Well this is not good. I have pre- ordered a iPad here in New Zealand and knowing it could potentially get a iSight cam now im upset Either way i think if Apple really wanted a iPhone and Mac in between a iCam should of been a top priority for iPad either way i can guarantee iPad 1G is going to be worthless compared to iPad 2G next year
I get he feeling allot of things changed at "the last minute" in regards to the hardware, with "ultra competitive" pricing being the main factor in what to include or exclude. I know wasn't the only one pleasantly surprised with the pricing.
I have this gut feeling that Apple is going to have an iPhone OS event in March.
They had one in March of both 2008 and 2009. It doesn't make sense to launch a new product in 3.2 and not 4.0. With Apple now allowing VOIP over 3G I can see their 'one more thing' being multitasking and iChat with video camera on the iPad and next gen iPhone. Multitasking will probably only work on the next gen iPhone with a custom built chip.
I dunno... you can call me an optimist... but if they really wanted to push alot of people over the edge to purchase one of these bad boys... thats what I would do.
While I would like to see 4.0 detailed in March, It will kind of be a kick in the nuts to the developers that just got the 3.2 SDK. Spending the rest of winter working on a 3.2 app only to have to rerelease it to work fluidly with 4.0 would suck. But at the same time, I'm not a developer. Bring on 4.0 with Multi-tasking, customizability, and whatever else you've been working on!
They also didn't nail down a launch date, instead stating they would be available 'in about 60 days; another 30 for 3G.'
This is similar to the iPhone's original debut, sure, but that still leaves time to add a camera.
And of course, they could include a camera without mentioning it if it lacks firmware or a compelling app. This would be similar to my new 32GB iPod touch's 802.11n antenna, which, while physically there, lacks the firmware to use it.
The SDK is designed for all the iPhone OS line. Therefore, if any devices - e.g. the iPhone itself - have a cam then the codes has to be in the SDK!
Yes 3.2 is for iPad only, but what are they gonna do? Rip out the code for this one version? Even in an iPad-only program such as Address Book, it would pay to keep features such as this in the code rather than ripping it out and then having to put it back in later. There is no significant cost for code which is not used. There is huge cost to rip out and then put back in.
As for the slot in the frame - if it is really there - there is not a huge cost to include it in the original milling specs planning for the future.
Well this is not good. I have pre- ordered a iPad here in New Zealand and knowing it could potentially get a iSight cam now im upset Either way i think if Apple really wanted a iPhone and Mac in between a iCam should of been a top priority for iPad either way i can guarantee iPad 1G is going to be worthless compared to iPad 2G next year
I just had a rogue thought......... is it possible that the camera modules themselves are in short supply?
I remember that the new iPod Touch was expected to sport a camera too, and didn't (although the Nano now has one)... tear-downs of the new iPod Touch also show a space for a camera.
And now we are having new delays with iMac shipments... the assumption was the screen problems... but it is selling quite well, and again, cameras onboard.....
When you consider that cameras are being included in every new iPhone, iPod Nano, MacBook, MacBook Pro AND iMac.... if you add up the combined unit sales for all those products, it adds up to what, tens of millions of camera-bearing units quarterly? Who supplies the cameras modules for those?
If the supply of camera modules was running short, which product would I delay first. The laptops? iPhone? The iPods? The iMacs? Laptops are Apple's biggest computer market, and iPods, well, shrinking but still substantial. The Nano is still a hot seller, especially with the camera onboard.
So, if I had to choose, I'd delay iMac shipments...
And, that could also explain why cameras haven't yet been added to the iPod Touch and iPad yet.. that would add additional millions of quarterly units needing cameras added...
Highly speculative of course... but I see a pattern here that just keeps pointing back to the camera itself (and therefore, availability), not the desire on the part of Apple to include one...
Well, so I went in search of who supplies the cameras to Apple, and found this job posting..... interesting coincidence!!
--------------
Global Supply Manager - Camera Module
Apple - Cupertino, CA
See original job posting at Apple »
The Global Supply Manager plays a critical role in the success of the Apple fulfillment model. Acting as a key interface between World Wide Materials, Strategic Suppliers and Contract Manufactures and managing all aspects of daily execution as well as quarterly supply planning required to maintain supply demand balance.
Key Responsibilities
•\tProvide leadership/guidance to APO (Apple's Asia Pacific Operations) Global Supply Managers to effectively and efficiently manage suppliers
--------------
It really makes me wonder if there isn't a supply issue with camera modules right now, forcing Apple to not include them in the iPad and iPod Touch?
OK, I've conjectured and speculated enough on the topic...
I just had a rogue thought......... is it possible that the camera modules themselves are in short supply?
I remember that the new iPod Touch was expected to sport a camera too, and didn't (although the Nano now has one)... tear-downs of the new iPod Touch also show a space for a camera.
And now we are having new delays with iMac shipments... the assumption was the screen problems... but it is selling quite well, and again, cameras onboard.....
When you consider that cameras are being included in every new iPhone, iPod Nano, MacBook, MacBook Pro AND iMac.... if you add up the combined unit sales for all those products, it adds up to what, tens of millions of camera-bearing units quarterly? Who supplies the cameras modules for those?
If the supply of camera modules was running short, which product would I delay first. The laptops? iPhone? The iPods? The iMacs? Laptops are Apple's biggest computer market, and iPods, well, shrinking but still substantial. The Nano is still a hot seller, especially with the camera onboard.
So, if I had to choose, I'd delay iMac shipments...
And, that could also explain why cameras haven't yet been added to the iPod Touch and iPad yet.. that would add additional millions of quarterly units needing cameras added...
Highly speculative of course... but I see a pattern here that just keeps pointing back to the camera itself (and therefore, availability), not the desire on the part of Apple to include one...
Props, genuinely good thinking. Does anyone know the details on apple and their camera partners? could they outsource to different companies and essentially do what the did to flash mem by leaving it scarce?...Apple may be the one caught in a pickle here.
Sometime I wonder whether they intentionally leave a few key details out when they make the announcement, so that everyone can freak out about how there isn't a camera, then, "oops" there is one!
If there is a camera in it by launch in 60+ days, I am guessing it wasn't ready to show last week and better wait until it's perfected and functional with software loaded.
So the camera would be installed for horizontal orientation, yet the dock and keyboard dock are designed for vertical orientation? Something seems fishy here.
edit: Never mind. I can't tell what I'm looking at in the photos.
If you look carefully, you can see the camera hole flash briefly in some of the videos. Skip to 29 seconds (and 47 seconds) on this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWqD2bKff_k
Dumb sarcasm aside, I find it hard to believe they would go through the trouble to fake this. Whats the point? And to fit and cast the iSight module into a fake frame that so happens to look genuine? Sure, it could be faked. But I think its more than likely, not.
Comments
G as in Generation
I get he feeling allot of things changed at "the last minute" in regards to the hardware, with "ultra competitive" pricing being the main factor in what to include or exclude. I know wasn't the only one pleasantly surprised with the pricing.
That seems the most likely.
I've been informed that 'upper line' (3G) versions of the iPad might well come equipped with front-facing web cameras and iSight software.
We'll See Soon Enough...[/CENTER]
I have this gut feeling that Apple is going to have an iPhone OS event in March.
They had one in March of both 2008 and 2009. It doesn't make sense to launch a new product in 3.2 and not 4.0. With Apple now allowing VOIP over 3G I can see their 'one more thing' being multitasking and iChat with video camera on the iPad and next gen iPhone. Multitasking will probably only work on the next gen iPhone with a custom built chip.
I dunno... you can call me an optimist... but if they really wanted to push alot of people over the edge to purchase one of these bad boys... thats what I would do.
While I would like to see 4.0 detailed in March, It will kind of be a kick in the nuts to the developers that just got the 3.2 SDK. Spending the rest of winter working on a 3.2 app only to have to rerelease it to work fluidly with 4.0 would suck. But at the same time, I'm not a developer. Bring on 4.0 with Multi-tasking, customizability, and whatever else you've been working on!
http://www.apple.com/iphone/iphone-3gs/
They also didn't nail down a launch date, instead stating they would be available 'in about 60 days; another 30 for 3G.'
This is similar to the iPhone's original debut, sure, but that still leaves time to add a camera.
And of course, they could include a camera without mentioning it if it lacks firmware or a compelling app. This would be similar to my new 32GB iPod touch's 802.11n antenna, which, while physically there, lacks the firmware to use it.
The SDK is designed for all the iPhone OS line. Therefore, if any devices - e.g. the iPhone itself - have a cam then the codes has to be in the SDK!
Yes 3.2 is for iPad only, but what are they gonna do? Rip out the code for this one version? Even in an iPad-only program such as Address Book, it would pay to keep features such as this in the code rather than ripping it out and then having to put it back in later. There is no significant cost for code which is not used. There is huge cost to rip out and then put back in.
As for the slot in the frame - if it is really there - there is not a huge cost to include it in the original milling specs planning for the future.
Well this is not good. I have pre- ordered a iPad here in New Zealand and knowing it could potentially get a iSight cam now im upset
From where did you "pre-order and why would you be upset?
You were happy enough when it was not included that you "pre-ordered" one.
What if it released with one? You will still be unhappy?
Well this is not good. I have pre- ordered a iPad here in New Zealand and knowing it could potentially get a iSight cam now im upset
G as in Generation
.....cough .....cough.......BULLSHITE........cough.......cough
I call BULLSHITE on you
I remember that the new iPod Touch was expected to sport a camera too, and didn't (although the Nano now has one)... tear-downs of the new iPod Touch also show a space for a camera.
And now we are having new delays with iMac shipments... the assumption was the screen problems... but it is selling quite well, and again, cameras onboard.....
When you consider that cameras are being included in every new iPhone, iPod Nano, MacBook, MacBook Pro AND iMac.... if you add up the combined unit sales for all those products, it adds up to what, tens of millions of camera-bearing units quarterly? Who supplies the cameras modules for those?
If the supply of camera modules was running short, which product would I delay first. The laptops? iPhone? The iPods? The iMacs? Laptops are Apple's biggest computer market, and iPods, well, shrinking but still substantial. The Nano is still a hot seller, especially with the camera onboard.
So, if I had to choose, I'd delay iMac shipments...
And, that could also explain why cameras haven't yet been added to the iPod Touch and iPad yet.. that would add additional millions of quarterly units needing cameras added...
Highly speculative of course... but I see a pattern here that just keeps pointing back to the camera itself (and therefore, availability), not the desire on the part of Apple to include one...
--------------
Global Supply Manager - Camera Module
Apple - Cupertino, CA
See original job posting at Apple »
The Global Supply Manager plays a critical role in the success of the Apple fulfillment model. Acting as a key interface between World Wide Materials, Strategic Suppliers and Contract Manufactures and managing all aspects of daily execution as well as quarterly supply planning required to maintain supply demand balance.
Key Responsibilities
•\tProvide leadership/guidance to APO (Apple's Asia Pacific Operations) Global Supply Managers to effectively and efficiently manage suppliers
--------------
It really makes me wonder if there isn't a supply issue with camera modules right now, forcing Apple to not include them in the iPad and iPod Touch?
OK, I've conjectured and speculated enough on the topic...
I just had a rogue thought......... is it possible that the camera modules themselves are in short supply?
I remember that the new iPod Touch was expected to sport a camera too, and didn't (although the Nano now has one)... tear-downs of the new iPod Touch also show a space for a camera.
And now we are having new delays with iMac shipments... the assumption was the screen problems... but it is selling quite well, and again, cameras onboard.....
When you consider that cameras are being included in every new iPhone, iPod Nano, MacBook, MacBook Pro AND iMac.... if you add up the combined unit sales for all those products, it adds up to what, tens of millions of camera-bearing units quarterly? Who supplies the cameras modules for those?
If the supply of camera modules was running short, which product would I delay first. The laptops? iPhone? The iPods? The iMacs? Laptops are Apple's biggest computer market, and iPods, well, shrinking but still substantial. The Nano is still a hot seller, especially with the camera onboard.
So, if I had to choose, I'd delay iMac shipments...
And, that could also explain why cameras haven't yet been added to the iPod Touch and iPad yet.. that would add additional millions of quarterly units needing cameras added...
Highly speculative of course... but I see a pattern here that just keeps pointing back to the camera itself (and therefore, availability), not the desire on the part of Apple to include one...
Props, genuinely good thinking. Does anyone know the details on apple and their camera partners? could they outsource to different companies and essentially do what the did to flash mem by leaving it scarce?...Apple may be the one caught in a pickle here.
Well, so I went in search of who supplies the cameras to Apple, and found this job posting..... interesting coincidence!!
For those curious about tribalogical's find, here's the link to the Apple's job posting:
http://jobs.apple.com/index.ajs?BID=...wJob&RID=46029
Agreed... props to you, man! Speculative or not, I like your theory.
so...um... what went wrong?
Sometime I wonder whether they intentionally leave a few key details out when they make the announcement, so that everyone can freak out about how there isn't a camera, then, "oops" there is one!
If there is a camera in it by launch in 60+ days, I am guessing it wasn't ready to show last week and better wait until it's perfected and functional with software loaded.
edit: Never mind. I can't tell what I'm looking at in the photos.
i guess i missed something. why would anyone be receiving repair parts on a product that doesn't ship for over 30 more days.
You didn't miss anything. And to a company in Kansas not even an authorized Apple dealer, no less?
You didn't miss anything. And to a company in Kansas not even an authorized Apple dealer, no less?
So you think they faked it?
So you think they faked it?
Oh no, nobody would ever do that.
Here's the frame at 29s from that video: http://pic.im/gWq
Doesn't prove anything except that a camera is likely planned. We just won't know when until Steve tells us!
Oh no, nobody would ever do that.
Dumb sarcasm aside, I find it hard to believe they would go through the trouble to fake this. Whats the point? And to fit and cast the iSight module into a fake frame that so happens to look genuine? Sure, it could be faked. But I think its more than likely, not.