Brighthand reviews the iPod Touch

I said on the latest MobileTechRoundup podcast that I was sure I would be getting an iPod Touch, I just didn't know when.  After reading Brighthand's review of the newest iPod that may be sooner than I thought.  The reviewer covers all the basics and was impressed with the speed of the iPod Touch:

No crashes yet, and programs load instantly. Zero wait times, with the only delay coming from home network wireless speeds.

Even more "stressful" programs like Safari or YouTube loaded without any wait.

So far the iPod touch is hands down the fastest handheld computer I have used; now if only Apple could add more features.

Handheld computer?  Apple is on to something, I think.  Note that the reviewer recommends that you wait a few weeks for Apple to fix the reported screen problems as the review unit had the problem.

Comments

[spinedoc]

It's NOT a handheld computer. Just like the iphone is NOT a smartphone. The touch is just a sub par DAP. Even the calendar function is gimped.

I think Apple, while they will sell millions to the typical fanboi sheep, missed an awesome opportunity here with the ommision of bluetooth in particular. A2DP is awesome for one. But even better, they could have added serial port support to bluetooth and released a subscription based GPS program with a bluetooth GPS receiver. With the GPS craze nowadays this would have been more revenue, even if it was only a pay one time for the software/receiver model.

Additionally some of the other STONE AGE features of the touch are it's lack of streaming music support, lack of streaming television/video support, strong ties to itunes, etc etc. At heart you are stuck with the media you load onto it, no chance for spontaneity, even if it has wifi. 16gb is meh, but ok, but unlimited music/video/television etc is not even comparable.

Beautiful screen though. Beautiful design, extremely thin. I even considered one, but the idea behind it is just too primitive, even if they do wrap it in shiny new technology. Just seems like a wasted effort after I have tasted more powerful things.

[Sumocat]

Technically, it is a computer and it most certainly is handheld. However, if I were to categorize it, I'd call it a Mobile Internet Device (MID) with media playback, which is bad news for Intel and their MID platform. I applaud Intel for continuing their push with MID's, but I think Apple has pretty much already crushed them with the iPhone and iPod Touch.

[Ctitanic]

Like I said at my blog, this, technically is a MID. ;)

[Ctitanic]

James, is not a better deal to get the 80 GB classic?

[The Wife]

So, um, do I get your used IPod?

[cr0ft]

The best part about these devices is the fact that for the first time ever, in my opinion, we're getting a rock-solid instant-response experience to a mobile device like this.

You look at your Windows Mobiles or Symbians, you have a passable and really nice OS, respectively, but both flicker when changing screens, have unbearable slowdowns and neither of them look that hot, either.

If we can get more companies to realize that having instant-response devices with near-flawless looking user interfaces isn't optional, it should be the default, then Apple has already done a lot for the evolution of the mobile device.

[Mike Cane]

Apps on iPhone. Don't know if these tricks -- or apps -- will work with the Touch. The Touch is not a phoneless-iPhone. It is much less. (And its screen apparently sucks eggs.)

http://tinyurl.com/33jyqa

[Chris K]

Oh, it's certainly a tiny handheld computer, it's just got an excessively-locked down OS. Claiming that the iPod Touch isn't a computer is like claiming that a Nokia Internet Tablet isn't a computer, or a WinMo device isn't a computer, or, more accurately, that a 3Com Audrey isn't a computer.

Is it flexible enough to *replace* a more open MID/UMPC? Probably not, but take the Touch, place it near a Wifi access point, and take everything that it CAN do as your basis of comparison to other handheld devices.

PIM: Sucks, no input.
DAP: Rocks, solid playback, but no expandability.
Web browser (non-Flash): Rocks.
On-screen keyboard: As good as it gets.
Flash player: Sucks, nonexistent.

I can go on, of course, but claiming that it's not a computer, or that it's a crummy media player, is picking on it for not meeting a certain set of esoteric requirements that don't necessarily affect *everyone.*

(Can we all at least agree that the UI is very well thought-out?)