It's rumors like these that cause problems for Apple. It's just not going to happen-- they can barely make enough of the model they have! -- but if enough people believe this it will start to depress sales and slow adoption. They're going to sell all the iPads they can build already, so it would be ridiculous to rev it again this year. Announce it in January so the developers can get on board then start selling it next March.
The killer app for me thus far on the iPad has been NetFlix. I will always pick up the iPad for something good to watch (if the lighting conditions are favorable; see below). Comics are also very good, as are newspapers and newsfeeds. Others will say games.
I'm not a fan of the glare screen however as it will reflect any light possible, and often gives me headaches. I would love to see a matte/antiglare version but I'm not holding my breath.
I would also like to see a way to get greater touchscreen sensitivity for art apps like Sketchbook. It seems that now the only way would be for someone to invent a bluetooth stylus that can echo pressure sensitivity readings to the software.
TenOne the maker of the Pogo stylus has been working on pressure sensitivity for the iPad. Here's the demo video using an iPad and they're saying they're hoping Apple would adopt it..
Accelerating their product cycle on the very hottest products would ensure copycats would have greater difficulty catching up, or simply shut them out entirely.
Bingo! The field has become cluttered. Several tablets are rumored to ship between now and Q1'11.
It doesn't surprise me that Apple might accelerate an iPad 2.
they do raise prices though, take the mac mini for example.
They didn't raise the price of the mini, they eliminated the lower speced model and dropped the price of the higher end model. The net effect may appear to be the raising of a price, but that's not what they did (the new Mini is an incredible value for what it is - although it is annoying to have lost a $500 entry level Mac)
Quote:
i think they're especially cautious about cannibalizing mac products.
To a point, sure - but not overly cautions. An overly cautious company would have never released the iPad because it would potentially cut into Notebook sales. An overly cautious company wouldn't refresh or outright replace successful products with new ones before their sale have peaked.
Apple may be many things, but overly cautious is not one of them
Quote:
while it is probably a halo effect right now, eventually people are most likely going to do most of thier computing on mobile devices.
Most assuredly. The vast majority of non-corporate users have general purpose computers now, not because they want them but because they are the only solution. Until the iPad, that is...
Quote:
i think apple can sustain higher prices (which are still a great value, eg competing tablets proposed that start around 1k) for a years before a reduced price will make a significant difference.
Misnomer - Apple doesn't have to sustain higher prices, just higher profits. Look at the latest iPods. At this point Apple has economies of scale and design that other manufacturers simply can't touch, and they cover price ranges from $45 on up.
Expect the exact same things to happen with iOS devices in the future.
Quote:
even at the moderate price points of today the ipad is hugely successful, and making another version before christmas would clinch apple's superiority in the tablet market. just imagine tens of millions of iOS devices activated and video chatting on christmas day, it would be a very significant moment for apple, and its servers.
Exactly. More importantly, as vendors like Qik add FaceTime support the ubiquity of FaceTime increases.
What potential exactly does the iPad have that would be "unlocked"? Talk about exaggerations.
Other than the camera, (which was planned form the start) there isn't anything the iPad can't already do that it has some kind of wild and crazy "potential" for. It will never be a competent portable computer for example without a complete change of form factor, but then it wouldn't be an iPad if it was a different size.
It would be better if the analysts stopped thinking of these as separate devices at all and started thinking of the platform.
I think the article's assessment is accurate. The iPad has barely gotten off the ground and the thing sells like hotcakes, despite the fact that there is no "it" app for the iPad (yet). Some apps have come close to "killer." I'd argue that the Korg iElectribe is a near-killer app for musicians. Art Studio is an impressive entry for artists. If there was a single app/feature upgrade for the iPad that could create rabid demand for an iPad 2 -- and I doubt there will be only one -- it seems FaceTime+camera could be it.
They didn't raise the price of the mini, they eliminated the lower speced model and dropped the price of the higher end model. The net effect may appear to be the raising of a price, but that's not what they did...
While cutting the RAM in half and using a slower processor. Keep thinking positive though.
What a lot of BS/hype. What potential exactly does the iPad have that would be "unlocked"?
What a complete lack of imagination! WIth a camera, all sorts of new apps and features become possible. Same way GPS 'unlocked' a slew of new products, same way the gyroscope either enhanced products or enabled new ones.
A camera isn't just about Facetime, and you don't even have to have much of an imagination to see what kind of apps an iPad camera would enable. All anyone has to do is look at apps requiring cameras which work on iPhones, but not on iPads.
"Time-equipped successors are said to be tracking for an introduction no later than the first quarter of next year."
I'd say in time for Christmas would be a better target if possible.
Apple is too smart to introduce a new iPad before Christmas. They are still selling them pretty much as quickly as they can be manufactured. Apple has always used high buying seasons (back to school, Christmas) to sell high volumes of older models. The occasion creates the sale, no new products required. Then they create buzz outside buying seasons with new products. The release of the new product creates the sale, no occasion needed.
The MacBook Pro lineup will be refreshed in October and that will be it for hardware until at least February of 2011.
People can diss the camera, but it has a lot of value for many. My wife's brother loves 13,000 miles away and video chats are important.
And when kids go away to college parents are going to want to have video chat when possible.
Or the kids get married and have a baby. You better believe that the grandparents will want to have video chat when they live in a different town.
I can see a lot of value - to the point that it is a critical feature for me to reach for the wallet.
The only question I see is if I can buy my wife one for Christmas.
Yean I'm with you. My son is in the Navy in Utah at present we VC a lot with our Mac's
He's pregnate now and I love to show the baby when it comes, around the coffee shop
to all my friends. Or lay up in bed and read and Face whatever you call it. I've been waiting for the camera, so, ah hope......ah hope...ah hope.....Xmas. All I see is the fun side of it. I'm retired.....screw the business application of the iPad.
Accelerating their product cycle on the very hottest products would ensure copycats would have greater difficulty catching up, or simply shut them out entirely.
This is true, but I think the iPad's yearly refresh cycle is probably fast enough. Why? Because refreshing the hardware is the easy part. Writing an all-new OS takes many years. Apple has worked for many years on developing multi-touch for different-sized screens, and it's unlikely that any other company could do it any faster.
It's clear that Windows 7 and Android are simply not suitable for a "tablet" format. Proof being that Microsoft is starting all over again with Windows Phone 7 and Hugo Barra, director of products for mobile at Google, is quoted as saying "...Froyo is not optimised for use on tablets. If you want Android market on that platform, the apps just wouldn't run..."
Google's best way out is to go with Chrome OS from now on. Especially considering that the Oracle lawsuit against Android's bogus Java implementation has merit, and there is legal precedent (Microsoft vs. Sun resulting in Microsoft settling for $20 million out of court). Microsoft's best way out is to somehow leverage Windows Phone 7 into a tablet-format OS. If it's successful on phones. And that's a big 'if'. KIN looms large in its absence.
I still think that announcing new iPads shortly *after* CES is the best way to go. All through CES, the media will be speculating on what Apple will announce. Which means that any iPad-wannabe products announced at CES will be compared with the old iPad and will be upstaged throughout CES by the impending Apple news. Also, announcing the new iPad after CES will instantly wipe all news of iPad-wannabes off the "front pages" thanks to the media's short attention span.
And let's not forget what Apple does with the iPhone every year. They keep the low-end version of the previous year's model around and drop its price. Doing the same thing with the iPad would be a devastating blow to the wannabes, whose only selling point will be low price. BOOM.
What a complete lack of imagination! WIth a camera, all sorts of new apps and features become possible.
Agree. If you do actually lug your iPad around with you, you could in theory take panoramic photos, shoot HD videos, navigate with enhanced reality apps, and all kinds of things you can't do with iPad now. Adding cameras on both sides of the iPad is a no-brainer. 2011 model for sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Snitch
A camera isn't just about Facetime, and you don't even have to have much of an imagination to see what kind of apps an iPad camera would enable. All anyone has to do is look at apps requiring cameras which work on iPhones, but not on iPads.
Disagree. I think FaceTime is a hugely important feature. It adds emotional value to the iPhone and now iPod touch. It enhances the concept of touch-based computing, which originally started as a transition from "personal computing" to "intimate computing." There is no more mouse or stylus between you and your apps + data. A layer of complexity is gone. It feels more personal and that's what makes it compelling.
Now there is one less thing between you and whoever you want to talk to, because you see them and they see you. It's almost as "high bandwidth" as standing there and talking to them. And that's extremely compelling.
Apple's iPhone ads used to be all about this app and that app and wow, you can also make phone calls. Now they're all about how iPhone 4 can make your life better, and iPad ads are all about apps. Next year, when iPad gets FaceTime, all iOS product ads will feature FaceTime. Except for Apple TV of course. But soon enough it too will get, you guessed it, apps.
Given the success of the social networking sites, it seems logical that giving people a new way to communicate would be popular.
Personally, I have a camera on my iMac and a fast Internet connection, and the ability to call iPhones from it would be great, so I am most looking forward to the Mac app. But the sight of people having video calls on a tablet on their lap is a sight, like something out of a sci-fi movie.
I honestly don't think a camera on the iPad is that big a deal. I feel no need for it. From my pretending with my 32GB Wi-Fi iPad, taking pictures would be a bit unwieldy. Having a video conference would only be comfortable if you had a stand. Frankly, video conferencing holds no sway over me. If I want it, it's right there on my iMac. I don't need to video chat with someone on the go.
The size of the iPad is great for many uses, but I'm left completely unconvinced with its use as a camera. Frankly, aside from making the iPad lighter, slimmer and faster I can't think of anything hardware wise that I need or want from a future iPad. It's pretty darn perfect as it is (hardware wise).
Bingo! The field has become cluttered. Several tablets are rumored to ship between now and Q1'11.
It doesn't surprise me that Apple might accelerate an iPad 2.
How can the field be cluttered when you state the other tablets are rumored? If they're not available, the market can hardly be considered cluttered. Also just because there may be a lot of tablets on the market does not mean that they are all viable competitors. Sales and market penetration would have to be taken into consideration.
In short, stating the tablet market is cluttered is a very premature statement.
This is true, but I think the iPad's yearly refresh cycle is probably fast enough. Why? Because refreshing the hardware is the easy part. Writing an all-new OS takes many years. Apple has worked for many years on developing multi-touch for different-sized screens, and it's unlikely that any other company could do it any faster.
It's clear that Windows 7 and Android are simply not suitable for a "tablet" format. Proof being that Microsoft is starting all over again with Windows Phone 7 and Hugo Barra, director of products for mobile at Google, is quoted as saying "...Froyo is not optimised for use on tablets. If you want Android market on that platform, the apps just wouldn't run..."
Google's best way out is to go with Chrome OS from now on. Especially considering that the Oracle lawsuit against Android's bogus Java implementation has merit, and there is legal precedent (Microsoft vs. Sun resulting in Microsoft settling for $20 million out of court). Microsoft's best way out is to somehow leverage Windows Phone 7 into a tablet-format OS. If it's successful on phones. And that's a big 'if'. KIN looms large in its absence.
I still think that announcing new iPads shortly *after* CES is the best way to go. All through CES, the media will be speculating on what Apple will announce. Which means that any iPad-wannabe products announced at CES will be compared with the old iPad and will be upstaged throughout CES by the impending Apple news. Also, announcing the new iPad after CES will instantly wipe all news of iPad-wannabes off the "front pages" thanks to the media's short attention span.
And let's not forget what Apple does with the iPhone every year. They keep the low-end version of the previous year's model around and drop its price. Doing the same thing with the iPad would be a devastating blow to the wannabes, whose only selling point will be low price. BOOM.
I think the holiday lineup is already in place for iPad, iPods, iPhone. The thing that could / should be fleshed out is ATV -- with flagship games, apps, and SDK enhancements. I believe that will happen in November.
Agree. If you do actually lug your iPad around with you, you could in theory take panoramic photos, shoot HD videos, navigate with enhanced reality apps, and all kinds of things you can't do with iPad now. Adding cameras on both sides of the iPad is a no-brainer. 2011 model for sure.
Disagree. I think FaceTime is a hugely important feature. It adds emotional value to the iPhone and now iPod touch. It enhances the concept of touch-based computing, which originally started as a transition from "personal computing" to "intimate computing." There is no more mouse or stylus between you and your apps + data. A layer of complexity is gone. It feels more personal and that's what makes it compelling.
Now there is one less thing between you and whoever you want to talk to, because you see them and they see you. It's almost as "high bandwidth" as standing there and talking to them. And that's extremely compelling.
Apple's iPhone ads used to be all about this app and that app and wow, you can also make phone calls. Now they're all about how iPhone 4 can make your life better, and iPad ads are all about apps. Next year, when iPad gets FaceTime, all iOS product ads will feature FaceTime. Except for Apple TV of course. But soon enough it too will get, you guessed it, apps.
If you are out and about with your iPad, you are, likely, carrying your iPhone... You can easily use the iPhone's camera for most of the tasks you mention.
FaceTime on the iPad could be software only-- using BT or the CCC to provide the camera at your end.
The thing is... a camera, like that in the iPhone, wouldn't add much capability for anything but closeups. A more robust camera with optical zoom, etc. would be superior for panoramas... The iPad is too thin to support optical zoom... An external camera would be better.
If the release of a new model means we'll finally see refurbished first-gen iPads in the store, great. Personally, I couldn't care less about Facetime.
You mean Apple is going to build FaceTime into it's new iPad models with a forward facing camera ... Gee, who on Earth would have seen that one coming?!?
Reporting the obvious makes one about as psychic as Carnac the Magnificent (all my Johnny Carson fans).
The fact that Apple is putting FaceTime in the iPad isn't the interesting part. What is interesting is that Apple might break its usual yearly update cycle and release the 2nd gen sooner.
Comments
The killer app for me thus far on the iPad has been NetFlix. I will always pick up the iPad for something good to watch (if the lighting conditions are favorable; see below). Comics are also very good, as are newspapers and newsfeeds. Others will say games.
I'm not a fan of the glare screen however as it will reflect any light possible, and often gives me headaches. I would love to see a matte/antiglare version but I'm not holding my breath.
I would also like to see a way to get greater touchscreen sensitivity for art apps like Sketchbook. It seems that now the only way would be for someone to invent a bluetooth stylus that can echo pressure sensitivity readings to the software.
TenOne the maker of the Pogo stylus has been working on pressure sensitivity for the iPad. Here's the demo video using an iPad and they're saying they're hoping Apple would adopt it..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgTcy...layer_embedded
Accelerating their product cycle on the very hottest products would ensure copycats would have greater difficulty catching up, or simply shut them out entirely.
Bingo! The field has become cluttered. Several tablets are rumored to ship between now and Q1'11.
It doesn't surprise me that Apple might accelerate an iPad 2.
they do raise prices though, take the mac mini for example.
They didn't raise the price of the mini, they eliminated the lower speced model and dropped the price of the higher end model. The net effect may appear to be the raising of a price, but that's not what they did (the new Mini is an incredible value for what it is - although it is annoying to have lost a $500 entry level Mac)
i think they're especially cautious about cannibalizing mac products.
To a point, sure - but not overly cautions. An overly cautious company would have never released the iPad because it would potentially cut into Notebook sales. An overly cautious company wouldn't refresh or outright replace successful products with new ones before their sale have peaked.
Apple may be many things, but overly cautious is not one of them
while it is probably a halo effect right now, eventually people are most likely going to do most of thier computing on mobile devices.
Most assuredly. The vast majority of non-corporate users have general purpose computers now, not because they want them but because they are the only solution. Until the iPad, that is...
i think apple can sustain higher prices (which are still a great value, eg competing tablets proposed that start around 1k) for a years before a reduced price will make a significant difference.
Misnomer - Apple doesn't have to sustain higher prices, just higher profits. Look at the latest iPods. At this point Apple has economies of scale and design that other manufacturers simply can't touch, and they cover price ranges from $45 on up.
Expect the exact same things to happen with iOS devices in the future.
even at the moderate price points of today the ipad is hugely successful, and making another version before christmas would clinch apple's superiority in the tablet market. just imagine tens of millions of iOS devices activated and video chatting on christmas day, it would be a very significant moment for apple, and its servers.
Exactly. More importantly, as vendors like Qik add FaceTime support the ubiquity of FaceTime increases.
What a lot of BS/hype.
What potential exactly does the iPad have that would be "unlocked"? Talk about exaggerations.
Other than the camera, (which was planned form the start) there isn't anything the iPad can't already do that it has some kind of wild and crazy "potential" for. It will never be a competent portable computer for example without a complete change of form factor, but then it wouldn't be an iPad if it was a different size.
It would be better if the analysts stopped thinking of these as separate devices at all and started thinking of the platform.
I think the article's assessment is accurate. The iPad has barely gotten off the ground and the thing sells like hotcakes, despite the fact that there is no "it" app for the iPad (yet). Some apps have come close to "killer." I'd argue that the Korg iElectribe is a near-killer app for musicians. Art Studio is an impressive entry for artists. If there was a single app/feature upgrade for the iPad that could create rabid demand for an iPad 2 -- and I doubt there will be only one -- it seems FaceTime+camera could be it.
All the things that make Facetime work on the new touch or iPhone. Will they only work with the
new hardware? Or is it something that could work on all the old iPods and iPhones?
They didn't raise the price of the mini, they eliminated the lower speced model and dropped the price of the higher end model. The net effect may appear to be the raising of a price, but that's not what they did...
What a lot of BS/hype. What potential exactly does the iPad have that would be "unlocked"?
What a complete lack of imagination! WIth a camera, all sorts of new apps and features become possible. Same way GPS 'unlocked' a slew of new products, same way the gyroscope either enhanced products or enabled new ones.
A camera isn't just about Facetime, and you don't even have to have much of an imagination to see what kind of apps an iPad camera would enable. All anyone has to do is look at apps requiring cameras which work on iPhones, but not on iPads.
"Time-equipped successors are said to be tracking for an introduction no later than the first quarter of next year."
I'd say in time for Christmas would be a better target if possible.
Apple is too smart to introduce a new iPad before Christmas. They are still selling them pretty much as quickly as they can be manufactured. Apple has always used high buying seasons (back to school, Christmas) to sell high volumes of older models. The occasion creates the sale, no new products required. Then they create buzz outside buying seasons with new products. The release of the new product creates the sale, no occasion needed.
The MacBook Pro lineup will be refreshed in October and that will be it for hardware until at least February of 2011.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...ews_technology
Looks like it's time for Apple to loosen those AT&T ties.
People can diss the camera, but it has a lot of value for many. My wife's brother loves 13,000 miles away and video chats are important.
And when kids go away to college parents are going to want to have video chat when possible.
Or the kids get married and have a baby. You better believe that the grandparents will want to have video chat when they live in a different town.
I can see a lot of value - to the point that it is a critical feature for me to reach for the wallet.
The only question I see is if I can buy my wife one for Christmas.
Yean I'm with you. My son is in the Navy in Utah at present we VC a lot with our Mac's
He's pregnate now and I love to show the baby when it comes, around the coffee shop
to all my friends. Or lay up in bed and read and Face whatever you call it. I've been waiting for the camera, so, ah hope......ah hope...ah hope.....Xmas. All I see is the fun side of it. I'm retired.....screw the business application of the iPad.
Accelerating their product cycle on the very hottest products would ensure copycats would have greater difficulty catching up, or simply shut them out entirely.
This is true, but I think the iPad's yearly refresh cycle is probably fast enough. Why? Because refreshing the hardware is the easy part. Writing an all-new OS takes many years. Apple has worked for many years on developing multi-touch for different-sized screens, and it's unlikely that any other company could do it any faster.
It's clear that Windows 7 and Android are simply not suitable for a "tablet" format. Proof being that Microsoft is starting all over again with Windows Phone 7 and Hugo Barra, director of products for mobile at Google, is quoted as saying "...Froyo is not optimised for use on tablets. If you want Android market on that platform, the apps just wouldn't run..."
Google's best way out is to go with Chrome OS from now on. Especially considering that the Oracle lawsuit against Android's bogus Java implementation has merit, and there is legal precedent (Microsoft vs. Sun resulting in Microsoft settling for $20 million out of court). Microsoft's best way out is to somehow leverage Windows Phone 7 into a tablet-format OS. If it's successful on phones. And that's a big 'if'. KIN looms large in its absence.
I still think that announcing new iPads shortly *after* CES is the best way to go. All through CES, the media will be speculating on what Apple will announce. Which means that any iPad-wannabe products announced at CES will be compared with the old iPad and will be upstaged throughout CES by the impending Apple news. Also, announcing the new iPad after CES will instantly wipe all news of iPad-wannabes off the "front pages" thanks to the media's short attention span.
And let's not forget what Apple does with the iPhone every year. They keep the low-end version of the previous year's model around and drop its price. Doing the same thing with the iPad would be a devastating blow to the wannabes, whose only selling point will be low price. BOOM.
What a complete lack of imagination! WIth a camera, all sorts of new apps and features become possible.
Agree. If you do actually lug your iPad around with you, you could in theory take panoramic photos, shoot HD videos, navigate with enhanced reality apps, and all kinds of things you can't do with iPad now. Adding cameras on both sides of the iPad is a no-brainer. 2011 model for sure.
A camera isn't just about Facetime, and you don't even have to have much of an imagination to see what kind of apps an iPad camera would enable. All anyone has to do is look at apps requiring cameras which work on iPhones, but not on iPads.
Disagree. I think FaceTime is a hugely important feature. It adds emotional value to the iPhone and now iPod touch. It enhances the concept of touch-based computing, which originally started as a transition from "personal computing" to "intimate computing." There is no more mouse or stylus between you and your apps + data. A layer of complexity is gone. It feels more personal and that's what makes it compelling.
Now there is one less thing between you and whoever you want to talk to, because you see them and they see you. It's almost as "high bandwidth" as standing there and talking to them. And that's extremely compelling.
Apple's iPhone ads used to be all about this app and that app and wow, you can also make phone calls. Now they're all about how iPhone 4 can make your life better, and iPad ads are all about apps. Next year, when iPad gets FaceTime, all iOS product ads will feature FaceTime. Except for Apple TV of course. But soon enough it too will get, you guessed it, apps.
Personally, I have a camera on my iMac and a fast Internet connection, and the ability to call iPhones from it would be great, so I am most looking forward to the Mac app. But the sight of people having video calls on a tablet on their lap is a sight, like something out of a sci-fi movie.
The size of the iPad is great for many uses, but I'm left completely unconvinced with its use as a camera. Frankly, aside from making the iPad lighter, slimmer and faster I can't think of anything hardware wise that I need or want from a future iPad. It's pretty darn perfect as it is (hardware wise).
Bingo! The field has become cluttered. Several tablets are rumored to ship between now and Q1'11.
It doesn't surprise me that Apple might accelerate an iPad 2.
How can the field be cluttered when you state the other tablets are rumored? If they're not available, the market can hardly be considered cluttered. Also just because there may be a lot of tablets on the market does not mean that they are all viable competitors. Sales and market penetration would have to be taken into consideration.
In short, stating the tablet market is cluttered is a very premature statement.
This is true, but I think the iPad's yearly refresh cycle is probably fast enough. Why? Because refreshing the hardware is the easy part. Writing an all-new OS takes many years. Apple has worked for many years on developing multi-touch for different-sized screens, and it's unlikely that any other company could do it any faster.
It's clear that Windows 7 and Android are simply not suitable for a "tablet" format. Proof being that Microsoft is starting all over again with Windows Phone 7 and Hugo Barra, director of products for mobile at Google, is quoted as saying "...Froyo is not optimised for use on tablets. If you want Android market on that platform, the apps just wouldn't run..."
Google's best way out is to go with Chrome OS from now on. Especially considering that the Oracle lawsuit against Android's bogus Java implementation has merit, and there is legal precedent (Microsoft vs. Sun resulting in Microsoft settling for $20 million out of court). Microsoft's best way out is to somehow leverage Windows Phone 7 into a tablet-format OS. If it's successful on phones. And that's a big 'if'. KIN looms large in its absence.
I still think that announcing new iPads shortly *after* CES is the best way to go. All through CES, the media will be speculating on what Apple will announce. Which means that any iPad-wannabe products announced at CES will be compared with the old iPad and will be upstaged throughout CES by the impending Apple news. Also, announcing the new iPad after CES will instantly wipe all news of iPad-wannabes off the "front pages" thanks to the media's short attention span.
And let's not forget what Apple does with the iPhone every year. They keep the low-end version of the previous year's model around and drop its price. Doing the same thing with the iPad would be a devastating blow to the wannabes, whose only selling point will be low price. BOOM.
I think the holiday lineup is already in place for iPad, iPods, iPhone. The thing that could / should be fleshed out is ATV -- with flagship games, apps, and SDK enhancements. I believe that will happen in November.
.
Agree. If you do actually lug your iPad around with you, you could in theory take panoramic photos, shoot HD videos, navigate with enhanced reality apps, and all kinds of things you can't do with iPad now. Adding cameras on both sides of the iPad is a no-brainer. 2011 model for sure.
Disagree. I think FaceTime is a hugely important feature. It adds emotional value to the iPhone and now iPod touch. It enhances the concept of touch-based computing, which originally started as a transition from "personal computing" to "intimate computing." There is no more mouse or stylus between you and your apps + data. A layer of complexity is gone. It feels more personal and that's what makes it compelling.
Now there is one less thing between you and whoever you want to talk to, because you see them and they see you. It's almost as "high bandwidth" as standing there and talking to them. And that's extremely compelling.
Apple's iPhone ads used to be all about this app and that app and wow, you can also make phone calls. Now they're all about how iPhone 4 can make your life better, and iPad ads are all about apps. Next year, when iPad gets FaceTime, all iOS product ads will feature FaceTime. Except for Apple TV of course. But soon enough it too will get, you guessed it, apps.
If you are out and about with your iPad, you are, likely, carrying your iPhone... You can easily use the iPhone's camera for most of the tasks you mention.
FaceTime on the iPad could be software only-- using BT or the CCC to provide the camera at your end.
The thing is... a camera, like that in the iPhone, wouldn't add much capability for anything but closeups. A more robust camera with optical zoom, etc. would be superior for panoramas... The iPad is too thin to support optical zoom... An external camera would be better.
.
You mean Apple is going to build FaceTime into it's new iPad models with a forward facing camera ... Gee, who on Earth would have seen that one coming?!?
Reporting the obvious makes one about as psychic as Carnac the Magnificent (all my Johnny Carson fans).
The fact that Apple is putting FaceTime in the iPad isn't the interesting part. What is interesting is that Apple might break its usual yearly update cycle and release the 2nd gen sooner.