The rounded edges now level out into a completely flat surface (so the iPod lays flat). This is not the case for the third generation iPod touch and first generation iPad.
The current iPad has a sharp edge but a rounded back surface. Apple took this design cue from the iMac (so the consumer would think of it more as a computer than an oversized iPod touch).
Being an electronics engineer, I never understood why Apple (or anyone) hasn't yet put just a single high quality camera in a phone or iPad and use it for both front & back viewing.
One good camera, pointing UP and buried internally near the upper edge. A movable mirror that can pivot 90 degrees and a glass aperture on either side of the mirror, one for the front and one for the rear. The camera points to the mirror and when in one position it gets a view out the front, and when the mirror is in the other position the camera gets its view out the back. Another big benefit is that it would make auto-focus and zoom much easier to do and more powerful since the front-to-back dimensions of the camera could be much greater, needed for high zoom and wide ranging focus.
... just early morning rambling... carry on.
The prism lens element solution you tout is something I thought about also. It has several weakness, alignment being the first. It is difficult to maintain the alignment and avoid the optical aberration that come with having another set of elements for viewing front/back. It is also a place where there would be at least the potential for mechanical wear when swapping from one position to the other which could end up not performing well after a fair amount of use. I think in general the move to static parts is a move toward less maintenance and less expensive to construct and test. Although do-able I think the cost/performance ratio ends up flipped over when you add all that is necessary to maintain alignment and move the optics to see with the front or back periscope.
I am not a professional with optics nor am I a manufacturing engineer - just observations with products I have used.
The speaker is ALREADY stereo. They're both in the same place, likely stemming the "wide-range" phrase in the rumor.
I checked the iFixit teardown and you're right that there two separate speakers for left and right, which makes it even more retarded that both have their sound directed out of the same hole - that effectively results in mono sound!
Also what the hell does "wide-range" mean anyway? Dynamic range? Frequency response? Physical distance the sound waves travel?
Being an electronics engineer, I never understood why Apple (or anyone) hasn't yet put just a single high quality camera in a phone or iPad and use it for both front & back viewing.
One good camera, pointing UP and buried internally near the upper edge. A movable mirror that can pivot 90 degrees and a glass aperture on either side of the mirror, one for the front and one for the rear. The camera points to the mirror and when in one position it gets a view out the front, and when the mirror is in the other position the camera gets its view out the back. Another big benefit is that it would make auto-focus and zoom much easier to do and more powerful since the front-to-back dimensions of the camera could be much greater, needed for high zoom and wide ranging focus.
... just early morning rambling... carry on.
I thought we as a 'whole' have learned about 'moving parts'....
In fact, I was very disappointed when Apple moved from the iPhone 3G to the iPhone 4 because the previous model always felt comfortable in my hand.
The hard edges of the iPhone 4 are not comfortable to hold at all.
Apple in fact has altered its recent products in order have a very attractive and cool look, but at the cost of ergonomics.
The hard edges of the recent MacBook Pro and the iPhone 4 are not fun to carry and hold.
Here we go again, i fear.
I too like the back of my 3GS and iPad. I remember when Jobs presented the original iphone. In his keynote address, he took the time to mention all the work Apple did to get the curves just right so it feels good in your hand. When they came out with the iPhone 4, I was surprised at the new case. It looked like a box of Good & Plenty. Not as elegant as the 3G and 3GS IMO.
I bought the ipad the day they came out. Overall I'm very satisfied with it. Two minor complaints though. It still loses connection with my wifi and I get a "Connecting" pop up once an hour or so. The second is I wish I could turn off the cut and paste capability. While its occasionally useful, all too often my fingers accidentally tap a web page while reading it and the page pauses and highlights in blue as if I want to copy or cut and paste. Shrinking the black bezel down any more and I think more people would complain about this.
Regardless, I'm planning to buy 3 iPad 2s so my two kids and I can communicate via face time.
That would be a really great conspiracy theory, if not for the fact that Apple makes a case for the iPad. (And they sell a boatload of them, too, at a great profit.)
Thompson
The history of the iPod and iPhone strongly suggest that I'm correct. iPad 2 will be a slightly different size than iPad 1 and, for a while, the only place to get a properly fitting case will be Apple themselves.
Apple has just taken their strategy to the next level by having an "approved" case that they believe complements the iPad and makes them even more money. They still hate most third party cases and discourage their use.
There's a few MILLION people out there that disagree with you...
I don't think people buy the iPhone 4 because it feels good in the hand. They buy on looks, hype, coolness, performance, etc. They buy it because it's arguably the best smartphone on the market and is much better in all the non-ergonomic ways than the model it replaced. People are willing to put up with a lot of little annoyances in order to have the best or coolest accessory.
Comments
Except the iPod Touch does not have a flat back, it's curved!!
That's not true:
http://images.apple.com/ipodtouch/de...ks20100901.jpg
The rounded edges now level out into a completely flat surface (so the iPod lays flat). This is not the case for the third generation iPod touch and first generation iPad.
The current iPad has a sharp edge but a rounded back surface. Apple took this design cue from the iMac (so the consumer would think of it more as a computer than an oversized iPod touch).
Being an electronics engineer, I never understood why Apple (or anyone) hasn't yet put just a single high quality camera in a phone or iPad and use it for both front & back viewing.
One good camera, pointing UP and buried internally near the upper edge. A movable mirror that can pivot 90 degrees and a glass aperture on either side of the mirror, one for the front and one for the rear. The camera points to the mirror and when in one position it gets a view out the front, and when the mirror is in the other position the camera gets its view out the back. Another big benefit is that it would make auto-focus and zoom much easier to do and more powerful since the front-to-back dimensions of the camera could be much greater, needed for high zoom and wide ranging focus.
... just early morning rambling... carry on.
The prism lens element solution you tout is something I thought about also. It has several weakness, alignment being the first. It is difficult to maintain the alignment and avoid the optical aberration that come with having another set of elements for viewing front/back. It is also a place where there would be at least the potential for mechanical wear when swapping from one position to the other which could end up not performing well after a fair amount of use. I think in general the move to static parts is a move toward less maintenance and less expensive to construct and test. Although do-able I think the cost/performance ratio ends up flipped over when you add all that is necessary to maintain alignment and move the optics to see with the front or back periscope.
I am not a professional with optics nor am I a manufacturing engineer - just observations with products I have used.
Peace all.
The speaker is ALREADY stereo. They're both in the same place, likely stemming the "wide-range" phrase in the rumor.
I checked the iFixit teardown and you're right that there two separate speakers for left and right, which makes it even more retarded that both have their sound directed out of the same hole - that effectively results in mono sound!
Also what the hell does "wide-range" mean anyway? Dynamic range? Frequency response? Physical distance the sound waves travel?
I actually LOVE the curved feel of the iPad.
It is VERY comfortable to hold, just too heavy.
In fact, I was very disappointed when Apple moved from the iPhone 3G to the iPhone 4 because the previous model always felt comfortable in my hand.
The hard edges of the iPhone 4 are not comfortable to hold at all.
Apple in fact has altered its recent products in order have a very attractive and cool look, but at the cost of ergonomics.
The hard edges of the recent MacBook Pro and the iPhone 4 are not fun to carry and hold.
Here we go again, i fear.
There's a few MILLION people out there that disagree with you...
Being an electronics engineer, I never understood why Apple (or anyone) hasn't yet put just a single high quality camera in a phone or iPad and use it for both front & back viewing.
One good camera, pointing UP and buried internally near the upper edge. A movable mirror that can pivot 90 degrees and a glass aperture on either side of the mirror, one for the front and one for the rear. The camera points to the mirror and when in one position it gets a view out the front, and when the mirror is in the other position the camera gets its view out the back. Another big benefit is that it would make auto-focus and zoom much easier to do and more powerful since the front-to-back dimensions of the camera could be much greater, needed for high zoom and wide ranging focus.
... just early morning rambling... carry on.
I thought we as a 'whole' have learned about 'moving parts'....
I actually LOVE the curved feel of the iPad.
It is VERY comfortable to hold, just too heavy.
In fact, I was very disappointed when Apple moved from the iPhone 3G to the iPhone 4 because the previous model always felt comfortable in my hand.
The hard edges of the iPhone 4 are not comfortable to hold at all.
Apple in fact has altered its recent products in order have a very attractive and cool look, but at the cost of ergonomics.
The hard edges of the recent MacBook Pro and the iPhone 4 are not fun to carry and hold.
Here we go again, i fear.
I too like the back of my 3GS and iPad. I remember when Jobs presented the original iphone. In his keynote address, he took the time to mention all the work Apple did to get the curves just right so it feels good in your hand. When they came out with the iPhone 4, I was surprised at the new case. It looked like a box of Good & Plenty. Not as elegant as the 3G and 3GS IMO.
I bought the ipad the day they came out. Overall I'm very satisfied with it. Two minor complaints though. It still loses connection with my wifi and I get a "Connecting" pop up once an hour or so. The second is I wish I could turn off the cut and paste capability. While its occasionally useful, all too often my fingers accidentally tap a web page while reading it and the page pauses and highlights in blue as if I want to copy or cut and paste. Shrinking the black bezel down any more and I think more people would complain about this.
Regardless, I'm planning to buy 3 iPad 2s so my two kids and I can communicate via face time.
That would be a really great conspiracy theory, if not for the fact that Apple makes a case for the iPad. (And they sell a boatload of them, too, at a great profit.)
Thompson
The history of the iPod and iPhone strongly suggest that I'm correct. iPad 2 will be a slightly different size than iPad 1 and, for a while, the only place to get a properly fitting case will be Apple themselves.
Apple has just taken their strategy to the next level by having an "approved" case that they believe complements the iPad and makes them even more money. They still hate most third party cases and discourage their use.
There's a few MILLION people out there that disagree with you...
I don't think people buy the iPhone 4 because it feels good in the hand. They buy on looks, hype, coolness, performance, etc. They buy it because it's arguably the best smartphone on the market and is much better in all the non-ergonomic ways than the model it replaced. People are willing to put up with a lot of little annoyances in order to have the best or coolest accessory.