around a nice piece of black plastic would help hide the camera and flash a bit. Or Apple could just go the iPhone 4 route and use the frame for the WiFi antenna.
Even though I think a front-facing camera is first on Apple?s priorities, I see no reasoning that can conclude a backside camera will not be coming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpics
...plenty of room for 5mp or more, room for chips to process the input as well as your average P&S, 720p, maybe even optical zoom.)
From what I?ve seen the 5px camera in the iPhone 4 is too large for the Touch in its current thickness. A 3.xMpx camera has shown to be doable, at least when it comes to the housing thickness.
In order for Apple to convince me to upgrade my Touch I need more screen real estate. I hate browsing on the Touch. I think the iPhone does a great job of browsing for a smartphone but the Touch is not a smartphone. The Touch is not a phone. Period.
Even if FaceTime is added to the Touch arsenal, you still don't use the Touch as you would a phone, i.e. placed up to your ear. For FaceTime, the device is held in front of you.
As such, the question is, what are the advantages of a 3.5" screen compared to let's say a 4.5" screen and conversely, what are the advantages of a 4.5" screen to a 3.5" screen.
As far as I can figure it, the advantages of the smaller screen are that the device is easier to slip into one's pocket and for children with smaller hands to hold.
The advantages of a 4.5" screen vs. 3.5" screen would be better video presentation, better photo presentation, better gaming, much better browsing, easier virtual typing for those of us with larger hands, more engaging FaceTime sessions, better e-reading and better GPS capabilities. Being as the device would be larger, there would be more room for a longer-lasting battery.
From Apple's perspective, a somewhat larger Touch would bring in additional revenue because quite a few more current Touch owners would have a compelling reason to upgrade (who doesn't already have a decent enough camera on their phone plus good dedicated digital camera gear so the cameras are no big deal and as for the Retina display, that would be nice but hardly compelling enough to motivate one to upgrade). Such a device would also provide Apple with an effective means of competing against e-readers with bigger displays. If you stick with the Retina Display resolution, that much detail would still look outstanding on a 4.5" display.
One more thing. The larger form factor would make it easier to add a 3G version, if Apple thought that would be worthwhile.
Can't imagine why Apple would choose to not do it.
I dont want a camera in everything! geez why does everything have to have a frikin,camera in it. buy an IPHONE
I like the ipod as an ipod! i actually am one of the few who "LOVE" the fact that apple did not put a camera in the ipad....
apple has always been about minimalist elegance,and all that is going out the window,to the wiz bang ooooooh ahhhh crowd.
i will switch to another brand of mp3 devices if they do this.
a retina display and bigger hard drive would be welcome,if they keep the classic touch design available along side one with a camera,that will be ok,like they kept the classic click wheel ipod.
In order for Apple to convince me to upgrade my Touch I need more screen real estate. I hate browsing on the Touch. I think the iPhone does a great job of browsing for a smartphone but the Touch is not a smartphone. The Touch is not a phone. Period.
[…]
Can't imagine why Apple would choose to not do it.
I think there is a case for a MID-focused device that can be made but it’s not as simple as putting iOS for the iPod Touch onto a device with a larger display, at least not for Apple or any company that cares about their product’s usability.
For one thing, it would require a new UI, with a new SDK for that UI. Apple’s simply not going to make everything that fits on the 3.5” device expand to fit on a 4.5”, 5.5” or whatever size device. That is a lot more difficult than people think.
For example, the iPad isn’t simply a larger iPhone/Touch. The UI was tailored for the device, not forced to work on a machine it wasn’t designed for (in other words, like netbooks shoehorning desktop OSes into a 10” display). People have said from the start that it would be great to use iPhone apps on their Macs, but even on the iPad — which has most HW similar to the iPhone, compared to a Mac — apps look and feel horrible. Even expanding that one inch on the diagonal for a 4.5” Touch would make buttons bigger than they needed to be.
If you still need proof, just take a look at the icon changes for the iPhone 4 of the previous iOS devices and the iPhone 4’s new font for the new display resolution. Apple is simply not going to pop the same UI into new HW then call it a day.
I dont want a camera in everything! geez why does everything have to have a frikin,camera in it. buy an IPHONE
I like the ipod as an ipod! i actually am one of the few who "LOVE" the fact that apple did not put a camera in the ipad....
apple has always been about minimalist elegance,and all that is going out the window,to the wiz bang ooooooh ahhhh crowd.
i will switch to another brand of mp3 devices if they do this.
a retina display and bigger hard drive would be welcome,if they keep the classic touch design available along side one with a camera,that will be ok,like they kept the classic click wheel ipod.
two cents
Assuming Apple can keep costs in check and not erode their margins, they would sell more iPod touches if it had a camera. For this reason itself, I would prefer if they marketed a camera-equipped iPod touch (I'm an AAPL shareholder).
As a longtime iPod touch owner, I personally would embrace a new model equipped with a camera.
From what I?ve seen the 5px camera in the iPhone 4 is too large for the Touch in its current thickness. A 3.xMpx camera has shown to be doable, at least when it comes to the housing thickness.
Just to clarify, that was in a hypothetical thicker model using the iP4 case. And getting the room by not having any phone parts.
My lineup was a thin Touch with FaceTime, and, after dropping the Classic, a thicker iPT Cam model with 128 GB, Retina Display and two cameras.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catman4d2
I dont want a camera in everything! geez why does everything have to have a frikin,camera in it. buy an IPHONE
I like the ipod as an ipod! i actually am one of the few who "LOVE" the fact that apple did not put a camera in the ipad....
apple has always been about minimalist elegance,and all that is going out the window,to the wiz bang ooooooh ahhhh crowd.
i will switch to another brand of mp3 devices if they do this.
a retina display and bigger hard drive would be welcome,if they keep the classic touch design available along side one with a camera,that will be ok,like they kept the classic click wheel ipod.
two cents
If it (a facetime cam only) doesn't make the device any bigger, you don't have to USE it, y'know. Or... ...go get that Zune, dude.
Assuming Apple can keep costs in check and not erode their margins, they would sell more iPod touches if it had a camera. For this reason itself, I would prefer if they marketed a camera-equipped iPod touch (I'm an AAPL shareholder).
As a longtime iPod touch owner, I personally would embrace a new model equipped with a camera.
My two cents as a shareholder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpics
Just to clarify, that was in a hypothetical thicker model using the iP4 case. And getting the room by not having any phone parts.
My lineup was a thin Touch with FaceTime, and, after dropping the Classic, a thicker iPT Cam model with 128 GB, Retina Display and two cameras.
If it (a facetime cam only) doesn't make the device any bigger, you don't have to USE it, y'know. Or... ...go get that Zune, dude.
An iPhone4 without the phone functionality = iPod touch 4 = WIN
You have all the space you need for whatever you want in the iPhone4, people that hate ATT and iPhones can have a sweet iPod touch, and iPod touches will sell like there was no tomorrow.
Glass on both sides, great form factor, massive battery life, 3MP back camera, front facing camera, Facetime, 1ghz and 512MB RAM, slick metal frame/ antenna.
What's not to like? Maybe the iPod touch 4 won't have Retina Display though, not enough parts and to keep iPhone 4 super premium in some way.
But basically all Apple needs to do to have an insanely popular iPod touch 4 is to take the iPhone 4 and just modify the insides. So Apple wouldn't make a bigger screen because that's a different form factor. Apple gets to ride the popularity of the iPhone 4 plus leverage economies of scale by following the iPhone 4 form factor.
Such you have:
iPod touch 4 <--- iPod line
iPhone 4 <--- Smartphone
iPad <--- Tablet
iPad 7" <--- More portable Tablet
MacBook Air 12" <--- Ultralight laptop
MacBook Pro 13", 15", 17"
iMac 21", 27"
Mac Pro
HDTV (iTV unit hooked up to third party TVs) <--- 36" to 60"
This line up could cover all the form factors and use scenarios and shoot AAPL to $400 by end of 2012.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo
In order for Apple to convince me to upgrade my Touch I need more screen real estate. I hate browsing on the Touch. I think the iPhone does a great job of browsing for a smartphone but the Touch is not a smartphone. The Touch is not a phone. Period.
Even if FaceTime is added to the Touch arsenal, you still don't use the Touch as you would a phone, i.e. placed up to your ear. For FaceTime, the device is held in front of you.
As such, the question is, what are the advantages of a 3.5" screen compared to let's say a 4.5" screen and conversely, what are the advantages of a 4.5" screen to a 3.5" screen.
As far as I can figure it, the advantages of the smaller screen are that the device is easier to slip into one's pocket and for children with smaller hands to hold.
The advantages of a 4.5" screen vs. 3.5" screen would be better video presentation, better photo presentation, better gaming, much better browsing, easier virtual typing for those of us with larger hands, more engaging FaceTime sessions, better e-reading and better GPS capabilities. Being as the device would be larger, there would be more room for a longer-lasting battery.
From Apple's perspective, a somewhat larger Touch would bring in additional revenue...
Can't imagine why Apple would choose to not do it.
Comments
I honestly think 95% of people with an iPod Touch already have a camera phone. I've got a great camera on my Elm. I don't need a camera on every device I own.
Facetime, however, is something that I have on NOTHING that I own. It would be a fantastic addition.
Yeah, but people who travel overseas don't bring their phone with them....but they DO bring their iPods. To have an integrated video still camera in their iPod would be an AWESOME tool...and would negate the need to carry a Flip or similar small video recorder.
So you see...it DOES make sense. :-p
No one seems to have said if this is a Retina Display. Or is it just the cover ?
I think they'll add both cameras. The new Iphone is very thin, if they can fit it in that they can fit it in the iPod. Carryover iPod design from the previous version must not be assumed.
Food for thought. I was constrained in thinking the $199 price point has to say. Apple can technically just move the current high end touch to $199, while pushing the redesigned touches with a higher price points (say $10-20 extra over what they cost now).
Although if I understand correctly, face time on the iPod touch will require a mobile me email account? If this be true, that's a brilliant move on Jobs part to increase Apple's revenue stream.
I think any email address will work. It would make sense to require MobileMe, if you wanted a proprietary solution. But Jobs wants FaceTime to be an open standard. I doubt the standards bodies would allow a MobileMe requirement.
The only thing we should be questioning ourselves is: the rear camera will be 3.2MP or 5MP? I hope for 5MP but I really doubt it.
Although if I understand correctly, face time on the iPod touch will require a mobile me email account? If this be true, that's a brilliant move on Jobs part to increase Apple's revenue stream.
I already have a mobile me account, so I'm all set. But I wonder how many people who don't, will sign up for one just to get face time? Probably ALOT! lol.
But that's why, in the meantime I hope it gets a back facing camera too. Much more useful to me. I want to shoot video and then have a quick way to edit it on the fly and post it to YouTube or email it to friends. The iPod touch would be perfect for this. IMHO. :-p
Why would it require Mobile Me? It's not a requirement to run FaceTime on an iPhone over WiFi.
2. It will not have 3G. It then becomes an iPhone without a phone. Something AT&T would freak out over. More strain on their network, while only netting $15-25/mon, compared to iPhones total net of $80+/mon.
They did it for the iPad because it's an entirely different device category, different enough that people would own one as well as an iPhone or iPod touch. A 3G iPod touch is NOT something iPhone owners would be interested in, and would definitely result in fewer iPhone sales due to the lower cost gateway. Neither Apple or AT&T would want this, yet.
3. A back camera is less and less likely as space becomes an issue inside the iPod touch and Facetime becomes a priority. Also, further differentiation from the iPhone is a desire of Apple's. They don't need a back camera to sell the 4,1 iPod touch, with it's face time camera, retina display, a4 chip, 512 mb of ram, and possibly lower cost 32 & 64gb offerings. Look for the iPod touch to gain "3G" capabilities almost simultaneously with Facetime going live on "3G" (which will probably be 4G, when it happens).
Ok, so now I have to decide if I should get my old iPod Touch fixed and a new battery installed, or to wait until next month to see what's new
It comes with me every where. I'm an on the road sales man, and I use the iPod a ton. Mostly because the radio doesn't always work where I'm driving, and because there aren't many stations playing classical music on the east coast. Not to mention the stuff I have loaded to listen to.
Skip
I say wait. You'll be kicking yourself in the rear when the new ones come out.....that's why I'm waiting..
Shit, I guess they are not gonna give me the back facing camera, are they.
More importantly it means that this will be a video only cam, and will not take stills.
What the hell are you talking about? The iPhone 4 front camera takes still shots. Although it is only good for self portraits because it is very awkward to use if you want to use the front camera for anything other than face time or self portraits.
Obviously Apple will want to keep the iPod touch as thin as possible. A thin profile won't work with two camera lenses. It is however possible with the 1.3 VGA front camera that is in the iPhone 4. Just slap it into the next gen iPod Touch for face time.
EDIT: sheff, you are looking at an old design. They redesigned the iPhone so odds are good they might do the same with the iPod touch. The iPhone 4 front camera looks pretty small to me.
I will still buy the next one. But I won't be happy about it without the memory bump.
Number one Value Added for me is for Apple to double the RAM capacity for music, video & app storage not adding the same features that are on my iP4. Very disappointed I could only buy a 32GB iP4. Thought it would be 32/64GB For sure. Already up to 7GB worth of 415 Apps, 11 videos and 23 photos. Only 22GB of space left for anything else. Very weak capacity spec on the iP4. So easy to fill up if it weren't for the iPT I've always got with me as well.
So everything the iPhone has minus the phone is a must? Then why not just get an iPhone? I don't see 3G on an iPod happening.
No Monthly Fee + More Flash RAM. Hopefully up to 128GB even if we have to pay $499 for it - I would.
As I said earlier I am willing to bet that there won't be a back facing cam and the front facing will be vid only, no stills.
...the new touch would have to be square and thicker then it is now, which I doubt will happen. Plus it would explain why the previous Touches did not get a rear facing cam: it would be stupid to put a video only rear camera only to have to flip it next year to the front.
I really can't imagine they won't find a way to squeeze a back facing camera in there. This is Apple were talkin' bout here! :-)
Of course it will have the 2 cameras, it's the main FaceTime feature that differentiates from any other videochat device, in Apple they are not crazy to suppress that feature. That rear camera will record video too. Some people think that it will be too much similar too the iPhone, but it isn't a threat to the iPhone 'cause the phone part weights too much.
The only thing we should be questioning ourselves is: the rear camera will be 3.2MP or 5MP? I hope for 5MP but I really doubt it.
Don't get bit by the laws of physics, but see below.....
What the hell are you talking about? The iPhone 4 front camera takes still shots. Although it is only good for self portraits because it is very awkward to use if you want to use the front camera for anything other than face time or self portraits.
Obviously Apple will want to keep the iPod touch as thin as possible. A thin profile won't work with two camera lenses.
With a 128 GB iPod Touch possible, the rationale for the Classic fades (assuming it can be used as a portable ext. HD by fotogs and such as now).
That leaves room for another SKU - so we could have a superskinny iPT with FaceTime added, and a iPod CamTouch on the iPhone 4 chassis (no new part required - just a little re-machining) - plenty of room for 5mp or more, room for chips to process the input as well as your average P&S, 720p, maybe even optical zoom.
And now, along with phone manufacturers, netbook makers, music retailers, etc. quaking, Apple's big in the P&S photo world. Look out Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, etc.
The internet, your library, your music and videos, your apps and games, navigation, FaceTime, Skype, your good quality P&S camera and vidcam in an iPhone 4 sized device whenever you're near WiFi. Whoa up! There's a value equation.
Add a tiny unsmart phone for calls and TXT's and you're a total pocket road warrior at under 8 or 9 oz. and no costly ATT data plan.
Add a 3G data model and what else could you need (except a big screen and productivity apps on an iPad or MacBook)?
Shit, I guess they are not gonna give me the back facing camera, are they.
More importantly it means that this will be a video only cam, and will not take stills. Since I doubt I would use Facetime more then once a month if that, that fron facing cam is basically useless to me.
Hopefully there will at least be a way to hack the cam to take stills. It would be an awkward operation, but if possible will at least give some reason for that camera to exist.
I?m not really sure how you have jumped to this conclusion on an article showing a front glass display with a front facing camera hole. The cameras on the iPhone 4 are offset so I don?t see why these can?t be offset, too.
I also can?t see why the WiFi antenna can?t be around a backside camera. Putting it around a nice piece of black plastic would help hide the camera and flash a bit. Or Apple could just go the iPhone 4 route and use the frame for the WiFi antenna.
Even though I think a front-facing camera is first on Apple?s priorities, I see no reasoning that can conclude a backside camera will not be coming.
...plenty of room for 5mp or more, room for chips to process the input as well as your average P&S, 720p, maybe even optical zoom.)
From what I?ve seen the 5px camera in the iPhone 4 is too large for the Touch in its current thickness. A 3.xMpx camera has shown to be doable, at least when it comes to the housing thickness.
Even if FaceTime is added to the Touch arsenal, you still don't use the Touch as you would a phone, i.e. placed up to your ear. For FaceTime, the device is held in front of you.
As such, the question is, what are the advantages of a 3.5" screen compared to let's say a 4.5" screen and conversely, what are the advantages of a 4.5" screen to a 3.5" screen.
As far as I can figure it, the advantages of the smaller screen are that the device is easier to slip into one's pocket and for children with smaller hands to hold.
The advantages of a 4.5" screen vs. 3.5" screen would be better video presentation, better photo presentation, better gaming, much better browsing, easier virtual typing for those of us with larger hands, more engaging FaceTime sessions, better e-reading and better GPS capabilities. Being as the device would be larger, there would be more room for a longer-lasting battery.
From Apple's perspective, a somewhat larger Touch would bring in additional revenue because quite a few more current Touch owners would have a compelling reason to upgrade (who doesn't already have a decent enough camera on their phone plus good dedicated digital camera gear so the cameras are no big deal and as for the Retina display, that would be nice but hardly compelling enough to motivate one to upgrade). Such a device would also provide Apple with an effective means of competing against e-readers with bigger displays. If you stick with the Retina Display resolution, that much detail would still look outstanding on a 4.5" display.
One more thing. The larger form factor would make it easier to add a 3G version, if Apple thought that would be worthwhile.
Can't imagine why Apple would choose to not do it.
I like the ipod as an ipod! i actually am one of the few who "LOVE" the fact that apple did not put a camera in the ipad....
apple has always been about minimalist elegance,and all that is going out the window,to the wiz bang ooooooh ahhhh crowd.
i will switch to another brand of mp3 devices if they do this.
a retina display and bigger hard drive would be welcome,if they keep the classic touch design available along side one with a camera,that will be ok,like they kept the classic click wheel ipod.
two cents
In order for Apple to convince me to upgrade my Touch I need more screen real estate. I hate browsing on the Touch. I think the iPhone does a great job of browsing for a smartphone but the Touch is not a smartphone. The Touch is not a phone. Period.
[…]
Can't imagine why Apple would choose to not do it.
I think there is a case for a MID-focused device that can be made but it’s not as simple as putting iOS for the iPod Touch onto a device with a larger display, at least not for Apple or any company that cares about their product’s usability.
For one thing, it would require a new UI, with a new SDK for that UI. Apple’s simply not going to make everything that fits on the 3.5” device expand to fit on a 4.5”, 5.5” or whatever size device. That is a lot more difficult than people think.
For example, the iPad isn’t simply a larger iPhone/Touch. The UI was tailored for the device, not forced to work on a machine it wasn’t designed for (in other words, like netbooks shoehorning desktop OSes into a 10” display). People have said from the start that it would be great to use iPhone apps on their Macs, but even on the iPad — which has most HW similar to the iPhone, compared to a Mac — apps look and feel horrible. Even expanding that one inch on the diagonal for a 4.5” Touch would make buttons bigger than they needed to be.
If you still need proof, just take a look at the icon changes for the iPhone 4 of the previous iOS devices and the iPhone 4’s new font for the new display resolution. Apple is simply not going to pop the same UI into new HW then call it a day.
I dont want a camera in everything! geez why does everything have to have a frikin,camera in it. buy an IPHONE
I like the ipod as an ipod! i actually am one of the few who "LOVE" the fact that apple did not put a camera in the ipad....
apple has always been about minimalist elegance,and all that is going out the window,to the wiz bang ooooooh ahhhh crowd.
i will switch to another brand of mp3 devices if they do this.
a retina display and bigger hard drive would be welcome,if they keep the classic touch design available along side one with a camera,that will be ok,like they kept the classic click wheel ipod.
two cents
Assuming Apple can keep costs in check and not erode their margins, they would sell more iPod touches if it had a camera. For this reason itself, I would prefer if they marketed a camera-equipped iPod touch (I'm an AAPL shareholder).
As a longtime iPod touch owner, I personally would embrace a new model equipped with a camera.
My two cents as a shareholder.
From what I?ve seen the 5px camera in the iPhone 4 is too large for the Touch in its current thickness. A 3.xMpx camera has shown to be doable, at least when it comes to the housing thickness.
Just to clarify, that was in a hypothetical thicker model using the iP4 case. And getting the room by not having any phone parts.
My lineup was a thin Touch with FaceTime, and, after dropping the Classic, a thicker iPT Cam model with 128 GB, Retina Display and two cameras.
I dont want a camera in everything! geez why does everything have to have a frikin,camera in it. buy an IPHONE
I like the ipod as an ipod! i actually am one of the few who "LOVE" the fact that apple did not put a camera in the ipad....
apple has always been about minimalist elegance,and all that is going out the window,to the wiz bang ooooooh ahhhh crowd.
i will switch to another brand of mp3 devices if they do this.
a retina display and bigger hard drive would be welcome,if they keep the classic touch design available along side one with a camera,that will be ok,like they kept the classic click wheel ipod.
two cents
If it (a facetime cam only) doesn't make the device any bigger, you don't have to USE it, y'know. Or... ...go get that Zune, dude.
Assuming Apple can keep costs in check and not erode their margins, they would sell more iPod touches if it had a camera. For this reason itself, I would prefer if they marketed a camera-equipped iPod touch (I'm an AAPL shareholder).
As a longtime iPod touch owner, I personally would embrace a new model equipped with a camera.
My two cents as a shareholder.
Just to clarify, that was in a hypothetical thicker model using the iP4 case. And getting the room by not having any phone parts.
My lineup was a thin Touch with FaceTime, and, after dropping the Classic, a thicker iPT Cam model with 128 GB, Retina Display and two cameras.
If it (a facetime cam only) doesn't make the device any bigger, you don't have to USE it, y'know. Or... ...go get that Zune, dude.
An iPhone4 without the phone functionality = iPod touch 4 = WIN
You have all the space you need for whatever you want in the iPhone4, people that hate ATT and iPhones can have a sweet iPod touch, and iPod touches will sell like there was no tomorrow.
Glass on both sides, great form factor, massive battery life, 3MP back camera, front facing camera, Facetime, 1ghz and 512MB RAM, slick metal frame/ antenna.
What's not to like? Maybe the iPod touch 4 won't have Retina Display though, not enough parts and to keep iPhone 4 super premium in some way.
Only thing is ramping up production.
Such you have:
iPod touch 4 <--- iPod line
iPhone 4 <--- Smartphone
iPad <--- Tablet
iPad 7" <--- More portable Tablet
MacBook Air 12" <--- Ultralight laptop
MacBook Pro 13", 15", 17"
iMac 21", 27"
Mac Pro
HDTV (iTV unit hooked up to third party TVs) <--- 36" to 60"
This line up could cover all the form factors and use scenarios and shoot AAPL to $400 by end of 2012.
In order for Apple to convince me to upgrade my Touch I need more screen real estate. I hate browsing on the Touch. I think the iPhone does a great job of browsing for a smartphone but the Touch is not a smartphone. The Touch is not a phone. Period.
Even if FaceTime is added to the Touch arsenal, you still don't use the Touch as you would a phone, i.e. placed up to your ear. For FaceTime, the device is held in front of you.
As such, the question is, what are the advantages of a 3.5" screen compared to let's say a 4.5" screen and conversely, what are the advantages of a 4.5" screen to a 3.5" screen.
As far as I can figure it, the advantages of the smaller screen are that the device is easier to slip into one's pocket and for children with smaller hands to hold.
The advantages of a 4.5" screen vs. 3.5" screen would be better video presentation, better photo presentation, better gaming, much better browsing, easier virtual typing for those of us with larger hands, more engaging FaceTime sessions, better e-reading and better GPS capabilities. Being as the device would be larger, there would be more room for a longer-lasting battery.
From Apple's perspective, a somewhat larger Touch would bring in additional revenue...
Can't imagine why Apple would choose to not do it.