I'm sure that come March 30th or whenever this device is launched, that it will have gained a front-facing camera.
"We listened to your feedback after our January event and one of the things we found you wanted was a front-facing camera for video calls. Well, we've added one! Look, you can have a video chat online whilst surfing the web or making notes. In addition we've a new peripheral - the Wall Dock, so that you can charge the tablet at face height whilst making VOIP calls. Suck on that AT&T!"
Or something like that.
Maybe some more hints of multitasking too. At least being able to run two user apps at the same time, one in the background and one in the foreground. The iPad has a dock-like thing, perfect for putting running apps.
I still think the device is missing two things - a USB port and an SD-card slot. I know the former especially could look tatty, but the OS is meant to support USB Host, but a dock->USB adapter looks worse. It could have a cover of some sort? They could have the decency to put the full USB port on the iPad dock offerings at least.
Also will it backup via Time Machine if you have such a setup?
Nope, it's a media consumption device. It currently lacks Flash. Flash is the one technology it MUST have which is currently doesn't. And yes, I do know that a minority of people will use an SD card slot, as few people currently use SD cards - in the UK at least they're used by photographers for cameras - that's about it, no doubt the reason why the USB and SD kit is referred to as the "camera" accessory for iPad.
(That damn advert at the top of this page is still destroying the web site. Go Flash!)
The target audience for this device either don't know what an SD card even is, or have a grown up computer at work/in their home office for work.
I know some people just don't get this. But it's a web browser, you can check your email and read ebooks, while playing music (and some people will prepare home accounts or the church newsletter on.) That it might be used for more - great. But it's a consumer level device.
Oh, and multitasking (which it already does) is the desire of a few, most users of this device won't even know what multi-tasking is.
I know, and it looks like a great media consumption device - what irks me is that it could easily have been much more than that without taking anything away from ease of use, design or even the price point. It could have been a fantastic consumption device as well as a more serious machine if they had only added multitasking, a camera and some connectivity (so that you could save iWork files to a USB-stick or even use an external drive to back up the iPad on Time Machine). The iPad could have been a computer in its own right with just these few tweaks. Granted, they would also have had to untether it from iTunes and perhaps give it some kind of mobile Finder, but none of this would have been impossible. Believe me, I never expected a Wacom-screen or full OS X, but I sure expected at least part of the features I just mentioned.
EDIT: Your point about multitasking is not very convincing, by the way. Sure, ask average users what multitasking is and they probably won't be able to define the term. But they sure as heck DO IT every day. The same thing goes for Flash, as much as I hate it. Even my very non-tech-savvy father multitasks routinely and uses Flash very often, even if he doesn't actually know what he's doing. He would miss those features in the iPad while actually being part of its target audience - this is not a good thing.
BTW, I'm not a fan of SD-cards, I only use them on my "cheap" camera (Canon S90) - my DSLR uses faster CF-cards. Still, an SD-slot would have been a nice addition, along with a USB-port.
the foward facing camera is a big deal for a small amount of people, most people that have a mac dont use the video chat features at all, therefore if the camera software/hardware isnt perfect its not gonna be there upon release---exactly what happened on the ipod touch--- the camera would also just raise the price and most people arent gonna use it in the first place, most of the ipads sold are gonna be the cheap 500 one, raising the price would just make people get a netbook which is what apple wants to kill.
now if they do include a camera they should include somekind of photobooth app, like they do on macs, with cool effects and everything, that is a feature more people will use and wll give the average joe a fun justification for a camera, it will definately give it an upper hand over an iphone apart from books and a bigger screen
video chat
photobooth
books
comfy big screen
these are the things that have to be made to justify the ipad to the average joe vs the iphone
APPLE MAKE THE IPAD DO THINGS THE IPHONE CANT, NOT JUST BETTER VERSIONS OF THINGS THE IPHONE CAN DO
The more I get the impression Apple released the iPad in a hurry. They might include iSight, and they should. The whole keynote looked less polished than usual and with less "wow" than what we got used to.
Moreover, in non-US sites the price is provided (which is unusual for a non released product) and all prices are still in US Dollars.
This tells me that the iPad is somehow still under development, at least software-wise. iWork is nice and interesting, but some software is missing big time:
- iLife. After all iLife is a major selling point for Apple and one thing the iPad could really use to be a compelling piece of hardware
- iMagazines. Besides books, on a gorgeous color display, one wonders why Magazines have not been included (National Geographic just to mention one).
- Multitasking. I believe multitasking, at least a couple of background apps running while doing other stuff, is a major missing feature
All this makes me believe that the iPad wasn't exactly "ready for market". Although I understand concerns related to keeping the price affordable I wonder how much of an impact would an iSight camera have made on one side and how much of an impact would iLife made on the other... As well as iMagazines which would even have repaid themselves.
I will not buy the iPad since I am not really in the target. But being an Apple fan I would have considered it if it had some of the mentioned features, which would have made it "better at certain tasks".
I know, and it looks like a great media consumption device - what irks me is that it could easily have been much more than that without taking anything away from ease of use, design or even the price point. It could have been a fantastic consumption device as well as a more serious machine if they had only added multitasking, a camera and some connectivity (so that you could save iWork files to a USB-stick or even use an external drive to back up the iPad on Time Machine). The iPad could have been a computer in its own right with just these few tweaks. Granted, they would also have had to untether it from iTunes and perhaps give it some kind of mobile Finder, but none of this would have been impossible. Believe me, I never expected a Wacom-screen or full OS X, but I sure expected at least part of the features I just mentioned.
EDIT: Your point about multitasking is not very convincing, by the way. Sure, ask average users what multitasking is and they probably won't be able to define the term. But they sure as heck DO IT every day. The same thing goes for Flash, as much as I hate it. Even my very non-tech-savvy father multitasks routinely and uses Flash very often, even if he doesn't actually know what he's doing. He would miss those features in the iPad while actually being part of its target audience - this is not a good thing.
BTW, I'm not a fan of SD-cards, I only use them on my "cheap" camera (Canon S90) - my DSLR uses faster CF-cards. Still, an SD-slot would have been a nice addition, along with a USB-port.
Again, Apple have recognised this requirement and as such have provided easy ways to attach USB and SD peripherals from the off.
I'm not arguing against the inclusion of flash - it's an absolute must, but it is for Adobe to fix their software so that this can be implemented - they've got two months and need to pull their finger out.
Multitasking will probably only work on the next gen iPhone with a custom built chip.
Multitasking works quite well on the current chip. Believe it or not, its not a matter of "it can't", it is a matter of a massive international corporation not letting you...
the foward facing camera is a big deal for a small amount of people, most people that have a mac dont use the video chat features at all, therefore if the camera software/hardware isnt perfect its not gonna be there upon release
I disagree particularly with the amount of "augmented reality" apps that are on the App Store as well as the fact that, opposed to the iPod Touch, the iPad has a stand with keyboard which makes the iSight position ideal for video chatting. The target is a business target and a casual home target. I can imagine people using it differently than a MacBook or an iPhone (which is also Apple's idea for the device). That said why not be able to answer a skype call on the couch with the camera in a perfect position for video chatting? Why not use and share iWork documents among colleagues while videochatting on iChat?
My opinion is that, if people use the iPad differently than existing devices, I can also imagine the use of a front-facing camera would increase or be more beneficial than we actually acknowledge.
Again, Apple have recognised this requirement and as such have provided easy ways to attach USB and SD peripherals from the off.
I'm not arguing against the inclusion of flash - it's an absolute must, but it is for Adobe to fix their software so that this can be implemented - they've got two months and need to pull their finger out.
Yes, well, they quite inelegantly address a single one of my points by providing an optional dongle. That's still pretty unimpressive. Like it or not, the points I raised in my previous post are valid, or at least they all point to as yet unanswered questions concerning this device.
But I do agree with you completely with regard to Flash.
Get it to market cheap - without some of the things we want ?
Bring it to market on an up-date with the things we want ? bring the price up, and we say, "that's fine, at least it has a camera now".
This also gives them time to find out what folks think, what folks like, what folks don't like, what folks might be willing to pay for these things/upgrades, and when in all of the up-dates coming out over the next 2 years, do we introduce said things.
We the general public, end up with the 1st edition iPad, the 3rd update (because the 1st is worn out a bit, and no where near as cool (and we're hooked by now, so the extra bucks don't even play into it), and we can't wait for the next upgrade, because there's RUMORS about it having ??
For this reason alone, you have to both Love apple and Hate Apple
Skip
PS I'll be curious as to what Apple will be willing to pay, and if fact may pay, to get the name iPad from the foreign company?
Guys, Apple genius is the real magical part in all this. As some have pointed out:
1a. Announce and wow everybody as much as they can.
1b. Say "60 days" and "90 days for 3G"
2. See how many suckers erm.. I mean early adopters sign up
3. Analyse feedback and backlash, complaints
4. Watch all other tech companies sh*t themselves coming up with competitors
5. Watch said companies come up with stuff in 2 months
6a. See which telcos come begging for the device, if any
6b. See which publishers/etc come begging to partner with Apple, if any
7. In two months, items 1 to 6 will be clear
8. 2 weeks before launch and production ramp, drop appropriate bombs if needed:
(a) front-facing camera
(b) iChat app
(c) defined multitasking
(d) price drops
So, given the hysteria on how great or how crap it is, I say things are falling nicely into place for Apple.
They have everything laid out to decide whether to roll with this "crap underpowered no-multitasking no-camera piece of garbage without 3G" at $499, or throw a little glitter into the mix.
It could go both ways at this stage, I say. We have about 50 days to go to see what turns out.
You must remember Apple has a roadmap for this product and they have to put out a [highly] profitable device, they don't do loss-leaders.
Some features may come, some may never (like Blu Ray after all these years).
Maybe, except for the abysmal codec support (I presume), the lack of a proper aspect ratio, and the inability to access lots of web sites.
That kills it as a great media consumption device for me. Hell, that kills it as a "good enough" device for me.
Aspect ratio and resolution also concern me, as does the lack of Flash (although this really isn't Apple's fault). However, thanks to Air Video Pro, I don't think Codec support is going to be a big problem. Or did you mean anything specific by that?
@ iMat, sorry cant quote on schools network for some reason, lol im in history class
I think you misunderstood what I was saying, I think a front facing camera is a great idea and has many uses, but the bulk of the ipads sold will be to people who wont give it use anyway, so its better to keep the camera developement in the oven for a little while longer until its perfect, or as many people theorize introduce it as a second generation feature,
you have to remember that ipad development until now has been all negative income, and apple is after our money after all, as opposed to what some people think is to make the world happy, its better to sell a well rounded device lacking a couple of features to get some income to fuel further development than to sell a device with buggy camera software and instead of making ur loyal fans happy piss them off and ruin your "it just works" reputation
Maybe, except for the abysmal codec support (I presume), the lack of a proper aspect ratio, and the inability to access lots of web sites.
That kills it as a great media consumption device for me. Hell, that kills it as a "good enough" device for me.
If they can sell enough devices, hell, they may just roll with it as it is.
If sales aren't good enough for them, then they'll meet demands.
I wouldn't be surprised that there is a special team for the past few years working on porting OS X to run on ARM. Just like the secret team that was working on OS X for x86.
If the 1st year of the iPad is relatively meh, by middle of 2011 you could see iPad 10" and 13" widescreens, with a specialised OSX for ARM announced. Boy, that would be sexy, no?
By 2012 either the iPhone OS is going to be much more advanced to be a laptop-quality OS, or ARM etc devices are good enough to run OS X.
AppleTV may be an experiment, but iPad is very much in Apple's future.
nvidia2008-- "If the 1st year of the iPad is relatively meh, by middle of 2011 you could see iPad 10" and 13" widescreens, with a specialised OSX for ARM announced. Boy, that would be sexy, no?"
why doesnt apple take their macbook, cut out the keyboard and trackpad, get smaller speakers, cut out the disc drive, swithch the hard drive for a ssd, cut out firewire, ethernet, slim down the profile in sleek aluminum, and place the screen unto the body, port Snowleopard into a touch interface,and VUALA!!! introducing the iPad Pro
Agreed. I think the device will be fantastic.I, however, am not in a hurry to get one and will happily wait until it has a camera.
Quote:
Originally Posted by slapppy
I don't think these kind of leaks help Apple at all. I don't know how many will not hold back on the 1st gen because of this (if true) leak. But I believe it will affect sales.
why doesnt apple take their macbook, cut out the keyboard and trackpad, get smaller speakers, cut out the disc drive, swithch the hard drive for a ssd, cut out firewire, ethernet, slim down the profile in sleek aluminum, and place the screen unto the body, port Snowleopard into a touch interface,and VUALA!!! introducing the iPad Pro
LOL because Apple likes to *invent* things and doesn't always take the most efficient route.
Comments
"We listened to your feedback after our January event and one of the things we found you wanted was a front-facing camera for video calls. Well, we've added one! Look, you can have a video chat online whilst surfing the web or making notes. In addition we've a new peripheral - the Wall Dock, so that you can charge the tablet at face height whilst making VOIP calls. Suck on that AT&T!"
Or something like that.
Maybe some more hints of multitasking too. At least being able to run two user apps at the same time, one in the background and one in the foreground. The iPad has a dock-like thing, perfect for putting running apps.
I still think the device is missing two things - a USB port and an SD-card slot. I know the former especially could look tatty, but the OS is meant to support USB Host, but a dock->USB adapter looks worse. It could have a cover of some sort? They could have the decency to put the full USB port on the iPad dock offerings at least.
Also will it backup via Time Machine if you have such a setup?
Nope, it's a media consumption device. It currently lacks Flash. Flash is the one technology it MUST have which is currently doesn't. And yes, I do know that a minority of people will use an SD card slot, as few people currently use SD cards - in the UK at least they're used by photographers for cameras - that's about it, no doubt the reason why the USB and SD kit is referred to as the "camera" accessory for iPad.
(That damn advert at the top of this page is still destroying the web site. Go Flash!)
The target audience for this device either don't know what an SD card even is, or have a grown up computer at work/in their home office for work.
I know some people just don't get this. But it's a web browser, you can check your email and read ebooks, while playing music (and some people will prepare home accounts or the church newsletter on.) That it might be used for more - great. But it's a consumer level device.
Oh, and multitasking (which it already does) is the desire of a few, most users of this device won't even know what multi-tasking is.
I know, and it looks like a great media consumption device - what irks me is that it could easily have been much more than that without taking anything away from ease of use, design or even the price point. It could have been a fantastic consumption device as well as a more serious machine if they had only added multitasking, a camera and some connectivity (so that you could save iWork files to a USB-stick or even use an external drive to back up the iPad on Time Machine). The iPad could have been a computer in its own right with just these few tweaks. Granted, they would also have had to untether it from iTunes and perhaps give it some kind of mobile Finder, but none of this would have been impossible. Believe me, I never expected a Wacom-screen or full OS X, but I sure expected at least part of the features I just mentioned.
EDIT: Your point about multitasking is not very convincing, by the way. Sure, ask average users what multitasking is and they probably won't be able to define the term. But they sure as heck DO IT every day. The same thing goes for Flash, as much as I hate it. Even my very non-tech-savvy father multitasks routinely and uses Flash very often, even if he doesn't actually know what he's doing. He would miss those features in the iPad while actually being part of its target audience - this is not a good thing.
BTW, I'm not a fan of SD-cards, I only use them on my "cheap" camera (Canon S90) - my DSLR uses faster CF-cards. Still, an SD-slot would have been a nice addition, along with a USB-port.
now if they do include a camera they should include somekind of photobooth app, like they do on macs, with cool effects and everything, that is a feature more people will use and wll give the average joe a fun justification for a camera, it will definately give it an upper hand over an iphone apart from books and a bigger screen
video chat
photobooth
books
comfy big screen
these are the things that have to be made to justify the ipad to the average joe vs the iphone
APPLE MAKE THE IPAD DO THINGS THE IPHONE CANT, NOT JUST BETTER VERSIONS OF THINGS THE IPHONE CAN DO
ps: a skipe app to video chat would be nice too
I couldn't see the reasoning for not having one so let's hope there is one in there by shipping time!
That seems unlikely. Much more likely it will be added 3 or 4 months after release, along with other missing elements.
Moreover, in non-US sites the price is provided (which is unusual for a non released product) and all prices are still in US Dollars.
This tells me that the iPad is somehow still under development, at least software-wise. iWork is nice and interesting, but some software is missing big time:
- iLife. After all iLife is a major selling point for Apple and one thing the iPad could really use to be a compelling piece of hardware
- iMagazines. Besides books, on a gorgeous color display, one wonders why Magazines have not been included (National Geographic just to mention one).
- Multitasking. I believe multitasking, at least a couple of background apps running while doing other stuff, is a major missing feature
All this makes me believe that the iPad wasn't exactly "ready for market". Although I understand concerns related to keeping the price affordable I wonder how much of an impact would an iSight camera have made on one side and how much of an impact would iLife made on the other... As well as iMagazines which would even have repaid themselves.
I will not buy the iPad since I am not really in the target. But being an Apple fan I would have considered it if it had some of the mentioned features, which would have made it "better at certain tasks".
I know, and it looks like a great media consumption device - what irks me is that it could easily have been much more than that without taking anything away from ease of use, design or even the price point. It could have been a fantastic consumption device as well as a more serious machine if they had only added multitasking, a camera and some connectivity (so that you could save iWork files to a USB-stick or even use an external drive to back up the iPad on Time Machine). The iPad could have been a computer in its own right with just these few tweaks. Granted, they would also have had to untether it from iTunes and perhaps give it some kind of mobile Finder, but none of this would have been impossible. Believe me, I never expected a Wacom-screen or full OS X, but I sure expected at least part of the features I just mentioned.
EDIT: Your point about multitasking is not very convincing, by the way. Sure, ask average users what multitasking is and they probably won't be able to define the term. But they sure as heck DO IT every day. The same thing goes for Flash, as much as I hate it. Even my very non-tech-savvy father multitasks routinely and uses Flash very often, even if he doesn't actually know what he's doing. He would miss those features in the iPad while actually being part of its target audience - this is not a good thing.
BTW, I'm not a fan of SD-cards, I only use them on my "cheap" camera (Canon S90) - my DSLR uses faster CF-cards. Still, an SD-slot would have been a nice addition, along with a USB-port.
Again, Apple have recognised this requirement and as such have provided easy ways to attach USB and SD peripherals from the off.
I'm not arguing against the inclusion of flash - it's an absolute must, but it is for Adobe to fix their software so that this can be implemented - they've got two months and need to pull their finger out.
Multitasking will probably only work on the next gen iPhone with a custom built chip.
Multitasking works quite well on the current chip. Believe it or not, its not a matter of "it can't", it is a matter of a massive international corporation not letting you...
the foward facing camera is a big deal for a small amount of people, most people that have a mac dont use the video chat features at all, therefore if the camera software/hardware isnt perfect its not gonna be there upon release
I disagree particularly with the amount of "augmented reality" apps that are on the App Store as well as the fact that, opposed to the iPod Touch, the iPad has a stand with keyboard which makes the iSight position ideal for video chatting. The target is a business target and a casual home target. I can imagine people using it differently than a MacBook or an iPhone (which is also Apple's idea for the device). That said why not be able to answer a skype call on the couch with the camera in a perfect position for video chatting? Why not use and share iWork documents among colleagues while videochatting on iChat?
My opinion is that, if people use the iPad differently than existing devices, I can also imagine the use of a front-facing camera would increase or be more beneficial than we actually acknowledge.
Again, Apple have recognised this requirement and as such have provided easy ways to attach USB and SD peripherals from the off.
I'm not arguing against the inclusion of flash - it's an absolute must, but it is for Adobe to fix their software so that this can be implemented - they've got two months and need to pull their finger out.
Yes, well, they quite inelegantly address a single one of my points by providing an optional dongle. That's still pretty unimpressive. Like it or not, the points I raised in my previous post are valid, or at least they all point to as yet unanswered questions concerning this device.
But I do agree with you completely with regard to Flash.
Bring it to market on an up-date with the things we want ? bring the price up, and we say, "that's fine, at least it has a camera now".
This also gives them time to find out what folks think, what folks like, what folks don't like, what folks might be willing to pay for these things/upgrades, and when in all of the up-dates coming out over the next 2 years, do we introduce said things.
We the general public, end up with the 1st edition iPad, the 3rd update (because the 1st is worn out a bit, and no where near as cool (and we're hooked by now, so the extra bucks don't even play into it), and we can't wait for the next upgrade, because there's RUMORS about it having ??
For this reason alone, you have to both Love apple and Hate Apple
Skip
PS I'll be curious as to what Apple will be willing to pay, and if fact may pay, to get the name iPad from the foreign company?
I know, and it looks like a great media consumption device
Maybe, except for the abysmal codec support (I presume), the lack of a proper aspect ratio, and the inability to access lots of web sites.
That kills it as a great media consumption device for me. Hell, that kills it as a "good enough" device for me.
1a. Announce and wow everybody as much as they can.
1b. Say "60 days" and "90 days for 3G"
2. See how many suckers erm.. I mean early adopters sign up
3. Analyse feedback and backlash, complaints
4. Watch all other tech companies sh*t themselves coming up with competitors
5. Watch said companies come up with stuff in 2 months
6a. See which telcos come begging for the device, if any
6b. See which publishers/etc come begging to partner with Apple, if any
7. In two months, items 1 to 6 will be clear
8. 2 weeks before launch and production ramp, drop appropriate bombs if needed:
(a) front-facing camera
(b) iChat app
(c) defined multitasking
(d) price drops
So, given the hysteria on how great or how crap it is, I say things are falling nicely into place for Apple.
They have everything laid out to decide whether to roll with this "crap underpowered no-multitasking no-camera piece of garbage without 3G" at $499, or throw a little glitter into the mix.
It could go both ways at this stage, I say. We have about 50 days to go to see what turns out.
You must remember Apple has a roadmap for this product and they have to put out a [highly] profitable device, they don't do loss-leaders.
Some features may come, some may never (like Blu Ray after all these years).
Maybe, except for the abysmal codec support (I presume), the lack of a proper aspect ratio, and the inability to access lots of web sites.
That kills it as a great media consumption device for me. Hell, that kills it as a "good enough" device for me.
Aspect ratio and resolution also concern me, as does the lack of Flash (although this really isn't Apple's fault). However, thanks to Air Video Pro, I don't think Codec support is going to be a big problem. Or did you mean anything specific by that?
I think you misunderstood what I was saying, I think a front facing camera is a great idea and has many uses, but the bulk of the ipads sold will be to people who wont give it use anyway, so its better to keep the camera developement in the oven for a little while longer until its perfect, or as many people theorize introduce it as a second generation feature,
you have to remember that ipad development until now has been all negative income, and apple is after our money after all, as opposed to what some people think is to make the world happy, its better to sell a well rounded device lacking a couple of features to get some income to fuel further development than to sell a device with buggy camera software and instead of making ur loyal fans happy piss them off and ruin your "it just works" reputation
Maybe, except for the abysmal codec support (I presume), the lack of a proper aspect ratio, and the inability to access lots of web sites.
That kills it as a great media consumption device for me. Hell, that kills it as a "good enough" device for me.
If they can sell enough devices, hell, they may just roll with it as it is.
If sales aren't good enough for them, then they'll meet demands.
I wouldn't be surprised that there is a special team for the past few years working on porting OS X to run on ARM. Just like the secret team that was working on OS X for x86.
If the 1st year of the iPad is relatively meh, by middle of 2011 you could see iPad 10" and 13" widescreens, with a specialised OSX for ARM announced. Boy, that would be sexy, no?
By 2012 either the iPhone OS is going to be much more advanced to be a laptop-quality OS, or ARM etc devices are good enough to run OS X.
AppleTV may be an experiment, but iPad is very much in Apple's future.
why doesnt apple take their macbook, cut out the keyboard and trackpad, get smaller speakers, cut out the disc drive, swithch the hard drive for a ssd, cut out firewire, ethernet, slim down the profile in sleek aluminum, and place the screen unto the body, port Snowleopard into a touch interface,and VUALA!!! introducing the iPad Pro
I don't think these kind of leaks help Apple at all. I don't know how many will not hold back on the 1st gen because of this (if true) leak. But I believe it will affect sales.
why doesnt apple take their macbook, cut out the keyboard and trackpad, get smaller speakers, cut out the disc drive, swithch the hard drive for a ssd, cut out firewire, ethernet, slim down the profile in sleek aluminum, and place the screen unto the body, port Snowleopard into a touch interface,and VUALA!!! introducing the iPad Pro
LOL because Apple likes to *invent* things and doesn't always take the most efficient route.
Maybe when the check the logs and see that only 5 people preordered it they will add in the camera before launch.
LOL more like 500,000 at least signed up for "notify me" -- in the US alone. Just my prediction. BTW there's no preorders yet.