digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

iPod Touch may have Bluetooth!

engadget.com — Engadget just discovered a picture on the German Apple website which shows a iPod touch with a clearly visible Bluetooth icon! Could be a sign of "one more thing" that Steve Jobs forgot to mention...

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • gklitt, on 10/10/2007, -3/+45http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/7420/ipodbluetooth2ak4.jpg

    Mirror if the picture is taken down.
    • DarkDx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21IMageshack is not exactly the best mirror...
    • cyberoidx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+18And I dont think Digg can Kill Engadget either.
    • greatblackowl, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15The pic on the Apple website now is missing the icon
    • hosannadrftwood, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Click on the picture on this website linking to a bigger photo. Now the icon is missing... Photoshopped?
    • bradym80, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1There is something in the reflection that is not in the original photo.
    • pinchies, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Bring it back! I want my A2DP!
  • milhouse156, on 10/10/2007, -4/+55I wouldn't exactly say "clearly", but it still looks like a bluetooth icon to me
  • WarMace, on 10/10/2007, -2/+62Thats bluetooth if i ever saw it. Its in the right place, just kinda far from the wifi icon.
    • JeffS, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1That is a Bluetooth icon but it doesn't necessarily mean it is in the device. My WM6 smartphone has an IR Beam icon in the CommManager but there is no IR port on my phone. It would be cool if the iPod Touch had bluetooth. If I could use it as a handsfree device for my smart phone or use the bluetooth in my car that would be a HUGE bonus.
      • hater2win, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10Yeah but WM6 is wide spread, not limited to 2 devices like Apple's "Mobile OS" (if thats what you wanna call it). A more plausible argument would be:

        Sure, it does look like a bluetooth icon, but that specific picture could be of the iPhone, since they look strikingly similar.
        • PA42, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3They don't look so much alike that people couldn't tell the difference. Chances are better that Apple edited a picture of the iPhone screen and put it on a touch. But that is clearly a picture of a touch.
        • cawpin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Well, considering it says "iPod" on the damned thing, I think it is an iPod.
    • Korexz, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6The iPod Touch also requires iTunes 7.4, which has not been released. Call me skeptical, but if 7.4 supported BT sync, wouldn't that give the farm away? I am betting that the Touch has BT and you will see a stereo headset before Black Friday.

      - Not An Analyst -
      • timusca, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Clearly.
      • rancemo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4iTunes 7.4 is out... I was prompted to install it when I logged into my office Mac this morning...
      • macniatic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Why BT sync if you could have faster Wi-Fi sync?
        • Tenoq, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Why the ***** would you use either? Could you imagine trying to sync 16GB over any kind of wireless connection? Even 'N' products would make that painful.
  • lars, on 10/10/2007, -4/+14It's strange that Bluetooth is not listed under the wireless tech specs. A2DP support would've been nice for some wireless earphones.
    • gklitt, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3Exactly, it wasn't mentioned at all in the announcement either! Could be a hidden feature.
    • noogiewoo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1lack of A2DP is a killer really, I'd love to see it on the iPhone too.
  • gfrakster, on 10/10/2007, -17/+1Yeah Bluetooth! Many phones can do DUN which, in case you're not aware, means they can transmit the internet over bluetooth so we could use Safari in the middle of a field.

    A2DP would be a cool feature as well.
    • sneeka2, on 10/10/2007, -2/+15The WHOLE internet?!!!!1!eleven! Wouldn't that clog them Bluetubes?
  • moonaust, on 10/10/2007, -10/+87Like I needed more of a reason to buy the Touch.....
    • bremstrong, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16The Touch should give people more reason to buy a iPhone. A phone for an extra $100 or so?
      • boejangles, on 10/10/2007, -3/+18Yea but with that..comes the monthly AT&T service charge.
      • subliminalurge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Not only that, but also Internet access when you're not near a hotspot. Sure, it may be slow access, but it's still a ***** faster than you'll get with the touch when you're away from a hotspot.
      • Morphinity, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I would totally do it if I didn't have to pay more massive fees to cancel my Verizon subscription.
    • wyldtek, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1This would give me a reason to buy the Touch. Without Bluetooth I would not.
    • OandA, on 10/10/2007, -2/+232 gb version next year thats where it at.
  • vampireblood, on 10/10/2007, -9/+3bluetooth will mean song to song sharing, video sharing and photo sharing.

    I hope this is true.

    But why would apple keep it a secret?
    • Lotheron, on 10/10/2007, -8/+9So they can charge later to activate it...
    • avions, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Has anyone noticed you can't buy videos on the Wi-Fi iTunes store? That's probably due to the file size being too large. So I seriously doubt that video sharing will be enabled.
      • floatingpoints, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I doubt any sharing will be enabled.

        These companies seem to like to tell us what we can and cannot do with our own software. If I wanna beam songs to my friends, who the hell are they to decide?
        • jftitan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1RIAA.... and that pesky settlement letter you receive when your friend decides the 'squrted' music you gave them turned out to be Aqua.
        • PA42, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1@floatingpoints: They are the owners of the copyrights and the companies that would be liable for our infringement, that's who they are.
      • jackyyll, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Well, the new wi-fi iTunes just came out, give it some time.. I'm sure they'll put videos on it too.
    • brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3If it had blue tooth someone could probably use a cheap blue tooth headset with it. Then it wouldn't be much of a jump to a handy little IP-phone for use on whatever wifi you're currently on. Then the only major perk of an iPhone is the celular capability which while still a huge difference makes the touch that much more appealing at the expense of the iPhone.
      • smackhero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1in a city like SF with municipal wifi that would be a much more preferable solution than using AT&T's crappy closed network and being charged extortionate data rates. heck, i'd rather pay an extra $50/month in taxes to get municipal wifi in my city and get unlimited data transfer + VoIP calls than the $80/month minimum rate for the iPhone.
  • KJKJava, on 10/10/2007, -0/+123Why does the reflection not match the iPod?
    • djSyndrome, on 10/10/2007, -8/+7Because it's fake?
    • speedyrev, on 10/10/2007, -3/+23Don't know, but the pic came from the apple website. It's not a fake.
      • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+24The reflection is a fake.
        • gremos, on 10/10/2007, -4/+11PHOTOSHOPED!!!
        • lacronicus, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4no, say it with me, digitally manipulated using Adobe Photoshop (r) digital manipulation software.
    • trichecodotcom, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6This last two years Apple have been using CPU generated/manipulated images for many of its products (and CPU generated reflections for them). They look a lot better but often you can spot some of these artifacts. And fake bluetooth icons.... :-D
      • sk2134, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0WOW that explains this... thank you for some clarity
      • smackhero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1CPU generated? do you know what a CPU is?
    • abandonedhero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Funny enough, they used a different photo for the reflection. If you look closely and/or do some contrast improvements, you can tell that they were playing audio, not video in the reflection.

      Nelly Furtado
      Afraid
      Loose

      is what was shown on the screen.
  • speedyrev, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Apple doesn't like file sharing, so I don't think it's there for that. But why would it offer stereo headphones when the iPhone doesn't. Could bluetooth stereo iPhone update be coming?
    • smackhero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i still don't get why so many devices don't support stereo bluetooth. it's not like it requires any extra hardware to support it and i don't see how it could be that much harder to implement the software for it. if the hardware is physically capable of supporting a feature like stereo bluetooth then why wouldn't you just design the software to support it and ship a better product?
      • KyleGoetz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I suppose it's because bluetooth only has so much bandwidth to transport audio data, and stereo is twice the size of mono. They already have to compress mono audio to get it to headphones, so it'd probably take some great compression to transmit stereo over bluetooth and have the resulting audio not suck completely.
    • toetagger, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I could see Apple offering a BT headphones for sale, SOON... um, Christmas? It'll be activated then. If they activate BT before then, people will buy BT phones from elsewhere...
    • p0tent1al, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1whether it's there for file sharing or not doesn't matter. If Bluetooth is in the device, it can be hacked.
  • Guagloves, on 10/10/2007, -0/+35bluetooth would be nice for wireless headsets
  • griz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Can anyone say if the iPod touch will support listening to streaming audio from sites such as Pandora though the Safari browser?
  • RyeBrye, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Sweet. If it DOES have a functional bluetooth chip in it, it would be possible to make the little bastard into an IP phone via a lot of hacking.

    (Obviously, with no mic this would be impossible - or all of your phone calls would be very boring to the other person)
    • Lotheron, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Wifi connection to the internet and a bluetooth headset. Skype would be a good possibility maybe? :D
    • hater2win, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Bluetooth headset, perhaps?
    • brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Exactly my thoughts. Apple might not want this feature enabled to avoid deflating the value of the iPhone. Obviously the wifi limitation is a big one.
    • Kruez, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3The iPhone's earbuds have a built-in mic, maybe it'd be compatible with the Touch.
      • pyry, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Since they run the same software, I bet it would be. And then they'll say, "Whoops, we forgot to tell you this thing accesses GSM networks, too... Didn't you notice the slot for SIM cards?"
  • jazzmann04, on 10/10/2007, -1/+82Screen Image Simulated, probably just an iPhone screen that someone didn't check closely enough.
  • Genady, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6The Apple Wireless Keyboard has been on back-order since it was announced? Coincidence? We speculate, you decide.
  • turbopro, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10another pic from the German site

    [IMG]http://i8.tinypic.com/4vhg6dh.png[/IMG]
  • IanPatterson, on 10/10/2007, -20/+14So what, it's still too small. 16G pfff
    • floatingpoints, on 10/10/2007, -10/+10Agreed.

      What's amazing is how people so blatantly ignore this and think it's okay (for example, you getting modded down).

      There is absolutely no justification whatsoever. These models are even smaller than the models that came out back in 2003 that didn't even HAVE color/video abilities.
      • tech42er, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Gee, I wonder why. Oh, I know. It's because it is FLASH-BASED and not a HD.
    • RadicalEdward, on 10/10/2007, -6/+22look if you want massive storage get the damn ipod classic and go f**k yourself in the butt with your 160 gb. The touch still has the most flash storage of any ipod.
      • devjunkie, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3Uh, maybe you can't comprehend math, but you'll be paying more per gig of storage with the new iPod touch.

        If you wanna go out and buy it, more power to you. But realize you're an idiot.

        And some of us are tired of the idiots hindering the progression of technology because they're willing to shell out cash for things they can't even understand.
        • Morphinity, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You're not just paying for the storage...
        • tech42er, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Flash costs much more per gigabyte. Hope you realize that. But it's the future anyway. HD's are on the way out for portable devices.
      • brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3Real mature response. The point stands. The touch has entirely too little storage. Especially when you consider they are promoting it as a video player. The only value I see in it is for quick web browsing at home instead of using my laptop. The interface and size of the screen make it really not so great even for that. Other than that it is just a toy since it can't carry all my music and a few movies will fill it up.
    • adude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Well I personally disagree because for me, I don't need more than 8 GB at a time. I actually have a very small music collection and don't need to put a dozen videos on one device at a time. Others, however, can use playlists to easily get around that. And 16 GB is a great amount for a Flash-based drive.
  • dogearedboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8This comes out in less than a month. I figure they probably have all the features worked out on it already. Especially the hardware bits. If Steve didn't mention it, I doubt it's going to be in this model.

    • bansai, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1most prolly wont be a feature as there wont be a point to having bluetooth in the device as a2dp is not supported. you wouldnt want to listen music in mono would you?
  • netburnr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Why would you want to tether internet over the bluetooth? Might as well just have your laptop connect to the wireless access point...
    • bearda, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Chances are the iPod Touch has a better browser than your phone, so you can use Safari with the phone's wireless (non-WiFi) network connection.
    • xciton, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1How about external GPS
      How about Stereo BT headphones.
    • x788, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1laptops are massive and very inconvenient in comparison to a bt phone + iPod touch. this would make it so you wouldn't need to have a laptop just to get a good browsing experience. phone browsers pretty much suck, aside from Opera Mini 4.
  • AlKo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Well, if iTunes has Wifi being added to it... will we see Bluetooth sync as well?
    • Rileyper, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1iTunes has Wifi???
    • TheSolomon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Right now, my iPhone does NO syncing (via iTunes nor iSync itself) using Bluetooth. My RAZR syncs with my Mac using Bluetooth. My iPhone is forced to use USB.

      Go figure.
  • floatingpoints, on 10/10/2007, -26/+5If you buy one of those, you're an idiot.

    How do you go from 80 gigs... back down to 16?

    And don't tell me the technology behind it costs that much, because it doesn't.

    All these features are great, but if I can't even transfer my entire collection off my 30GB first generation model (or was it third? Dunno, back in 2003), then that's pretty ***** up. 4 years later, and going... backwards.
    • floatingpoints, on 10/10/2007, -15/+2Go on, ignore the truth, consumer sheep.
    • VulnoX, on 10/10/2007, -6/+18Oh wow you are so right. Wow you the most enlightened person ever. Consumer sheep! How do you come up with this stuff?

      Look, I know you may have trouble understanding this so I will keep the words small and simple for you. Not everyone needs 80 or 160 GB for their music. I only need 4-5GB for music, and I can fit quite a few TV episodes on it in the remaining space. If I end up keeping my pre-order, this device would be great for me. I use my current 5G at work all day and the larger screen would be perfect. I also keep all my music and videos on my laptop or portable HD, so I am sure I could find a few minutes to update the iPod.

      I mean on my 5G 30GB I only use 19GB on it, and 10 of that is just old episodes I have not yet deleted, not something I need on there.

      I think you are just too much of a "give me everything or else" person that you don't realize that not everyone needs the same things everyone else does. That MAY BE why there are more than one type of iPod.

      More than one type of MP3 player.

      More than one style of car.

      More than one style and type of TV.

      I could go on, but I am afraid you may already be confused as to why not everyone wants the same things you do so I will stop.
      • devjunkie, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Sounds like you're the confused one, LOL.
      • floatingpoints, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2

        Look, I know you may have trouble understanding this so I will keep the words small and simple for you. Not everyone needs 80 or 160 GB for their music. You only need 4-5GB for music, and I can fit quite a few TV episodes on it in the remaining space. You should buy a nano, since that would be more suited for your style of use. I use my current 30G at work all day and the larger screen would be perfect. I also keep all my music and videos on me at all times, so I am sure I will want a new way to transfer my stuff to a newer improved model.

        Now kindly GTFO :)
      • rmdl, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1so buy a nano then?
      • devjunkie, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0Sorry, comment ran out.

        The point that's being made is the price you're paying versus storage.

        $399 for 16 GB comes out to $25 per gig of storage.

        $349 for 160 GB in the iPod class. $2 per gig.
        $249 for 80 GB $3.11 per gig.

        The point being made here is in an mp3 device, you're paying for storage space, since that's all it is. So because this thing has "touch" and wifi on it, you'll be willing to cough up $25 per gig?

        That sounds idiotic, so floatingpoints is correct with the whole "you're an idiot if you buy one", because it's true. The truth isn't always pretty.

        ...and we seriously wonder why so many people are in debt. The inability to fully comprehend exactly what they're buying.
        • devjunkie, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0...why do you people keep comparing this to cars?

          Maybe you don't realize it's a 1200% price increase. Cars vary in range, a very close one, unless you're so rich you can just pound down cash on a Bentley. So yeah, I can pick from a Prius for $20k or maybe shell out $30k and get something that I'd like better. I'm not paying $240k for a car because I like how the ***** radio looks.

          If you wanna compare it to cars, then the 60 GB touch should be about $499, maybe an 80GB at $599.

          Apples to oranges, and a prime example of how consumers are just idiots.

          No, people are in debt because of their inability to comprehend what they're paying for, which is what I just stated.

          It's amusing how many people are so ignorant about this. Choice is great and all, but hey, if you buy that touch iPod, you are stupid. Period.

          What I'm saying is the truth, it's just a matter of whether or not you're smart enough to say, "You know what.. he's right.."
        • geminitojanus, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9A person buying the 16GB iPod touch isn't thinking "geez, this is only 16GB for $399", they're thinking "this thing navigates the web, allows me to buy songs on the go, and has that awesome touch interface that the iPhone has with more storage space."

          I know you'll never realize this, but some consumers just plain don't care if it's "only" 16GB. First of all, it's 16GB of Flash, which means it's damned fast, will not drain a battery at even 1/10th of the rate of most hard disks on the market, it has no moving parts to break if it's "accidentally" mistreated, and it won't skip if you're jogging and changing songs. Secondly, the /majority/ of iPod owners have iPods that store less than 10GB of music. The best selling iPod of all time is the Nano, not only because it's cheaper than its bigger hard disk based brother, but because it's perfectly situated, not too much space that you'd never use anyways, and not too little that you find yourself changing out songs every day (at least for most normal people). Apple, as a company, caters to the everyday person and the fringe users, which is why they still make the iPod classic even though it's never going to sell anywhere near as many units as even the new Shuffles will.

          So for those of you who only care about density, buy the iPod classic. For those of you who are gadgetophiles, buy the iPod touch. For those of you who say "screw you Apple for not fitting me perfectly", go buy the Microsoft WiFiBrick.
        • vypergts, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6If size matters so much to you then why are you completely ignoring the fact that the touch also has a larger screen? I consider the ability to see my videos on something larger than a postage stamp to be a feature worth the extra money over one that doesn't.
        • subliminalurge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6"The point being made here is in an mp3 device, you're paying for storage space, since that's all it is."

          That's the dumbest ***** thing I've heard all day.

          By your logic, you're an idiot for buying an MP3 player at all, since you could store all of that music on DVD for a fraction of the price per gig that you pay for the MP3 player. After all, it's just storage, nothing more.

          So, buy your own logic you are calling yourself an idiot for owning an MP3 player.
        • tech42er, on 10/10/2007, -0/+116 GB Flash for $300 is very good. At least they kept the Classic around so everyone who needs a massive HD to store all their music can do so. The Touch could not be based on anything but flash, unless you want a 5 minute battery life.
      • Smills, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Problem is, I always like to store more than just movies and videos on my media players. 16Gb is bearable if the only things you are storing are music and movies but as soon as you start dragging in files that space becomes nothing.
    • darny, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I have a smart playlist that cycles through my songs based on ratings and last date played. I listen to between 30 and 110 songs per day. The playlist size is usually around 350 songs (at maximum), much less than 16GB. Point is I don't need my entire library on me during normal day to day usage.

      You're still right, however. If I go on a trip or whatever I'm gonna want my whole library, AND my ipod touch.

      I really really want one but having one won't enable me to completely ditch my 5G 60GB video. I can't have any more gadgets in my life.
    • RadicalEdward, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3i don't get why people complain, if they want more storage, get the 160 gb classic.
    • muirisara, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Flash memory ain't cheap. Look at the cost of 16 GB flash drives...
      http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2013240522+1309425474&name=16GB

      With that said, I too wouldn't buy the iPod touch. I don't feel the price is exorbitant, but the minuscule storage capacity is a deal breaker. Let the early adopters pave the way for R&D to create lower cost, higher capacity flash memory.
  • counterplex, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2There is no bluetooth icon in any of the other pictures. I wonder if it's a 2nd gen feature that wasn't properly airbrushed out of this one pic. It's not like Jobs to not announce something known to be a in so much demand from consumers.
    • anonatron, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7It is fare more likely that they took the image from an iphone and forgot to remove the bluetooth symbol.
  • ozziek, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2Bluetooth, another thing to sap the battery life.
    • shaka999, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Yes, turning off the radio is so tough.....
  • Zippo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12I imagine it was a possible feature that was ultimately removed before production. That or a mistake when the image was created.
  • MetalHaze, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2that is def a bluetooth icon...what else could it be?
  • mseneschal, on 10/10/2007, -10/+1Just because someone Photoshops a bluetooth logo on, doesn't mean that Apple is going to add Bluetooth to it's iPod.
    • oblongmouth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Apple photoshopped a bluetooth icon onto it?
      It's directly from Apple.com/de
    • Rileyper, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1apples photos have always looked shopped, i guess it adds the extra beauty to it...shiny shiny shiny
  • P373Y, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1mabye its for the starbucks thing?
    • djSyndrome, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Nein. Starbucks is going to use the Wi-Fi connection.
    • zongamin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1nice bit of paying attention there
  • devjunkie, on 10/10/2007, -17/+2What's the point if the space available on it is smaller than past models of iPods?

    Are people seriously okay with paying the SAME price for a smaller capacity item?

    Currently, a 30 GB iPod is $220. This new one will be $399 for 16?! There really isn't any justification for doing that.

    Why aren't more people furious about this, or are we all complacent now to the point where we like paying more for less?
    • cajie, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Because the iPod touch uses flash memory (as opposed to hard disk) ?
      You could always buy the 80 GB iPod classic that is selling for $249.
    • darny, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5do you ALWAYS need your ENTIRE library on you at all times?????
      • rmdl, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2I do, yes.
      • djSyndrome, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2No, but if you're on an intercontinental flight, it sure does help.
        • abandonedhero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Bring your laptop. It's probably coming with you anyways.
      • brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1That's one of the major appeals of the ipod. If I just wanted a chunk of my music library I would never have bought an ipod in the first place.
        • bkemper, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Well then, you've got a couple choices. 1: Go with a hard disk based iPod and lose out on all the compactness and great software features of this model, or 2: wait a few years for the cost per MB of flash-based drives to go down while their capacity goes up (or of mini hard drives to fit into the same form factor).

          Or just wait a few months for Apple to apply the screen and software to their larger (in capacity and thickness) models. There's no need for people to act all pissy just because Apple didn't redesign their entire line all at the same time. Different models have different advantages.
      • Smills, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1It is a hassle having to delete songs to bring on new ones. Also, when I delete them I end up wanting to listen to them again a week later and can't so then I have to delete something else to make room and yeah, just a vicious circle. This might just sound lazy but the fact is that people are lazy and if they want to sell their product then they need to take this into account. There is no way I will be getting that any way. If I want to move just a few game demos from my computer to a friends house then I have already taken up 10gb. Pretty useless.
    • teqonix, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5The reason people aren't enraged is because the Touch uses flash-based memory. The higher capacity iPods still use magnetic storage to make it possible to be that cheap for all the space you're getting.

      Plus, I haven't even filled up my 4GB Nano yet, and I need a basic PDA. So the touch is perfect for my needs. I imagine it's the same story with a lot of other interested people.
      • tech42er, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ditto. The problem is that Apple based their flagship product on flash memory. For years, flash has been confined to the nano, while the iPod kept boasting about its incredible storage for cheap. Apple is really changing. They're making flash-based mini-computers now. At least they kept the old HD-based iPod.
    • RadicalEdward, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3actually your wrong, it's $349 for 160gb. or $249 for 80. hardly a step back. The touch is more like an iphone than an ipod.
    • rmdl, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1usually its the apple fans who are suckered into bizarre marketing. well, the ipod division, anyway.

      yes, a few of us realize how backwards and unusual this is, but there is a market for people willing to pay more for less.

      they'll most likely come out with a 30/80 gb model in a year once they're done milking those who easily give into the newest flash gadget that they just "have" to have.
      • tech42er, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Uh...they're not coming out with a 80GB flash gadget in a year, unless the MSRP is a couple thousand dollars. Flash memory is expensive, but it is much, much better than HD memory. Of course, if you need 100 gigs, stick with a HD. IF you can get by with 16 GB, use flash.
    • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Or maybe they aren't enraged because there are other models (and makers) of digital consumers devices to choose from. Maybe you shouldn't take it so seriously.
      • devjunkie, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0I'm just pointing out to people how non-sensical it is.

        From a post I made above:

        $399 for 16 GB comes out to $25 per gig of storage.

        $349 for 160 GB in the iPod class. $2 per gig.
        $249 for 80 GB $3.11 per gig.

        If you have no problems paying 1200% simply because the thing has "touch" on it, then we have to question either your ability to do math, or your lack of concern for how you handle money. In other words, being complacent.
        • ChoadNamath, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6You're comparing apples to oranges. Flash memory costs more, but it has tangible benefits. Can you imagine how much bigger it would need to be if it had a hard drive? Or how much shorter the battery life would be? It's the same principle that causes some people to buy hybrids. You might value a bigger engine with more horsepower for less money, but there's someone else who will pay more for a smaller, more efficient car. Trust me, I'm no Apple fan, but you just sound silly right now.
          • somecheesypoofs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Amen. Dev can't figure out some people might actually want all of the functionality of an iPhone - minus the phone part. Especially without the AT&T *****..... I'm happy with my Treo and EVDO, but i need a new iPod and the Touch fits the bill. put me down for one. ***** the 1200000% more for a different format of storage with different specs.....16GB is plenty - and Flash - even better.
        • bkemper, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Circuit City has a 300 GB HD for $150, so maybe you should hook that up to the USB port of your Zune or whatever and carry it around, thereby adding capacity at 50ยข per gig. Otherwise "we" have to question either your ability to do math, or your lack of concern for how you handle money.

          http://www.circuitcity.com/ccd/productDetail.do?oid=170087&WT.mc_n=4&WT.mc_t=U&cm_ven=COMPARISON%20SHOPPING&cm_cat=GOOGLE&cm_pla=DATAFEED-%3EPRODUCTS&cm_ite=1%20PRODUCT&cm_keycode=4
        • Tippis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"If you have no problems paying 1200% simply because the thing has "touch" on it"
          And how can you be so sure that's the *only* thing they pay extra for? The iPT has more going for itself than that, you know...
    • milkmage, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3you can get a cheap ass dodge van for less than a mini cooper. does that mean a NICER car is not worth the extra money even though it's smaller? oh, and nevermind the 30GB is a hard disk, and 16GB is solid state.. or do you not unederstand the difference?
      • devjunkie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1LOL

        Who are you trying to convince, me or you?
        • SniperX, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Bit thick headed arn't we?

          Pot. Kettle. Black.
      • subliminalurge, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"or do you not unederstand the difference?"

        It seems that he does not understand a great many things.
  • fahrvergnuugen, on 10/10/2007, -0/+20Would be killer for the car, I'm dying for wireless streaming to the car stereo via bluetooth.
    On a side note, why the hell didn't they make this thing compatible with AirTunes?? All the hardware is there....
    • giroguy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i was hopping as well that with the wifi you could stream from the ipod to the airport express
    • toetagger, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Perhaps, but the idea is that airtunes is in the same location as your computer with ALL of your music...
  • elmoslemur, on 10/10/2007, -6/+0If it has blue-tooth then its worth every cent to me. Without it... its crap. Not everyplace in the US has Wi-Fi avail. Don't let us down apple. Don't make this another Apple TV. Great concept but horrible delivery. Sway me from my Nokia 880.
    • Korexz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I actually like my Apple TV... When you weigh the cost of a PVR subscription, and the cost of your Cable/SAT bill it actually comes out cheaper. I don't have cable/sat and I just get the stuff I want, like Robot Chicken.
    • tech42er, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If you want an iPod touch that ha Internet everywhere, including outside of hotspots, I'd suggest you look into the iPhone.
  • oblongmouth, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Does the iPod touch synch with iTunes via wifi, or is it just the shop that you have access to?
    the iTunes store is a waste of my time, i'm not buying their ***** encoded drm-d crap.
    I'll rip my own CDs and get REAL artwork, not just the cover
  • emopi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2apple uk - http://www.apple.com/uk/ipodtouch/gallery/index10.html
  • kolais, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1UK site has it as well - http://www.apple.com/uk/ipodtouch/gallery/index10.html
    • aliguana, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2no BT icon in any of those pics - unless they swiftly swapped them
  • pixelbend, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The justification is that it is flash memory instead of a hard drive. Right now, in order to make it this thin, that is the highest amount of flash that they could squeeze in there.
  • beatmix01, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9if it is there... and you can sync up a bluetooth headset... can you say SKYPE on the itouch!?
    • brendanryder, on 10/10/2007, -9/+0no you cant say SKYPE cus theres no fricking mic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      • Sartori, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Wouldn't the Bluetooth headset have a mic?
      • duzytata, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Please read it again. "Bluetooth headset"
  • WorldRTomi, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1ipod touch ? isn't that a rip off the cowon D2/A2 ?

    http://www.cowonglobal.com/product/product_D2_feature.php
    • tech42er, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No. The only thing they have in common is touch screen. Neither is a rip of the other.
  • HanSolo69, on 10/10/2007, -10/+2Most pointless product Apple has ever introduced..well.since the Apple TV.
    I love mine, but we don't need 4 simultaneous versions of the iPod (5 counting the iPhone).
    • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6It called choice...some people like it
    • EdwardsNH, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You mean, "Most pointless product... that I'm going to buy"
    • Korexz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I actually like my Apple TV...
    • subliminalurge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2You do realize that you're not required to actually purchase all 4 versions, right?
  • kermithefrogand, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2yeah rite: steve jobs FORGOT to mention bluetooth during his announcement? dugg as inaccurate!
  • donkeySays, on 10/10/2007, -9/+1The amount of iPod on Digg is becoming crazy. Will log in back after a week. See ya, Digg!
    • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4and yet you took the time comment that you aren't interested in iPod stories. There's just no end to your giving
    • fluidfoundation, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1yeah, we'll be waiting for you right here.
  • thatsiebguy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Apple BlueTooth stereo headsets on the way?
  • speedygonzalez, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2F bluetooth headsets, bluetooth means tethering it to cell phone data plans, and surfing safari using whatever carrier of cell phone you have.
    • g33b33, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Um...what?
    • fluidfoundation, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1(in best Louis Griffin voice) (chuckles)w---w--w-w-w-w-wwhhhhhat?!
      I'm digging this comment up in hopes that someone can make sense of you.
      • nuudles, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1What the parent means is that rather than being excited about using Bluetooth headsets with the iPod Touch, speedygonzalez is hoping to use the Bluetooth to connect via DUN to the Internet using whichever phone and plan he uses so that he can utilize Safari to browse the Internet rather than the small screen and limited browser most phones supply. For instance, I have a normal Samsung phone on the Sprint SERO plan (which allows me unlimited data) so it would be nice if I could tether the iPod Touch to my phone.
  • canyonblue, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Guys you all need to calm down and think!

    Steve would CLEARLY HAVE STATED YESTERDAY if this had Bluetooth. It doesn't. Likely this is an honest mistake where Apple put an early mockup image on an iPod touch screen in photoshop and messed up. Perhaps in the past they even intended it to have had Bluetooth but removed the feature.

    The only thing I can tell you for sure... the iPod touch doesn't have Bluetooth.
    • fluidfoundation, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3pretty flawed thinking. your basing your opinion on the omission of information instead of evidence to the contrary.
      Do you have any rent-to-own furniture?
      • mc4_a, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Not really if you consider the website technical specs have always been the best source of information.

        Having worked in that industry, image mock-ups are usually done with simulated pictures. They probably took the screen shot from the iPhone picture gallery because they didn't think it made a difference. Easy mistake to make.
  • bimmerboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2if this were true, that would be great! no wifi coverage...bluetooth to my phone to use 3G to browse the web. awesome!
  • jalapeno, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5There is one pic linked to from the us apple site where you can barely make out the bluetooth icon...
    http://a248.e.akamai.net/7/248/2041/1311/store.apple.com/Catalog/regional/amr/touch/img/overview-wifi.jpg
  • MicNaste, on 10/10/2007, -8/+0Even if it is true that the iPod Touch has Bluetooth, it is sill not anywhere close to get one.
  • fluidfoundation, on 10/10/2007, -3/+15your mom has bluetooth.
  • daman01, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4It is also on the American site. Halfway down on the right. The photo with the biker upside down.
    http://tinyurl.com/34sdm8
  • devjunkie, on 10/10/2007, -7/+0I'm simply baffled by the amount of sheer ignorance in this thread.

    The price per gig on this thing versus what's already out now... and people are willing to buy it just because it has "touch".

    This is hilarious. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
    • joq100, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You are forgetting about the big screen apparently
    • subliminalurge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I'd love to see what your house looks like. Do you buy your carpet based on price per square foot and ignore all other factors? Things like appearance, color, and durability?

      As I read through this page, you just keep sounding dumber and dumber every time I come across one of your comments.
    • exomni, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2We're not buying a ***** 7200 RPM hard-drive, you dumbass, we're buying a ***** MUSIC PLAYER. The "price per gig" is near the bottom of my list of considerations when buying a music player.
    • SniperX, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3From an impartial view-point it seems to me that you, devjunkie, are the most ignorant thing about this thread.

      I would love the touch to have more space, but i completely understand why it does not. You seem to be too thick headed to even consider what other factors might be in play here. Therefore that means YOU are the ignorant one. Though, because of your ignorance you will never allow yourself to believe this simple fact, so I suppose I am wasting my time here.
    • tech42er, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's flash, not a HD. The latter is much, much cheaper per gig, but has serious disadvantages. And, of course, the touch has WiFI, which is pretty nice and a larger screen.
  • rohitsonika, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0BTW, it's not just the German Apple website....it's the US as well as the UK.....I am guessing it's on all Apple Store websites.
  • TexanPsycho, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2What about the signal thing in the top-left? I'm guessing it's for the Wi-Fi
    • fluidfoundation, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9d-d-d-d-d-dd-d-d-d-duh.
    • getbusyliving, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Astonishing powers of deduction there Einstein.
    • toetagger, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0ding ding ding ding ding you get an extra cookie!
  • holdencaulfield, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0I don't see any reason why Steve would have left this out of the presentation. Yeah, it would be sweet... but I'm not holding my breath.
    On an off-topic note: why there isn't a camera on the touch is beyond me....
    • vgtek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Steve knows what he's doing, that'll probably be in the next release haha
    • limoo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Ah, you're getting the hang of Job's evil plans. The next announcement a couple months from now will be the iCamera Touch, with video recording and music capabilities, but no phone.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 101 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.