Seriously, though, see it from inside of Apple. The poor team that is going to release the laptops and desktops. How boring it must be to release another laptop upgrade while other teams are reshaping the computer industry.
The laptop guys will do fine.
The desktop guys are likely shitting bricks, with all this talk of Apple now being a "Mobile Device Company".
Apple's least success has traditionally been with thier desktops stuff. And now they call them selves a mobile device company. Hmmm...
Wow, that's rather surprising. How does this thing perform the way it does with so little RAM? I spent better than 6 hrs yesterday playing on my wife's iPad. I played games, watched movies, listened to music, and browsed many of my favorite sites - all without a single hiccup.
Could someone with a better understanding than I have, explain how this is even possible? I'm assuming it's the OS and perhaps the processor.
You are running only one app at a time. There are small background processes from other apps running too, but only one full app, and that app is tiny. So tiny that it still runs OK with very little ram.
Remember - this is basically a cell phone with a big screen. It has little overhead and the apps are not complex.
I don't feel any need to argue the cost positioning issue but I frankly have used the webcam on my iMac maybe a handful of times in its entire seven year existence - notably on major holidays to connect up with my family scattered all over the US. And some quick and dirty photobooth shots. That's it. Now try to figure out how, with a physical format that is meant to be flexibly horizontal or vertical - depending on your immediate need or desire, to position a camera, angle it so that it can be used conveniently, configure your software to be able to hard-disable it for things like government and medical practice use (privacy/confidentially issues) and sell that as a feature.
There is a good reason why nearly every portable computer has a webcam.
You might not think a webcam is a good idea, but Apple puts one on every pretty much every portable device it sells.
The security issue is specious - every laptop has a webcam.
The positioning issue is specious - both OEM and third-party stands are currently being sold to prop up the iPad for a variety of horizontal-viewing uses.
Impossible to understand how they could be so short-sighted.
I dunno - I think the choice to omit the "nasal cam" was a quite deliberate one. I would expect at least one add-on camera for the dock in the near future (ESP after OS4). And I would expect it to have a very important feature - the ability to swivel!
I dunno - I think the choice to omit the "nasal cam" was a quite deliberate one. I would expect at least one add-on camera for the dock in the near future (ESP after OS4). And I would expect it to have a very important feature - the ability to swivel!
LOL @ nasal cam. You have a good point, perhaps the implementation was always off in their concepts. It's also possible that it was part of the lowering costs and/or make it something to add in a future generation.
We really don't know and it seems silly for anyone to complain about it. I figure other tablets competing with the iPad will add one in a likely vain attempt to "one up" it. It'll be curious to see how they fare with a camera. The Notion Ink has one that swivels 180°.
There is nothing stopping anyone from adding a camera to the iPad right now. v3.0 allows access to the Dock Connector.
I dunno - I think the choice to omit the "nasal cam" was a quite deliberate one. I would expect at least one add-on camera for the dock in the near future (ESP after OS4). And I would expect it to have a very important feature - the ability to swivel!
It's a shame that Apple hasn't sold an external iSight in a while.
I think a lighter iPad would be better than 2 batteries. Most people on this board are saying they will use this device at home. If that's the case then recharging would be a snap. If you're at a cafe or wherever you can use the outlet to recharge if you plan on using it for more than 4 hours at a cafe. All of you said you wouldn't be using it for more than brief FaceBook and email moments anyway so going past a few hours on a single battery shouldn't be an issue. Right?
So now you have to choose what camp you're in. Either you stick with your camp which means you don't need a dual battery (which means it's not the best design after all) or you switch camps which means that the iPad isn't the ideal portable device becaue you can't use it like a netbook.
I'm just going by what you guys have been flaming about.
Personally I'll still buy a 2nd gen iPad and hope for a wireless keyboard solution made out of fabric or other non-hard-plastic material that I can fold up and use on the go.
But the angle is all wrong for typing too, and is all wrong for viewing unless it is propped up.
If folks are willing to buy special typing props and viewing props, why not speacial props for video conferenceing? You'd want two hands free, and you wouldn't want to shake the camera.
The viewing angle objection doesn't make any sense to me.
I have the iphone case that apple manufactures for typing and viewing. It does three positions very well horizontal/vertical and inclined like a keyboard. While in those positions it is rigid. It isn't very adjustable. It's possible that someone could come up with a less rigid stand for the ipad.
That being said I still think an external camera would garner more flexibility on small mobile devices like the ipad and iphone. Someone could potentially use the external camera on either device, thus eliminating the need for an extraneous front facing camera. I personally wouldn't purchase a camera for web conferencing but at least it would give folks like you who really want this functionality an option.
I think a lighter iPad would be better than 2 batteries. Most people on this board are saying they will use this device at home. If that's the case then recharging would be a snap. If you're at a cafe or wherever you can use the outlet to recharge if you plan on using it for more than 4 hours at a cafe. All of you said you wouldn't be using it for more than brief FaceBook and email moments anyway so going past a few hours on a single battery shouldn't be an issue. Right?
So now you have to choose what camp you're in. Either you stick with your camp which means you don't need a dual battery (which means it's not the best design after all) or you switch camps which means that the iPad isn't the ideal portable device becaue you can't use it like a netbook.
I'm just going by what you guys have been flaming about.
Personally I'll still buy a 2nd gen iPad and hope for a wireless keyboard solution made out of fabric or other non-hard-plastic material that I can fold up and use on the go.
For me the battery life of the device was one of the key selling points. Being able to use it for a full day without a charge is key for me. A huge part of the utility of this device is it's mobility. Having to strap it up to charge every couple hours would ruin it in my opinion.
I've been reading that the 256mb ram equipped iPad has regressed back to the problem that the iPhone 3G suffered from, namely Safari tabs being reloaded because the device has run out of RAM to keep them open in the background. If this is true, it's a crying shame, and as browsing is the main thing I would do with a portable device like this, it's simply out of bounds to me until Apple fix this. The reloading tabs really bugged the heck out of me on the iPhone 3G, and now that I have a 3GS, I simply won't tolerate this problem anymore.
I have a iPhone with a data package I barely use close to my limit, but I can't tether and will be forced into a another 3 year long agreement. (Canada)
No thank you and the bottom line reason why I won't be getting one, not matter how good it MAY be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino
i'm curious who your provider is. as far as i know tethering is included with most data plan in canada (for now).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headrush69
The problem isn't the tethering from the provider. I was sure I read an Apple source quoted as saying you WON'T be able to tether the iPad. It's either buy the WiFi+3G package initially or you're out of luck.
@Headrush69 - In your first post it seemed like you were saying you can't tether with your iPhone. Is that correct? And are you assuming the iPad will be the same?
Tethering is allowed by Fido and Rogers for the iPhone. Of course we won't know about the iPad until the 11th hour when our wonderful Canadian providers decided to tell us how great we have it with their terrible rate plans.
BLUETOOTH? How the hell are you going to get video transfer rates across Bluetooth? I mean, you would have to compress the HELL out of it.
I find a plugged-into-the-dock-connector's-USB-bus camera FAR more likely.
You do realize that BT 2.1EDR has a theoretical peak bandwidth of 3Mbit which is plenty for a decent quality video stream? And if the iPad supported BT 3.0HS (it might, dunno), it would have a peak speed of 24Mbit (this requires BT and WiFi tho).
So it is more than possible to get decent video streamed over BT.
I've been reading that the 256mb ram equipped iPad has regressed back to the problem that the iPhone 3G suffered from, namely Safari tabs being reloaded because the device has run out of RAM to keep them open in the background. If this is true, it's a crying shame, and as browsing is the main thing I would do with a portable device like this, it's simply out of bounds to me until Apple fix this. The reloading tabs really bugged the heck out of me on the iPhone 3G, and now that I have a 3GS, I simply won't tolerate this problem anymore.
Yup. The cost/benefit of early adopters. They get to use a nice device early but will suffer for it with early deficiencies. I'm surprised that Apple chose 256 MB RAM. One of the reasons to hold on a version and wait for the version 2 or 3. I'm sure part of it was to ensure an upgrade path over the next few years.
I'm very suspicious that 6 months from now, iPad gen 2 arrive with 512 MB RAM and 32, 64, 128 GB storage plus a webcam. iPad gen 1 is very much your typical gen 1 Apple product where Apple did everything they could reasonably do to pare down features to ship on time.
Yup. The cost/benefit of early adopters. They get to use a nice device early but will suffer for it with early deficiencies. I'm surprised that Apple chose 256 MB RAM. One of the reasons to hold on a version and wait for the version 2 or 3. I'm sure part of it was to ensure an upgrade path over the next few years.
I'm very suspicious that 6 months from now, iPad gen 2 arrive with 512 MB RAM and 32, 64, 128 GB storage plus a webcam. iPad gen 1 is very much your typical gen 1 Apple product where Apple did everything they could reasonably do to pare down features to ship on time.
I can understand why it happens. These devices are specified months/years in advance where I guess the expectation was that 256mb would be sufficient. To backtrack and add another 256mb of RAM would probably write off a few months worth of sales. This is where the V2 of the product steps in to correct the earlier mistakes.
What surprises me though is that Apple tripped up with this. I'd expect it from a company with very tight margins, but since Apple commands such a premium, I'd hope for them to conjure up something they consider 'sufficient', and then add a little bit extra just in case. The OS the iPad ended up with must be a little bit more bloated than Apple originally anticipated.
I can understand why it happens. These devices are specified months/years in advance where I guess the expectation was that 256mb would be sufficient. To backtrack and add another 256mb of RAM would probably write off a few months worth of sales. This is where the V2 of the product steps in to correct the earlier mistakes.
What surprises me though is that Apple tripped up with this. I'd expect it from a company with very tight margins, but since Apple commands such a premium, I'd hope for them to conjure up something they consider 'sufficient', and then add a little bit extra just in case. The OS the iPad ended up with must be a little bit more bloated than Apple originally anticipated.
There are plenty of reasons why they thought 256 MB RAM was adequate. It could have been Apple wanted to ship 4 to 6 months ago sometime November to January. If it shipped in Fall of 2009, it would have seemed fine. Any number of things could have delayed it.
Anyways, as a version 2 or 3 guy, waiting has it's benefits. 512 MB to 1 GB RAM, 128 to 256 GB storage and a web cam will be the sweetspot like the 32 GB iPhone 3GS. Everything will be more robust, apps better designed, content bountiful, and many bugs fixed.
Comments
Seriously, though, see it from inside of Apple. The poor team that is going to release the laptops and desktops. How boring it must be to release another laptop upgrade while other teams are reshaping the computer industry.
The laptop guys will do fine.
The desktop guys are likely shitting bricks, with all this talk of Apple now being a "Mobile Device Company".
Apple's least success has traditionally been with thier desktops stuff. And now they call them selves a mobile device company. Hmmm...
Wow, that's rather surprising. How does this thing perform the way it does with so little RAM? I spent better than 6 hrs yesterday playing on my wife's iPad. I played games, watched movies, listened to music, and browsed many of my favorite sites - all without a single hiccup.
Could someone with a better understanding than I have, explain how this is even possible? I'm assuming it's the OS and perhaps the processor.
You are running only one app at a time. There are small background processes from other apps running too, but only one full app, and that app is tiny. So tiny that it still runs OK with very little ram.
Remember - this is basically a cell phone with a big screen. It has little overhead and the apps are not complex.
if the ipad isn't your ideal piece of technology right now, don't buy it and stop whining.
What sort of demeaning, dismissive crap is this?
I don't feel any need to argue the cost positioning issue but I frankly have used the webcam on my iMac maybe a handful of times in its entire seven year existence - notably on major holidays to connect up with my family scattered all over the US. And some quick and dirty photobooth shots. That's it. Now try to figure out how, with a physical format that is meant to be flexibly horizontal or vertical - depending on your immediate need or desire, to position a camera, angle it so that it can be used conveniently, configure your software to be able to hard-disable it for things like government and medical practice use (privacy/confidentially issues) and sell that as a feature.
There is a good reason why nearly every portable computer has a webcam.
You might not think a webcam is a good idea, but Apple puts one on every pretty much every portable device it sells.
The security issue is specious - every laptop has a webcam.
The positioning issue is specious - both OEM and third-party stands are currently being sold to prop up the iPad for a variety of horizontal-viewing uses.
Impossible to understand how they could be so short-sighted.
I dunno - I think the choice to omit the "nasal cam" was a quite deliberate one. I would expect at least one add-on camera for the dock in the near future (ESP after OS4). And I would expect it to have a very important feature - the ability to swivel!
I dunno - I think the choice to omit the "nasal cam" was a quite deliberate one. I would expect at least one add-on camera for the dock in the near future (ESP after OS4). And I would expect it to have a very important feature - the ability to swivel!
LOL @ nasal cam. You have a good point, perhaps the implementation was always off in their concepts. It's also possible that it was part of the lowering costs and/or make it something to add in a future generation.
We really don't know and it seems silly for anyone to complain about it. I figure other tablets competing with the iPad will add one in a likely vain attempt to "one up" it. It'll be curious to see how they fare with a camera. The Notion Ink has one that swivels 180°.
There is nothing stopping anyone from adding a camera to the iPad right now. v3.0 allows access to the Dock Connector.
I dunno - I think the choice to omit the "nasal cam" was a quite deliberate one. I would expect at least one add-on camera for the dock in the near future (ESP after OS4). And I would expect it to have a very important feature - the ability to swivel!
It's a shame that Apple hasn't sold an external iSight in a while.
Getting this to work with the iPad would be nice.
http://www.tuaw.com/2009/07/07/road-...ving-one-away/
Or even this:
http://macdaddyworld.com/2008/01/12/...iew-iphonecam/
So now you have to choose what camp you're in. Either you stick with your camp which means you don't need a dual battery (which means it's not the best design after all) or you switch camps which means that the iPad isn't the ideal portable device becaue you can't use it like a netbook.
I'm just going by what you guys have been flaming about.
Personally I'll still buy a 2nd gen iPad and hope for a wireless keyboard solution made out of fabric or other non-hard-plastic material that I can fold up and use on the go.
But the angle is all wrong for typing too, and is all wrong for viewing unless it is propped up.
If folks are willing to buy special typing props and viewing props, why not speacial props for video conferenceing? You'd want two hands free, and you wouldn't want to shake the camera.
The viewing angle objection doesn't make any sense to me.
I have the iphone case that apple manufactures for typing and viewing. It does three positions very well horizontal/vertical and inclined like a keyboard. While in those positions it is rigid. It isn't very adjustable. It's possible that someone could come up with a less rigid stand for the ipad.
That being said I still think an external camera would garner more flexibility on small mobile devices like the ipad and iphone. Someone could potentially use the external camera on either device, thus eliminating the need for an extraneous front facing camera. I personally wouldn't purchase a camera for web conferencing but at least it would give folks like you who really want this functionality an option.
I think a lighter iPad would be better than 2 batteries. Most people on this board are saying they will use this device at home. If that's the case then recharging would be a snap. If you're at a cafe or wherever you can use the outlet to recharge if you plan on using it for more than 4 hours at a cafe. All of you said you wouldn't be using it for more than brief FaceBook and email moments anyway so going past a few hours on a single battery shouldn't be an issue. Right?
So now you have to choose what camp you're in. Either you stick with your camp which means you don't need a dual battery (which means it's not the best design after all) or you switch camps which means that the iPad isn't the ideal portable device becaue you can't use it like a netbook.
I'm just going by what you guys have been flaming about.
Personally I'll still buy a 2nd gen iPad and hope for a wireless keyboard solution made out of fabric or other non-hard-plastic material that I can fold up and use on the go.
For me the battery life of the device was one of the key selling points. Being able to use it for a full day without a charge is key for me. A huge part of the utility of this device is it's mobility. Having to strap it up to charge every couple hours would ruin it in my opinion.
But the huge battery is great
Isn't that the truth.
I have a iPhone with a data package I barely use close to my limit, but I can't tether and will be forced into a another 3 year long agreement. (Canada)
No thank you and the bottom line reason why I won't be getting one, not matter how good it MAY be.
i'm curious who your provider is. as far as i know tethering is included with most data plan in canada (for now).
The problem isn't the tethering from the provider. I was sure I read an Apple source quoted as saying you WON'T be able to tether the iPad. It's either buy the WiFi+3G package initially or you're out of luck.
Found link: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...nd_iphone.html
@Headrush69 - In your first post it seemed like you were saying you can't tether with your iPhone. Is that correct? And are you assuming the iPad will be the same?
Tethering is allowed by Fido and Rogers for the iPhone. Of course we won't know about the iPad until the 11th hour when our wonderful Canadian providers decided to tell us how great we have it with their terrible rate plans.
BLUETOOTH? How the hell are you going to get video transfer rates across Bluetooth? I mean, you would have to compress the HELL out of it.
I find a plugged-into-the-dock-connector's-USB-bus camera FAR more likely.
You do realize that BT 2.1EDR has a theoretical peak bandwidth of 3Mbit which is plenty for a decent quality video stream? And if the iPad supported BT 3.0HS (it might, dunno), it would have a peak speed of 24Mbit (this requires BT and WiFi tho).
So it is more than possible to get decent video streamed over BT.
I've been reading that the 256mb ram equipped iPad has regressed back to the problem that the iPhone 3G suffered from, namely Safari tabs being reloaded because the device has run out of RAM to keep them open in the background. If this is true, it's a crying shame, and as browsing is the main thing I would do with a portable device like this, it's simply out of bounds to me until Apple fix this. The reloading tabs really bugged the heck out of me on the iPhone 3G, and now that I have a 3GS, I simply won't tolerate this problem anymore.
Yup. The cost/benefit of early adopters. They get to use a nice device early but will suffer for it with early deficiencies. I'm surprised that Apple chose 256 MB RAM. One of the reasons to hold on a version and wait for the version 2 or 3. I'm sure part of it was to ensure an upgrade path over the next few years.
I'm very suspicious that 6 months from now, iPad gen 2 arrive with 512 MB RAM and 32, 64, 128 GB storage plus a webcam. iPad gen 1 is very much your typical gen 1 Apple product where Apple did everything they could reasonably do to pare down features to ship on time.
Yup. The cost/benefit of early adopters. They get to use a nice device early but will suffer for it with early deficiencies. I'm surprised that Apple chose 256 MB RAM. One of the reasons to hold on a version and wait for the version 2 or 3. I'm sure part of it was to ensure an upgrade path over the next few years.
I'm very suspicious that 6 months from now, iPad gen 2 arrive with 512 MB RAM and 32, 64, 128 GB storage plus a webcam. iPad gen 1 is very much your typical gen 1 Apple product where Apple did everything they could reasonably do to pare down features to ship on time.
I can understand why it happens. These devices are specified months/years in advance where I guess the expectation was that 256mb would be sufficient. To backtrack and add another 256mb of RAM would probably write off a few months worth of sales. This is where the V2 of the product steps in to correct the earlier mistakes.
What surprises me though is that Apple tripped up with this. I'd expect it from a company with very tight margins, but since Apple commands such a premium, I'd hope for them to conjure up something they consider 'sufficient', and then add a little bit extra just in case. The OS the iPad ended up with must be a little bit more bloated than Apple originally anticipated.
I can understand why it happens. These devices are specified months/years in advance where I guess the expectation was that 256mb would be sufficient. To backtrack and add another 256mb of RAM would probably write off a few months worth of sales. This is where the V2 of the product steps in to correct the earlier mistakes.
What surprises me though is that Apple tripped up with this. I'd expect it from a company with very tight margins, but since Apple commands such a premium, I'd hope for them to conjure up something they consider 'sufficient', and then add a little bit extra just in case. The OS the iPad ended up with must be a little bit more bloated than Apple originally anticipated.
There are plenty of reasons why they thought 256 MB RAM was adequate. It could have been Apple wanted to ship 4 to 6 months ago sometime November to January. If it shipped in Fall of 2009, it would have seemed fine. Any number of things could have delayed it.
Anyways, as a version 2 or 3 guy, waiting has it's benefits. 512 MB to 1 GB RAM, 128 to 256 GB storage and a web cam will be the sweetspot like the 32 GB iPhone 3GS. Everything will be more robust, apps better designed, content bountiful, and many bugs fixed.