# IPOD touch



## toonarmy (Jul 8, 2007)

Anybody got one? What do u think?

toon


----------



## barton TT (Nov 13, 2004)

I Would go for the 80gb or 160gb ipod classic better value for money.


----------



## coupe-sport (May 7, 2002)

Bought one yesterday - only the 8gb version but i'm not using it for its music playing abilities 

James


----------



## ezzie (Jul 2, 2004)

Its great. The music bit is what you expect but the web browsing implementation is fantastic.


----------



## barton TT (Nov 13, 2004)

Are we talking iphone or ipod touch 2 differents things. :?


----------



## Widget (May 7, 2002)

barton TT said:


> Are we talking iphone or ipod touch 2 differents things. :?


Clue's in the title :wink:


----------



## barton TT (Nov 13, 2004)

I know what a touch is. :wink:


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

i don't see the point, due to the cost of them compared to the nano and classic and with the latter having greater memory


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

p1tse said:


> i don't see the point, due to the cost of them compared to the nano and classic and with the latter having greater memory


How about the rest of the features?


----------



## Private Prozac (Jul 7, 2003)

coupe-sport said:


> Bought one yesterday - only the 8gb version but i'm not using it for its music playing abilities
> 
> James


What are you using it for then?


----------



## robrob (Dec 7, 2004)

toonarmy said:


> Anybody got one? What do u think?
> 
> toon


I've got a 16Gb Touch and it's fantastic - best gadget I've owned. The ipod nano/classic are only better "value for money" if you're only interested in memory size.

Apple were clever enough to realise that if you were going to offer another device which had a tenth of the memory of a similar product and cost more, it had better do something a bit different. Even the memory is different - the touch has flash memory as opposed to a small hard disk. Less moving parts supposedly mean greater reliability and shockproofing. It also means thinner ipods. The 16gb touch is 8mm.

If you want to watch video, the screen is bigger than the others.

If you want Internet on the go, the in built wi-fi and the Safari App are the best implementation of portable internet I've used. I like being able to go direct to YouTube and I like being able to buy stuff from iTunes on the go. I very much like the free wifi in many McDonalds and I prefer the touch interface to the Classics too. I spend most of my free work time hanging about at airports and the wifi feature alone would almost be worth the money for me.

I don't find the memory limiting either. I only carry about with me what I'm listening to at any one time. I tend to work with playlists and have never once on my previous iPods copied my entire CD collection onto them. I accept some people do though, and 16Gb may not be enough for them.

I have about 600 tracks on it at the moment and about 40 live 3-4 minute video tracks taken from YouTube or burned from my personal DVDs and numerous podcasts. This takes up about 2.5Gb. I sometimes burn a DVD movie onto it when I'm going away, wach it on my downtime, and delete when I get home again.

PC Pro had a great summation of the device:
"The touch doesn't offer the simplest music-playing experience, so if you want something purely for songs the iPod classic is considerably cheaper and offers much more storage. But when it comes to handheld internet, the touch pulls the rug from under every other device we've seen.".


----------



## smartartkid (Aug 20, 2007)

Yep ditto that, they are amazing! Best gadget I think I've ever seen.


----------



## coupe-sport (May 7, 2002)

> What are you using it for then?


It makes a great remote control running an App called Remote Buddy. Great for multirooming with a few Airport Express units 8)










James


----------



## PissTT (Apr 7, 2006)

I love my 16GB Touch also.

Fully jail broken so that it has all the bells and whistles that I could ask for.

I don't need the iphone capabilities (rather poor)... and will wait for a better iphone to come out.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Quick question - has anyone got any email apps working (eg Entourage) on the Touch?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Touch is pointless, you might as well just get the iphone.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Toshiba said:


> Touch is pointless, you might as well just get the iphone.


iPhone is Â£700+

iTouch (16gb) is Â£249.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

We just got a Touch and an new Nano given to us.  Touch is very clever and novel and good at everything apart from playing music, where the Nano has significantly better sound quality. Not sure that iTouch screen will stay scratch free for long.

When the iTouch gets decent capacity (100gb+) and has the same quality sound chip DACs as the Nano, Classic and 5G Pods, it will be a serious contender.

It's a nice toy for Xmas.


----------



## ezzie (Jul 2, 2004)

The iPod Touch's screen is scratch proof, so no need to fret on that front, the back however is not. Interesting to note re sound quality between the nano and touch.


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

barton TT said:


> I Would go for the 80gb or 160gb ipod classic better value for money.


Except the Touch looks far better, is much better functionally & the sound quality is twice as good as the classic (tired & tested).


----------



## barton TT (Nov 13, 2004)

W7 PMC said:


> barton TT said:
> 
> 
> > I Would go for the 80gb or 160gb ipod classic better value for money.
> ...


Tried both sorry don't agree sound on classic is far better.


----------



## CH_Peter (May 16, 2002)

jampott said:


> Quick question - has anyone got any email apps working (eg Entourage) on the Touch?


Short answer: no.

With a jailbroken Touch and iPhone, it is possible to copy the email app from the latter to the former - I recall reading this somewhere and it not even be particularly difficult. However, Exchange support is still hopelessly nobbled, unless IMAP is enabled on the server.

Third party apps (see http://www.vistomobile.com/vistomobile/ ... ?pageid=15) can give you access to your Inbox.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

barton TT said:


> W7 PMC said:
> 
> 
> > barton TT said:
> ...


Ditto. I have new Nano, touch, 40 gb 4Gpod , 80g 5G pod and 60gb 5G pods all at my disposal.  Docked up to hi fi or through decent earphones, there is a marked difference in quality between touch and all the other pods, when listening to same tracks at 320kps.

I was sad enough to try them all back to back with one fav track (Placebo - Ask for Answers). Touch loses out in absolute quality - its harsher. less real base, more closed in vocals, and generally less pleasing to my ear than even the 4G pod.

Good enough for 192 kps stuff tho, and rest of fucntionality is great. So i am sure sound chips can be improved.


----------



## mac's TT (May 13, 2006)

The sound quality for mine is fantastic played through this KEF system










I am going to get the subwoofer to suit soon to make it complete, haven't used the earphones yet as I want to get a decent pair. Absolutely delighted with the touches capability. Mine came from Australia, but don't think it should make any difference


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Had my Touch, my Classic 80GB Video & another Classic 80GB video go head to head in a Bose Dock & the sound on the Touch was much much better than both the classics. Everyone present in the room agreed on this. Far more depth & clarity.

Not done the head to head via earphones yet but may have to try as i bought some rather lush B&O headphones in the US a couple of weeks ago & the improvement in sound quality over my Sony NC buds which i'd used to date is significant.


----------



## coupe-sport (May 7, 2002)

> I was sad enough to try them all back to back with one fav track (Placebo - Ask for Answers). Touch loses out in absolute quality - its harsher. less real base, more closed in vocals, and generally less pleasing to my ear than even the 4G pod.


Oh come on Gary - you'll be saying all CD players sound different next :roll: :wink:

James


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

coupe-sport said:


> > I was sad enough to try them all back to back with one fav track (Placebo - Ask for Answers). Touch loses out in absolute quality - its harsher. less real base, more closed in vocals, and generally less pleasing to my ear than even the 4G pod.
> 
> 
> Oh come on Gary - you'll be saying all CD players sound different next :roll: :wink:
> ...


...and all 2.0L cars drive the same too. :wink:

<<less impressive audio quality make it a surprisingly so-so alternative to the less expensive iPod classic>>

http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/ipod/review/apple-ipod-touch-8gb-16gb/P5


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Well perhaps my ears are not as they used to be, but defo a noticable difference to me & others that listened to the impromptu test. Perhaps the Bose dock just prefers the Touch


----------



## PissTT (Apr 7, 2006)

jampott said:


> Quick question - has anyone got any email apps working (eg Entourage) on the Touch?


I use the iphone mail software..... ok for my needs....


----------



## jam (May 8, 2002)

coupe-sport said:


> > What are you using it for then?
> 
> 
> It makes a great remote control running an App called Remote Buddy. Great for multirooming with a few Airport Express units 8)
> ...


That looks awesome James! Gonna give it a whirl with my iPhone tonight and my two aiport express boxes 

One this though - the image above - is that a skin for iTunes under where it says "On your desktop"? It looks really nice

Thanks

James


----------

