I dont understand why Apple would leave out a camera at this point, to me, it would make sense. Almost every person today wants a camera attached to whatever device. I LOVE Apple, I LOVE my Iphone....and yes i do want an ipad, but i'm NOT buying one without a camera, without better memory, as far as flash goes, i dont care...but here's my question, why would Apple leave it out, and leave out websites that rely on that? If this device is to be truely revolutionary, then why would it exclude web content that used Flash. Now i know, it's old, macs crash when running it, i get it, i read what Jobs said, but that doesn't change the fact that the rest of the world is using that type, so why would you just leave it out, i know HTML5....but until then....wouldn't that take away from the desire to have an ipad? Also, when i watched the unveiling...i couldn't wait for him to show us ichat....and then he never did. Honestly, i'd put a camera in the thing, add the flash support..for now, nix a non 3G option, lower the price, and push this thing as the next way to communicate and Mass Market the heck out of it ( i know the latter will be done). Until a camera and flash, not buying it....so hopefully, something may be added prior to release of this...but i've come to find out that holding one's breath on these things, just makes one pass out...
I'm assuming that it was a matter of cost, or that they had some problem.
Next revision, I would be surprised if it didn't show up.
It is amazing what the little fanboys here will believe in. They actually think the iPad is more than an iPod Touch. Not everything from Apple becomes popular.
Poor thing. I see you have issues with reading and retention. Plus anyone who uses the term fanboy can be immediately dismissed as a non-serious person.
Lost interest AFTER unveiling? I lost interest WHILE they were unveiling....
no multitask, no flash, no camera, no interest....
I know you are just here trolling like a child but in the real world where the rest of us live Apple allows built-in apps to multi-task. I block Flash anyway because it sucks so I don't care if it is on the iPad or not. Camera? For what?
Apple wants to kill Flash dead. Thank god for that as it is long overdue. Apple isn't the only company that thinks this. So does Google.
**** All kinds of factors go into pricing decisions for added features such as this. Parts prices are the tiniest sliver of that. Engineering, industrial design, consulting cost, etc., etc., all go into pricing.
While that data might be relevant, everything boils down to one factor and one factor only: Maximization of total profits.
Every pricing decision ever made by Apple was made in order to attain this goal.
USB through adapter. Video output through adapter. Hi def.
It will not display hi def due to the antique aspect ratio.
In letterboxed mode, the image is quite shrunk, and not nearly HD dimensions. The vertical resolution is only about 60% of the lowest HD resolution, and is barely better than DVD.
I dont understand why Apple would leave out a camera at this point, to me, it would make sense. Almost every person today wants a camera attached to whatever device. I LOVE Apple, I LOVE my Iphone....and yes i do want an ipad, but i'm NOT buying one without a camera, without better memory, as far as flash goes, i dont care...but here's my question, why would Apple leave it out, and leave out websites that rely on that? If this device is to be truely revolutionary, then why would it exclude web content that used Flash. Now i know, it's old, macs crash when running it, i get it, i read what Jobs said, but that doesn't change the fact that the rest of the world is using that type, so why would you just leave it out, i know HTML5....but until then....wouldn't that take away from the desire to have an ipad? Also, when i watched the unveiling...i couldn't wait for him to show us ichat....and then he never did. Honestly, i'd put a camera in the thing, add the flash support..for now, nix a non 3G option, lower the price, and push this thing as the next way to communicate and Mass Market the heck out of it ( i know the latter will be done). Until a camera and flash, not buying it....so hopefully, something may be added prior to release of this...but i've come to find out that holding one's breath on these things, just makes one pass out...
Do you mean a webcam or a camera? I don't understand the burning desire to have a camera on a device with a 10" screen. Take a picture on your camera or camera equipped device and transfer it over to the iPad instead of holding an iPad in front of your face. Most cell phones have cameras, and people generally carry those around. It's not like people are hurting for the lack of a camera. I don't get the need for webcams either. They are a nice feature, but I don't see how they are a must have. Regardless of that, I think an addon webcam would do a better job anyway. A webcam that is independent of the screen orientation would be a good thing for a tablet as a tablet mounted webcam would shoot the ceiling if you ever laid it down.
The iPad with flash would not be revolutionary. Revolution implies change. Having flash is just maintaining the status quo. If (and it is a big if) the growing number of flashless idevices means that web developers stop using flash so they can gain greater platform support, it could be stated that the lack of flash was actually revolutionary. While I'm not sure if Apple will be able to force changes in web development, the device could be revolutionary in other ways, such as redefining what the average consumer actually needs out of a computing device.
While I know people will disagree anyway, I'm going to try and make some sense out of surveys like this, as it's a perfect example.
Let's first make an assumption for the sake of the argument that this survey is different from other online self selected surveys, and say that it's correct. Who knows, it might be.
So where does that leave us? Well, there are two ways to look at surveys, depending on the product, and how it's positioned.
If a large company has a new $1 product that's been rumored for a while with a 100 million possible market size, and a survey shows what the "before" survey shows, it would have 49% of people being possible buyers, not bad.
But the "after" survey only shows 30% as interested. Not good.
Even with the "definitely buying" percentage tripling from 3 to 9% that's way too small for a $1 product to be on market for a large company, and the 30% shows a serious drop in overall interest.
Well, for a $1 product, the manufacturer might take it off the shelves after a few months if sales are that slow, as not all of the 30% will materialize as real sales.
But now we take a product that averages about $675. How do we look at the survey, assuming the same number 100 million customers?
Well, it's not likely the company is looking for that 49% as real customers. The after survey results aren't devastating with the drop to 30% either. Why? Because the product isn't expected to resonate with the majority of consumers at that price, as it's a more specialized product. The fact that 30% are interested is itself amazing.
But here, the 3% originally, and the later rise to 9% is the real story.
3% would result in 3 million sales that first year, and 9% would result in the company possibly not being able to fill orders. The product would be a good seller at the low number, and a major hit at the higher one.
So the survey can be looked at in two different ways, but how one looks at it must depend on the size of the market, the price of the product, how specialized it is, and the sales of approximately similar products.
Wasn't the competition able to build a better phone with a better interface? Wasn't the competition able to change the entire Mobile landscape almost overnight?\\
No, they were not. But the differences between the original and the 3GS are incremental, and Apple was fully capable.
You may think otherwise, and assume that for years they couldn't properly implement cut and paste. Are you one of the guys who is currently saying that Apple is unable to figure out how to implement multitasking without disastrous results? I don't believe that for one second.
Comments
I dont understand why Apple would leave out a camera at this point, to me, it would make sense. Almost every person today wants a camera attached to whatever device. I LOVE Apple, I LOVE my Iphone....and yes i do want an ipad, but i'm NOT buying one without a camera, without better memory, as far as flash goes, i dont care...but here's my question, why would Apple leave it out, and leave out websites that rely on that? If this device is to be truely revolutionary, then why would it exclude web content that used Flash. Now i know, it's old, macs crash when running it, i get it, i read what Jobs said, but that doesn't change the fact that the rest of the world is using that type, so why would you just leave it out, i know HTML5....but until then....wouldn't that take away from the desire to have an ipad? Also, when i watched the unveiling...i couldn't wait for him to show us ichat....and then he never did. Honestly, i'd put a camera in the thing, add the flash support..for now, nix a non 3G option, lower the price, and push this thing as the next way to communicate and Mass Market the heck out of it ( i know the latter will be done). Until a camera and flash, not buying it....so hopefully, something may be added prior to release of this...but i've come to find out that holding one's breath on these things, just makes one pass out...
I'm assuming that it was a matter of cost, or that they had some problem.
Next revision, I would be surprised if it didn't show up.
It is amazing what the little fanboys here will believe in. They actually think the iPad is more than an iPod Touch. Not everything from Apple becomes popular.
Poor thing. I see you have issues with reading and retention. Plus anyone who uses the term fanboy can be immediately dismissed as a non-serious person.
This is an effort (pathetic at that) to increase traffic to Retrovo, and nothing more.
Lost interest AFTER unveiling? I lost interest WHILE they were unveiling....
no multitask, no flash, no camera, no interest....
I know you are just here trolling like a child but in the real world where the rest of us live Apple allows built-in apps to multi-task. I block Flash anyway because it sucks so I don't care if it is on the iPad or not. Camera? For what?
Apple wants to kill Flash dead. Thank god for that as it is long overdue. Apple isn't the only company that thinks this. So does Google.
**** All kinds of factors go into pricing decisions for added features such as this. Parts prices are the tiniest sliver of that. Engineering, industrial design, consulting cost, etc., etc., all go into pricing.
While that data might be relevant, everything boils down to one factor and one factor only: Maximization of total profits.
Every pricing decision ever made by Apple was made in order to attain this goal.
I hear Balmer laughing again!
Yeah,,,he laughed at the iPod and the iPhone and Microsoft stock owners are furious at his incompetence.
The bleating about Flash is ridiculous. It's as if some of you actually desire a proprietary web.
Apart from geeks, most folks want access to the full web. Not just part of it.
You must be on the internet in some alternate universe then.
Mel is right, I wasn't being serious. Sorry if I confused.
USB through adapter. Video output through adapter. Hi def.
It will not display hi def due to the antique aspect ratio.
In letterboxed mode, the image is quite shrunk, and not nearly HD dimensions. The vertical resolution is only about 60% of the lowest HD resolution, and is barely better than DVD.
I dont understand why Apple would leave out a camera at this point, to me, it would make sense. Almost every person today wants a camera attached to whatever device. I LOVE Apple, I LOVE my Iphone....and yes i do want an ipad, but i'm NOT buying one without a camera, without better memory, as far as flash goes, i dont care...but here's my question, why would Apple leave it out, and leave out websites that rely on that? If this device is to be truely revolutionary, then why would it exclude web content that used Flash. Now i know, it's old, macs crash when running it, i get it, i read what Jobs said, but that doesn't change the fact that the rest of the world is using that type, so why would you just leave it out, i know HTML5....but until then....wouldn't that take away from the desire to have an ipad? Also, when i watched the unveiling...i couldn't wait for him to show us ichat....and then he never did. Honestly, i'd put a camera in the thing, add the flash support..for now, nix a non 3G option, lower the price, and push this thing as the next way to communicate and Mass Market the heck out of it ( i know the latter will be done). Until a camera and flash, not buying it....so hopefully, something may be added prior to release of this...but i've come to find out that holding one's breath on these things, just makes one pass out...
Do you mean a webcam or a camera? I don't understand the burning desire to have a camera on a device with a 10" screen. Take a picture on your camera or camera equipped device and transfer it over to the iPad instead of holding an iPad in front of your face. Most cell phones have cameras, and people generally carry those around. It's not like people are hurting for the lack of a camera. I don't get the need for webcams either. They are a nice feature, but I don't see how they are a must have. Regardless of that, I think an addon webcam would do a better job anyway. A webcam that is independent of the screen orientation would be a good thing for a tablet as a tablet mounted webcam would shoot the ceiling if you ever laid it down.
The iPad with flash would not be revolutionary. Revolution implies change. Having flash is just maintaining the status quo. If (and it is a big if) the growing number of flashless idevices means that web developers stop using flash so they can gain greater platform support, it could be stated that the lack of flash was actually revolutionary. While I'm not sure if Apple will be able to force changes in web development, the device could be revolutionary in other ways, such as redefining what the average consumer actually needs out of a computing device.
Did you just make all of this up?
No, just
USB through adapter.
Adapter
That's another adapter
Hi def.
I meant HD aspect ratio, it would have to be 1280x962 and now it looks like SD.
140,000 third party apps.
Good for portable devices like iphone/ipod, not good for real business application.
Did you actually read anything about this before commenting?
Yep, and did you actually thought about the use and not just followed the specs available on apple website?
While that data might be relevant, everything boils down to one factor and one factor only: Maximization of total profits.
Every pricing decision ever made by Apple was made in order to attain this goal.
Your point being?
...anyone who uses the term fanboy can be immediately dismissed as a non-serious person.
Couldn't agree more. A juvenile delinquent and therefore a non-serious person.
Let's first make an assumption for the sake of the argument that this survey is different from other online self selected surveys, and say that it's correct. Who knows, it might be.
So where does that leave us? Well, there are two ways to look at surveys, depending on the product, and how it's positioned.
If a large company has a new $1 product that's been rumored for a while with a 100 million possible market size, and a survey shows what the "before" survey shows, it would have 49% of people being possible buyers, not bad.
But the "after" survey only shows 30% as interested. Not good.
Even with the "definitely buying" percentage tripling from 3 to 9% that's way too small for a $1 product to be on market for a large company, and the 30% shows a serious drop in overall interest.
Well, for a $1 product, the manufacturer might take it off the shelves after a few months if sales are that slow, as not all of the 30% will materialize as real sales.
But now we take a product that averages about $675. How do we look at the survey, assuming the same number 100 million customers?
Well, it's not likely the company is looking for that 49% as real customers. The after survey results aren't devastating with the drop to 30% either. Why? Because the product isn't expected to resonate with the majority of consumers at that price, as it's a more specialized product. The fact that 30% are interested is itself amazing.
But here, the 3% originally, and the later rise to 9% is the real story.
3% would result in 3 million sales that first year, and 9% would result in the company possibly not being able to fill orders. The product would be a good seller at the low number, and a major hit at the higher one.
So the survey can be looked at in two different ways, but how one looks at it must depend on the size of the market, the price of the product, how specialized it is, and the sales of approximately similar products.
Wasn't the competition able to build a better phone with a better interface? Wasn't the competition able to change the entire Mobile landscape almost overnight?\\
No, they were not. But the differences between the original and the 3GS are incremental, and Apple was fully capable.
You may think otherwise, and assume that for years they couldn't properly implement cut and paste. Are you one of the guys who is currently saying that Apple is unable to figure out how to implement multitasking without disastrous results? I don't believe that for one second.
Just put a USB port on the device to move files with the Mac. And PowerPoint inside as well.
USB is available through an adapter, and you don't need Powerpoint, as Keynote, a product that is considered to be better, is only $9.95.
And, apparently, you will be able to move files over WiFi. That's something that people have been screaming for. Now its here, be happy.