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.
Can someone explain the need for a camera??
- Thread starter jlblodgett
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's exactly why I said the camera is not ideal for all situations. Didn't you get that, or are you just nitpicking?
I don't disagree, but you are still talking about a consumer-grade app making use of Apple's consumer-grade API.
My beef is that Apple won't let you do ANYTHING other than consumer-grade stuff with their API. Like, oh I don't know....how about fleet device management? They are just over the top anti-enterprise and anti-VAR anything. I don't know why....and I'm not trying to fight it. It is what it is.
Yep, a dedicated camera beats out a phone camera, however that is not what this thread is about.
Hmm, did you know some corps are using video conferencing to interview employee candidates who are in remote locations/countries? Facetime could be the next step if certain things by Apple are put into place.
In regard to marketing the iPad to corps, have not seen that either. What I have seen is this:
Bloomberg
Fortune
Silicon
ABC: More than half of Fortune 500 companies bought iPads in the first few months of their availability
Forbes
Information week: iPads Hit The Enterprise
American Banker
Financialpost
Front camera has its uses, mainly Facetime as probably mentioned. Rear camera has only one real use I can think of and that is augmented reality apps.
Most people whining are the same people who most likely don't own an iPad but are just doing it for the sake of it. They'll be next complaining that the pad hasn't an SD card slot etc.
Most people whining are the same people who most likely don't own an iPad but are just doing it for the sake of it. They'll be next complaining that the pad hasn't an SD card slot etc.
No, the thread is actually pretty open, so you can't really state what it's actually about. The OP could, but you...no. The OP is questioning the need for Facetime, indicating that it isn't needed. I just supported his comment by stating that I rarely use my iPhone's camera (and it DOESN'T even have dual cameras). It appears VERY relevant to me.
Hmm yourself. I've edited your comment. See the bold word? Define 'some'. 'Some' doesn't usually relate to general (yes, I said 'general' in my post). I can think of several other IT solutions that can do video conferencing that don't involve an iPad or Facetime. I can buy a whole system that would be cheaper than an iPad that would certainly work just as well as Facetime. In fact, I could probably find two such systems and still undercut an iPad. Actually, you know you can do an interview without video, right? Or, you can attempt to visit the applicant or have the applicant visit another regional office for an interview (we do that all the time or have someone interview for us as proxy at regional office closest to the applicant...and yes, we do this for over-the-ocean candidates too...and yes, I'm very familiar with the corporate arena...I work for an extremely large company and we don't use such technology...we're fine without it).
I think you need to work on reading comprehension.
I stated that it is not generally accepted as a corporate device. Just because there are articles stating that the iPad is used in the corporate environment doesn't mean that its being MARKETED as a corporate device. I've read several articles that state the iPad doesn't meet most corporate usage (mainly security) criteria (especially in the federal space). The same goes for the iPhone, which is basically what an iPad is. I'll spare you the links, though...I'm sure if you were a bit more open-minded, you could find those on your own.
Absolutely, its very clear that iPads have become quite the 'darlings' in corporate America. And this is in SPITE of the fact that Apple is fairly hostile to allow enterprise IT to do anything with them other than treat them as consumer-grade devices. Device security? Sorry, gotta use a personal Mobile Me account to deal with that. Want to lock the unit down so people can't use the Home button to hop out of your custom kiosk application? Nope, not allowed.
I love the fact that Apple has given RIM a kick in the a$$ when it comes to threatening their corporate capabilities by sneaking onto their home turf. But why they don't embrace this by setting up a dedicated enterprise-class development track with corresponding licensing agreements, etc. is beyond me.
Then again....maybe its because they just don't care since they are printing money as it is? Who knows?
Originally Posted by sinsin07 ![]()
Hmm, did you know some corps are using video conferencing to interview employee candidates who are in remote locations/countries? Facetime could be the next step if certain things by Apple are put into place.
I used the word some in referencing this comment:
When I addressed:
which did use the word general and was talking about marketing, I addressed that separately. I agreed with you on the market part, I have not seen it. The links were not to prove that is being marketed, just that some business are starting to look at it.
I'm sure you could. And? I did not say Facetime was the only solution. I did not even say FT was being used like this yet. I said it could be the next step.
Yes you probably could. So what? I was referring to a candidate that is working from a location who can't get to a remote corporate site. Hell, there a programmers who are disabled and work from home only. Suppose they are looking for another job. FT could be used as a tool in the future, but it is not the only future for job interviews.
See the above comment, if the interview is home home-bound person and they already owns FT capable device your undercut point is moot. Does your company employee home bound people? Keep in mind that is just one example.
Yes, again so what? Aren't talking about possible uses for a rear facing camera?
1: Yes at times some of what you describe is possible.
2: How your company does business and what your company is fine without is not relevant to me, it's your company with it's business model. Other corps have other business models. Millage will vary.
I guess this was a jab, I'll ignore it
No, you did not state that. You stated:
Yes, I have already agreed with you previously on the fact it is not being marketed as a corporate device.
Yes that is most likely true. I will again ignore the last jab.
Hmm, did you know some corps are using video conferencing to interview employee candidates who are in remote locations/countries? Facetime could be the next step if certain things by Apple are put into place.
I used the word some in referencing this comment:
When I addressed:
which did use the word general and was talking about marketing, I addressed that separately. I agreed with you on the market part, I have not seen it. The links were not to prove that is being marketed, just that some business are starting to look at it.
I'm sure you could. And? I did not say Facetime was the only solution. I did not even say FT was being used like this yet. I said it could be the next step.
Yes you probably could. So what? I was referring to a candidate that is working from a location who can't get to a remote corporate site. Hell, there a programmers who are disabled and work from home only. Suppose they are looking for another job. FT could be used as a tool in the future, but it is not the only future for job interviews.
See the above comment, if the interview is home home-bound person and they already owns FT capable device your undercut point is moot. Does your company employee home bound people? Keep in mind that is just one example.
Yes, again so what? Aren't talking about possible uses for a rear facing camera?
1: Yes at times some of what you describe is possible.
2: How your company does business and what your company is fine without is not relevant to me, it's your company with it's business model. Other corps have other business models. Millage will vary.
I guess this was a jab, I'll ignore it
No, you did not state that. You stated:
Yes, I have already agreed with you previously on the fact it is not being marketed as a corporate device.
Yes that is most likely true. I will again ignore the last jab.
Last edited:
This is not a snarf question, but can you use the iphone configuration utitity to put a policy on the iPad to lock it down for the kiosk? Or does that tool only work on iPhones?
how hard is it going to be to take a picture on an iPad? To have to hold that thing up with stability and to tap the shutter button isn't going to be the easiest thing when you've got to get a certain angle
there's definitely going to be a ridiculous thing where people make fun of iPad users trying to take pictures
there's definitely going to be a ridiculous thing where people make fun of iPad users trying to take pictures
As a blogger who likes to travel light I can see the use for a camera on the iPad.
The ipod Touch with iMovie can produce great video clips with titles, transitions, captions and end credits.
One of the contributors on my blog made a movie with a couple of clips of a bike race with titles credits and transitions and posted it. I nearly crapped when he told me he made it with his ipod touch.
You don't need 1080 to make a decent enough clip to report a story and upload to youtube and just having to carry an iPad instead of camera gear, adapters and other gear would make my life easier.
I'm just sayin.
It might not be for everyone but I would welcome it with open arms.
Oh and I'm one of those people who have no use for a facetime but don't criticize people that do.
The ipod Touch with iMovie can produce great video clips with titles, transitions, captions and end credits.
One of the contributors on my blog made a movie with a couple of clips of a bike race with titles credits and transitions and posted it. I nearly crapped when he told me he made it with his ipod touch.
You don't need 1080 to make a decent enough clip to report a story and upload to youtube and just having to carry an iPad instead of camera gear, adapters and other gear would make my life easier.
I'm just sayin.
It might not be for everyone but I would welcome it with open arms.
Oh and I'm one of those people who have no use for a facetime but don't criticize people that do.
I see the appeal for it too.
Say I'm a Field Tech using an iPad 3G to send a status email from the field. The receiving parties are confused so I use the iPad to quickly snap a picture of the machine I'm servicing and email it back.
Or say I'm using Evernote or some other note-taking app, I can use the iPad camera to quickly interface with the app and drop a picture in there in secs. No need for moving pictures from a SD card or doing a cloud sync with my phone.
I don't think anyone is going to be using this as a DSLR. But for all the times you need to take a picture on the fly and all you have is your iPad, a built-in camera is a no brainer. For all the times you have an iPad content creation app and want to put in a photo quickly and painlessly, it's also a no-brianer.
how hard is it going to be to take a picture on an iPad? To have to hold that thing up with stability and to tap the shutter button isn't going to be the easiest thing when you've got to get a certain angle
there's definitely going to be a ridiculous thing where people make fun of iPad users trying to take pictures
Well we have a shopping list app.
Can you imagine what people would think of you wandering around the grocery store checking items off on your iPad.
I can guarantee they would not be thinking, wow, he's cool doing that.
how hard is it going to be to take a picture on an iPad? To have to hold that thing up with stability and to tap the shutter button isn't going to be the easiest thing when you've got to get a certain angle
there's definitely going to be a ridiculous thing where people make fun of iPad users trying to take pictures
You don't have to tap the shutter button at all
You put your finger on it and the shutter releases when you remove your finger
Just like it does on the iPhone
Scenario:
John: "Hey Susie, check out this awesome new desk I got."
(John enables rear camera on iPad to show Susie his desk while doing FaceTime)
Susie: "Wow, that is a really nice desk!"
John: "Hey Susie, check out this awesome new desk I got."
(John enables rear camera on iPad to show Susie his desk while doing FaceTime)
Susie: "Wow, that is a really nice desk!"
I'm sure John has other nice things he could let Susie have a look at with FaceTime that would make her go "Wow" also.
And no doubt Susie has some things that John would like to see too.
The year 2002 called, they want their naive question back. Replace "iPad" with "mobile phone" and the same questions were being raised back then. I mean seriously, why do you need a camera on a phone?
An old photographer's saying is that the best camera is the one you have on you. People will use whatever is available to them. Everyone has a phone, and cameras on phones have become mandatory simply because you always carry a phone.
If you're using an iPad and a photographic opportunity arises, you don't want to have to drop the iPad, rummage around looking for your phone (or worse, a real camera), then fumble with the controls etc. You just want to take a picture.
Finally, those of you who lack the vision to see how a MASSIVE viewfinder will be a game changer for all those who are used to squinting at tiny LCD screens at a distance, I would advise caution lest you end up with egg on your face...
Last edited:
i don't think many people are obsessed with a rear facing camera.
i would like a rear facing camera on the iPad because i see myself quite often taking pictures of documents, handwritten sketches, receipts, business cards or pictures to either mail them or archive them for later use.
I'm doing this with my iPhone but when I'm working/reading with my iPad it's neat not to have to get the iPhone and then mail the pics back to myself.
aside of that I think apple should keep the hardware between iPad and iPhone as similar as possible to make developers life easier.
i would like a rear facing camera on the iPad because i see myself quite often taking pictures of documents, handwritten sketches, receipts, business cards or pictures to either mail them or archive them for later use.
I'm doing this with my iPhone but when I'm working/reading with my iPad it's neat not to have to get the iPhone and then mail the pics back to myself.
aside of that I think apple should keep the hardware between iPad and iPhone as similar as possible to make developers life easier.
I am thinking "outside the box". The problem is that some of you expect the box to encompass the world. Why are you reinventing the wheel? We already have phones with high resolution cameras, including the iPhone 4. Take that with you if you're so hell bent on snapping shots. As klamse says...
THAT is logical, practical, sensible, productive thinking. Take the smaller device that can do great things instead of trying to force an oversized, bulky device to be something it's not.
If your complaint is "but I'm not stationary!!!" then justify why you refuse to carry existing cell phones that already have high res cameras and can do the exact same thing already. I'll bet you don't have a logical reason besides "I don't own an iPhone!!!" which is countered by the fact that nearly every phone has a camera capable of such snaps besides the Palm Pre.
Haha +1
To add to the main convo. I don't see the point yea surenmaybe I would snap a photo when I have my iPad in hand which is when I'm lounging around but still. I'm not gunn a carry it in the street taking photos like my iPhone. Nor do I use FaceTime so I'm gunn a stick with my iPad 1. But for others maybe both are useful.