At one stage during the development the iPad may have had a webcam or camera of some sort.
Read the news article here: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/02/apple-ipad-may-ship-with-webcam/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wired%2Findex+%28Wired%3A+Index+3+%28Top+Stories+2%29%29
I seriously doubt this. In my opinion it's most likely to be a light sensors.
What do you think?
So is defending an inferior product to the death.
Flash is an inferior product and the sooner this proprietary software is replaced by the web standard html5 the better. Apple is putting pressure on lazy web developers to actually embrace the standards instead of taking the easy route.
So does this apply to the iPhone as well then... Will it be able to display everything once HTML5 becomes the standard and Flash dies?
Flash is an inferior product and the sooner this proprietary software is replaced by the web standard html5 the better. Apple is putting pressure on lazy web developers to actually embrace the standards instead of taking the easy route.
Oh excellent, so in 10 years once Flash finally ceases to exist, we can all look back at the current iPhone OS and thank it copiously for removing such an archaic format from our lives 👍
Oh excellent, so in 10 years once Flash finally ceases to exist, we can all look back at the current iPhone OS and thank it copiously for removing such an archaic format from our lives 👍
Yes. Good huh!![]()
I thought you bought another one when they came out with one small functionality upgrade in a year, you know, like EA Sports games.This is what Apple do best - they create a device you don't need to buy, and then go about trying to put you off buying it with a huge price tag. And then of course you buy one, followed by another when you inevitably drop it and the screen breaks.
If someonejustwants an e-reader,
the iPad is likely at the bottom of their list.
Did I say it was?That's really it?
Last I checked most of the Get a Mac ads don't really say anything about why Macs are better.An advertising campaign based on trying to convince people that their system is actually more user friendly and intuitive than what's been the only option for most of the past decade and a half?
And Microsoft has been raked over the coals for it for over 10 years now.Maybe it's arrogant, but it's certainly not any more arrogant than the way Microsoft has been running its business.
And the worthwhile ones coming out even later. We already know there is camera support in both the body and the SDK, so you can bet safely future models will include at least a camera, and probably some other stuff that's not in there now.Can't wait for people to run out and buy one only to find out the only semi-worthwhile ones don't come out till later in the month.![]()
I'd been seeing jokes about this thing for months now, and I asked my iPhone-loving friends about it a couple weeks ago. They said "It's real." I thought they were joking but it turns out they were right. The iPad is real. I fell to the floor laughing.Should have launched it on April fools day.
Should have launched it on April fools day.
One week till launch.
Im going to go out on a very unpopular branch here and say, that having thought about this for quite a while, and from a totally objective non-Apple-fanboy viewpoint, in five years this will probably be seen as the most important user interface development since the original GUI. Ill even be wreckless enough to say that this will be more important than the iPhone in terms of changing its respective industry.
Why? Its all about abstraction. Most of us here, especially people in this thread who care about these kinds of things, are tech-savvy. But 99% of people arent, and theres no good reason why they should have to be to benefit from technology. If you truly sit down and think about it from a non-techy point of view, computers nowadays fail at delivering seamless experiences for users. Example: Mac OS X is often lauded for how easy it is to install smaller shareware/freeware programs usually you open a disk image, drag the application to the Applications folder, then eject the disk image. It may seem dead simple to you and me, but in reality its needlessly complex for most people (my mom had to ask me the first time she had to install something using this method). The idea of a disk image is a weird concept, the idea of installing something by copying it is a weird concept, and then ejecting a non-existent disk and having to throw away a .dmg file? I mean seriously, is there anything intuitive about that? Ive seen people run applications straight from disk images because they didnt know what to do with them. On the other hand, on an iPad, you click Install and then it gets installed. Done.
I mean, really, I think all semi-techies take way too much for granted how familiar we are with computers. Just consider for a second how much the most basic of GUI operationsthe file systemscares most people. How many people do you know who pretty much only use the desktop for organizing their files? Thats because its a physical, intuitive abstraction that they can latch onto. The rest of the file system is just scary innards to them. It doesnt matter that we have nice names for these folders like Documents or Movies many people are convinced that if they mess with anything outside of the desktop all hell will break lose. Im not just talking about grandma here, Im talking about a majority of the computer-using population. Most people dont need to be exposed to this crap.
So, yes, in a technical sense the iPad is a supersized iPod touch. But in terms of UI design its so much more important than that, because it brings the UI developments of the iPhone OS platform (in particular, enormous levels of abstracting away things) to something that is actually usable. For example, I generally prefer browsing the web on my iPhone than at my desktop, because as humans we are hard-wired to enjoy tactical experiences more often than not. However, I browse on my desktop a lot more because the iPhones viewport requires a laborious amount of scrolling and panning. I can browse the web comfortably on my phone for minutes at a time; you could probably comfortably browse the web on an iPad for many hours at a time. I cant imagine trying to make an entire Keynote/Powerpoint presentation from scratch on my phone; I could easily imagine making such a document on an iPad, and if that means I get to deal with an easier-to-use interface than whats on the desktop, then why not? The screen size is everything. How many of you bitch that Dell sells computer monitors in multiple screen sizes at disparate price points?
Point is, everything that has made the iPhone OS successful needed to be scaled up to major computer use at some point, because its too good and too important for mass-computer-consumerism to not to. Current desktop OSs are like manual transmissions; the iPad is an automatic transmission, which is what the rest of the world wants. So far weve only gotten a small taste of it with our cell phones and iPods, but now Apple is bringing it into mainstream computer usage.
I know most of you will disagree with this evaluation. Ill just say that if five years from now Im proven wrong, Ill eat my words and you can mock me all you want. Im not going to be wrong though.![]()
I would buy this instead of the ipad. It's a heck of a lot more portable and for the fact that it can run an entire OS. The battery lasts 6 hours which is very good and it got a bit more power to boot. Not to mention you also got more storage for the price.
I am sorry but I just ain't a believer of the ipad.
I know most of you will disagree with this evaluation.
Oh excellent, so in 10 years once Flash finally ceases to exist, we can all look back at the current iPhone OS and thank it copiously for removing such an archaic format from our lives 👍
Ten years may pass quicker than we both thought.
http://www.brightcove.com/en/video-platform/solutions/html5
New York Times and Time are users of this platform and confirmed launch customers.
This issue with this device (and Tablets in general) is that they actually have very few practical applications, ironically outside a specialist role.
Where would you use a 10" Tablet? It's too big to carry around in your pocket. And it's too big to whip out for quick information (like an iPhone). So now you're basically confined to your house or someone you know you will be for an extended period of time.
At your house, are you really going to spend $500+ to view webpages? Especially when a large percentage of users most likely have a MacBook or other laptop, which may only be 3" bigger than an iPad. You also can't browse most web pages on the iPad because it doesn't support Flash.
Can you get Office Suite on an iPad? I don't care what people say, but Microsoft Office is the de facto standard for a lot of work creation, and reviewing, especially in the business and education sectors. iWork may look kinda spiffy, but send your boss a presentation knocked up uncomfortably on your iPad in iWork format and I bet you won't be asked to make a presentation again.
You know how long Tablet PCs have been around? Since around 1985. They have never been successful because they are awkward to use ergonomically and they're hard to input text on. They're used in specific applications such as portable screens for construction sites. Anyone who knows anything about technology knows that tablets generally suck and if this was made by any company other than Apple no one would give a toss.
To be honest though, nobody is going to be producing anything serious on it. Quickly going over a presentation perhaps, but writing a report? Eh-no.
Where would you use a 10" Tablet?
At your house, are you really going to spend $500+ to view webpages?
You also can't browse most web pages on the iPad because it doesn't support Flash.
Can you get Office Suite on an iPad?
You know how long Tablet PCs have been around? Since around 1985. They have never been successful because they are awkward to use ergonomically and they're hard to input text on.