3G iPod touch means the iPhone is dead. There's no point in buying an iPhone, as you could get an iPod touch and use Skype, Fring, or any of the other VoIP services for calls.
Please thing about things before posting them. This is abject nonsense.
Wi-Fi and 3G iPod touch 4th generation. Same 3G-type plans and no exclusive as the iPad. You heard it here first.
I'm not going to dismiss this as impossible, there are certain appeals for all parties involved. However Si'm not convinced the price point can be managed well against iPhone. Once you put a 3G modem in a Touch how do you justify iPhones price? Plus if restrictions are put on VoIP apps, Facetime and the like then what is the point?
On the otherhand I could see myself snapping one up real quick and dumping iPhone for something much cheaoer. The 3G networking however needs to be unrestricted with respect to VoIP and such. The real fact of the matter is that i use the actual phone function very little on my iPhone. Mail and net access are the big points.
While a Touch would be good here this would work especially well on a larger device. Not massively large mind you but a slightly larger screen would rock. Looking at my 3G right now the screen could be made wider with little impact on the final size in ones pocket. Add a quarter inch here and a half inch there and we would end up with a much larger screen that still fits into ones pocket.
Sadly the other negative here is that 3G would kill Touches battery. That is unless they implement some sort of auto power down of the interface. Lets face battery life is a big selling point of the Touch
Yes, I am speculating. I have no inside information.
Apple would probably disable Face Time over 3G, effectively preventing iPhone cannibalization.
Apple has changed its mobile device business model from exclusive contracts with mobile carriers to wide open competition. For instance, in Canada, the 3 major carriers all sell the iPhone. The iPad 3G has no requirement for a contract.
Yes, I've thought this through. It's perfectly consistent with Apple's business model and past behaviour.
Also, Apple would make the iPod touch 3G far more expensive than the Wi-Fi only version. Maybe not $130 more expensive, but not far off. This would also preserve the advantage of buying an iPhone, since it would be far cheaper with a contract.
Apple has changed its mobile device business model from exclusive contracts with mobile carriers to wide open competition. For instance, in Canada, the 3 major carriers all sell the iPhone. The iPad 3G has no requirement for a contract.
That's because Canada has 3 HSPA carriers on the 850/1900 MHz bands: Bell, Rogers, and Telus. However, in the US, there's only one major GSM/HSPA carrier that works with the 850/1900 MHz bands found in the iPhone and iPad 3G. That carrier is AT&T. Verizon and Sprint are CDMA/EV-DO 3G, and T-Mobile USA uses 1700/2100 MHz HSPA for 3G.
However, there is a possible solution. Logically, in the short/medium term, Apple could drop in a pentaband HSPA radio (850/900/1700/1900/2100) in the iPhone 4, iPod touch 4, and iPad 3G. This is like what Nokia did on their N8 to add T-Mobile USA and WIND Canada support. Plus adding a pentaband HSPA radio would cost far lower than building a separate CDMA version for Verizon and Sprint. This would let Apple add another carrier in the short them while sticking to what Tim Cook calls "one iPhone for the world". By 2012, when AT&T and Verizon (and possibly Sprint/Clear) move to LTE, then Verizon can be added.
That's because Canada has 3 HSPA carriers on the 850/1900 MHz bands: Bell, Rogers, and Telus. However, in the US, there's only one major GSM/HSPA carrier that works with the 850/1900 MHz bands found in the iPhone and iPad 3G. That carrier is AT&T. Verizon and Sprint are CDMA/EV-DO 3G, and T-Mobile USA uses 1700/2100 MHz HSPA for 3G.
What's to prevent Apple from including a 3G antenna on the next gen iPod touch that works with T-Mobile's GSM frequency?
Quote:
However, there is a possible solution. Logically, in the short/medium term, Apple could drop in a pentaband HSPA radio (850/900/1700/1900/2100) in the iPhone 4, iPod touch 4, and iPad 3G. This is like what Nokia did on their N8 to add T-Mobile USA and WIND Canada support. Plus adding a pentaband HSPA radio would cost far lower than building a separate CDMA version for Verizon and Sprint. This would let Apple add another carrier in the short them while sticking to what Tim Cook calls "one iPhone for the world". By 2012, when AT&T and Verizon (and possibly Sprint/Clear) move to LTE, then Verizon can be added.
OK, I guess the answer to my question is "nothing much".
What's to prevent Apple from including a 3G antenna on the next gen iPod touch that works with T-Mobile's GSM frequency?
Four reasons:
1) AT&T would likely want the iPhone 4, iPad Wi-Fi + 3G, and iPod touch 3G to all be exclusively on AT&T.
2) Though the length of the original iPhone contract with AT&T is unknown, Ma Bell would likely extend its exclusive contract with Apple in exchange for an iPod touch 3G, much like what was rumored for the iPad Wi-Fi + 3G.
3) The fact that the iPhone 4 doesn't have a T-Mobile USA-compatible 3G antenna, and likely the iPod touch 3G wouldn't, either.
4) Apple likes keeping product lines consistent. Why would the iPod touch get T-Mobile 3G before the iPhone 4?
It's funny that you think FaceTime is the reason they won't do this.
My point is that any voice/video communication can be disabled over 3G as opposed to Wi-Fi, effectively preventing iPhone cannibalization.
Quote:
Between CARRIERS. Not between THEIR OWN DEVICES.
See my point above. Apple will ensure the 3G touch doesn't cannibalize the iPhone.
Quote:
I'd love an example of this from any point in Apple's past.
The iPad?
Quote:
So $2,000+ over the life of the device is supposed to be CHEAPER than whatever plan this mythical iPod touch 3G gets?
Perception is reality. The mobile carriers' business plan of ripping off customers by thinking they're getting a cheap or free phone has worked incredibly well. Personally, I abhor cell phone contracts, but I'm in a very tiny minority.
Quote:
Right. Yeah, you go ahead and see how well that works out for you.
1) AT&T would likely want the iPhone 4, iPad Wi-Fi + 3G, and iPod touch 3G to all be exclusively on AT&T.
Well, unless AppleInsider, all the other rumour sites, and numerous Wall Street analysts (ok, the last ones are *most* likely to be wrong ) are all out to lunch, Apple is about to end AT&T's exclusive contract. Since the iPhone 3G, Apple has shunned the tactic of granting exclusive contracts to mobile carriers, preferring to do business with multiple competing carriers in most countries outside the U.S. For instance, in Canada, the iPhone and iPad data plans are available from all 3 GSM carriers. In the U.S., it appears as though a deal with Verizon is inevitable (though I could be wrong).
Quote:
2) Though the length of the original iPhone contract with AT&T is unknown, Ma Bell would likely extend its exclusive contract with Apple in exchange for an iPod touch 3G, much like what was rumored for the iPad Wi-Fi + 3G.
Like I said, it's no longer Apple's style to do exclusive deals judging by what they're doing in the rest of the world.
Quote:
3) The fact that the iPhone 4 doesn't have a T-Mobile USA-compatible 3G antenna, and likely the iPod touch 3G wouldn't, either.
This makes sense, but it doesn't prevent Apple from introducing the iPod touch 3G as far as the rest of the world is concerned.
Quote:
4) Apple likes keeping product lines consistent. Why would the iPod touch get T-Mobile 3G before the iPhone 4?
Comments
3G iPod touch means the iPhone is dead. There's no point in buying an iPhone, as you could get an iPod touch and use Skype, Fring, or any of the other VoIP services for calls.
Please thing about things before posting them. This is abject nonsense.
Wi-Fi and 3G iPod touch 4th generation. Same 3G-type plans and no exclusive as the iPad. You heard it here first.
Just because you think you're the first person to post that rumor doesn't mean you are.
Wi-Fi and 3G iPod touch 4th generation. Same 3G-type plans and no exclusive as the iPad. You heard it here first.
I'm not going to dismiss this as impossible, there are certain appeals for all parties involved. However Si'm not convinced the price point can be managed well against iPhone. Once you put a 3G modem in a Touch how do you justify iPhones price? Plus if restrictions are put on VoIP apps, Facetime and the like then what is the point?
On the otherhand I could see myself snapping one up real quick and dumping iPhone for something much cheaoer. The 3G networking however needs to be unrestricted with respect to VoIP and such. The real fact of the matter is that i use the actual phone function very little on my iPhone. Mail and net access are the big points.
While a Touch would be good here this would work especially well on a larger device. Not massively large mind you but a slightly larger screen would rock. Looking at my 3G right now the screen could be made wider with little impact on the final size in ones pocket. Add a quarter inch here and a half inch there and we would end up with a much larger screen that still fits into ones pocket.
Sadly the other negative here is that 3G would kill Touches battery. That is unless they implement some sort of auto power down of the interface. Lets face battery life is a big selling point of the Touch
Dave
Apple would probably disable Face Time over 3G, effectively preventing iPhone cannibalization.
Apple has changed its mobile device business model from exclusive contracts with mobile carriers to wide open competition. For instance, in Canada, the 3 major carriers all sell the iPhone. The iPad 3G has no requirement for a contract.
Yes, I've thought this through. It's perfectly consistent with Apple's business model and past behaviour.
Also, Apple would make the iPod touch 3G far more expensive than the Wi-Fi only version. Maybe not $130 more expensive, but not far off. This would also preserve the advantage of buying an iPhone, since it would be far cheaper with a contract.
Apple has changed its mobile device business model from exclusive contracts with mobile carriers to wide open competition. For instance, in Canada, the 3 major carriers all sell the iPhone. The iPad 3G has no requirement for a contract.
That's because Canada has 3 HSPA carriers on the 850/1900 MHz bands: Bell, Rogers, and Telus. However, in the US, there's only one major GSM/HSPA carrier that works with the 850/1900 MHz bands found in the iPhone and iPad 3G. That carrier is AT&T. Verizon and Sprint are CDMA/EV-DO 3G, and T-Mobile USA uses 1700/2100 MHz HSPA for 3G.
However, there is a possible solution. Logically, in the short/medium term, Apple could drop in a pentaband HSPA radio (850/900/1700/1900/2100) in the iPhone 4, iPod touch 4, and iPad 3G. This is like what Nokia did on their N8 to add T-Mobile USA and WIND Canada support. Plus adding a pentaband HSPA radio would cost far lower than building a separate CDMA version for Verizon and Sprint. This would let Apple add another carrier in the short them while sticking to what Tim Cook calls "one iPhone for the world". By 2012, when AT&T and Verizon (and possibly Sprint/Clear) move to LTE, then Verizon can be added.
That's because Canada has 3 HSPA carriers on the 850/1900 MHz bands: Bell, Rogers, and Telus. However, in the US, there's only one major GSM/HSPA carrier that works with the 850/1900 MHz bands found in the iPhone and iPad 3G. That carrier is AT&T. Verizon and Sprint are CDMA/EV-DO 3G, and T-Mobile USA uses 1700/2100 MHz HSPA for 3G.
What's to prevent Apple from including a 3G antenna on the next gen iPod touch that works with T-Mobile's GSM frequency?
However, there is a possible solution. Logically, in the short/medium term, Apple could drop in a pentaband HSPA radio (850/900/1700/1900/2100) in the iPhone 4, iPod touch 4, and iPad 3G. This is like what Nokia did on their N8 to add T-Mobile USA and WIND Canada support. Plus adding a pentaband HSPA radio would cost far lower than building a separate CDMA version for Verizon and Sprint. This would let Apple add another carrier in the short them while sticking to what Tim Cook calls "one iPhone for the world". By 2012, when AT&T and Verizon (and possibly Sprint/Clear) move to LTE, then Verizon can be added.
OK, I guess the answer to my question is "nothing much".
Apple would probably disable Face Time over 3G, effectively preventing iPhone cannibalization.
It's funny that you think FaceTime is the reason they won't do this.
Apple has changed its mobile device business model from exclusive contracts with mobile carriers to wide open competition.
Between CARRIERS. Not between THEIR OWN DEVICES.
Yes, I've thought this through. It's perfectly consistent with Apple's business model and past behaviour.
I'd love an example of this from any point in Apple's past.
This would also preserve the advantage of buying an iPhone, since it would be far cheaper with a contract.
So $2,000+ over the life of the device is supposed to be CHEAPER than whatever plan this mythical iPod touch 3G gets?
Right. Yeah, you go ahead and see how well that works out for you.
What's to prevent Apple from including a 3G antenna on the next gen iPod touch that works with T-Mobile's GSM frequency?
Four reasons:
1) AT&T would likely want the iPhone 4, iPad Wi-Fi + 3G, and iPod touch 3G to all be exclusively on AT&T.
2) Though the length of the original iPhone contract with AT&T is unknown, Ma Bell would likely extend its exclusive contract with Apple in exchange for an iPod touch 3G, much like what was rumored for the iPad Wi-Fi + 3G.
3) The fact that the iPhone 4 doesn't have a T-Mobile USA-compatible 3G antenna, and likely the iPod touch 3G wouldn't, either.
4) Apple likes keeping product lines consistent. Why would the iPod touch get T-Mobile 3G before the iPhone 4?
It's funny that you think FaceTime is the reason they won't do this.
My point is that any voice/video communication can be disabled over 3G as opposed to Wi-Fi, effectively preventing iPhone cannibalization.
Between CARRIERS. Not between THEIR OWN DEVICES.
See my point above. Apple will ensure the 3G touch doesn't cannibalize the iPhone.
I'd love an example of this from any point in Apple's past.
The iPad?
So $2,000+ over the life of the device is supposed to be CHEAPER than whatever plan this mythical iPod touch 3G gets?
Perception is reality. The mobile carriers' business plan of ripping off customers by thinking they're getting a cheap or free phone has worked incredibly well. Personally, I abhor cell phone contracts, but I'm in a very tiny minority.
Right. Yeah, you go ahead and see how well that works out for you.
We'll find out tomorrow
Four reasons:
1) AT&T would likely want the iPhone 4, iPad Wi-Fi + 3G, and iPod touch 3G to all be exclusively on AT&T.
Well, unless AppleInsider, all the other rumour sites, and numerous Wall Street analysts (ok, the last ones are *most* likely to be wrong
2) Though the length of the original iPhone contract with AT&T is unknown, Ma Bell would likely extend its exclusive contract with Apple in exchange for an iPod touch 3G, much like what was rumored for the iPad Wi-Fi + 3G.
Like I said, it's no longer Apple's style to do exclusive deals judging by what they're doing in the rest of the world.
3) The fact that the iPhone 4 doesn't have a T-Mobile USA-compatible 3G antenna, and likely the iPod touch 3G wouldn't, either.
This makes sense, but it doesn't prevent Apple from introducing the iPod touch 3G as far as the rest of the world is concerned.
4) Apple likes keeping product lines consistent. Why would the iPod touch get T-Mobile 3G before the iPhone 4?
An iPhone 4 recall?