Faster iPod Touch pointing to faster iPhone?


IphoneWhen folks find out that I still use a first-generation Apple iPhone for my primary handset, the first question out of their mouth is usually, "why didn’t you upgrade to the iPhone 3G?" I’ve covered that before but as a quick rehash: adding 3G and true GPS capabilities didn’t appeal much to me for a few reasons. First: I spend $599 for the handset, although I did get $100 back that I put towards the purchase of Leopard. Second, I purchased and pay a monthly fee to Verizon Wireless for a USB 3G adapter… I’d rather have the 3G to use on my other larger screened and more capable devices. Third, AT&T’s 3G coverage in my area was spotty at the time. Finally, I felt it was safe to assume that Apple would boost the processor at some point. From the sounds of it, they might have done just that in September, only they did it with the iPod Touch.

Since the CPU is actually capable of running at 620MHz, it’s not yetclear if Apple has reduced the underclocking to achieve any performanceboosts.

However, it shouldn’t be huge surprise that the ARM CPU on thisplatform is getting a boost one way or another from the original 412MHzclock-cycle to 532MHz. It even makes sense that Apple added theturbocharge to the iPod Touch platform prior to the iPhone. While the iPhone is becoming a leader in market share,the Touch appeals to a wider audience is and is slowly building itselfup as a challenger to Nintendo’s DS and Sony’s PlayStation Portable. Myson owns both of those devices and while I’d argue that the PSP offershigher quality graphics, controls and gameplay, that may not matter inthe end. You could correctly use the same argument against Nintendo’sWii when compared to Microsoft’s Xbox 360, but guess which console ismore in demand? The lower-resolution Wii with less computing power.

At some point in the near future, perhaps even in the first quarterof 2009, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if Apple adopted a faster CPUor boosted the current one in the iPhone handset. Ideally, anadditional hardware feature or two would put me over the edgepersonally, say a better camera sensor for example, but a faster CPUalone might do it for me. AT&T and built up the 3G network in myarea now and if they allow for 3G tethering as expected, you’d certainly find me in a line to upgrade from my lowly first-gen iPhone. Of course, with great power comes great responsbility: how much does a faster processor affect battery life?



Kevin, regarding to your staying with 1st gen iPhone line, there are more reasons to stay with 1st Gen iPhone over 3G one: Battery life and Screen quality. Compared to side by side, the 1st gen has downright superior screen. White looks white (very slightly blueish) on it compared to yellow tinted screen in 3G and overall brightness is much better with the 1st gen. I’ve never worried about battery with the 1st one, but even 3G and GPS turned off, 3G iPhone has pretty short battery time. I also like the build quality of 1st one better. In addition, the price plan for the 1st gen is about $15/m cheaper.


I hope the people interested in a faster iPhone aren’t the same people who complain about its battery life…

Janet Tokerud

I recall a rumor a long time ago, can’t remember the source, about an iPhone Pro or higher end iPhone. Steve has been saying 1 device a la his remark about Babe Ruth kept hitting the same home run over and over again. So maybe not.

But, once you start wondering about what a pro version would be like, you think faster processor, higher resolution and better camera. And, as you say about battery life, more processor power may require a bigger battery thus thicker iPhone. Doubt Steve will go thicker.

I definitely want a faster iPhone but don’t want a bigger one unless we go all the way to a different, new device such as the rumored larger screen 480 x 800 creature. Then I would buy it as an adjunct and stop waiting for an Apple Netbook.

Comments are closed.