WiFi-Only iPhones

[tubemonkey]

Let's say Apple made wifi-only versions of the iPhone; effectively killing off the iPod touch. Pricing would be at or just a bit above current iPod touch prices. Do you think it would seriously cannibalize sales of the iPhone?

[Delotte231]

If the buyers want to use Android phones and only use the Wifi only iPhone as a game center and music player, then yeah. I seriously think so. I mean, all people want from the iphone is really just the app ecosystem. Especially gaming ecosystem, while android devices are more towards productivity in my opinion.

[kyteflyer]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Let's say Apple made wifi-only versions of the iPhone; effectively killing off the iPod touch. Pricing would be at or just a bit above current iPod touch prices. Do you think it would seriously cannibalize sales of the iPhone?

umm, wouldn't it *be* an iPod Touch if theres no 3G/2G service???

[afv011]

Originally Posted by kyteflyer

umm, wouldn't it *be* an iPod Touch if theres no 3G/2G service???

My thoughts exactly, as far as I know, and iPod touch is an iPhone without the phone part.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by kyteflyer

umm, wouldn't it *be* an iPod Touch if theres no 3G/2G service???

Originally Posted by afv011

My thoughts exactly, as far as I know, and iPod touch is an iPhone without the phone part.

Kind of; but the iPhone has a long list of features that the iPod touch doesn't have:

• Display: IPS vs none
• Rear Cam: 8MP vs 0.7MP
• Focus: auto focus vs fixed focus
• Flash: yes vs none
• Front Cam: 0.9MP vs 0.3MP
• CPU: dual-core vs single-core
• RAM: 512MB vs 256MB
• GPS: yes vs none
• Compass: yes vs none
• Battery: 1432mAh vs 930mAh
• Siri: yes vs none
• Size: 4.5 x 2.3 x 0.37" vs 4.4 x 2.3 x 0.28"
• Weight: 4.9 oz vs 3.6 oz

As you can see, the iPod touch is quite weak compared to the iPhone. What I want is an iPhone with the 3G/4G radio stripped out and everything else left intact.

My question is why Apple won't do it. Are they afraid people will stop buying the phones?

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Kind of; but the iPhone has a long list of features that the iPod touch doesn't have:

• Display: IPS vs none
• Rear Cam: 8MP vs 0.7MP
• Focus: auto focus vs fixed focus
• Flash: yes vs none
• Front Cam: 0.9MP vs 0.3MP
• CPU: dual-core vs single-core
• RAM: 512MB vs 256MB
• GPS: yes vs none
• Compass: yes vs none
• Battery: 1432mAh vs 930mAh
• Siri: yes vs none
• Size: 4.5 x 2.3 x 0.37" vs 4.4 x 2.3 x 0.28"
• Weight: 4.9 oz vs 3.6 oz

As you can see, the iPod touch is quite weak compared to the iPhone. What I want is an iPhone with the 3G/4G radio stripped out and everything else left intact.

Other than the GPS and compass, that largely reflects the fact that the iPod Touch series didn't get an upgrade last year, and the specs are still from 2010.
iPhone = iPod Touch + extra chip for phone/GPS/compass
(and since when did being smaller and lighter count as weak?)
[Edit: Your comparison of front camera resolution is incorrect, both have VGA (0.3MP) resolution.]

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Other than the GPS and compass, that largely reflects the fact that the iPod Touch series didn't get an upgrade last year, and the specs are still from 2010.
iPhone = iPod Touch + extra chip for phone/GPS/compass
(and since when did being smaller and lighter count as weak?)
[Edit: Your comparison of front camera resolution is incorrect, both have VGA (0.3MP) resolution.]

Thanks, I corrected the camera spec. I had it listed wrong in my spreadsheet.

It's still more than compass and GPS, so I'll compare it to the the iPhone 4 (its contemporary):

• Display: IPS vs none
• Rear Cam: 5MP vs 0.7MP
• Focus: auto focus vs fixed focus
• Flash: yes vs none
• RAM: 512MB vs 256MB
• GPS: yes vs none
• Compass: yes vs none
• Battery: 1420mAh vs 930mAh
• Size: 4.5 x 2.3 x 0.37" vs 4.4 x 2.3 x 0.28"
• Weight: 4.8 oz vs 3.6 oz

The iPhone 4's battery is 53% larger and it has twice the RAM. The lack of IPS display in the iPod touch is noticeable and the lack of an auto-focusing camera prevents me from downloading a whole bunch of apps that require a real camera.

At the time of its introduction, the iPod touch's size prevented it from getting the thicker 5MP AF camera module and the larger 1420mAh battery of the iPhone 4. So being smaller and lighter was a severe handicap.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

The iPhone 4's battery is 53% larger

And it needs the bigger battery to power the phone portion.

and it has twice the RAM. The lack of IPS display in the iPod touch is noticeable and the lack of an auto-focusing camera prevents me from downloading a whole bunch of apps that require a real camera.

Right, and a iPod Touch 5th gen with better display, more memory and a better camera would be a good device. But it would be a better version of the iPod Touch.
The only fundamental difference between the two is the lack of cellular/GPS chip. The iPod Touch line already are iPhones without the Phone bit. Everything else is pretty minor spec haggling.
If they made a Wifi version of the current iPhone, they would call it an iPod Touch.

At the time of its introduction, the iPod touch's size prevented it from getting the thicker 5MP AF camera module and the larger 1420mAh battery of the iPhone 4. So being smaller and lighter was a severe handicap.

Yes, I'm sure as many as several dozen people would agree with you.
Most others would rather have a smaller, lighter device.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

If they made a Wifi version of the current iPhone, they would call it an iPod Touch.

Which is what I want. The same size, shape, feature set, etc.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

And it needs the bigger battery to power the phone portion.

Right, and a iPod Touch 5th gen with better display, more memory and a better camera would be a good device. But it would be a better version of the iPod Touch.
The only fundamental difference between the two is the lack of cellular/GPS chip. The iPod Touch line already are iPhones without the Phone bit. Everything else is pretty minor spec haggling.
If they made a Wifi version of the current iPhone, they would call it an iPod Touch.

We obviously have different definitions of the terms "fundamental" and "minor specs", so I'll let it stand there. Arguing the point any further would be pointless.

Yes, I'm sure as many as several dozen people would agree with you.
Most others would rather have a smaller, lighter device.

Because of it's destiny to always have weaker specs, I'd like to see the iPod touch ditch a bunch of its current features and turned into a streaming audio player with access to the app store for supported apps. They could then shrink the size to a level that's realistic for its capabilities; something along the lines of this mock up:



Now that would be a great iPod touch

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Thanks, I corrected the camera spec. I had it listed wrong in my spreadsheet.

It's still more than compass and GPS, so I'll compare it to the the iPhone 4 (its contemporary):

• Display: IPS vs none
• Rear Cam: 5MP vs 0.7MP
• Focus: auto focus vs fixed focus
• Flash: yes vs none
• RAM: 512MB vs 256MB
• GPS: yes vs none
• Compass: yes vs none
• Battery: 1420mAh vs 930mAh
• Size: 4.5 x 2.3 x 0.37" vs 4.4 x 2.3 x 0.28"
• Weight: 4.8 oz vs 3.6 oz

The iPhone 4's battery is 53% larger and it has twice the RAM. The lack of IPS display in the iPod touch is noticeable and the lack of an auto-focusing camera prevents me from downloading a whole bunch of apps that require a real camera.

At the time of its introduction, the iPod touch's size prevented it from getting the thicker 5MP AF camera module and the larger 1420mAh battery of the iPhone 4. So being smaller and lighter was a severe handicap.

The unlocked iPhone 16GB model sells for $649. If Apple sold this without a phone radio, it would still be for well over $500. I doubt any of us would pay between $500 and $600 for phoneless iPhone labelled as an iPod touch! I seriously doubt you could even find a used and working iPhone 4 or 4s for the price of an iPod touch (which currently sells for under $200). I'm guessing a used iPhone 4 or 4s will be at least twice the price of the touch. It is simply not worth that amount to be used as an iPod only.

EDIT: The least pricy working iPhone 4 I could find on eBay was $335. Below that and they all had problems. Get below $300 and they usually have a broken screen or simply won't work!

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by jswinden

The unlocked iPhone 16GB model sells for $649. If Apple sold this without a phone radio, it would still be for well over $500. I doubt any of us would pay between $500 and $600 for phoneless iPhone labelled as an iPod touch! I seriously doubt you could even find a used and working iPhone 4 or 4s for the price of an iPod touch (which currently sells for under $200). I'm guessing a used iPhone 4 or 4s will be at least twice the price of the touch. It is simply not worth that amount to be used as an iPod only.

It sells for that price because Apple gouges its customers.

iSuppli has the BOM + Mfg for the 16GB iPhone 4S at $196. Sell the 16GB for $249 and the 32GB for $299; and Apple still makes a tidy profit.

[DaleDe]

The GPS on the iPhone depends on a cell-phone connection to work. This is why even the iPad does not have a GPS if you get the Wi-Fi version. The GPS is not a full stand alone GPS but rather one that is built in to provide location service and depends on a cell tower for some of its initialization. There are, of course, full GPS's available but Apple in their infinite wisdom and greediness for cut of any hardware sales does not even support a standard external GPS. Instead you have to buy a special qualified version which is an additional $100+ bucks even for a blue-tooth version since they have disabled that functionality in their blue-tooth software.

However, having said that you can get location services from the Wi-Fi itself. You can even make this more accurate by submitting access points, even your own home. http://www.skyhookwireless.com/locat...y/coverage.php

Dale

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

The GPS on the iPhone depends on a cell-phone connection to work. This is why even the iPad does not have a GPS if you get the Wi-Fi version. The GPS is not a full stand alone GPS but rather one that is built in to provide location service and depends on a cell tower for some of its initialization. There are, of course, full GPS's available but Apple in their infinite wisdom and greediness for cut of any hardware sales does not even support a standard external GPS. Instead you have to buy a special qualified version which is an additional $100+ bucks even for a blue-tooth version since they have disabled that functionality in their blue-tooth software.

My Galaxy Player has a stand alone GPS. Just upload some offline maps.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

It sells for that price because Apple gouges its customers.

Seriously? Shocker!