will a new touch come in june?? my foriegn exchange student and my little girl want to buy a touch "soon" one leaves for japan june 21
New iPods are typically released in September. That is when the original iPod Touch came out (although it was announced at the same time as the phone).
Separately, the report cites the same sources as saying that this year's iPhones will feature "exactly the same shape and size than the current iPhone 3G, despite fakes and rumors circulating."
Is the same "plastic" outer shell that features possible "stress" cracks going to be the same as well?
Is the same "plastic" outer shell that features possible "stress" cracks going to be the same as well?
You know if you have one of the phones with stress cracks you can just walk into any Apple store, make an appointment with a genius and have it replaced for free right?
I don't really see a need to create artificial differentiation between the iPod Touch and the iPhone.
The differentiation is already there. One makes phones calls through a cell carrier the other does not.
I wouldn't exactly call it artificial. The first Touch did nit have a speaker while the next generation did. Despite the inclusion it was still not as good as the original iPhone's speaker. They could have simply used a cheaper speaker but it looks note likely that the issue is based on the device's thinness. This thin obsession will keep the iPhone's camera behind in quality over other smartphones. That isn't necessarily a bad thing; it's a trade off that may or may bot appeal to the customer.
Of course, the next argument is that Apple doesn't have to make their devices so thin. While true, it is what they do and to expect anything different is irrational.
I see no reason to give something that's supposed to be dedicated to playing music, the ability to take photos. I mean, its a cool feature, but I think it's something that would be better off on the ipod touch. I've never heard anyone say they want the ipod touch strictly for music, know what I mean? It's the opposite for the regular ipod which people think of when looking for something for music only.
Could be wrong though. If it didn't raise the price substantially, I'm sure people would make use of it.
I wouldn't exactly call it artificial. The first Touch did nit have a speaker while the next generation did. Despite the inclusion it was still not as good as the original iPhone's speaker. They could have simply used a cheaper speaker but it looks note likely that the issue is based on the device's thinness. This thin obsession will keep the iPhone's camera behind in quality over other smartphones. That isn't necessarily a bad thing; it's a trade off that may or may bot appeal to the customer.
Of course, the next argument is that Apple doesn't have to make their devices so thin. While true, it is what they do and to expect anything different is irrational.
It was never meant to be. Did it ever occur to you that the iPhone needs a better speaker because it is a phone?
Yup, me must agree. I think a camera on the Nano could make sense, if only from a 'need to upgrade' perspective. It would be a fun thing aimed at the target Nano consumer group. But I somehow doubt it will happen. If Apple brings out an iPhone 'light' in some form or other, it will have a camera, and ditto the Touch. A phone without a camera today would be lame.
My preference for the iTouch would be for CCD camera with fill LED flash which does not use much power. However, the game changer would be speaker and microphone like the iPhone. Dirt cheap to implement. It would allow VoIP calls over WiFi. Start a whole new upgrade cycle. I could use such a phone at home, work and some of the public places with free WiFi.
However, even I realize it is not going to happen. Apple got the market segmented and is in tight with ATT. It would be too consumer friendly!
I know that there is the NightCamera app that helps, but without a flash indoor images, especially in the evening, are nearly impossible to get of any quality. So Apple could add as many megapixels they want, but no flash still means blurry images.
You don't even need to appeal to the lack of a flash to make the point that adding more megapixels won't prevent blurry images. With those tiny optics that are in cell phones, CCDs of even modest density already outperform the optical resolution. In other words, putting sensors with more megapixels into most cell phones is only going to result in getting more "blurry" pixels. This is true in plain daylight, flash or no flash, and perfectly still camera and subject.
If you want quality photos, you need a good sized lens and a respectable focal distance, preferably with nothing in between. In other words... get a camera, not a camera phone.
Number of pixels does not necessarily equate to quality. It's amazing how many people don't get this.
A nano with video recording could take the market from the Flip.
Maybe it could. That said, I really haven't figured out what the market is for the Flip-like devices when a point and shoot camera of the same price can record good video too, and you'd get optical zoom.
The iPod Touch sells more than the iPhone. It makes little sense to deliver an iPod Touch sans camera when iLife has had iPhoto forever.
The cameras should geotag and leverage video recording features as well. The iPod is no longer just a music player it's a multimedia and communications device.
I'll be waiting and in September I'll order 4 of these if they have the features I want.
i second that vote for geotagging (GPS too?).
and yeah, i use my iPT for more than music too. i actually use the apps more than listen to music, spent more too.
Maybe it could. That said, I really haven't figured out what the market is for the Flip-like devices when a point and shoot camera of the same price can record good video too, and you'd get optical zoom.
It may work by combing the convenience of combining one's iPod with a "good enough" camera.
Comments
I'd rather have GPS in the Touch before a camera. Most people with a Touch are probably already toting a phone with camera.
I definitely agree.
will a new touch come in june?? my foriegn exchange student and my little girl want to buy a touch "soon" one leaves for japan june 21
New iPods are typically released in September. That is when the original iPod Touch came out (although it was announced at the same time as the phone).
come on that's reaching
charlie could be the "pre" developers dogs name
Separately, the report cites the same sources as saying that this year's iPhones will feature "exactly the same shape and size than the current iPhone 3G, despite fakes and rumors circulating."
Is the same "plastic" outer shell that features possible "stress" cracks going to be the same as well?
Not bloody likely.....I say perhaps on the Ipod Touch...
The touch makes sense.
Is the same "plastic" outer shell that features possible "stress" cracks going to be the same as well?
You know if you have one of the phones with stress cracks you can just walk into any Apple store, make an appointment with a genius and have it replaced for free right?
I don't really see a need to create artificial differentiation between the iPod Touch and the iPhone.
The differentiation is already there. One makes phones calls through a cell carrier the other does not.
I wouldn't exactly call it artificial. The first Touch did nit have a speaker while the next generation did. Despite the inclusion it was still not as good as the original iPhone's speaker. They could have simply used a cheaper speaker but it looks note likely that the issue is based on the device's thinness. This thin obsession will keep the iPhone's camera behind in quality over other smartphones. That isn't necessarily a bad thing; it's a trade off that may or may bot appeal to the customer.
Of course, the next argument is that Apple doesn't have to make their devices so thin. While true, it is what they do and to expect anything different is irrational.
Could be wrong though. If it didn't raise the price substantially, I'm sure people would make use of it.
I wouldn't exactly call it artificial. The first Touch did nit have a speaker while the next generation did. Despite the inclusion it was still not as good as the original iPhone's speaker. They could have simply used a cheaper speaker but it looks note likely that the issue is based on the device's thinness. This thin obsession will keep the iPhone's camera behind in quality over other smartphones. That isn't necessarily a bad thing; it's a trade off that may or may bot appeal to the customer.
Of course, the next argument is that Apple doesn't have to make their devices so thin. While true, it is what they do and to expect anything different is irrational.
It was never meant to be. Did it ever occur to you that the iPhone needs a better speaker because it is a phone?
It was never meant to be. Did it ever occur to you that the iPhone needs a better speaker because it is a phone?
Did it ever occur to you to read AND comprehend the post you are quoting before submitting your reply?
One word for this:
Nifty.
Yup, me must agree. I think a camera on the Nano could make sense, if only from a 'need to upgrade' perspective. It would be a fun thing aimed at the target Nano consumer group. But I somehow doubt it will happen. If Apple brings out an iPhone 'light' in some form or other, it will have a camera, and ditto the Touch. A phone without a camera today would be lame.
Did it ever occur to you to read AND comprehend the post you are quoting before submitting your reply?
Always- especially when they're well written AND not constantly reinterpreted by the author himself to deflect valid criticism.
However, even I realize it is not going to happen. Apple got the market segmented and is in tight with ATT. It would be too consumer friendly!
I know that there is the NightCamera app that helps, but without a flash indoor images, especially in the evening, are nearly impossible to get of any quality. So Apple could add as many megapixels they want, but no flash still means blurry images.
You don't even need to appeal to the lack of a flash to make the point that adding more megapixels won't prevent blurry images. With those tiny optics that are in cell phones, CCDs of even modest density already outperform the optical resolution. In other words, putting sensors with more megapixels into most cell phones is only going to result in getting more "blurry" pixels. This is true in plain daylight, flash or no flash, and perfectly still camera and subject.
If you want quality photos, you need a good sized lens and a respectable focal distance, preferably with nothing in between. In other words... get a camera, not a camera phone.
Number of pixels does not necessarily equate to quality. It's amazing how many people don't get this.
Thompson
i'd rather have gps in the touch before a camera. Most people with a touch are probably already toting a phone with camera.
+1!!!!
A nano with video recording could take the market from the Flip.
Maybe it could. That said, I really haven't figured out what the market is for the Flip-like devices when a point and shoot camera of the same price can record good video too, and you'd get optical zoom.
I'd rather have GPS in the Touch before a camera. Most people with a Touch are probably already toting a phone with camera.
What's wrong with both?
The iPod Touch sells more than the iPhone. It makes little sense to deliver an iPod Touch sans camera when iLife has had iPhoto forever.
The cameras should geotag and leverage video recording features as well. The iPod is no longer just a music player it's a multimedia and communications device.
I'll be waiting and in September I'll order 4 of these if they have the features I want.
i second that vote for geotagging (GPS too?).
and yeah, i use my iPT for more than music too. i actually use the apps more than listen to music, spent more too.
Maybe it could. That said, I really haven't figured out what the market is for the Flip-like devices when a point and shoot camera of the same price can record good video too, and you'd get optical zoom.
It may work by combing the convenience of combining one's iPod with a "good enough" camera.