Why does a Skype phone need GPS? Or are you making separate points?
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.
I believe that Apple would like to ultimately undermine the phone industry. This would be the device to drive the wedge to do so. Besides, there must be some greater plan for the new Clouds they are building, beyond sync data, sell apps and run the voice command functions. These functions seem to overlap the very function of a phone company. Steve works slowly, but insidiously, in his plans. The only thing missing is the cell towers. And that might be only a matter of money.
Just a thought.
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."
That is exactly why our friends Big Red and Ma Bell won't let this device happen. If you can charge through the roof for texts and calls that cost you nothing, why carry a device that allows you to do both for $15 per month?
Don't get me wrong, I want it. I wanted this to happen since iPod Touch 1, but now I gave up and own an iPhone. Specifically because I don't believe 3G touch will happen any time soon.
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
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.
That is exactly why our friends Big Red and Ma Bell won't let this device happen. If you can charge through the roof for texts and calls that cost you nothing, why carry a device that allows you to do both for $15 per month?
Don't get me wrong, I want it. I wanted this to happen since iPod Touch 1, but now I gave up and own an iPhone. Specifically because I don't believe 3G touch will happen any time soon.
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.
I believe that Apple would like to ultimately undermine the phone industry. This would be the device to drive the wedge to do so. Besides, there must be some greater plan for the new Clouds they are building, beyond sync data, sell apps and run the voice command functions. These functions seem to overlap the very function of a phone company. Steve works slowly, but insidiously, in his plans. The only thing missing is the cell towers. And that might be only a matter of money.
Just a thought.
Dear Mr. Van Winkle! What a hilarious thought! However, while you were sleeping, the phones have actually already undermined the iPod industry!
The only problem with it will be a battery life while 3g is on. No way it's going to last for more than a few hours, thus you would not be able to use it as a skype/facetime "phone" available to receive calls round-the-clock.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir
But the fact will be that most people will hate to carry an extra device for GSM-coverage voice
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!
Quote:
Originally Posted by 333en
Why do we need a 3G iPod touch? Isn't that what an iPhone is? How about they make a Wi-Fi only iPhone instead and drop the iPod touch completely?
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.
I think this makes mucho sense on many levels and would even consider this option over an iPhone if it had the same quality display as the iPhone.
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.
Why do we need a 3G iPod touch? Isn't that what an iPhone is? How about they make a Wi-Fi only iPhone instead and drop the iPod touch completely?
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.
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.
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...
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98
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.
I believe that Apple would like to ultimately undermine the phone industry. This would be the device to drive the wedge to do so. Besides, there must be some greater plan for the new Clouds they are building, beyond sync data, sell apps and run the voice command functions. These functions seem to overlap the very function of a phone company. Steve works slowly, but insidiously, in his plans. The only thing missing is the cell towers. And that might be only a matter of money.
Just a thought.
OR...it is just a gateway device to set kids and young adults on the path to owning an iPhone.
The only problem with it will be a battery life while 3g is on. No way it's going to last for more than a few hours, thus you would not be able to use it as a skype/facetime "phone" available to receive calls round-the-clock.
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?
The current 16 and 32 GB iPod touches cost $299 and $399. The 16 and 32 GB iPhone 4s cost $649 and $749.
So, how much would a 3G iPod touch cost? The same $129 premium as on the the iPad? That would leave a $320 premium for the slightly better display (wider viewing angle), camera, metal chassis, microphone and actual GSM/3G voice capability of the iPhone 4.
Something has to give here unless actual non-VoIP phone capacity can really command such a huge premium. What likely will happen is that Apple will slightly up the 3G premium (maybe to $150), will slightly reduce the iPhone 4 price, maybe to $600.
But the fact will be that most people will hate to carry an extra device for GSM-coverage voice (you cannot do Skype over pure GSM or even pure GRSP, though Edge will do if the signal is strong enough). Of course, in the US where most carriers refuse to sell data-only or data+low minute plans for smartphones, a 3G iPod touch might get an additional boost.
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?
Why do we need a 3G iPod touch? Isn't that what an iPhone is? How about they make a Wi-Fi only iPhone instead and drop the iPod touch completely?
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
One thing that bugs me about the 3G iPad is that AT&T and/or Apple doesn't allow you to txt to the phone number. I think there might be apps that work around this but I don't know of any. I also have an unlimited AT&T 3G card for a laptop and the built in software lets you txt just fine. I don't know why they don't allow it on iPad and if the Touch get 3G data, are they going to do the same thing?
Just use Google voice with your data plan and you can text to any phone number.
What Apple should produce is an iPod touch with voice only (no 3G), i.e. a dumb phone. My children have dumb phones because I do not want to pay $180/yr each for the data plan. And, they would easily exceed the 200MB anyway.
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.
1. Sit it in a charging dock where your land line used to sit.
You do not need a mobile device for that purpose. For instance, I have Ooma and it's a completely free service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing
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?
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.
Comments
Why does a Skype phone need GPS? Or are you making separate points?
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.
I believe that Apple would like to ultimately undermine the phone industry. This would be the device to drive the wedge to do so. Besides, there must be some greater plan for the new Clouds they are building, beyond sync data, sell apps and run the voice command functions. These functions seem to overlap the very function of a phone company. Steve works slowly, but insidiously, in his plans. The only thing missing is the cell towers. And that might be only a matter of money.
Just a thought.
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."
That is exactly why our friends Big Red and Ma Bell won't let this device happen. If you can charge through the roof for texts and calls that cost you nothing, why carry a device that allows you to do both for $15 per month?
Don't get me wrong, I want it. I wanted this to happen since iPod Touch 1, but now I gave up and own an iPhone. Specifically because I don't believe 3G touch will happen any time soon.
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
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.
Doh. Still think that Apple won't release a device that won't accepted by carriers in US.
Don't you people have pay as you go sims down there?
That is exactly why our friends Big Red and Ma Bell won't let this device happen. If you can charge through the roof for texts and calls that cost you nothing, why carry a device that allows you to do both for $15 per month?
Don't get me wrong, I want it. I wanted this to happen since iPod Touch 1, but now I gave up and own an iPhone. Specifically because I don't believe 3G touch will happen any time soon.
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.
Don't you people have pay as you go sims down there?
Doesn't matter. The carriers don't allow any plan but the iPhone's plan on an iPhone.
I believe that Apple would like to ultimately undermine the phone industry. This would be the device to drive the wedge to do so. Besides, there must be some greater plan for the new Clouds they are building, beyond sync data, sell apps and run the voice command functions. These functions seem to overlap the very function of a phone company. Steve works slowly, but insidiously, in his plans. The only thing missing is the cell towers. And that might be only a matter of money.
Just a thought.
Dear Mr. Van Winkle! What a hilarious thought! However, while you were sleeping, the phones have actually already undermined the iPod industry!
Sweet Dreams-
The only problem with it will be a battery life while 3g is on. No way it's going to last for more than a few hours, thus you would not be able to use it as a skype/facetime "phone" available to receive calls round-the-clock.
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.
But the fact will be that most people will hate to carry an extra device for GSM-coverage voice
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!
Why do we need a 3G iPod touch? Isn't that what an iPhone is? How about they make a Wi-Fi only iPhone instead and drop the iPod touch completely?
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.
I think this makes mucho sense on many levels and would even consider this option over an iPhone if it had the same quality display as the iPhone.
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.
Why do we need a 3G iPod touch? Isn't that what an iPhone is? How about they make a Wi-Fi only iPhone instead and drop the iPod touch completely?
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
I believe that Apple would like to ultimately undermine the phone industry. This would be the device to drive the wedge to do so. Besides, there must be some greater plan for the new Clouds they are building, beyond sync data, sell apps and run the voice command functions. These functions seem to overlap the very function of a phone company. Steve works slowly, but insidiously, in his plans. The only thing missing is the cell towers. And that might be only a matter of money.
Just a thought.
OR...it is just a gateway device to set kids and young adults on the path to owning an iPhone.
The only problem with it will be a battery life while 3g is on. No way it's going to last for more than a few hours, thus you would not be able to use it as a skype/facetime "phone" available to receive calls round-the-clock.
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?
The current 16 and 32 GB iPod touches cost $299 and $399. The 16 and 32 GB iPhone 4s cost $649 and $749.
So, how much would a 3G iPod touch cost? The same $129 premium as on the the iPad? That would leave a $320 premium for the slightly better display (wider viewing angle), camera, metal chassis, microphone and actual GSM/3G voice capability of the iPhone 4.
Something has to give here unless actual non-VoIP phone capacity can really command such a huge premium. What likely will happen is that Apple will slightly up the 3G premium (maybe to $150), will slightly reduce the iPhone 4 price, maybe to $600.
But the fact will be that most people will hate to carry an extra device for GSM-coverage voice (you cannot do Skype over pure GSM or even pure GRSP, though Edge will do if the signal is strong enough). Of course, in the US where most carriers refuse to sell data-only or data+low minute plans for smartphones, a 3G iPod touch might get an additional boost.
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?
Why do we need a 3G iPod touch? Isn't that what an iPhone is? How about they make a Wi-Fi only iPhone instead and drop the iPod touch completely?
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
One thing that bugs me about the 3G iPad is that AT&T and/or Apple doesn't allow you to txt to the phone number. I think there might be apps that work around this but I don't know of any. I also have an unlimited AT&T 3G card for a laptop and the built in software lets you txt just fine. I don't know why they don't allow it on iPad and if the Touch get 3G data, are they going to do the same thing?
Just use Google voice with your data plan and you can text to any phone number.
What Apple should produce is an iPod touch with voice only (no 3G), i.e. a dumb phone. My children have dumb phones because I do not want to pay $180/yr each for the data plan. And, they would easily exceed the 200MB anyway.
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.
1. Sit it in a charging dock where your land line used to sit.
You do not need a mobile device for that purpose. For instance, I have Ooma and it's a completely free service.
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?
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.
=