Comments on: Is iPod Touch getting a camera?

Apple may be planning to add a camera in the next iPod Touch, according to reports.

[Mr. Dee]

I guess this is a great way to get around AT&T's crappy 3G network. Persons who were contemplating an iPhone will have less reason to if this turns out to be true. I personally hope it is. Claro in Jamaica is the sole carrier of the iPhone and they are raping people for it. Shame on them. I hope the ZUNE HD folks didn't start mass producing yet.

[zarchon1]

The 3G network may ot be up to par, I am not sure. It does what I want and I am very happy with the 3GS. Why the hate towards something nobody makes you use or buy?

[shamanskyh]

+1

[ballmerisanape]

Seems like a logical evolution. I will for sure upgrade if they do.

[monkeyfun14]

Actually I don't think so...

The iPod Touch already cannibalizes the iPhone as it is.

If they keep adding iPhone features to the iPod touch people are going say hell why should I get locked into a contract when I can have get a iPod Touch and have everything but the phone.

Way I see it. iPod Touch = iPhone w/o a sim card

[cvaldes1831]

I own the iPod touch (plus a cheapo Motorola dumbphone on the T-Mobile network) and it is not a iPhone w/o a SIM card.

Some people will always want just one device in their pocket and will pay extra dollars for the privilege. You don't get visual voicemail or SMS on your iPod touch, nor do you get full integration with your Address Book, etc.

Also, without a cellular data connection, the iPod touch can't work as an effective GPS device for turn-by-turn directions. Unlike dedicated GPS units with preloaded maps, the iPhone and iPod touch download maps on the fly. Any app/service that streams content is far more effective on the iPhone (e.g., last.fm, Pandora, SimplifyMedia) since you can be on the go and still have a data feed.

It's up to the individual to decide if the always-on data connection is worth it.

[blusky08]

There may be a slight amount of "cannabilizing" by those who are willing to use the klunky iPod Touch phone work around or those who are willing to carry two devices (a phone and an iPod Touch). Either scenerio is painfully inconvenient.

IMO, what really holds the iPod Touch back from greatness is an integrated mic and ear speaker for utilizing Internet phone services, such as Skype. But as I understand it, Apple doesn't only get an iPhone sale through AT&T. They also receive a portion of the monthly fees paid by customers. So it is unlikely we'll see these additions to avoid the large scale cannibilizing of which you speak--and it would be large scale as millions of people could eliminate their monthly phone service altogether! Hmmm...perhaps this could be the perfect feature for an Apple competitor to gain ground in the market??

[cvaldes1831]

If I recall correctly, Apple no longer receives a share of the carrier revenue, now that the hardware is more heavily subsidized.

[edtmark]

The IPod Touch is far less useful than the iPhone for the reasons mentioned by cvaldes1831. In addition, from my experience, the vast majority of people have secure wireless networks now which means connecting to a free WiFi network is hard to come by. As a result, apart from being a gaming/music/video device, its usefulness is quite limited as a communicating tool.

[Vegaman_Dan]

Considering the reasons for what most cell cameras are used for, I do not believe a camera on a Touch would be as useful. You coudn't immediately upload it or share it via MMS to your friends. You'd have to find a wifi spot or wait to sync with your desktop. At that point, you might as well use a real digital camera with flash instead for better results... at a far cheaper price.

Cameras on cell phones make Cellular Service Providers money since the MMS portion is often an extra fee on top of the normal plan. CPS's can't make money off a Touch in the same way so...

Nope, I'll put this into the same category as a Mac Tablet for likelihood to come true.

[ckh1272]

monkeyfun14 says-"Way I see it. iPod Touch = iPhone w/o a sim card"

The way you see it?? Thank goodness a lot of people don't see things through your eyes. They would all be blind. As usual, you take an ounce of truth and mix it with a pound of FUD. Camera or not, the iPhone does more than the Touch (SMS, Navigation, Visual Voice mail, being dependent of WiFi for a connection). They do share some traits for sure, but there is enough to distinguish the two so as to keep the "cannibalizing" to a minimum.

[lazycat202]

it's a best way to get $$$ from consumers. Yes! it's you; ITouch users.

[thelemurking]

@ cvaldes1831

Remember though, you cannot use the GPS for long periods of time, or in direct sunlight! ;) Apple blames that pesky sun for the overheating problem, especially when using the GPS for long periods of time. The irony is, for short trips, most people already know where they are going and really do not need a GPS... they only come in handy when traveling outside of your general living area and thus, long periods of time. So unless you plan on visiting unknown neighborhoods in the middle of the night, Apple more or less recommends that you do not use the GPS ;)

[make_or_break]

The Touch is a different creature, albeit cut from the same cloth. You simply can't undersell the significance of the iPhone's wireless telephone capabilities even if it's crappy ol' AT&T. Unless freely roaming, accessible Wi-Fi becomes a widespread reality and not merely linger as a pipe dream, the Touch will always be second-tier to the iPhone.

Personally, I'd rather have integral GPS in a future Touch over a weak, kneecapped resolution camera...if the iPhone 3Gs's camera is any indicator. But adding a camera makes sense; netbooks almost universally have them, and Apple DOES push the Touch's Wi-Fi capability. If the Touch is supposed to be some sort of functional alternative to hauling a netbook around, then it makes a lot of sense that the next Touch has to have a camera.

[zarchon1]

@thelemurking, I have air conditioning in my car and my iPhone hooks to the air vent. Heat doesn't seem to be a problem. I don't have the GPS program yet but I plan on getting TomTom's when it comes out.

[monkeyfun14]

Actually I don't think so...

The iPod Touch already cannibalizes the iPhone as it is.

If they keep adding iPhone features to the iPod touch people are going say hell why should I get locked into a contract when I can have get a iPod Touch and have everything but the phone.

Way I see it. iPod Touch = iPhone w/o a sim card

[ckh1272]

Wow!! You actually copy and pasted from an earlier post. Very creative <sarcasm>.

[JigenIII]

@ckh1272: it's an accidental double post. relax!!

[ckh1272]

@Jigenlll-I realize its' an accidental post, hence the sarcastic tone.

[thelemurking]

deja vu

[terminalblue]

that seems reasonable, its basically the same hardware as the iphone and it would help it stay competitive with the ZuneHD (feature-wise, that is). but its necessarily upgrade worthy. I think it could be upgradeable if they added to cameras (one in the front and one in the back) or one VERY high resolution camera (6MP or higher), something to really separate it from the competition, including the iphone, is what it needs.

[monkeyfun14]

6mp?

You know that would make the thing alot more expensive.

You can add a feature that none of the competition has but when your product cost 150 - 200 more cause of it then it really serves no benefit anymore.

[terminalblue]

I agree, it would make it more expensive...$300 to $500...but most people would still pay more for it for a marginal feature set increase (kind of like Apple's computer line up). It's very unlikely, but it is something i would like to see, a true hybrid device.

But honestly, i dont see how the touch can remain competitive (at least feature wise) with so many similar devices coming to market. But least face it, if they put a 0.3MP camera on it, Apple's Sheople will snap it up like its the best tech ever.

[cvaldes1831]

Actually, a lower resolution camera would probably have better low-light performance, especially due to the puny sensor size. The small fixed lens wouldn't take advantage of a higher-resolution sensor anyhow.

Remember that for video, the shutter speed is basically 1/60 sec. An image sensor with bad low-light performance is basically useless in poorly-lit venues (like rock clubs). You basically get a bunch of shadowy, highly-pixelated blobs moving around on a mostly black background.

[ckh1272]

terminalblue says "But honestly, i dont see how the touch can remain competitive (at least feature wise) with so many similar devices coming to market. But least face it, if they put a 0.3MP camera on it, Apple's Sheople will snap it up like its the best tech ever."

@terminalblue--That sounds like the same thing that some people said about iPods (i.e. classic and nanos). I don't even have to comment any further about how that has turned out over the years. BTW, the only "sheople" are the drones on this post that continue to post the same FUD. I know their some over-zealous Apple fans, but some of you people (the Apple bashers) take the cake sometimes.

[terminalblue]

@cvaldes1831 fair enough, i honestly didnt consider video performance. but thats a good point. still though, more MP's equals a bigger "wow" factor.


and finally...

@ apple lover ckh1272...

Fear...i dont think the camera is a bad idea
Uncertainanty...People will buy it
Doubt...it will work just fine

There is no FUD in my comment, i just would like to see tech that isn't low end or rehashed put in a pretty package (like almost everything apple releases in hardware). I am sorry that you have such a deep and undying infatuation for a computer company, but some of us just arent into Apple like that.

[ckh1272]

by terminalblue July 6, 2009 4:07 PM PDT
@cvaldes1831 fair enough, i honestly didnt consider video performance. but thats a good point. still though, more MP's equals a bigger "wow" factor.


and finally...

@ apple lover ckh1272...

Fear...i dont think the camera is a bad idea
Uncertainanty...People will buy it
Doubt...it will work just fine

There is no FUD in my comment, i just would like to see tech that isn't low end or rehashed put in a pretty package (like almost everything apple releases in hardware). I am sorry that you have such a deep and undying infatuation for a computer company, but some of us just arent into Apple like that.

@terminalblue-You obviously have no clue about what I was talking about. It is FUD when people are saying what you were saying regarding the iPod's competition. Learn from history my friend, is all that I am saying. BTW, I am not some Apple fanatic. I have many different products form many different makers, so you are just slinging more FUD with that ignorant statement. Quit reading what isn't there.

[myles taylor]

Question: why does buying something you want and being happy with it (i.e. content and not always needing the best) make you a "sheopple"?

[make_or_break]

But how much more expensive would it be really? You can get dedicated, name brand 10MP cameras for under $100 these days. 6MP is now considered an OUTDATED resolution in that marketplace.

[serpicolugnut]

I don't see how the iPod Touch could cannibalize iPhone sales. People who buy the Touch are people who generally pass on the iPhone, generally because either the monthly data plan is too costly, or they don't want to switch to AT&T or other regional provider. The iPod Touch removes those excuses, and gives the user an iPhone without commitment or lock-in to a cell provider. Seems to me those aren't cannibalizing iPhone sales, but extending them.

[terminalblue]

people that buy the touch arent the same people buying the iphone. they are buyers without phones or on other networks. they are still creating customers and loyalty with reliable device. the touch is literally like the "my first iphone" .

apple would rather lose sales on the iphone and sell more touch's and create better brand loyalty, and by other apple products...even f its not an iphone.

[Vegaman_Dan]

I bought a Touch instead of the iPhone when it came out. That was money AT&T didn't get from me as a result. The Touch had all the features I wanted so it very much cannibalized their sales to me.

[ckh1272]

by terminalblue July 6, 2009 10:44 AM PDT
people that buy the touch arent the same people buying the iphone. they are buyers without phones or on other networks. they are still creating customers and loyalty with reliable device. the touch is literally like the "my first iphone" .apple would rather lose sales on the iphone and sell more touch's and create better brand loyalty, and by other apple products...even f its not an iphone.

@terminalblue--I don't always agree with your posts, but I agree 100% with that statement. Apple will make their money regardless. There main objective is customer loyalty and there are many ways to achieve that.

[thelemurking]

@ terminalblue

actually, I bought the iPod Touch to make up for the shortcomings of the Samsung Instinct and Sprint's failure to live up to promises and hype. The iPod Touch provided me with features, apps and WiFi that the Instinct simply could not accomplish.

I purchased the 2nd gen iPod Touch around Nov. 08 and in a matter of days it became the best little gadget I'd ever put my greedy little fingers on. My love for the little guy grew and grew up until the point I decided to say screw Sprint and my stupidass Instinct, and I dropped them for AT&T and the iPhone 3G S and passed the iPod Touch on to my girlfriend.

While I miss Sprint's $99 unlimited plan, in the short time I have had the 3G S, I feel the extra cost of better service is worth it. Of course there will be those who disagree, because cell service varies city by city... but so far, I have faster speed and better coverage and not to mention a much better phone going with AT&T and the iPhone 3G S!

[Sgr76]

The one thing keeping me from getting a ipod touch (besides the obvious i cant afford it excuse) is 32gb wouldn't hold half of my library. Right now i have a 80gb classic with 7gb free.

[cvaldes1831]

I have an 80GB classic and over 110GB of rock/pop/etc. music + 50GB of classical/jazz + scads of videos/movies so there is no device that holds all of my media. My 1st generation iPod touch only has 16GB, so I have to be careful about managing the on-board content, but after the App Store opened up, I've spend far less time diddling with this.

Why? Because there are great Internet radio apps (Pandora, last.fm, Yahoo! Music, FlyCast, etc.) as well as SimplifyMedia (which streams your audio content from your machine to your iPhone/iPod touch).

I'm hoping the next-generation iPod touch goes up to 64GB, but I already know it won't be able to store all my music. I just need more room for apps and maybe have some flexibility with video.

[notovny]

I've got a 16GB second-gen iPod touch (and cut my teeth on a 8GB ipod nano) My muisic library is much smaller than both of yours (I think around 40GB at my last check) But I generally make use of smart playlists to rotate in and out songs I like that I haven't played in awhile.

I will look into SimplifyMedia, though. I'd been using the Remote app to play the rest of my media from my computer when home, and having something that operates in the other direction

I just wish they'd fix
A) the podcast/audiobook synching issue with 3.0.The remembered position in iTunes /always/ trumps the one on the iPod touch after a sync, so if you listen to your podcasts or audiobooks on the Touch, and stop in the middle, you're always having to hunt down your place after a sync. Also, they need to...

B) Respect the Playlist Folder Heirarchy. I made those folders in iTunes for a reason, blast it. I've got dozens of different playlists, and I hate being forced to scroll alphabetically to find the one I'm looking for. Oh, and...

C) Non-letter characters sort /before/ letters in iTunes, but /after/ letters on the Touch's playlist listings. Vexing and nonsensical.

[sanjayb]

Who cares about a camera? It's bad enough that we have camera's in phones but now music players? Sheesh!

I rather see the Ipod Touch have features that the Zune HD will have (i.e: OLED screen, HD capability, etc, etc). To me that would be much better than a stupid camera. I already have a digital camera to take photos.

[blusky08]

Like it or not, the truly "all-in-one" handheld is the future as technology allows people freedom from carrying multiple devices. It would certainly be nice, however, if they would stop making the camera an almost useless afterthought. Most mobile cameras need a drastic increase in pq (and a flash would be welcome).

[Performa550]

A camera is really the only thing missing from the current ipod touch. I have a 1st gen that I got for my B-day last year. I wanted to upgrade to a 32gig but, the 2nd gen didn't have enough features other than the microphone and built in speaker to actually make upgrading worthwhile. Work you magic Apple. If you build it, they will buy!

[zizzybaloobah]

Was going to buy an iTouch when they introduced it, til I realized it had no camera. I would definitely upgrade my iPod to an iTouch if it had a camera. (and I could still keep my current wireless provider whose network is far superior to AT&T's).

[cvaldes1831]

I still think the rumor of the iPod nano getting a camera is a crock. The hardware, iPod OS, and lack of WiFi greatly reduces the chances of a camera, let alone video recording/editing functions.

For playback of captured video, you'd really want a built-in speaker and certainly a microphone. Is there enough room in the nano for all this?

[sartor1]

I hope to sell my 2G iPod Touch soon! ;-)
New iPod Touch 3G here I come!

[Jimmy the Scuffer]

What about GPS? That's one of the other things the iPhone has that the Touch doesn't.

I'm one of those people who is planning to buy a Touch but have no interest in the iPhone because of the monthly cost. I want the apps to replace my obsolete Palm but my cheap pay as you go cell plan suits me just fine. Yes, having iPhone net access from anywhere would be cool, but it's not affordable for me.

[iertry]

"In May, AppleInsider said that iPods would get cameras similar to those found in iPhones. At this point the only handheld device from Apple with a camera is the iPhone."

The reasons the iPod's still haven't received cameras is because they are due for an update yet. They are usually updated every September and I don't think it would be sensible for Apple to come out with such an upgrade less than a year from the previous update.

[Perry_Clease]

From what I read on the rumor site is that Apple ordered a bunch of cameras "of the type used in the iPhone." Is it possible that these are going into iPod Nanos and Classics as well as the iPod Touch?

[natedogg0511]

I would be willing to hold off on buying my iPod touch if they are putting a camera on the next gen. Need a definite answer soon!!!

[cvaldes1831]

Sorry, you will not receive a definite answer since Apple generally does not pre-announce products. You will have to wait like the rest of us.

[wrightj62]

that would be cool, its an option that would be great with some of my apps on my 2G iPod touch

[-Oneota-]

iPod Touch w/Camera + reasonably priced, optional 3G data connection (like the Kindle) = Winner. Bonus points for included GPS.

[ckh1272]

3G will not happen on a Touch. That would truly cannibalize iPhone sales.

[beachfront12]

Until the Touch receives the ability to support other media formats like so many other players in the same price category and receives the ability to add expandability via SD cards, it is going to be a second rate player and adding a camera is not going to change that fact. I still do not get why I can get a regular iPod with 100 gigs but I can only get a Touch with 32 gigs. I would rather watch a video on the Touch screen instead of the iPods tiny screen.

I considered the Touch until I noticed other players for less money with more features and more hard drive space.

Yes, I was considering the iPhone but in my area AT&T has awful service (people are fleeing AT&T here) and I am not going to pay $500+ to put an iPhone on T-Mobile (which supports the iPhone) when I currently have Blackberry service at a third of what people are paying for iPhone service on AT&T.

[ckh1272]

@beachfront12--The Touch uses a flash drive (costs more) as opposed to a HDD. As prices comes down on flash memory, more makers are going to move to it, dumping HDD. It also does so much more than a traditional mp3 player (obviously). If you don't understand that, you really are smoking some messed up stuff.

[CreativeMalcolm]

@beachfront

Dude what the heck are you smoking? More features? Like what an FM transmitter? How many other MP3 players can you update your Facebook on? The iPod touch is a lot of things, but feature poor it is not, there's thousands of optional apps that expand it's functionality.

As far as the camera I imagine we'll keep seeing the iPod touch regularly add new features that the iPhone introduces. This year we'll see a faster processor and graphics chipset as well as a camera. I imagine voice control will also be on this model.