Comments on: iPod Touch gets Bluetooth after OS upgrade

Discussion over Apple's latest OS 3.0 for iPhone has uncovered that the existing iPod Touch will receive A2DP Bluetooth functionality.

[kylebuttermore]

its ridiculous they are charging to unlock functionality it already had

[dizzygill]

Archos already behaves that way and makes money for it. You can't use the GPS chip in phones from Verizon without paying extra for the VZW navigation app. THere are plenty more examples. Since it isn't illegal, the only way to change such behgavior is to let those companies know you will not purchase products from them until that changes. Then you need to get millions of other consumers to do the same thing. Shouldn't be a problem. :-D

[ikramerica--2008]

it is now required by law that all consumers must PAY for new features, so that the company providing them is obligated to support their product (if this update breaks your device, and it's free, who's fault would it be?). i forget the exact law, but it was supposed to be "pro consumer" but instead, like most do good laws, turns out to cost us more money.

anyone, most products you bought in the past were not upgradable, even if features were disabled. For years and years, VCRs from one manufacturer all basically had all the features built in, it was simply a matter of which remote control they provided, which ports they hooked up, and which LCD they connected. At least here, Apple is enabling the features that were on the chip, rather than leaving them dormant.

[Renegade Knight]

@dizzygill

Archos dropped some of the extra "Pay for what the device can already do" things with the 5. Competative pressure is a nice thing. I love the irony that to unlock my browser (Archose 605) I can use the browser already built in.

The excuse that it is a law that they charge for new features is a misinterpretation. The law states that any money from adding a feature must be treated as a new sale not part of the original sale. For that sake, if they were required to charge, the cost could be $0.000000000001 and one person with a penny could pay for everyone.

This is just Apple wanting more money to enable something you paid for already.

Who is the evil empire now?

[blusky08]

My guess: Apple didn't want to jeopardize the iPhone or its contracts with AT&T in any way. But now that the devices are so popular, it is feeling comfortable offering this option which will technically allow VOIP fans the ability to cut the cord with AT&T (and any other mobile service). VOIP may well be the future, and Apple sees it coming.

[modelboy111]

What happens to the iPod Touch 1st Generation???

[FroZone]

um, I'm not an Apple fanboy, but there are tons of products out there that have "locked" features/ability...

software
cell phone data apps
cars

did they want to have to buy another Touch for bluetooth functionality?

[Renegade Knight]

One reason there are a lot of companies I don't like. Right now I have an Archose that doesn't do all it can because of the "Pay me more to do the job I can already do out of the box" funcationality. My Verizon phone connects via USB to a computer but I have to pay to send a photo since it won't download. Odds are these companies made me pay more for the product to disable features that they want to charge for later. Ironic.

[blusky08]

NO ONE has answered the question asked about whether this means the ability to use a bluetooth earpiece.
If so, this is huge since iPod users could have the real VOIP experience. For those who don't want mobile phone service fees or internet fees associated with the iPhone, this would do the trick.

[jparishii]

So it seem like the 2nd Gen Ipod Touch has bluetooth...

What about the people who have purchased the Ipod Touch 1st generation users....We believed in Apple to take a chance on the 1st generation...If they would have let me know I would have just only bought the 2nd Gen.

Do we know for sure that 1st gen adopter won't be let out to dry and have to purchase the 2nd Gen version?

[ikramerica--2008]

you got exactly what you paid for. you did NOT buy a bluetooth product, so why are you now, over a year later, complaining about it? my iBook G4 didn't have bluetooth either, and even though OS X could use it, I didn't have the hardware. Screw you apple for not putting it in when I bought it 5 years ago!

[MyTThor]

That is always the price early adopters pay.

[VTNick7]

I just think its ridiculous that the second gen ipod touch had this functionality, maybe not tweaked all the way, but now we have to pay ten bucks just to unlock the capability of being able to use it?? What will we be able to do specifically with bluetooth on our ipod beside sync it with some bluetooth speakers?? can we trade songs or files with other ipod touch users?

[Gimpymw]

If you watch the Apple presentation you can find out for yourself without coming off as such a giant *********.

http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/0903lajkszg/event/index.html

And, why would you think you could trade songs? Purchasing your songs is the only way to legally get songs onto an iPhone and you can buy songs wirelessly now. That was introduced last update.

[Renegade Knight]

@Gimpymw

Why coudln't you trade a song? That's fair use. "I don't like this one anymore, I'll trade you for that one you stopped listening too yourself". Works for most things we pay for. Why not music. Oh, that's right. Big Media Copyright Holders are refusing to honor the right of first sale, working to nullify fair use, and make it a point to not actually sell you the song you bought in digital format.

[zhakidd532]

It's better than having to buy a whole new Touch for the funcionality. People who are peeved about not having it already or still not having it in a first Gen Touch are going overboard. New updated devices come out all the time. Apple isn't the only ones who do that. They add new features and capabilites and roll out a new product.

[ikramerica--2008]

They are among the same people who complained when the iPhone dropped in price over time. How dare a computer company continue to lower the price of a product over time once the costs to manufacture and implement it come down. I've never heard of such a thing. It's unfair!

[iff2mastamatt]

My Samsung P2 lets me transfer music files between my phone and the player.

[Yazdmich]

so, what dose that have to do the iPod touch?

[ELFERRETO]

it seems apple doesnt release something unless its squeaky clean, they might have delayed the release to make it better rather than releasing it still in a weak state.

or they could release it late to have more hype or just more money. either way you payed like 300+ dollars for the iPod, what's ten more dollars gonna harm to get bluetooth?.

[Yazdmich]

not eaven $300, more like $260+

[macsterman44]

Now lets see. I bought my ipod touch and the specs said nothing about bluetooth. I still bought it anyway as the rest of what it offered suited me.

Now I can have bluetooth for $10 - IF I think thats highway robbery - then I'll not spend $10 and not have the bluetooth. But if I change my mind I can have it. Which ever way I look at it I'm ahead.

Doubt many other users will be so peeved that they are prepared to protest and return their ipod. And yep getting it free would be nicer. But its not. Live with it. When I want bluetooth I can have it.

[make_or_break]

So Apple didn't have the BT-code ready to begin with, and now wants more money in order for us to have it now that it IS ready...seems like a rip to me, considering that I had NO CHOICE in what BT hardware that they implanted in my 2G Touch to begin with. By your example, if I didn't want BT to begin with, then I shouldn't have to pay for the unnecessary hardware piece to begin with. But all of us 2G Touch owners did, whether we wanted it or not.

So instead we have the business profit-making model that in order for me to get the full capability of the hardware I already unwittingly paid for, I have to fork over MORE for the "privilege" of using something that they already forced on me to begin with. Gee...where do I bend over???

It's good of you that you can be so accommodating of Apple's squeeze-you-dry policies. They can always use another billion or two of our money in their accounts, after all.

[ikramerica--2008]

sorry, but you are clueless. you have no idea what is inside your electronics. there are plenty of things you own that chips that can do far more than they are used for in the device. it's CHEAPER to use these do-it-all chips than to spec out individual chips that do each iteration of combinations. electronics manufacturers have been doing this for at least 20 years! it saves them money and you money. you very likely paid less because BT was on-chip even if not enabled, not more.

[johnbc72]

I'm a little confused. Will iPod Touch gen 1 users get anything out of this 3.0 release, as far as bluetooth goes? Thanks.

[Renegade Knight]

Nope. The chip needed is a 2.0 item.

[planblove]

Ok, so for $10 bucks I get to "cut the cord" to my stereo? I guess that isn't so bad but this upgrade really should be free, or really close to it.

[linuxgeek90]

Happy to pay $10 for the upgrade, and BT. But very, *very* upset that we didn't have it before.

[ikramerica--2008]

So upset that you bought the product anyway when it wasn't even mentioned in the spec. Wah, wah, wah.

[Christopera]

Does this mean you could use two sets of BT headphone to listen to one ipod touch? If so, that's awesome. Not that being wireless isn't totally awesome in its self.

[sbrickell]

My curiosity lies in the fact that the OS 3.0 upgrade is free for the iPhone but $9.99 for the iTouch (even though this is the same approach they used in their 2.0 upgrade last year). Anyway, as it has been stated on multiple occasions all ready, this is a common marketing process. As an example, for you Microsoft haters, Windows 7 will have a single install for all platform variations. The will functionality will be dependent on your license key.

So I am disappointed, but not surprised.

[ikramerica--2008]

iPhone is a subscription product. Updates and upgrades are included in your subscription. iPod Touch is a buy once product, like a computer, in that OS upgrades, software upgrades, etc. are not free. Bug fixes and such are free, but new feature sets are not.

Anyone with a current iPod touch bought it knowing what it could or could not do at that time. If they didn't like the lack of certain features, they didn't have to buy it. That apple is offering an upgrade to 3.0 spec for $10 is a plus, not a minus. In the history of consumer electronics, you are almost always out of luck in these situations, stuck with 'last year's model' and that's that.

[jmjh88]

i have a gen 1 zune and last i checked i can do everything on it that the latest one can do plus i have an eq. semi-early adopter (bought right before zune2 came out). still works and sounds awesome and i love watching movies on it on the small or big screen.

[jmjh88]

btw, i love my zune and once it dies (as all electronics these days are designed to do) i'll buy a current gen to replace it.

[abundantsnotbob]

Do you buy firmware upgrades from iTunes? Can you make a copy of the firmware and put it on a second iPod touch? If you but a 3rd gen, can you copy the firmware onto a second gen? Is this legal or will Apple try to brick your iPod? I don't think I want blutooth very badly because I would have to buy some expensive headphones.

[Yazdmich]

no 3rd gen ipod touch

[cynicselectant]

ikramerica i don't think you have a clue what this article is saying. It's entirely different than the situation that you are referencing, your notebook did not have blue tooth in it from the beginning whereas the ipod touch had it built in but they saw a money grab and waited a while so they could make us pay an unnecessary addition to an already overpriced mp3.

[jmjh88]

it's been this way with apple since they started becoming more popular: they introduce a new minor feature or two but in order to get it you have to buy a completely new product for $$$$ even though you just spent $$$$ on a very similar product a couple months prior. people continue to do it though so they can have the latest/greatest. i just choose not to be one of them and keep my money in my pocket instead of chasing the jones'.

[djtsukasa]

You know..... it makes sense. You bought the iPod touch knowing there was no Bluetooth. So you were fine without it. If you didn't want BT, would you rather have paid 10 bucks for something you won't even use, or leave it up to the consumer who can decide whether or not they want it? Yes, I can see where it is upsetting, but at the same time..... it leaves the choice to the consumer. I probably won't use it so I saved $10.

[enochrios]

"What the consumer doesn't know wont hurt them" mentality is not acceptable business practice. I think everyone who bought the iPod Touch already paid for the Broadcom BCM4325 chip when they bought the iPod Touch. They shouldn't have to pay to allow it to function as it's intended.

[kushagra93sharma]

Will we have to give our ipod back to the companay for getting 3.0 OS or it will be an software update ??

[Yazdmich]

it will be a s****d $10 software update

[szstudios]

The point is that it's not $10 JUST for Bluetooth it's the ENTIRE upgrade you'll get regardless of whether you'll use BT or not. And as the bastard stepchild of the iPhone, that's the price we pay to play to have a unit that does 90% of what the iPhone does w/o the $70 /month AT&T bill.

$10 bucks compared to them releasing a new model for $225 is a small price to pay. I just hope they just start releasing new models every 2 years instead of every year while updating the OS every 6 months.

Does anyone know if a typical BT earpiece & mic will work with this upgrade? If so, that will be awesome when using VOIP via Fring without the silly wired earbuds and mic.