or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › iPad photos show slot for forward-facing video camera
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iPad photos show slot for forward-facing video camera - Page 5

post #161 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

After the iPad goes on sale, Apple will reveal that the suckers, sorry - lucky owners - can unlock the feature by purchasing a new version of the firmware.

The camera either exists or it doesn't firmware won't make it come into being.

Quote:
Some Touch owners may experience a sense of DéjÃ* vu when this is announced.

For that to be deja vu a camera would have to exist in the iPod Touch.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #162 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by infinitespecter View Post

1. Beyond a few proof of concept sites, it really isn't, at least not yet.

Flash was never designed for mobile devices. It wasn't even designed for GPUs. The engineering does not scale, does not exploit hardware playback and so on.

It's not just Apple. Nokia's Maemo team has just dropped Flash, because it "ruins the experience". We don't know if the Chrome OS will support Flash. But as more and more people are shifting to accessing the Web via mobile devices, the proportion of Flash enabled browsers is falling. Content providers know this.

Talk to Web developers and they have already dropped Flash from their future plans for this reason.

Content providers make their money from pushing content to an audience. They don't care how it's done. Flash is just one method.

As long as there is an alternative to Flash- then everybody wins.

And there will be an alternative to Flash. It is already happening.

So we already have YouTube delivering video by h264. Vimeo now has h264 - and the biggest video site in the UK. the BBC iPlayer offers h264.

Flash does not have to die - or "be replaced" there'll probably be people still using it in 10 years time.

But content providers are increasingly finding ways to by-pass it to reach a mobile audience.

If you are interested in seeing what the world looks like without Flash, you can download "clicktoflash" - which disables Flash unless you click.

http://rentzsch.github.com/clicktoflash/

C.
post #163 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The camera either exists or it doesn't firmware won't make it come into being.


For that to be deja vu a camera would have to exist in the iPod Touch.

When the 2G iPod Touch was released, it had the hardware to enable bluetooth but it was not functional. Touch users who wanted to enable the hardware had to pay $10 for new firmware that would enable the bluetooth.

Quote:
Apple intentionally crippled Bluetooth in iPod touch 2G, wants $10 to unlock it!

http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=3988

My comment was mostly tongue-in-cheek humour.

The iPad could ship with a camera that was not enabled by the firmware and Apple 'could' then charge for new firmware to enable it. There is certainly a historical precedent for such behaviour on their part.

If your thought processes are so rigid that you can't see how a sense of DéjÃ* vu can apply to an experience, rather than literal specifics, then I would not be in the slightest bit surprised.
post #164 of 203
If there is an iPad camera - and Apple did not reveal it, there's probably a simpler explanation.

They are waiting for something.

My guess is that there's going to be a forward-facing camera in the new iPhone. If that is true there's no way that a major new iPhone USP is going to be up-staged by a relatively minor feature on the iPad.

C.
post #165 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

It's not just Apple. Nokia's Maemo team has just dropped Flash, because it "ruins the experience". We don't know if the Chrome OS will support Flash. But as more and more people are shifting to accessing the Web via mobile devices, the proportion of Flash enabled browsers is falling. Content providers know this.

Another viewpoint:

"Adobe is "on the verge" of Flash Player 10.1 for smartphones with "all but one" of the top manufacturers, including Google's Android, RIM's BlackBerry, Nokia, and the Palm Pre. Even the Nexus One will be Flash 10.1-equipped and, according to Lynch, it "will rock.""

http://www.pcworld.com/article/18848...e_is_lazy.html
post #166 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

Another viewpoint:

I love the notion that Flash was "presciently designed for 1980's tablets!"
Unfortunately it was not designed for GPUs and hardware video codecs which are essential in modern mobile devices.

I got my post wrong. It was the Firefox team for Maemo that has dropped Flash.

http://blog.pavlov.net/2010/01/27/fi...for-maemo-rc3/

Quote:
Weve decided to disable plugin support for this release. The Adobe Flash plugin used on many sites degraded the performance of the browser to the point where it didnt meet our standards.

C.
post #167 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

I got my post wrong. It was the Firefox team for Maemo that has dropped Flash.

http://blog.pavlov.net/2010/01/27/fi...for-maemo-rc3/

You can turn it on in settings. I can't wait to see it in action. People expect Flash to plus Hulu et al, but it can't even play an banner ad competently. This is gonna be fun.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #168 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

You can turn it on in settings. I can't wait to see it in action. People expect Flash to plus Hulu et al, but it can't even play an banner ad competently. This is gonna be fun.

I think you mean that Macs are unable to play flash competently. It seems to work fine with Win7 on my Dell.
post #169 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by idanceapps View Post

Please pretty please include a camera. Call it the iPad Pro. Once it has a camera for video conferencing, i'll get 2 of them!

Definitely agree. the iPad is going to be even more awesome with a camera.
post #170 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

I think you mean that Macs are unable to play flash competently. It seems to work fine with Win7 on my Dell.

He was talking about Flash for a Nokia device, not Macs.

My only beefs with flash is that it's a little inefficient, and I don't like ads with motion and sound attached to content that is plain text.
post #171 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

He was talking about Flash for a Nokia device, not Macs.

My only beefs with flash is that it's a little inefficient, and I don't like ads with motion and sound attached to content that is plain text.

I think "a little inefficient" doesn't quite explain the problem with Flash. Adobe only stated last year that they are getting a real version of Flash ready for smartphones.They still don't plan to be released until mid-2010.

There is evidence to support that Flash video sites like Hulu (and arguably the most likely reason people want Flash) still won't run on these weak devices. Flash games are a no go unless they are designed for a handheld touchscreen 9though Adboe addressed that with Packager for iPhone). Most sites are designed for larger displays, 800x600(?). Finally, besides the power usage sites load slower when waiting for Flash banners as we saw with the faster Droid being bested by the slower iPhone 3G.

Now there is a rumour that even WinMo 7 won't have Flash. I'd expect it to eventually come when Adobe builds it, but they have their hands full trying to get a decent version made for many other mobile OSes.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #172 of 203
I am buying the 1st gen regardless of what it does or does not have now or in the future. If another one with an iSight and more options comes out later fine, I may turn mine in to Ebay and buy another. I refuse to guess what it will have. The thing is not even out yet. Remember cost was the issue. The iPad was not made to replace an iPhone or a Computer for that mater. It was created as a tool with the intentions of music, movies, and yea internet without the crappy flash code.
post #173 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by davesw View Post

Definitely agree. the iPad is going to be even more awesome with a camera.

I just don't see a front facing camera as all that user friendly on iPad. Who wants to hold that at arms length to do any sort of video based chat. A forward facing camera would be far more useful on an iPhone and even there demand is limited.

In any event I suspect that people will wise up fairly quickly with respect to the camera desire. IPad is simply the wrong device for this use.



Dave
post #174 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I just don't see a front facing camera as all that user friendly on iPad. Who wants to hold that at arms length to do any sort of video based chat. A forward facing camera would be far more useful on an iPhone and even there demand is limited.

In any event I suspect that people will wise up fairly quickly with respect to the camera desire. IPad is simply the wrong device for this use.



Dave

I would disagree

I use iChat daily to keep in touch with friends & family around the US, and I could see video chatting with the iPad being a HUGE selling point. Sitting on the couch or in an armchair, the iPad could be cradled easily for iChatting; it could also be sitting 'upright' in the Apple carrying case on the coffee table. Sitting at a desk or countertop, the iPad could again be in the 'upright' position in the Apple carrying case, or easily used while in the Dock or Keyboard Dock
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #175 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRonin View Post

I would disagree

I use iChat daily to keep in touch with friends & family around the US, and I could see video chatting with the iPad being a HUGE selling point. Sitting on the couch or in an armchair, the iPad could be cradled easily for iChatting; it could also be sitting 'upright' in the Apple carrying case on the coffee table. Sitting at a desk or countertop, the iPad could again be in the 'upright' position in the Apple carrying case, or easily used while in the Dock or Keyboard Dock

So if it would be such a huge selling point, and so easy to use, then why didn't Apple do it?

This reminds me of the great bezel debate. It's so easy to design a product when you aren't the one who actually has to solve the problems.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #176 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

So if it would be such a huge selling point, and so easy to use, then why didn't Apple do it?

Why didn't they offer a limited app for IMing when there are already plenty of great apps on the App Store?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #177 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I just don't see a front facing camera as all that user friendly on iPad. Who wants to hold that at arms length to do any sort of video based chat. A forward facing camera would be far more useful on an iPhone and even there demand is limited.

In any event I suspect that people will wise up fairly quickly with respect to the camera desire. IPad is simply the wrong device for this use.

Dave

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRonin View Post

I would disagree

I use iChat daily to keep in touch with friends & family around the US, and I could see video chatting with the iPad being a HUGE selling point. Sitting on the couch or in an armchair, the iPad could be cradled easily for iChatting; it could also be sitting 'upright' in the Apple carrying case on the coffee table. Sitting at a desk or countertop, the iPad could again be in the 'upright' position in the Apple carrying case, or easily used while in the Dock or Keyboard Dock

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

So if it would be such a huge selling point, and so easy to use, then why didn't Apple do it?

This reminds me of the great bezel debate. It's so easy to design a product when you aren't the one who actually has to solve the problems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Why didn't they offer a limited app for IMing when there are already plenty of great apps on the App Store?

solipsism, Dr. Millmoss is actually referring to the lack of a forward facing camera, and my thoughts that video chatting will be a huge plus for the iPad

I will stand by my comment that iChat video will be one of the 'killer apps' for the iPad, and I will wait until the iPad actually is released and on store shelves to see if a camera actually makes the mix

If not this initial offering, I am sure Apple would include one on the next revision. If not this revision, many reasons as to 'why not?' could be true; short supply of cameras altogether, Apple wanting to get 'second sales' when they release revision two with a camera, cost considerations relating to the profit margin, etc.
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #178 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRonin View Post

I will stand by my comment that iChat video will be one of the 'killer apps' for the iPad, and I will wait until the iPad actually is released and on store shelves to see if a camera actually makes the mix

If not this initial offering, I am sure Apple would include one on the next revision. If not this revision, many reasons as to 'why not?' could be true; short supply of cameras altogether, Apple wanting to get 'second sales' when they release revision two with a camera, cost considerations relating to the profit margin, etc.

Curious... what makes video chat a killer app for tablet computers?

If anything, the tablet form is the least suitable option for video chat. Tablets are handheld computers and as such, screen orientation in relation to the user's head is quite unpredictable. If video chat is to be a killer app, it seems like laptops or desktops would be more suitable.

(Or prehaps even pocket computers. While pocket computers (iPhones) suffer from the same unpredictable orientation, they're at least with users constantly. Thus, the non-optimal form might be reasonable because portability could justify the trade-off. It is the only computing form available much of the time.)

In summary, while video chat will certainly work with tablets, the tablet form provides about the worst video chat experience possible. Imagine trying to not move your hand a single milimeter while video chatting. It is a hugely annoying experience. Just try video chatting with a handheld camera if in doubt. I tried doing so when the iSight first came out. It quickly became apparent that I would need track down some more double sided tape if I was going to video chat on a regular basis. Having to hold the camera was a deal breaker.
post #179 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

Curious... what makes video chat a killer app for tablet computers?

If anything, the tablet form is the least suitable option for video chat. Tablets are handheld computers and as such, screen orientation in relation to the user's head is quite unpredictable. If video chat is to be a killer app, it seems like laptops or desktops would be more suitable.

(Or prehaps even pocket computers. While pocket computers (iPhones) suffer from the same unpredictable orientation, they're at least with users constantly. Thus, the non-optimal form might be reasonable because portability could justify the trade-off. It is the only computing form available much of the time.)

In summary, while video chat will certainly work with tablets, the tablet form provides about the worst video chat experience possible. Imagine trying to not move your hand a single milimeter while video chatting. It is a hugely annoying experience. Just try video chatting with a handheld camera if in doubt. I tried doing so when the iSight first came out. It quickly became apparent that I would need track down some more double sided tape if I was going to video chat on a regular basis. Having to hold the camera was a deal breaker.

Killer App from the standpoint of the average non-computer savvy end user who gets an iPad because they are simple and just work…

The grandparents will love the fact that they can video chat with their grandkids just as easily as making a telephone call…

And Killer App from the standpoint that it is not a desktop or laptop; it is not tied down to a desk or a suitable surface for setting a laptop; although laptops can be carried around while video chatting, the two planes make a laptop more cumbersome than a tablet for doing so…

I say we should all lay to rest this whole handheld tablet not gonna be good for video chat thing. There are already three options for stability while video chatting; the Apple carrying case (which can be oriented to stand upright for viewing movies, and is oddly similar to the orientation of a laptop screen/camera…), the Apple Dock & the Apple Keyboard Dock. I am sure third party vendors will also have goods to offer that allow one to easily prop up the iPad for viewing (and video chatting) pleasure…

And even if one were to hold the iPad in their hands while chatting, it is not like you have to hold it extended out at arms length forever… I chat regular with my kids, and they walk around the house with the laptop, the image is still pretty stable. Cradling the iPad in your arm while sitting would also be okay for chatting. The entire idea that the viewer on the other end is gonna see nothing but nose hairs is ridiculous! For that to happen, you would need to be constantly looking above/over the iPad; in my experience of video chatting with iChat, I find that I tend to actually look at the screen, which means I am also orienting my face towards the same plane as the camera is mounted…
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #180 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Why didn't they offer a limited app for IMing when there are already plenty of great apps on the App Store?

I don't understand what you are driving at with this response. The argument was that a camera would be a "huge selling point" for the iPad. I asked why, if this so obvious, Apple apparently (at least initially) has passed on the idea.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #181 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I don't understand what you are driving at with this response. The argument was that a camera would be a "huge selling point" for the iPad. I asked why, if this so obvious, Apple apparently (at least initially) has passed on the idea.

Based on the wording I thought the focus was on iChat app being simple to add, not that the camera would be simple to add. I was separating a forward-facing camera as being iChat-specific or being named as such when I assume this will just be an API for developers to tie into. Too many threads, too many posts, too much skimming, my fault.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #182 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Based on the wording I thought the focus was on iChat app being simple to add, not that the camera would be simple to add. I was separating a forward-facing camera as being iChat-specific or being named as such when I assume this will just be an API for developers to tie into. Too many threads, too many posts, too much skimming, my fault.

No worries. I'd still like to see the answer to my question, though. I'm not asking you to supply it. The person who made the claim should, IMO.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #183 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRonin View Post

Killer App from the standpoint of the average non-computer savvy end user who gets an iPad because they are simple and just work

The grandparents will love the fact that they can video chat with their grandkids just as easily as making a telephone call

And Killer App from the standpoint that it is not a desktop or laptop; it is not tied down to a desk or a suitable surface for setting a laptop; although laptops can be carried around while video chatting, the two planes make a laptop more cumbersome than a tablet for doing so

I say we should all lay to rest this whole handheld tablet not gonna be good for video chat thing. There are already three options for stability while video chatting; the Apple carrying case (which can be oriented to stand upright for viewing movies, and is oddly similar to the orientation of a laptop screen/camera), the Apple Dock & the Apple Keyboard Dock. I am sure third party vendors will also have goods to offer that allow one to easily prop up the iPad for viewing (and video chatting) pleasure

And even if one were to hold the iPad in their hands while chatting, it is not like you have to hold it extended out at arms length forever I chat regular with my kids, and they walk around the house with the laptop, the image is still pretty stable. Cradling the iPad in your arm while sitting would also be okay for chatting. The entire idea that the viewer on the other end is gonna see nothing but nose hairs is ridiculous! For that to happen, you would need to be constantly looking above/over the iPad; in my experience of video chatting with iChat, I find that I tend to actually look at the screen, which means I am also orienting my face towards the same plane as the camera is mounted

"even if one were to hold the iPad in their hands"

Are you seriously envisioning iPads being commonly used while not being held in the user's hands?

While video chatting on a tablet is certainly possible. It is far from what I consider a killer-app for the tablet form. If anything, tablets are less suited to video chatting than pretty much every other computing form ever invented. Being required to hold a device in a constant position and orientation is a major pain in the ass and most users will simply choose not to do tasks which require that. Or at least they'll choose a computer form more well suited. The exception would be pocket computers for which the mobility justifies putting up with the form's numerous functional shortcomings.

Users definitely prefer not having to use a handheld camera for video chat. One could reasonably argue that tablets have other advantages that overcome the disadvantage of being required to hold the camera. But it seems that you're claiming that it doesn't matter at all. Is that the case?
post #184 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

"even if one were to hold the iPad in their hands"

Are you seriously envisioning iPads being commonly used while not being held in the user's hands?

While video chatting on a tablet is certainly possible. It is far from what I consider a killer-app for the tablet form. If anything, tablets are less suited to video chatting than pretty much every other computing form ever invented. Being required to hold a device in a constant position and orientation is a major pain in the ass and most users will simply choose not to do tasks which require that. Or at least they'll choose a computer form more well suited. The exception would be pocket computers for which the mobility justifies putting up with the form's numerous functional shortcomings.

Users definitely prefer not having to use a handheld camera for video chat. One could reasonably argue that tablets have other advantages that overcome the disadvantage of being required to hold the camera. But it seems that you're claiming that it doesn't matter at all. Is that the case?

So at this point you are still going to totally ignore the references to the three complimentary products Apple is offering for the iPad that would make video chatting a more stable prospect; namely the Apple Carrying Case, the Apple Dock & the Apple Keyboard Dock. All of these items orient the iPad in an upright manner and provide stability for the camera while in use

And, again, handheld does not mean arms extended out in front of you, iPad suspended in the air Handheld can be left hand holding right edge of iPad, left forearm supporting iPad from underneath, left edge of iPad nestled against left inner elbow In a word, cradled

And, this is the important part!, no matter what the orientation of the iPad, no matter what the angle of the screen/camera; one will still look at the screen when video chatting, meaning that one will still have their face/head properly oriented towards the plane of the camera!!!

Yes!!! Sitting on the couch or in an armchair, one will find video chatting easier and more compelling than getting up and going over to the desktop computer or finding a stable surface for the laptop Therefore, one just may tend to do quick informal video chats more frequently!

Come on people, the iPad is a new communications device, and video chatting is a viable means of communication!

Geez!!!
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #185 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

Are you seriously envisioning iPads being commonly used while not being held in the user's hands?

They have 2 docks and a case that folds into a raised platform for placing it on a table. Apple's surely expecting it to be used at times without being held.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #186 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

They have 2 docks and a case that folds into a raised platform for placing it on a table. Apple's surely expecting it to be used at times without being held.

The question is, will it be common?

For instance, how many people with pocket computers use one of these?

or one of these


Plenty of manufacturers make these products, but how many people use them?

Docks today are used almost exclusively for charging/syncing/audio-playback. If the intention is to sit down in front of a docked iPad, will users choose instead to just sit down in front of a more full featured computer?

I honestly haven't come up with a definite prediction for how prevalent iPad keyboard-dock usage will be. But I do firmly believe that people will never rely exclusively on tablet computers as their only computer. Tablets will forever be part of a computing ecosystem where people use different devices for different needs.

Which brings us full circle. If people aren't going to be commonly sitting in front of a docked tablet, and video conferencing works best with a non handheld camera, then video conferencing shouldn't really considered a killer-app for the tablet form factor.
post #187 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

The question is, will it be common?

Wont be close to one-to-one for the docks but I do think they'll be more popular than other docks. Look at those small devices. Crap.

For me, the biggest draw to the iPad is the converting case, though it's not overwhelming. I like the idea of that on a plane.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #188 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRonin View Post

So at this point you are still going to totally ignore the references to the three complimentary products Apple is offering for the iPad that would make video chatting a more stable prospect; namely the Apple Carrying Case, the Apple Dock & the Apple Keyboard Dock. All of these items orient the iPad in an upright manner and provide stability for the camera while in use

And, again, handheld does not mean arms extended out in front of you, iPad suspended in the air Handheld can be left hand holding right edge of iPad, left forearm supporting iPad from underneath, left edge of iPad nestled against left inner elbow In a word, cradled

And, this is the important part!, no matter what the orientation of the iPad, no matter what the angle of the screen/camera; one will still look at the screen when video chatting, meaning that one will still have their face/head properly oriented towards the plane of the camera!!!

Yes!!! Sitting on the couch or in an armchair, one will find video chatting easier and more compelling than getting up and going over to the desktop computer or finding a stable surface for the laptop Therefore, one just may tend to do quick informal video chats more frequently!

Come on people, the iPad is a new communications device, and video chatting is a viable means of communication!

Geez!!!

Nothing has been ignored. We simply disagree about what form factor is best for video chat. And perhaps whether video chat is compelling enough to be used on non-optimal form factors.

The reason why the form factor matters is because it is handheld and thus is held in a variety of positions and orientations. Unless aim-able cameras are used, or multiple cameras, or a wide-angle-lens + cropping, the device will have to held perpendicular to the viewing angle in order for the user to be in the field of view.

While people tend to hold tablets roughly perpendicular to their sight-line, roughly doesn't cut it for video chat. Have you ever tried to video chat with a handheld camera? (That is a serious question) I have and it made video chat vastly less compelling.

My prediction is that video chat won't be popular on tablets until this problem is overcome. Perhaps a wide angle lens with face recognition used to apply cropping and video stabilization... then it might pass the grandma test.

I certainly could be wrong. But the above assertions don't stem from ignorance or Luddite tendencies. Instead, they're rooted in well-reasoned analysis of which computing form factors are suitable for which tasks.
post #189 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Wont be close to one-to-one for the docks but I do think they'll be more popular than other docks. Look at those small devices. Crap.

For me, the biggest draw to the iPad is the converting case, though it's not overwhelming. I like the idea of that on a plane.

It certainly will be interesting to see how usage pans out from a human factors perspective!

There has really only been three widely successful form factors in computing history. The stationary workstaion, the laptop, and quite recently... the pocket computer. With declining hardware prices and multi-touch, the iPad is poised to finally bring a fourth form factor to the masses. Tablets have been around forever, but it looks like the utility to cost ratio is finally high enough that wide adoption might be realized.
post #190 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

It certainly will be interesting to see how usage pans out from a human factors perspective!

There has really only been three widely successful form factors in computing history. The stationary workstaion, the laptop, and quite recently... the pocket computer. With declining hardware prices and multi-touch, the iPad is poised to finally bring a fourth form factor to the masses. Tablets have been around forever, but it looks like the utility to cost ratio is finally high enough that wide adoption might be realized.

The usability of other tablets has been complex and limiting. Desktop OSes don't work in tablets. iPhone OS App Store apps can scale up okay, but Mac OS X apps won't work (something tablet running Windows tried to sell us), just as "iPad OS" App Store apps aren't going to run on the iPhone.

Again, I have absolutely no use for the iPad but I can see this as the first tablet to be able to easily replace a certain class of user's home computing needs. The device with the keyboard-dock for Mail, Safari, the occasional office doc. it can print, too.i think this might be a trojan horse use that may force Apple to make it more independent, not requiring iTunes for syncing, despite being designed as a complementary device for a PC. Meaning, they may have to make it backup via Time Machines and install updates without iTunes.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #191 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

Nothing has been ignored.

Actually something has been ignored, but not by you. My question to McRonin about why Apple would leave out a feature he's so certain is a huge selling point, has been ignored. At least twice now.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #192 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Actually something has been ignored, but not by you. My question to McRonin about why Apple would leave out a feature he's so certain is a huge selling point, has been ignored. At least twice now.

First, it is MacRonin, not McRonin… I am not part of some fast food franchise…

The entire thread is stemming from the reported ability of the iPad chassis to house a standard MacBook/Pro style iSight camera…

There are reports on the internet of the possibility of the standard camera opening on the front bezel being seen in some presentations; along with the sense of the actual iPad 'keynote' being changed from its original format, as if some things/functions/areas of the iPad were not ready for showing to the viewing audience…

The iPad has not even shipped yet, and no one has had their hands on one long enough to go over the entire device from either a hardware or a software point of view…

All comments towards the iPad having or not having a camera are, at this point, pure conjecture…

So, outside of Steve Jobs and those in the know at Apple, we cannot really say if Apple has yet left out this feature I am so certain is a huge selling point…

But, it seems logical that, if the iPad does not ship with a built-in iSight on the first revision, a subsequent revision will more than likely have said camera installed…

So, having the ability to do casual video chatting, whether mounted in a dock or handheld, is something I still feel is a must have for the iPad; whether that be when the product first ships or down the road with another revision… It is also something that I feel a vast majority of people will gravitate towards, young & old alike…

And I still maintain, if you are looking at the screen (as you would be when video chatting) then the camera is oriented towards you enough for casual video chatting…!!!
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #193 of 203
Sorry for mistyping your screen name. I can't promise that it will never happen again.

Yes, I suppose it's possible that Apple will shock us and include a significant hardware feature that they have so far neglected to mention either in a 90 minute presentation on the product or in the hardware specs published on their web site. Possible, but I think you must admit, a huge long shot.

I also have to point out that the "evidence" for the iPad's internal accommodations for a camera is a couple of rumor photos, the authenticity of which is always in question. I would never take that sort of evidence to the bank.

I'm still not clear on why you believe that the camera is a huge feature that Apple must include or have made committed a major blunder. That is what you will say if, as we have every reason to expect at this point, that it won't have one -- right?

Just so we're clear, I think it could be a worthwhile feature too, but with limited appeal, given what we know about the use of video chatting generally. Also I strongly suspect that a camera is not so easy to work out in a computer form factor as different as this one. Apple isn't the sort of company to put a feature in just to say it's there -- if it's going in, they're going to want it to be cool.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #194 of 203
Those who quote: "Fully expect a camera on launch" are far, far, far out to lunch.
post #195 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Sorry for mistyping your screen name. I can't promise that it will never happen again.

Yes, I suppose it's possible that Apple will shock us and include a significant hardware feature that they have so far neglected to mention either in a 90 minute presentation on the product or in the hardware specs published on their web site. Possible, but I think you must admit, a huge long shot.

I also have to point out that the "evidence" for the iPad's internal accommodations for a camera is a couple of rumor photos, the authenticity of which is always in question. I would never take that sort of evidence to the bank.

I'm still not clear on why you believe that the camera is a huge feature that Apple must include or have made committed a major blunder. That is what you will say if, as we have every reason to expect at this point, that it won't have one -- right?

Just so we're clear, I think it could be a worthwhile feature too, but with limited appeal, given what we know about the use of video chatting generally. Also I strongly suspect that a camera is not so easy to work out in a computer form factor as different as this one. Apple isn't the sort of company to put a feature in just to say it's there -- if it's going in, they're going to want it to be cool.

I can only hope (and it is indeed a stretch) that a camera makes it into rev1, but I fully realize that it is probably not gonna be so

I would like to think that eventually putting in a camera makes sense, and it is just a matter of Apple getting iChat ported over to the iPhone OS

But if a camera never happens, I really don't think it would be a deal breaker, it would just make my inner geek a little less happy about the iPad
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #196 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRonin View Post

I can only hope (and it is indeed a stretch) that a camera makes it into rev1, but I fully realize that it is probably not gonna be so

I would like to think that eventually putting in a camera makes sense, and it is just a matter of Apple getting iChat ported over to the iPhone OS

But if a camera never happens, I really don't think it would be a deal breaker, it would just make my inner geek a little less happy about the iPad

Well that's honest.

Yeah, my inner geek would like to have one too, no question. I've got to tell my inner geek to take a hike sometimes. Inner geek wants to have all sorts of toys that I'll never get much value out of owning. The rest of me says that if Apple can't make it work elegantly then they should probably just leave it out.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #197 of 203
Apple Job Posting Suggests Video Recording Coming To Future iPad Models

A new job posting on Apple's site suggests that the company is preparing to add still and video camera capabilities to its iPad tablet device in the future. The position is for a quality assurance engineer in the Media Systems division of Apple's broader Interactive Media Group and is specifically focused on the "iPad Media" segment of the division.
The Media Systems team is looking for a software quality engineer with a strong technical background to test still, video and audio capture and playback frameworks. Build on your QA experience and knowledge of digital camera technology (still and video) to develop and maintain testing frameworks for both capture and playback pipelines.

According to the job description, the employee will be responsible for assisting the development team by testing performance of their systems and developing appropriate tools for performing the testing.
Familiarity with and interest in photography, video as well as media file formats is highly desirable. Experience with tuning of and image pipeline, including, but not limited to AWB, Color Correction, AutoExposure, FrameRate adjustments is a plus.

The lack of a camera has been seen by many observers as a significant disappointment for the iPad. It does appear, however, that the iPad's enclosure contains an empty space appropriate for a notebook-style iSight camera, and the resulting speculation has included thoughts that Apple had either planned to offer a camera in the iPad but pulled it for unknown reasons or is still planning to offer one in the shipping version but did not include discussion of it during the device's introduction for similarly unknown reasons.
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #198 of 203
With as anti-tablet-video-chat as my above posts might seem, perhaps I should clarify. It wouldn't be surprising if the iPad has a camera or does not have a camera. The point was really that the tablet form won't make video chat a killer-app. Or that video chat won't be a killer app for the iPad. Thus, it isn't a blunder if the iPad doesn't include one initially.

It seems likely that far more people merely think they want video chat on a tablet, and that once having experienced it, would realize that it isn't that useful/desirable. With that said, it will eventually be a "why-not?" feature. When the price of the hardware/software/support of video chat becomes negligible, including a camera will make sense. In the meantime, it isn't surprising or disastrous in the slightest, to sell iPads sans camera.

My guess is that hardware costs are a consideration for inclusion of what would likely be a seldom used feature. But more significant is likely the R&D cost along with software necessary to make a camera work on a device which is held at various orientations. Support would also likely be non-trivial for apple. Video chat, even on desktop systems with wired network connections, is anything but hassle-free for users.

In other words, would it be horrible to include one? Definitely not. But it also isn't terribly justified at this point in time.
post #199 of 203
Good points. It's remarkable to me how, after this many years, iChat is still virtually useless. I don't know a single other Mac user who uses it, so when I do video chats, it's over Jabber/Googletalk in the web browser, which is buggy, clunky and erratic. If Apple really wants iChat to be big, and to work well on an iPad, they will probably have to release a Windows version. I don't see Apple being so tremendously committed to video chatting as perhaps others do, and I offer as evidence the continued lack of Jabber support for video conference in iChat on the Mac. And now they're going to put a camera in the iPad -- and for what? To proliferate a feature that fundamentally doesn't work very well?
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #200 of 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Good points. It's remarkable to me how, after this many years, iChat is still virtually useless.

Amen to that brother!

I feel sorry for poor old Ralph Johns who haunts the Apple forums explaining how to open firewalls and do various other magic to get iChat to work.

C.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › iPad photos show slot for forward-facing video camera