Apple's iPod Touch (2010) Review, Not a Poor Man's iPhone 4
by Anand Lal Shimpi on September 9, 2010 12:38 AM EST- Posted in
- Gadgets
- Apple
- iPod Touch
A Not-so-Perfect FaceTime Device
The new Touch obviously supports FaceTime. With no cellular modem are no phone or messaging apps on the iPod Touch, but you do get a dedicated FaceTime app. Starting with iOS 4.1 you can now associate an email address with FaceTime so iPhone 4 owners can call iPod Touch owners.
Calling an iPhone 4 user via FaceTime can happen via cellphone number or email address. The FaceTime connection happens entirely over IP so it doesn’t matter that the iPod Touch lacks a cellular modem. FaceTime appears to work the same on the Touch as it does on the iPhone. There appear to be slight differences in quality but I’m unclear as to why that is.
The FaceTime app uses your synced contacts, it keeps a log of your recent FaceTime sessions and even has a favorites pages. The favorites didn’t work as expected. I could add favorites but tapping on the names didn’t do anything, I’d have to hit the blue arrow and manually select a phone number or email address to FaceTime.
 |
 |
When I first wrote about FaceTime I called it a great way to keep in touch with people who are close to you. The only problem was that, at least back then, it required both ends of the call to have iPhone 4s. The new iPod Touch makes FaceTime a bit more accessible.
Both parties can get the iPod Touch, or if you want to FaceTime with someone who has an iPhone 4 you no longer have to buy one yourself - an iPod Touch will suffice.
The mic, to the right of the rear camera
There are issues with Apple's implementation of Facetime on the iPod Touch however. The only mic on the device is on the back of the phone, next to the rear camera - on the other side of where you'll be speaking. Thankfully this proved to be a non-issue in my office but I can see it being a problem in a more crowded/noisey environment. With the mic on the back you also can't FaceTime with the iPod Touch laying on a desk (not that you'd want to). But you do need to hold onto it or at least use something to prop it up with. The iPod Touch worked wonderfully with my Luxa2 H1-Touch:
The major issue I had was with the external speaker volume. I noted a 12dB difference in sound pressure between the iPhone 4's speakerphone and what you get with the iPod Touch while playing music, with voice alone the gap peaks at around 20dB. The iPod Touch's external speaker just isn't loud enough for FaceTime in my opinion. If you're in a very quiet room it's not a problem, but have a computer or two running and it's uncomfortably quiet.
Unfortunately, if you want to use a headset you may find Apple's bundled earbuds aren't perfect - they don't include a microphone. You still have to rely on the rear facing mic on the iPod touch. It works, but it's not ideal.
Apple will sell you a set of earbuds + mic for $30 if you'd like, they work perfectly on the new Touch.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
86 Comments
View All Comments
Mike1111 - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
Anand, are you sure about the 960x720 sensor resolution upscaled to 1280x720 video recording resolution? Wouldn't it make more sense the other way around, that the sensor resolution is 1280x720 and pictures are just cropped to 960x720 to be 4:3?gunblade - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
This is what I think too. I couldn't think of any algorithm that could reproduce the extra horizontal field that is not capture from the sensor and not losing the feel and aspect ratio.OBLAMA2009 - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
good job to anand flushing out the truth here, but im not prepared to call apple a rip-off artist. first of all the look is similar to the old ipod touch so they arent overtly trying to deceive you into thinking youre getting an iphone 4, which would have been an easy thing to do. second they arent charging anywhere near the noncontract iphone 4 price. $200 isnt very much for what it does--nobody else has a device that does that much and is that size. try getting any smart phone for that price. this is a decent compromise for now with some neat new features like a faster chip and a schitt camera. i went and saw it at the apple store yesterday and it is very thin and yes it does smudge horribly on the back but i liked it and will probably get one. does anyone know where the best place to get it is? what is the costco price on the 32 mb ?wintermute000 - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
How about it Apple?Theres still a market for those of us who just want a mp3 player with big storage and big touchscreen controls ideal for mounting in a car. hehe
Stas - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
just another rape-off. rush to the store.Lord 666 - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
I too had hoped it was just an iPhone 4 in slimmer chassis. Thanks to your completely unbiased review, the honest truth got out.MrPickins - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
Same here.I had been planning on buying one, but they've downgraded it too much for my liking...
Sahrin - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
Anandtech has reviewed an iPod. You are now officially no longer a hardware website. Welcome to the world of consumer electronics websites - enjoy competing with CNET for the most drive-by impressions. I hope your dignity was not too high a price to pay for the ignorant masses clicking on your website when they search for "iPod player."It's honestly really sad to see this happen. Anandtech has definitely lost a lot of its credibility as a hardware site over the years, but nothing was as damaging to this as embracing the Applefication of the hardware world. It would be like the Wall Street Journal beginning to report petty crimes. It is beneath them, because it is anthithetical to their purpose. Sure, they could draw tens of millions of readers by doing so - but that's no who they are.
Anandtech chose to "change." I can't speak for the business realities of this - and I am sure they exist. I can only say that I hope that the drive-by readers who come in to get Apple rumors will generate as much ad revenue as the serious readers, who pore over the articles and take ads seriously (generating actual revenue for advertisers, as opposed to the all-powerful but completely worthless "impressions").
Maybe I misunderstand what AT's writers are trying to accomplish. I always thought it was to bring a level of objective understanding and discernment to the computer hardware world. I can tell you with absolute certainty this article doesn't accomplish that. It's a comparison of gasoline brands where neither makes any claims of superiority. It's a comparison of attributes Fuji to Granny Smith Apples - completely subjective and just as pointless.
The last bastion, the last line to cross is the one that Jon Stokes at Arstechnica (a site that went down the road Anandtech now travels a long time ago) stepped over earlier this year: expressing actual *disdain* for having an understanding of how the hardware that underpins the "neato gadgets" we use today works. "It's so boring, and difficult, and uninteresting."
Welcome to the "rest of the web" Anandtech. I'm sorry you couldn't understand that what made you valuable was the fact that you were *not* like everyone else, your coverage was not a duplicate of that provided by every other site. I'm sorry that the market dictated that you had to drop technically competent coverage in favor of vapid noise. But mostly - if it's as I fear - I am sorry that your writers are so willing to cash in comprehension for simplicity; to exchange technical knowledge for coolness, marketing schick and mass market appeal. It seems that most fundamental and undignified compromise: exchange underappreciated expertise for overrewarded incompetence.
I know I will always fondly remember the day when every author at AT aggressively pursued every story, desperately seeking an analytical truth (even if they made mistakes) by questioning, testing, verifying and then synthesizing their work into an appreciable and relevant description of "The Way Things Are." That will always be the only type of journalism which exposes readers to new ideas worth anything - and I hope that, even as the malignant cruft of this kind of story spreads through AT's failing body, there will still be a place for the occasional article of this type, so that I can find a reason to continue to patronage the site. Farewell, old friend.
We barely knew ye.
icrf - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
Huh? Not a hardware site? Did you miss the Sandy Bridge, Bulldozer, Bobcat, Cortex A9/A15 articles of the last couple weeks?Anand, keep up the good work. I enjoyed the hardware-focused review of a consumer electronics device, and everything else you do. I thought a new Touch might be good to pick up, but the lack of memory and cheap screen convinced me otherwise. I'm guessing your average CNET-style CE site doesn't pick up on such things.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
We've actually reviewed quite a few iPods on the site, including the first one reviewed back in 2002 by Matthew Witheiler:http://www.anandtech.com/show/867
About 7 years ago I made the conscious decision to start covering Mac hardware. Macs and PCs were headed on a collision course and we started to see convergence in the technology. At the same time, over the past few years we've seen a lot of PC technology make its way into consumer electronics devices. Intel is shipping SoCs for TVs and smartphone SoCs are easily as powerful as the PC hardware we were reviewing a decade ago.
We still review motherboards, CPUs, SSDs, we talk about overclocking, memory technologies and of course GPUs, but we've added to the list. What constitutes a PC is far broader these days than when we first started the site, and I suspect that expansion will continue. As we've added new categories we've also tried to apply our unique approach to those reviews. I believe our iPod Touch review is the only one on the web that does objective audio quality testing, display quality testing and (later today) battery life testing. While subjective analysis is important, we try to bring objective testing and the scientific method to all of our reviews.
I'm glad you have fond memories of AT, but if anything I believe our coverage is deeper today than it has ever been. We do more enterprise, SSD and notebook coverage than we've ever done in the past, and our CPU, GPU and motherboard reviews are more thorough than they've ever been. On top of all of that, we actually do a lot of behind the scenes work with manufacturers to make sure that issues with products are discovered and fixed before they are sold to end users.
I will personally never stop wanting to understand how the hardware works. After over 13 years of running AnandTech I can honestly say that I'm more interested in what I do than I've ever been. I enjoy learning, and there's no better way to learn than to be introduced to new technologies and try to figure out how they work.
If there's a particular area that you feel we're neglecting I'm more than willing to listen. We're always looking to add more coverage to the site and go deeper in existing areas. You'll see another call for writers by the end of this year that supports that.
I appreciate your concern for the site and taking the time to post, and more than anything I do appreciate that you having read the site for long enough to care. I know I can't make everyone happy, but I will always try.
Take care,
Anand