Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 66
  1. #21  
    My son wants one too. He wants it for games and to FaceTime his friends.
  2. #22  
    I share the disappointment with the new iTouch's camera. I still haven't been able to find out whether it has autofocus, which would be necessary for a Chinese OCR app I'd want to use.
  3. jp99's Avatar
    Posts
    403 Posts
    Global Posts
    411 Global Posts
    #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33 View Post
    The reality is that for 3x5 prints and looking at photos on a screen the size of the iPod Touch, those resolutions are actually fine. Higher resolution adds no value to that screen size/resolution - and it would create pictures that 10x larger.

    Obviously if you are planning to use your iPod as your primary camera, this isn't a good answer. But for snapping picks for facebook and using facetime - the specs for the iPod Touch cameras are perfect.

    No flames please, I don't even own an iPod. But, I can actually imagine buying one of these just to run skype and facebook, etc.

    Apple did some good research to figure out what they needed. this wasn't a random choice. I had the same concerns about the display resolution on the iPad (I thought it needed to be 720p), but it seems to be a non issue for iPad owners.
    You have some good points. But like many digital cameras, would it have been difficult to give users the choice of two or three resolutions? The OS could make the 960 x 720 the default, but for the occasions you need higher res a 2 or 3 MP option would have been a good idea.

    Most pictures we take with our Pre's in our family end up on the PC for archiving, so they are used for more than just on device viewing. Maybe that's not the norm, but we don't keep numerous pictures on our Pre's.
  4. #24  
    my point is that the photos are reduced to lower resolutions when you print them, so you rarely can actually tell any difference when viewing the phots.

    yes, I would prefer a better camera.yes, i'll bet they improve it in next year's model. Adding higher resolution options you suggested would require a different CCD.

    I don't know what the cost or power considerations were in picking lower resolution cameras. I just know that the current specs are 'good enough' for most.

    I think apple assumes iPod users also carry an iPhone for important photo opportunities.

    I still carry a digital camera.
  5. #25  
    Jobs mentioned the camera was for shooting video. He didn't really mention stills. I am assuming the 5 megapixel iPhone 4 camera would make the device as thick as the iPhone. I still think that should have been the route to take.
  6. #26  
    IMHO the new ipod touch 4th gen is a great advanced PDA. Some small features differences with the iphone 4 is fair enough to have, if apple is playing with some kind of marketing strategy differences
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by akitayo View Post
    IMHO the new ipod touch 4th gen is a great advanced PDA. Some small features differences with the iphone 4 is fair enough to have, if apple is playing with some kind of marketing strategy differences
    Price the base model at $99 and it will sell like crazy.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by mobileman View Post
    Price the base model at $99 and it will sell like crazy.
    Price it at 99 and kiss their profit margin goodbye.
  9.    #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by mobileman View Post
    Jobs mentioned the camera was for shooting video. He didn't really mention stills. I am assuming the 5 megapixel iPhone 4 camera would make the device as thick as the iPhone. I still think that should have been the route to take.
    interesting theory -- do you know this -- is the 5meg chip that much thicker ??
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by mobileman View Post
    Jobs mentioned the camera was for shooting video. He didn't really mention stills. I am assuming the 5 megapixel iPhone 4 camera would make the device as thick as the iPhone. I still think that should have been the route to take.
    I think the battery is the primary culprit in making the iPhone so much thicker. The Touch has many fewer radios so it has a much smaller battery. I higher density CCD probably isn't any biggee, but I'm sure they are more expensive. He also wants to keep a few advanced features exclusive to his flagship product, which is the iPhone.
  11. #31  
    Do the Ipod touch have a FM radio ?
  12.    #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by Workerb33 View Post
    I think the battery is the primary culprit in making the iPhone so much thicker. The Touch has many fewer radios so it has a much smaller battery. I higher density CCD probably isn't any biggee, but I'm sure they are more expensive. He also wants to keep a few advanced features exclusive to his flagship product, which is the iPhone.
    sounds much more plausible
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by netwrkr9 View Post
    Why carry around 2 devices, ipods are outdated, just like the pager (remember those things).
    I'd rather risk breaking my relatively inexpensive sandisk sansa at the gym or camping than my palm pre. I don't use my phone for music other than streaming.

    Plus, the sansa with rockbox is far beyond anything you can do with webos. I can program custom fades, have different mixers automatically set based on what type of speakers or headphones I connect, easily create playlists on the fly, queue without adding to a playlist, BATTERY LIFE, customize the UI, Album art without kludging it into id3 tags, FM Radio, etc etc etc.

    http://www.rockbox.org/
    : (){:|:&};:
  14.    #34  
    This PCworld article notes the Touch's camera "is a mere 960-by-720 resolution, which translates to roughly 0.7 megapixels."

    This is an insult -- a slap in the face for Touch users -- especially after not even provisioning it with a camera at all until now...

    It also lacks a GPS, or a gyroscope.

    The Touch in no way is an iP4 without the cellular radio or a contract -- its much much less that an iP4




    iPod Touch is Not Quite an 'iPhone Without the Phone'

    Jared Newman, PC World
    Sep 3, 2010

    Sorry, geeks, but Apple's new iPod Touch is not quite ready to become your contract-free, data-only iPhone.

    The smartphone without a voice plan is a fantasy that a lot of people share, at least judging from blog and website comments that I've read over the last year or two. At Apple's press event on Wednesday, Chief Executive Steve Jobs hinted that iPod Touch could get the job done, saying that "a lot of people call it an iPhone without the phone." He added, half-jokingly, "It's also an iPhone without a contract."

    Indeed, the iPod Touch is a leading candidate to become your contract-free smartphone solution, thanks to VoIP apps like Skype and Line 2, and the call management of Google Voice's web app, but a few critical missing pieces hold the iPod Touch back from data-only glory.

    First, let's consider how features in the new iPod Touch are more phone-like than before. The iPod Touch's most significant additions are its front- and rear-facing cameras. These allow users to take pictures without lugging around a digital camera -- a signature phone feature even before smartphones came along -- and to conduct video calls over Facetime.

    With the camera comes two other important features: speakers and a microphone. While previous iPod Touches required an external headset for VoIP apps, now Skype conversations can be conducted by speaker phone.

    This brings me to the first flaw in the iPod Touch as an iPhone replacement. Speakers are nice, but without an actual earpiece -- the other, quieter speaker that points directly into your ear -- iPod Touch calls are everybody's business. Your only workaround is to sync a Bluetooth headset for private phone calls.

    Over at GigaOM, Kevin Tofel points out a couple other major drawbacks. He notes that the iPod Touch's rear-facing camera is inferior to that of the iPhone, shooting in a mere 960-by-720 resolution, which translates to roughly 0.7 megapixels. That's worse than any iPhone, ever. More importantly, Tofel notes, the iPod Touch has no 3G radio, so you can't actually subscribe to a data plan with it, and no GPS, relying on Wi-Fi triangulation instead.

    I think you can get around the data problems with a portable hotspot, like the contract-free Virgin Mobile hotspot, but it's just another device to lug around in addition to the phone and a Bluetooth headset.

    If you don't mind carrying three gadgets in your pockets all the time, more power to you for your geeked-out smartphone alternative with the iPod Touch. The rest of us will have to wait for something else, and pray that by the time it comes along, unlimited mobile data plans aren't completely dead
    Last edited by BARYE; 09/03/2010 at 04:17 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  15. #35  
    I think they're figuring if you really want an iPhone, just spend the $200-$300 to get it on contract. Or deal with this. That's why they gimped it a bit. Also for web upload to blogs or whatever(which I'm thinking this is really for), sometimes the picture quality doesn't need to be top notch, just clear. 960x720 is decent for quick snap and upload photos. Still, even 2MP could have been used IMO.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  16. #36  
    It doesn't have a 3G radio in it either. That's because it's an iPod. If you want a better camera along with the functionality of an iPod touch you have the option of moving up to an iPhone 4. no?
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    WHY WHY WHY Jobso ??? Why do you torture me so ?? how much can you have saved to make it worth your while to screw me on the camera I've waited a solid year for --why why why Jobso -- why ???[/url]
    Because Jobso prefers you to buy an iPhone then an iTouch. He'll make a lot more money off of it, hardware wise and bonusses from the carrier.
    < M105 - M130 - M515 - T|T3 - Clié UX50 - T|x - Pré - Pré 2 - TouchPad 16GB>
    [url]
  18.    #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by Hz-R View Post
    Because Jobso prefers you to buy an iPhone then an iTouch. He'll make a lot more money off of it, hardware wise and bonusses from the carrier.
    all true -- but why then endure the costs associated with designing and building an entirely new (and smaller) hardware profile for the Touch -- when if he had used the same body as the iP4 nobody would have raised an eyebrow ??
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  19. #39  
    Is it possible to buy an iPhone4 and use it without a contract?
  20. MNotar91's Avatar
    Posts
    87 Posts
    Global Posts
    422 Global Posts
    #40  
    I too was very interested in the newly announced iPod Touch. I was ready to buy one within a month after it released, but discovered the back camera was indeed different than the one in the iPhone 4. There's that and I also gave it a second thought and decided that I will just stick with my Zune HD. When it comes to music, it is excellent. I'll keep using my Pre as a camera when I do not have a digital camera.
    - Verizon Palm Pre Plus UberKernel Screenstate 500/1000
    - Microsoft Zune HD 32gb
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions