Doesn't make sense to label it as an iPod. Not in the slightest. It barely makes sense to call the current iPod touch an iPod. Making it 5.5" and adding cellular radio for DATA only makes it an iPad. Far more iPad than iPod. People are more likely to buy an iPad than iPod.
You think it doesn't matter which vowel in used in the name for the 5.5" device, but it certainly does.
Sorry, completely disagree... It would make zero sense to call it an iPad if it didn't run iPad apps - the screen, even at 5.5" is WAY too small to run iPad apps. The size and dimensions (4:3) of the iPad screens are specifically designed for running a different class of apps. Calling it an iPad, but not being able to run iPad apps would just confuse the hell out of users. That is why the iPod touch is not called an "iPad nano" or something. It is a different class of device.
I know quite a few people who do not have an iPhone but do have an iPod touch and use it in place of a mobile phone - the only down side is that they need to be connected to Wi-Fi to use it. Having a cell radio in the iPod touch makes as much sense as having one in an iPad and maybe even more so, since they're much more mobile than the iPad.
I don't see them releasing a 4.7 iPhone and then a month later and saying here is the 5.5. I know too many iPad 3 buyers who were pissed when the iPad 4 came out 6 months later. I could however see Apple announcing both versions and releasing the 4.7 immediately to 2 weeks and the 5.5 at a later date.
They might have been pissed but they got over it. They kept using their perfectly good iPad 3's or decided to sell them and buy a newer model.
Quote:
Originally Posted by huglev
They'd still need to update the 4 inch with latest specs, and three new phones won't happen = no 5.5 inch phone. Something else is going on here.
Who says it will get updated? This is likely the EOL for the 4" at least as a premium model. Slap a plastic case on the 5s and boom...introducing the iPhone 6c.
Sorry, completely disagree... It would make zero sense to call it an iPad if it didn't run iPad apps - the screen, even at 5.5" is WAY too small to run iPad apps. The size and dimensions (4:3) of the iPad screens are specifically designed for running a different class of apps. Calling it an iPad, but not being able to run iPad apps would just confuse the hell out of users. That is why the iPod touch is not called an "iPad nano" or something. It is a different class of device.
I know quite a few people who do not have an iPhone but do have an iPod touch and use it in place of a mobile phone - the only down side is that they need to be connected to Wi-Fi to use it. Having a cell radio in the iPod touch makes as much sense as having one in an iPad and maybe even more so, since they're much more mobile than the iPad.
Good points and I mostly agree. I have been wondering the last few years when the iPod Touch would also offer a cellular data version like the iPad. Seems a natural progression to keep it relevant. I still think there is room or a 5.5" iPhone as well though. I imagine the iPod touch would remain at 4" as an entry level product. 4" for the iPod and "C" model iPhones which will offer a clear delineation between the iPhone with much larger displays.
One shall never worry nor analyze the rumors. Unless u r working for S;?,!.&' or G&;&?,!,(
Let me tell you who ISN'T working for Samsung: Samsung just kicked their head of mobile design to the curb. Donghoon Chang, most responsible for the company's flagship Galaxy phones is on the street with his resumé. This is not a rumor... total fact!
Doesn't make sense to label it as an iPod. Not in the slightest. It barely makes sense to call the current iPod touch an iPod. Making it 5.5" and adding cellular radio for DATA only makes it an iPad. Far more iPad than iPod. People are more likely to buy an iPad than iPod.
You think it doesn't matter which vowel in used in the name for the 5.5" device, but it certainly does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin
Sorry, completely disagree... It would make zero sense to call it an iPad if it didn't run iPad apps - the screen, even at 5.5" is WAY too small to run iPad apps. The size and dimensions (4:3) of the iPad screens are specifically designed for running a different class of apps. Calling it an iPad, but not being able to run iPad apps would just confuse the hell out of users. That is why the iPod touch is not called an "iPad nano" or something. It is a different class of device.
I know quite a few people who do not have an iPhone but do have an iPod touch and use it in place of a mobile phone - the only down side is that they need to be connected to Wi-Fi to use it. Having a cell radio in the iPod touch makes as much sense as having one in an iPad and maybe even more so, since they're much more mobile than the iPad.
Not holding my breath, but I agree there might well be a market for a non-phone that ran all the phone apps in a mostly pocketable size.
For one thing, "iPod" is an iconic brand (that set so much in motion) maybe worth a little reviving...
...4G and a larger screen (and maybe a pretty bitchin' camera in the space saved by removing the phone bits) would be grounds for such a revival... ...and also differentiate it from both the iPhone and iPad.
For another, using phones as phones is a disappearing behavior for many, so why not have the cheapest dumb phone and plan around from whatever carrier or secondary carrier even for infrequent calls and casual texting and one of these for the rest of what an iPhone does. And save quite a few bucks on the monthly bill...?
I have a smart phone bought off contract not connected to T-Mob yet (because I didn't move to the area I thought I was headed for that has good TM service yet) and use it as a WiFi device around the home and at coffee shops/cable company hotspots all over the area... ...and well worth what I paid for it for that alone.
I also know several people with smaller iPods who use them as their main net access device, and their main complaint is screen size.
The question to me would be if the niche looked large enough to Cupertino (and how people would howl if Apple offered a 5-5.5" device that wasn't a complete iPhone without offering a phone).
Comments
The trick is to make a lot of noise.
Doesn't make sense to label it as an iPod. Not in the slightest. It barely makes sense to call the current iPod touch an iPod. Making it 5.5" and adding cellular radio for DATA only makes it an iPad. Far more iPad than iPod. People are more likely to buy an iPad than iPod.
You think it doesn't matter which vowel in used in the name for the 5.5" device, but it certainly does.
Sorry, completely disagree... It would make zero sense to call it an iPad if it didn't run iPad apps - the screen, even at 5.5" is WAY too small to run iPad apps. The size and dimensions (4:3) of the iPad screens are specifically designed for running a different class of apps. Calling it an iPad, but not being able to run iPad apps would just confuse the hell out of users. That is why the iPod touch is not called an "iPad nano" or something. It is a different class of device.
I know quite a few people who do not have an iPhone but do have an iPod touch and use it in place of a mobile phone - the only down side is that they need to be connected to Wi-Fi to use it. Having a cell radio in the iPod touch makes as much sense as having one in an iPad and maybe even more so, since they're much more mobile than the iPad.
I don't see them releasing a 4.7 iPhone and then a month later and saying here is the 5.5. I know too many iPad 3 buyers who were pissed when the iPad 4 came out 6 months later. I could however see Apple announcing both versions and releasing the 4.7 immediately to 2 weeks and the 5.5 at a later date.
They might have been pissed but they got over it. They kept using their perfectly good iPad 3's or decided to sell them and buy a newer model.
They'd still need to update the 4 inch with latest specs, and three new phones won't happen = no 5.5 inch phone. Something else is going on here.
Who says it will get updated? This is likely the EOL for the 4" at least as a premium model. Slap a plastic case on the 5s and boom...introducing the iPhone 6c.
Sorry, completely disagree... It would make zero sense to call it an iPad if it didn't run iPad apps - the screen, even at 5.5" is WAY too small to run iPad apps. The size and dimensions (4:3) of the iPad screens are specifically designed for running a different class of apps. Calling it an iPad, but not being able to run iPad apps would just confuse the hell out of users. That is why the iPod touch is not called an "iPad nano" or something. It is a different class of device.
I know quite a few people who do not have an iPhone but do have an iPod touch and use it in place of a mobile phone - the only down side is that they need to be connected to Wi-Fi to use it. Having a cell radio in the iPod touch makes as much sense as having one in an iPad and maybe even more so, since they're much more mobile than the iPad.
Good points and I mostly agree. I have been wondering the last few years when the iPod Touch would also offer a cellular data version like the iPad. Seems a natural progression to keep it relevant. I still think there is room or a 5.5" iPhone as well though. I imagine the iPod touch would remain at 4" as an entry level product. 4" for the iPod and "C" model iPhones which will offer a clear delineation between the iPhone with much larger displays.
Let me tell you who ISN'T working for Samsung: Samsung just kicked their head of mobile design to the curb. Donghoon Chang, most responsible for the company's flagship Galaxy phones is on the street with his resumé. This is not a rumor... total fact!
Doesn't make sense to label it as an iPod. Not in the slightest. It barely makes sense to call the current iPod touch an iPod. Making it 5.5" and adding cellular radio for DATA only makes it an iPad. Far more iPad than iPod. People are more likely to buy an iPad than iPod.
You think it doesn't matter which vowel in used in the name for the 5.5" device, but it certainly does.
Quote:Sorry, completely disagree... It would make zero sense to call it an iPad if it didn't run iPad apps - the screen, even at 5.5" is WAY too small to run iPad apps. The size and dimensions (4:3) of the iPad screens are specifically designed for running a different class of apps. Calling it an iPad, but not being able to run iPad apps would just confuse the hell out of users. That is why the iPod touch is not called an "iPad nano" or something. It is a different class of device.
I know quite a few people who do not have an iPhone but do have an iPod touch and use it in place of a mobile phone - the only down side is that they need to be connected to Wi-Fi to use it. Having a cell radio in the iPod touch makes as much sense as having one in an iPad and maybe even more so, since they're much more mobile than the iPad.
Not holding my breath, but I agree there might well be a market for a non-phone that ran all the phone apps in a mostly pocketable size.
For one thing, "iPod" is an iconic brand (that set so much in motion) maybe worth a little reviving...
...4G and a larger screen (and maybe a pretty bitchin' camera in the space saved by removing the phone bits) would be grounds for such a revival... ...and also differentiate it from both the iPhone and iPad.
For another, using phones as phones is a disappearing behavior for many, so why not have the cheapest dumb phone and plan around from whatever carrier or secondary carrier even for infrequent calls and casual texting and one of these for the rest of what an iPhone does. And save quite a few bucks on the monthly bill...?
I have a smart phone bought off contract not connected to T-Mob yet (because I didn't move to the area I thought I was headed for that has good TM service yet) and use it as a WiFi device around the home and at coffee shops/cable company hotspots all over the area... ...and well worth what I paid for it for that alone.
I also know several people with smaller iPods who use them as their main net access device, and their main complaint is screen size.
The question to me would be if the niche looked large enough to Cupertino (and how people would howl if Apple offered a 5-5.5" device that wasn't a complete iPhone without offering a phone).
Whaaaaaaattttttttttt?