Talk:IPod Touch

view · edit Frequently asked questions Why isn't there a criticism/controversy section in this article? While reliable sourced criticisms and controversies can be included in this article, criticism sections themselves are generally discouraged. As a result of this, criticisms of the iPod Touch have been interleaved throughout the article in the appropriate section. See WP:NPOV and WP:CRIT for further information on criticism and controversy sections. Where are the prices? Under guideline WP:NOPRICES, street and retail prices are considered trivia items. Why capitalise the T in "Touch" when the brand name is "iPod touch"? Wikipedia has a guideline on trademark usage which errs on the side of standard English title case except for specific cases of common deviation (ironically including "iPod"). This helps ensure consistency in language for the sake of readers who might be unfamiliar with the subject. Why is the operating system still called "iPhone OS" for versions less than 4.0? For historical purposes, Wikipedia retains the naming convention of each major release of the operating system, as they were named at the time of its release. It was called "iPhone OS" until version 3.1.3, and "iOS" for versions 4.0 and later. By the same logic, if Microsoft Windows was renamed to "Microsoft XYZ", Wikipedia would not rename the previous releases to "Microsoft XYZ XP", "Microsoft XYZ Vista", etc. Such renaming would result in anachronism.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Apple Inc. High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc. articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Can you add Myriad logos to the iPod touch 4, 5 and 6?

(It's worth noting that the iPod touch 4 and 5 used the Myriad Pro Semibold and not the ultra-light one)

Another thing, copy those logos FROM the histrory.

--2.83.119.156 (talk) 12:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"FROM" what history of what?  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:03, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any indication in RS how much storage space is actually usable? I.e., how much does the OS and the Apple bloatware use up? I imagine this is a growing and growing amount with each successive generation.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:55, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion about the difference between advertised and actual storage capacities of this device is taking place at the MOSNUM talk page. Interested editors are invited to comment there. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 00:19, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SMcCandlish: Dondervogel 2 (talk) 00:22, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@CactiStaccingCrane: for what it's worth, I agree. Just because the New York Times spells "iPod Touch" like boomers would, doesn't mean they get to rename the product. Same with Mac mini, etc. But I guess this would need WikiProject-level consensus, since other pages, like Mac mini, iPod mini, iPad mini, are affected too (Apple silicon being an interesting and fortunate exception). DFlhb (talk) 23:06, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In reference to this discussion at WikiProject Apple Inc.

Propose we merge all iPod Touch models into this article. Rationale:

• Much of the content of the model-specific articles is applicable to all models (like iOS changes)
• They received largely routine coverage; not that much room for expansion of these articles without a merge
• Separating them would make more sense if they were distinct products, but they're just different revisions of the same product.
• Maintaining and improving a single article is a ton easier, for a barely-active WikiProject, than maintaining 8 substantially-redundant pages.

There's precedent: iPod Classic, for example; which used to be separate articles. DFlhb (talk) 23:07, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it makes more sense to have information on each individual model on different pages. There's detailed information on each page for each iPod Touch generation, like what iOS versions are supported on each model. I have a feeling that merging these all into one page could cause some detailed information like this to be lost. Dtlux1 (talk) 04:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That information on supported versions is already in this article; in fact I added it!

The information in the infoboxes would also not be lost; it'd simply be turned into wikitables, placed at the end of this article. See iMac G3 for an example of what a nice table could look like. DFlhb (talk) 01:06, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It would be inconsistent with other iOS devices. And considering these have far more notable differences than the classics it would be worthy. And there are reviews sections too which don't work as well with a single long article. QuarioQuario54321 (talk) 18:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want to bludgeon as little as possible, but would just like to point out that we can merge the extremely-short ones (and turn them into {{R with possibilities}}), and keep the more developed ones separate, with {{main}} hatnotes pointing their main articles. Would you support that? Only thing we would lose for the shorter ones is the infobox, but we can use a specs table for that. DFlhb (talk) 08:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Although it may be inconsistent with other iPhone related articles. I really love the wikitables on the iMac G3 series and it would work great for the iPod line. The Apple Watch article has a great example of this too. Jake01756 🗩 🖉 01:32, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: I think the peculiarities of particular generations would likely get lost if they were merged; I've already spent too much time correcting inaccuracies in the tables in the List of iOS and iPadOS devices that I think stem from this. It might have been a good time to do such a merger back in like 2015 or something, but these days the iPod touch series is old and relatively obscure, so there's not enough educated eyeballs on them to catch the kinds of problems that could be introduced by attempting a merger. Also, I fear there'd inevitably be pressure to “clean up” the resulting article, and lots of valuable small details in prose would get lost. —ajf (talk) 11:04, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

so there's not enough educated eyeballs on them to catch the kinds of problems that could be introduced by attempting a merger. Also, I fear there'd inevitably be pressure to “clean up” the resulting article, and lots of valuable small details in prose would get lost I'd be doing any merger, and I guarantee you that wouldn't happen; regardless, I've removed the move templates. DFlhb (talk) 20:58, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, Macpro8921 (talk) 06:07, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, As above. --HenriHa (talk) 09:50, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

the top of the article has alot of red text, what is happening? Jatanea (talk) 18:50, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What happened was a vandal damaged it. The damage has been reverted. Guy Harris (talk) 23:28, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for teling me Jatanea (talk) 15:08, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]