Filed under: Rumors, iPod nano, iPod touch
iPod touch, nano might get cameras
Ah, the loose lips on those 3rd party case manufacturers. This time we're seeing what looks like an iPod case with a hole cut out for... yes, a camera. Macrumors has a few juicy shots of both nano and touch-sized iPod cases with said holes. These match up with sketches reported by iLounge back in May and rumored by HardMac before then.Personally I think it's brilliant and logical to add a camera to the nano and I doubt a touch with video would scuttle many iPhone sales. More importantly, the touch is likely to get the same "upgrade" treatment the 3GS did: oleophobic screen and speed boost. Adding a camera just turns the touch into what people wanted anyway: pretty much an all-in-one device.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
bioadam said 10:34AM on 7-06-2009
Who doesn't need fewer devices in their pockets?
Reply
JR said 10:41AM on 7-06-2009
Yes, please, and thank you.
Reply
owenmhv said 10:49AM on 7-06-2009
if they keep the ipod touch dimensions the same, speed boost and camera are in order. if not, i expect the device to be half as thin.
Reply
michae1 said 6:48PM on 7-06-2009
I lost my Nano several weeks ago, and decided to wait until the new Touch comes out to upgrade (if I can hold out that long). To me, the addition of a camera would be fine, but what I would really like to see in the Touch is GPS. With so many apps being location-aware, GPS seems like a must-have feature. But I find it hard to believe Apple would put both a camera and GPS in the Touch...so it looks like it will be the camera instead.
Reply
tyler138 said 10:50AM on 7-06-2009
camera would be great on the itouch, would be good if it could do video aswell
Reply
Celedhring said 11:22AM on 7-06-2009
I'm not sure, chances are that if you own an I-Pod you are already carrying a phone with its own camera in your pocket. Even if the experience is better than most camera phones, it will still feel rather redundant as an upgrade for the Touch line.
Reply
ghostshadow said 11:01AM on 7-06-2009
Yeah, this would be great! Heck even some HD video would be cool.
Reply
macuser said 11:18AM on 7-06-2009
The next gen. iPod Touch should have a camera (with video), a speed boost, an oleophobic screen, and a built in mic. A digital compass would also be nice, if that is possible with out gps. Even if it is a little thicker. Apple should try to make it as similar as possible to the new iPhone, so that less apps will be iPhone only. Soo basically the new features of the 3GS. :)
Reply
Kelmon said 11:19AM on 7-06-2009
Silly question but given that pretty much every cellular telephone these days has a camera in it, how many cameras do we actually need? I can see the attraction of an iPod with a camera if the customer didn't already have a mobile telephone with a camera but if they do already have one then this is basically unnecessary fluff. Given that the iPhone's camera isn't exactly renown for its excellence, I fail to see how much of a draw a so-so camera is going to be.
Reply
CV said 11:29AM on 7-06-2009
The key is that the iPod touch camera would also record video.
My cheapo Motorola dumbphone does not have a camera, but even if it did, the data link is way too slow to effectively upload video. The iPod touch has 11g WiFi, fine for uploading both photos and video.
Grant said 11:31AM on 7-06-2009
If I had a camera on my iPod touch, I would use the Evernote app nearly every day. I have a camera on my normal cell phone, but I can't use it with Evernote nearly as easily. I'm sure the same sort of situation applies to hundreds and hundreds of iPhone apps that make use of the camera in cool ways.
Kelmon said 12:35PM on 7-06-2009
Well, I suppose there is that to be said for it - if the iPod Touch supports a camera then applications that had previously been supporting the camera on an iPhone will become more useful to Touch owners. Differentiation between the iPhone and iPod Touch in terms of features has always looked like a bit of an issue to me, although I can quite understand why Apple does it.
Personally, I'm not much bothered about a camera (I have plenty of them kicking around the house in various forms) but adding GPS would be interesting since you can now load the maps onto the device and do not need a cellular signal to stream map data from Google.
cuteSAVAGE said 11:26AM on 7-06-2009
Hopefully the camera comes to the touch by years end. I'm not renewing my contract with AT&T and plan on downgrading to a touch for now - this would definitely sweeten the deal.
Reply
whoapossum said 1:51PM on 7-06-2009
The current "Buy a Mac, get an iPod" promotion runs until Oct. 8, and if precedence serves, the new iPods should follow shortly thereafter in time for the holiday season. Too early to call Oct. 13th?
fishface said 5:43PM on 7-06-2009
The promotion ends September 8, 2009 not in October.
N I T E said 11:30AM on 7-06-2009
5mp minimum please!
Reply
CV said 11:54AM on 7-06-2009
The resolution of the camera is not terribly important due to the teeny sensor size and the fixed focal length of the lens itself.
What is more far important is low light sensitivity. This is even more important for video recording since the slowest effective shutter speed is 1/60 second (you can use slower shutter speeds for still images, but you really need good light sensitivity for video).
Also, these devices don't have tripod sockets or flash units, so better light sensitivity results in better images, since you have to handhold the devices and slower shutter speeds exacerbate camera shake.
Skullivan said 12:00PM on 7-06-2009
I'm always baffled by this idea that Apple can't put too much into the iPod Touch or else it'll cannibalize iPhone sales. That theory suggests that there are a whole slew of people who don't want or need a multi thousand dollar 2 year phone contract with AT&T but are getting iPhone's anyway because they want the few extra features the iPhone has. People who don't want the phone (or want the phone but don't want AT&T) are getting the iPod Touch. If they made the two devices identical in terms of non-phone features it would have absolutely no effect on iPhone sales and would only serve to increase iPod sales.
It's in their best interest in terms of app sales to keep the two devices as similar as technically possible (in terms of stuff like compass, video cam, etc.). The more people who have that hardware, the more sales they'll get for apps that depend on them.
I still think Apple should make a high end Touch (say $500 for the 64GB model) that has GPS, Video, all the bells and whistles and then have a $400 64GB model for people who don't need all that. I'd be more than willing to shell out an extra $100 to have a handheld GPS/portable video cam in a device I'm going to carry around with me everywhere anyway.
Reply
dagamer43 said 1:48PM on 7-06-2009
The iPod Touch doesn't cannibalize on iPhone sales simply because the most important advantage the iPhone has is Internet access anywhere. When you couple that with the Internet-enabled/Internet-only apps on the App Store, Apple has little to fear. Take for example apps like Facebook and Fandango. They are great when you are in a free WiFi hotspot, but 99% of the time you aren't. They're pretty useless when you're in a car. And at home, you'd rather use your computer.
Apple can add all the tiny stuff it wants, but an iPod Touch without a persistent Internet connection pales in comparison to an iPhone in the long run.
3rdpig said 12:13PM on 7-06-2009
I got the 3GS so my "old" 3G is essentially a Touch with a camera. Now if only the GPS capabilities of the 3G would still work without it being active as a phone. Now Maps only works with a WiFI connection. How is it that GPS units like Garmin work differently - no need for wifi or cell networks?
Reply