Not only that, instead of carrying JUST an hdmi cable, you get to carry the hdmi cable AND the apple tv and the power cord. And I own an apple tv (1 and 2).
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 to Announce Second-Generation iPad Within 3-4 Weeks?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not only that, instead of carrying JUST an hdmi cable, you get to carry the hdmi cable AND the apple tv and the power cord. And I own an apple tv (1 and 2).
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
I wouldn't need to sync the footage, i'd just like to review it. With the Adam, I know I can review it with the HDMI port and I can also transfer the footage directly to the tablet via something as simple as USB. The footage can be as little as 100 mb, to as much as about 4 gigs. All shot in 1080p raw footage.
0815 said:
I wouldn't need to sync the footage, i'd just like to review it. With the Adam, I know I can review it with the HDMI port and I can also transfer the footage directly to the tablet via something as simple as USB. The footage can be as little as 100 mb, to as much as about 4 gigs. All shot in 1080p raw footage.
Thank you, bergmef... you know exactly what I am talking about. I think AppleTV and the way it works with an iPad is great, but it's not a practical solution for the way many use the iPad in a working environment. Again, I'm not saying it's for everyone, I am just pointing out there there are in fact very practical reasons why mainstream folks like myself would want an HDMI out.
I'm sure they are on the way.
Don't judge what apple is doing based on rumor volume.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
Now you're talking about living rooms, before it was business presentations.
Way too many holes in your argument. If the house you're in doesn't have an AppleTv, or any other device with AirPlay standard ( thinking future ), then you have the VGA to 30 pin to get you by. If whatever you're showing isn't long enough / worth the 2 minutes to setup Atv, then is it really necessary for Apple to undermine their newest futuristic tech, and redesign the entire iPad, to accommodate your desire for HDMI output? ( reminding you again that there is close to HD via VGA. )
If you really want to be tethered, then it's already possible.
rhuber said:
Now you're talking about living rooms, before it was business presentations.
Way too many holes in your argument. If the house you're in doesn't have an AppleTv, or any other device with AirPlay standard ( thinking future ), then you have the VGA to 30 pin to get you by. If whatever you're showing isn't long enough / worth the 2 minutes to setup Atv, then is it really necessary for Apple to undermine their newest futuristic tech, and redesign the entire iPad, to accommodate your desire for HDMI output? ( reminding you again that there is close to HD via VGA. )
If you really want to be tethered, then it's already possible.
Yes. Both companies are just going to go right under when the Verizon iPhone is released.
...
I'm talking about normal office conference rooms. Again, I am not attempting an "argument", I am simply stating what is useful to me and the 60 or so people I work with. It's great if you have a different perspective, but why you would want to turn it into a a peeing contest is a little bizarre and certainly uncalled for. I thought I was pretty clear. I, and those I see in my situation would greatly benefit from an HDMI out, and I think outline pretty well why that is. If you don't get that, then let's move on. It's not for you... I get that and can appreciate it, but our needs are clearly not yours.
Am I then supposed to take Apple TV on the road when I want to plug my iPad into my parents/in-laws/friend's/hotel's TV?
Some of you people really need to start thinking out-of-your-house, especially when we talk about portable devices. It's not meant to be a remote, it's supposed to be taken OUT!
Read the original scenario. pmzs comment made absolute sense there.
Sure, it would be nice to have an option for HDMI, but there are current options with the VGA and component via the 30-pin Dock Connector. An HDMI port directly on the iPad is simply foolish to expect.
2560x1920
there is no way in hell that there is anything that can drive that!
Huh? I guess my 27" iMac is impossible then, and only a product of my dreams
It has a 2560X1440 display, not quiet 2560X1920, but it's pretty close I think.
AT work all the DLP projectors are older models that only have VGA input. Every HDTV that I have seen also has VGA input.
It would be nice to have both VGA/HDMI, but if you are only going to have one, most are better off with VGA.
But no doubt, eventually it will include HDMI.
Thank you Bytor65. I appreciate the pleasant response. We've experimented with VGA too, but are still using the HDMI of pc's. I'm sure we'll see HDMI (or something better) before long too. Was hoping it would be in the next version, but it's not like they are going to run out and buy us new iPads anyway.
They need to get over that. If it doesn't need to be an integer multiple,
then 1920x1440 would be great, since it would allow 1080p to fit
without scaling.
Love my iPad but will not be buying the 2nd unless AT&T/Verizon decide to increase their utterly criminal low caps
Huh? I guess my 27" iMac is impossible then, and only a product of my dreams
It has a 2560X1440 display, not quiet 2560X1920, but it's pretty close I think.
You really dont see the difference between a discrete desktop GPU with a continuous power source and a integrated GPU for a handheld device that runs off a battery?
Several upcoming Android tablets will have 10" 1280x800 screens.
To repeat my earlier comment:
Keep in mind that Apple has access that is slightly in the future as far as we're concerned.
We speculate based on what is known at the consumer level about what is possible. With maybe some information about technology that is about to come out.
Corporations like Apple are privy to technology that consumers may not see for years. Because of that it is harder for consumers to accurately guess at what technology is ready for Apple to implement for the iPad 2.
Apple may very well have found a way to deliver retina display resolution to the iPad.
Apple is currently working on developing liquid metal in new battery technology, who knows what will come of that. The point being, there is stuff Apple is working on that we aren't privy to.
Speculation at the consumer level, without any special insight, is just speculation.
If I knew what technologies Apple is playing with I could probably tell you exactly where they are going.
Last edited:
You completely miss the point and fall into the DOA category of many CE maker. Being able to technically do something doesnt make it a good experience. If the game play is hurt because your mobile IGP cant adequate push that many pixels at a decent framerate your product fails. If your battery is time is severally reduced because this increased effort by the GPU then your product fails.
Case in point, the current iPhone/iPad HW will play 1080p content, but its jiggery and lose frames with any decent profile. So guess what? Its not enabled so geeks will have figure out how to add it themselves before they jackoff to their devices a spec list.
I'm with you 100%. Without HDMI and USB ports, the iPad is and will always be a larger iPod touch. Having to always sync it to another computer and having it rely solely on itunes limits this 'tablet' tremendously. Let's face it, if the iPad was made by Motorola, Sony, MICROSOFT,HP, or pretty much any other company we'd be making fun of it, BUT it's made by Apple. iPad version 1, was a test product, it was obsolete when they sold it back in March. Apple just wanted to run the niche (At the time) tablet market. Now they are the market leaders, simply because they had no competition.
If Apple wants to stay number 1 in the tablet market, then they best do alot better than slim down the tablet and increase the resolution.
I'd like to see:
A Pixel Qi screen, so I can read when I'm outside
HDMI port, if it even has 1080p
USB Port(s), come on its 2011 get with the program
I know we all love apple products, but we have to realize when they are treating us like beta testers. iPad v1 was a beta, they tested the market and people responded well. If iPad v2 is obsolete, just like v1 was when it entered the market then APPLE as a company is being disloyal to it's most loyal followers.
1280x800 isnt too far off from the iPads 1024x768 and most seem to have state 6 to 10 hours of video playback. 1,024,000 pixels v. 786,432 pixels, especially with the newer HW.
I think Apple could do 1280x960 (SXGA) which is 1,228,800 pixels (165 ppi) or 1400×1050 (SXGA) which is 1,470,000 pixels (180 ppi).
The problem comes when people start foolishly expecting 4x jump like the iPhone did or 326 ppi. Thats just not feasible for these machines and wont be for several years.