How 'bout we cover you in white plastic and put an Apple logo on that forehead of yours?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Readying New FaceTime Equipped iPads?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How 'bout we cover you in white plastic and put an Apple logo on that forehead of yours?
That sounds like more of a wish list then anything.
There's no way there's any economy (for Apple at least) to put a 1600x900 screen in the ipad. It's not even the right ratio for the current product.
Your 'upgrades' would put the resulting product way above the current cost of the highest value ipad. In short, ain't gonna happen.
Any addition of a camera, or any other revision will happen after Christmas. The demand for the current product is high, it wouldn't be financially prudent to change it now.
slow weekend news, so lets talk about this.
Apple could launch Video iPad in january and release a 20$ front facing camera for 1st gen iPad.
I don't much use of a rear facing camera, for video and photo recording. iPod touch should be iPod, iPads should be iPads and iPhone should be iPhones. If not, people will get confused about which one to buy or why they need an iPod Touch and an iPad, or why they need an iPad and an iPhone.
Apple could launch Video iPad in january and release a 20$ front facing camera for 1st gen iPad.
I don't much use of a rear facing camera, for video and photo recording. iPod touch should be iPod, iPads should be iPads and iPhone should be iPhones. If not, people will get confused about which one to buy or why they need an iPod Touch and an iPad, or why they need an iPad and an iPhone.
Or they could make yet another dock with a camera built in, with a wider field of view so you could be far enough away from it not to be a "nostril cam." That might be a simple enough part that they could get ready for Christmas.
Even at $79, I bet it would sell like hotcakes.
Even at $79, I bet it would sell like hotcakes.
A $20 Apple branded iPad cam. That's very funny. $20? This from a company who sells a $2 iPad USB adapter for $30 and a $3 iPad case for $40. Heck a 6-pack of Apple branded iPod socks are $30. You can get two 3-packs of Under Armour human socks for $15.
juicedropsdeuce said:.
I almost feel as bad for iPad owners as I do for the beta iPhone4 owners. At least the iPad owners aren't stuck in a dead end contract.
You should have known something was up when that big iPad was less powerful than a PHONE. Duh people! I guess some peoples like to buy billionaire Steve new Mercedes. Just mail him the check directly next time.
Please don't feel bad for me. I knew what I was buying full aware a 2nd gen would be better, I weighed my odds and when I saw the price at 500 bucks was well worth spending on something I use everyday. I don't plan on buying a 2nd gen just for a camera that I know I won't use, but I do plan on buying again if there's enough features to warrant it. It was well worth 500 bucks and "if" I do sell it I'll make back some of that back. Well worth it instead of waiting forever on something you already want.
It's like cars, every year there's a new model out with new features on it, how long do you wait?
If you wanna wait for 2nd gen, then cool, don't rag or feel bad for us that willingly and can afford to buy 1st gen 2nd gen products.
I didn't buy the 1st gen iPhone but did when the 3GS came out, that's when it became worth it to me. Everybody is different, leave it alone.
No regrets here, I'm still glad I bought the 1st gen iPad. I would do it again.
Unfotuantely, this wish list isn't coming for a while.
1) "Retina Display" means that it's a higher resolution than your retina can discern. Now, there's some wiggle-room as to what PPI that actually is (especially as you don't hold your iPad as close to your eye as you do your iPhone), but the resolution needed to be a "Retina Display" would overwhelm the current gen CPU/GPU's.
2) Maybe we'll get the 512MB RAM from the iPhone4. It would make sense in the iPad, but I was shocked when it was not added to the iPod touch. 128GB of flash is still too expensive (given that the price/capacity curve is roughly linear for flash, unlike hard drives).
3) I agree that the successor for the A4 is coming, based on the Cortex-A9 architecture, potentially dual-core. It seems like it won't be in the iPad refresh if the timing of this rumor is true - but maybe Apple/Samsung are ready to go with these chips. Faster than current (1GHz) is unlikely; it took a lot of tweaking to get to 1GHz and would result in a drop in battery life (all things staying equal).
4) If Apple is making only one version of the A4, then it is unlikely to ever include a different GPU. The PowerVR SGX 535 is integrated into the A4; a GPU upgrade will likely come with the A4's successor.
5) It does not seem cost-effective to make (and stock) two lines of the iPad with different cellular boards (i.e., one GSM and one CDMA). Alternatively, if you had one wireless chip that could do both GSM and CDMA, this might work - but I would expect it in the Verizon iPhone4/iPhone5 first.
6) Doubtful to see a rear camera; the iPad would be pretty unwieldy as a camera. If it did get a camera, it would likely get the iPhone4's camera, as device thickness isn't an issue (in comparison to the iPod touch).
What do I think is coming?
1) 512MB RAM
2) Gyroscopes
3) Front camera
4) HSUPA
5) iOS 4 - and I'm hopeful that the iPad refresh coincides with iOS 4.2's release
Next next version:
1) Apple "A5" chip (faster, dual-core, better GPU)
2) Higher res screen
3) 128GB flash option
I tweeted John Gruber about this rumor....he doesn't believe it. Given his track record, I agree with him.
Honestly, I'm not sure what's so hard to believe about this rumor. The timing is about right. There's a new 4.2 iOS coming in November and Apple is getting a lot of pressure to add a camera to the iPad. So, it would make sense and not even a stretch IMHO.
The big questions isn't if they do it, it's when... November or after the new year????
Still Waiting for a Good Color TV
You can always wait for newer/better technology, but then you miss life as it is moving by..
The iPad has been fantastic for the months I have used it -- if I waited six months for a "better" model, I would have wasted six months.
Reminds me of my old family members who said they would buy a television when it was perfected and are still waiting...
You can always wait for newer/better technology, but then you miss life as it is moving by..
The iPad has been fantastic for the months I have used it -- if I waited six months for a "better" model, I would have wasted six months.
Reminds me of my old family members who said they would buy a television when it was perfected and are still waiting...
I agree that cost issues likely mean that there will not be an improved screen in the iPad for a long while (much to my chagrin), but if you think about it, the only area in which GPU power would be lacking on a higher-res display would be 3D graphics. I think the GPU power available in the iPad is sufficient to drive a 2D display at 1600x1200, even play back videos. When is the last time you ever saw 2D benchmarks for video cards? They used to run them alongside 3D ones, but 2D performance has surpassed realistic needs for many, many years now.
Rendering a complex 3D game at native resolution would be an issue, but in theory the "retina display" would have sufficient PPI that downscaling/interpolating would not be that severe an issue. Think of gaming consoles, where many games are rendered at 720p but upscaled to show on 1080p displays, or even other games which are rendered at less than 720p. Yet they still look okay because typically TVs are far enough from your sitting location that you can't resolve the 1080p anyways. Even something like straight up pixel doubling would give a lower rendering resolution but maintain a relatively crisp display because of the minimal interpolation.
I wonder why they didn't use a res like 1280x960 in the first place. It would have allowed for 1:1 playback of 720p video content. But I don't think going from 1024x768 to 1280x960 is a big enough jump to be worth it as an upgraded screen route. They need to shoot higher (1600x1200 IMO, or in fantasyland, a straight doubling for 2048x1536)
Other than tech junkies whining on MR forums and the like, I am not sure what "pressure" Apple is receiving. They are selling iPads faster than they can make them- true "pressure" would have been low sales and everybody complaining that they wanted a camera. However, the market (what Apple really cares about) is clearly telling them that a camera is not an absolute necessity.
I think they will include a camera in the next revision (again, much to my chagrin as I don't see the use and would rather have seen that cost put elsewhere) but they won't rush one out ahead of schedule (likely 1yr update cycle).
Thanks for the great laugh! It seems like during the deepest recession in 100 years over 3,000,000 people a month feel like they need an iPad. That's a lot of "nobodys" who see its cost effectiveness.
You gotta quit smokin' them funny cigars.
In 1984 I got along nicely with 128k of RAM in my first Mac. In my office I have an early version of Microsoft Word on a 400K floppy. It shows you what can be done before bloatware set in.
Large amounts of RAM are fine on a computer plugged into the wall. With an iDevice you have to think of battery life as more important than the old list of RAM/speed/core specs. You can get that done by efficient coding and hardware that responds to meet surges in demand.
The timing is right for a release early next year, however the timing is not right for a release in November or before the year is over. That is why Gruber is saying that, he is a good analyst unlike many people who simply think products magically appear out of thin air instead of taking time to develop and release.
Here are a few reasons why the iPad won't be out until next year:
- 4.2 might be coming out soon, but Apple has already announced all the features it would contain. The SDK will reveal anything they didn't announce. If there was a new iPad there would definitely be a lot more new software features to back it up. Apple also announces new hardware BEFORE releasing the software so that devs can start updating their apps, they have less than a month to announce new iPad hardware if that is the case.
- A camera on the iPad is a given, but the "pressure" you speak of it simply not there. It is fabricated pressure by people on the internet. In reality the competition is pretty much null when it comes to the iPad. Whatever exists by the end of the year won't even come close.
- Apple has their product cycles planned way in advance, they don't change their cycle just because of "competition" and they definitely don't risk supply issues by releasing a new product if the time isn't right.
- We have nothing but unsubstantial rumor to go on about a new iPad before the year is over. There is no spy photos, there is nothing really obvious that gets people thinking there is anything new for at least the next 4+ months.
- Apple has only just now got control over supply on the iPad. If they were ramping up for a release soon, then we would see the opposite happening because supply would begin to slow down in anticipation.
- Why release a new one when the current one is selling over 3 million a month, and will have a HUGE holiday success. They will sell like crazy, and then Apple will release a new one next year as planned.
- I could go on forever, but you get the point I hope.
Since we are just having fun speculating, I'll guess that the new iPad comes out before Christmas. Normally they would wait for the one year cycle to elapse. The difference now is that there are a slew of competing tablets coming out. These can't compete on the deeper DNA of the OS or ecosystem but they can slap on superficial things like cameras, more memory and SDHC slots. To counter that I can see Apple coming out with a minor upgrade in November to make sure they keep the iPad squarely in front of the consumer's eye. Who knows, maybe this would give Apple a chance to reset the clock and start updating the iPad every November?
My guess
Front and rear cameras, Face Time support.
512MB memory
iOS 4.2
I'd love to see a higher resolution screen but that is probably not coming till spring 2012 or maybe fall 2011.
I've been using an iPhone 4 for about a month now. Today I dropped by the Apple store and looked at an iPad and found the display resolution quite coarse. 1280x1024 wouldn't cut it. 2048 x 1535 is needed to make the text look smoother. That would be too expensive today. Perhaps in a year or so it might be possible. That would get you almost 200DPI, not the same as the iPhone but very nice.
edit:
Just thinking about Apple's billions and their passion for excellence. Apple is often tagged for setting prices high, yet when the iPod mini came out it was priced such that people bought them just to take out the mini HD to use in cameras as this was less than the retail price of the drive at the time. It is not impossible that Apple might do that again. They could fund an LCD maker to develop a high resolution display at reasonable cost for Apple that would be far cheaper than anything available on the open market.
Prices on things like this are quirky. Often the incremental cost of producing one more item is quite low. The high prices on newly developed parts usually reflects the costs of R&D and tooling. But if Apple paid the R&D costs and wrote that off in tax deductions then they could buy displays at a relatively low cost and gain a huge benefit in increased sales. It would be a great way to use some of those billions. Just wondering.
My guess
Front and rear cameras, Face Time support.
512MB memory
iOS 4.2
I'd love to see a higher resolution screen but that is probably not coming till spring 2012 or maybe fall 2011.
I've been using an iPhone 4 for about a month now. Today I dropped by the Apple store and looked at an iPad and found the display resolution quite coarse. 1280x1024 wouldn't cut it. 2048 x 1535 is needed to make the text look smoother. That would be too expensive today. Perhaps in a year or so it might be possible. That would get you almost 200DPI, not the same as the iPhone but very nice.
edit:
Just thinking about Apple's billions and their passion for excellence. Apple is often tagged for setting prices high, yet when the iPod mini came out it was priced such that people bought them just to take out the mini HD to use in cameras as this was less than the retail price of the drive at the time. It is not impossible that Apple might do that again. They could fund an LCD maker to develop a high resolution display at reasonable cost for Apple that would be far cheaper than anything available on the open market.
Prices on things like this are quirky. Often the incremental cost of producing one more item is quite low. The high prices on newly developed parts usually reflects the costs of R&D and tooling. But if Apple paid the R&D costs and wrote that off in tax deductions then they could buy displays at a relatively low cost and gain a huge benefit in increased sales. It would be a great way to use some of those billions. Just wondering.
"This" after all the compelling arguments articulated to the contrary is perhaps the most laughable post yet.
Thanks.
This.
If you were smart, she would be in the bedroom with you. That would be real facetime...
Yeah, because I want to be forced to watch 90210 reruns for the 50th time with her every waking moment of my life. No she's fine downstairs.