And why do you think every ipad user wants a camera? Ill tell you what just to make you happy your right. I guess i wanted a camera too? I guess you know what my needs are and the rest of the mac rumors needs to.
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.
Google Reportedly Prepping Android-Based iPad Challenger
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And why do you think every ipad user wants a camera? Ill tell you what just to make you happy your right. I guess i wanted a camera too? I guess you know what my needs are and the rest of the mac rumors needs to.
Why are you comparing the iPad, a 10" tablet computer, to the Nexus One, a telephone? That is a nonsensical comparison.
I never claimed that everyone wanted a camera in the iPad. That would be a ludicrous claim. Equally ludicrous would be any claim that nobody wants a camera in the iPad.
It is a demonstrable fact that some people want a camera in the iPad, and that there is a compelling usage model for this. I have shown that, despite your assertions to the contrary, the camera on the iPhone is extremely popular. I have shown that, despite your assertions to the contrary, this feature missing from the iPad is a common 'wishlist' item.
Perhaps this mental exercise will help you out. Let us suppose that you have a choice between two products: an iPad *with* a camera, and an iPad *without* a camera. All else is equal. Which would you choose?
I'll guess that you would choose the iPad *with* a camera (further, I'll guess that you'd loudly sing the praises of the forward-thinkers at Apple who included a camera, but that's beside the point). Therefore you place some value on a camera on the iPad.
Point. Game. Set.
Thank you very much, I'll be here all week.
I didn't say every. I posted a few articles above showing people outside of Macrumors wanted a camera as you requested, yet you didn't comment, nor did you show me proof otherwise.
Actually i would choose the ipad without the camera. I Don't do the whole social networking thing. So i don't feel the need to snap pictures and tweet,etc . And if i needed a quick pic i would use my iphone.
And from the way you phrased that you seem to think everyone is camera obssessed. I belive rather than capturing moments on paper. I would actually rather live them out. Now i know alot of people are picture hounds but im not.
If you give a MacRumors member a camera...
... They will complain that it doesn't face the right angle when using it...
... Or that it doesn't have a flash...
... Or that it drains battery too fast
Apple can never satisfy all the haters. They always find a complaint.
... They will complain that it doesn't face the right angle when using it...
... Or that it doesn't have a flash...
... Or that it drains battery too fast
Apple can never satisfy all the haters. They always find a complaint.
The issue I have with this is why people like you tag everyone that complains as a "hater"? Last time I heard, people were in fact allowed to complain about devices. Last time I heard, no device is perfect.
Some of these complaints are in fact valid you know.
It's the truth. People complain about apple all the time. If apple had included dual hdmi ports, 1080p, 3D, DVR support and stuff out of your wildest dreams people would still complain.
I suppose it's human nature to do that. When i went to high school people picked on the artsy guy in the corner because he get all A's and did his own thing.
So some complaints are valid but in this case they aren't because when it comes to apple people will always find something to complain about and hold to to a standard that other companies that make the same thing arent
Are you really comparing the sales volume of the Nexus One to an iPad?
No camera is an issue, that's pretty clear. If the iPad had a camera on it (which would enable things like video conferencing), it would have sold more. Sure the iPad sold well without a camera, but surely you can't be arguing that, had it had a camera, it would have sold less.
Saying no camera is not an issue because people are buying the iPad is extremely short sighted. You could take a bag full of ****, slap an Apple logo on it, and people would buy it. I bet if you labeled it as "from the ass of Steve Jobs" you wouldn't be able to keep it in stock.
Very well said.
app store beats all
iPad has the app store. A big win for apple when it comes to the tablet.
Lets see what Google can do to beat that though.
iPad has the app store. A big win for apple when it comes to the tablet.
Lets see what Google can do to beat that though.
So many comments to reply to...
Chrome OS has "web Apps" and will fully incorporate HTML5 to make these appear more traditional.
The exponential growth of Android appears to be at odds with the above statement. Have you used it?
I think Apple has some serious competition. The new microsoft KIN women phones actually look pretty damn cool and makes both the new OS4 and Android OS look old.
Check them out here.
I saw what you did there.
That's pretty funny. Granted I have never physically played with the iPad so I can't really come up with my own conclusion. But there are 2 facts that prohibit me from even thinking about buying an iPad.
1) No multitasking. If I'm using a tablet/laptop computer, I tend to do many things at once. If I can't have my email up, surfing the web, writing in Pages/Word, yadda yadda, there's no point to me buying it. I'm not bashing the iPad or anything, I'm merely part of the majority that needs to multitask.
2) It looks like a bloated iPhone/iPod touch. Some of you are bashing Google saying that their tablet is gonna be like a giant Android touch phone. Wake up and smell the coffee. Your iPad is kinda like a giant iPhone too, but with some distinct differences.
I'm proud of Apple for releasing such a revolutionary machine, but until they can fine-tune it and allow for multitasking, theres nothing that can make me want to buy it.
Commence fanboy assaults.
1) No multitasking. If I'm using a tablet/laptop computer, I tend to do many things at once. If I can't have my email up, surfing the web, writing in Pages/Word, yadda yadda, there's no point to me buying it. I'm not bashing the iPad or anything, I'm merely part of the majority that needs to multitask.
2) It looks like a bloated iPhone/iPod touch. Some of you are bashing Google saying that their tablet is gonna be like a giant Android touch phone. Wake up and smell the coffee. Your iPad is kinda like a giant iPhone too, but with some distinct differences.
I'm proud of Apple for releasing such a revolutionary machine, but until they can fine-tune it and allow for multitasking, theres nothing that can make me want to buy it.
Commence fanboy assaults.
Well, what did we really expect, right? Apple goes after Google's main revenue stream (advertising) and so it was only a matter of time before Google does something similar to attack Apple's revenue. The tablet is without doubt the most effective, as it most likely represents a new dawn of computing. I hope the users (us) will be the benefactors of this competition, but time will tell.
It always does.
It's some cultural phenomenon that's so absolutely stupid, there are no words strong enough to describe it. Anyone with dissenting opinions or valid concerns nowadays is automatically labeled as a "hater". It's one of those terms that once you throw it out there, all intelligent discussion and dissection of the topic ends, because the other party is forced to respond to such an absurd label. It's just as stupid as "FAIL" and needs to die a quick death. There used to be a time where differing opinions were respected and discussed intelligently.
I hate commenting so close to my other posts in a thread, but here was my take on the iPad.
Like you, I chose not to buy the iPad (first generation). It was lacking a front facing camera and video chat, so I found it to be pointless for my needs. I'm good with using my laptop until there are a few more full featured apps too (which will happen in time, just not what I'm looking for now). Even though I knew I wouldn't buy it, I went in to the Apple Store and played with it for quite a while - then I messed with the iPad (that was a joke). Anyway... I thought it was a pretty cool device. If I was into reading things other than blogs and I travelled all the time, I might be all over it without the camera, but I didn't feel the same urgency I felt with the iPhone.
To address your issues...
It seems to be getting multitasking (from what I can see with the iPhone 4.0 update). It doesn't look like multitasking on your laptop where you have 4 apps opened up next to one another (or visibly stacked), but you can switch pretty seamlessly without going to the homepage again and again.
The look is what it is. They're trying to stay consistent. I think the reference to Android Tablet looking like a giant Android touch phone was from an earlier reference to the iPad looking like a giant iPod Touch or iPhone. There's no need to get worked up about it.
I'm not sure what sort of "fine-tuning" is necessary, but multitasking is on the way.
Like you, I chose not to buy the iPad (first generation). It was lacking a front facing camera and video chat, so I found it to be pointless for my needs. I'm good with using my laptop until there are a few more full featured apps too (which will happen in time, just not what I'm looking for now). Even though I knew I wouldn't buy it, I went in to the Apple Store and played with it for quite a while - then I messed with the iPad (that was a joke). Anyway... I thought it was a pretty cool device. If I was into reading things other than blogs and I travelled all the time, I might be all over it without the camera, but I didn't feel the same urgency I felt with the iPhone.
To address your issues...
It seems to be getting multitasking (from what I can see with the iPhone 4.0 update). It doesn't look like multitasking on your laptop where you have 4 apps opened up next to one another (or visibly stacked), but you can switch pretty seamlessly without going to the homepage again and again.
The look is what it is. They're trying to stay consistent. I think the reference to Android Tablet looking like a giant Android touch phone was from an earlier reference to the iPad looking like a giant iPod Touch or iPhone. There's no need to get worked up about it.
I'm not sure what sort of "fine-tuning" is necessary, but multitasking is on the way.
None needed.
With some people, yeah. But whether it's a major issue, I dunno. I think as a device goes up in size, the desirability of, say, a still camera goes down.
Question: is Apple software up to snuff for video conferences? And can it be stuffed into a tablet form? Serious question here.
Competition is good, but I will be interested to see what Google can do to make up for the content gap.
Google doesn't have the connections or experience Apple has with iTunes.
Google may follow Apple with a product that offers superior specs for the hardware but I wonder they will do for content.
There are plenty of MP3 players on the market that are cheaper and more feature rich than the iPod, but without iTunes, they just aren't as appealing to consumers.
Google doesn't have the connections or experience Apple has with iTunes.
Google may follow Apple with a product that offers superior specs for the hardware but I wonder they will do for content.
There are plenty of MP3 players on the market that are cheaper and more feature rich than the iPod, but without iTunes, they just aren't as appealing to consumers.
Personally,
I think the introduction of a tablet device from Google is great. Mainly because I think it will force Apple into really keeping their iPad updated.
My friend has the new motorola phone that runs Android OS, and I found the OS a joy to use. It wasn't as refined as iPhone OS, and it didn't respond as well and such, but I think that the Android OS will be a serious competitor once it reaches version 4 (just as iPhone OS is about to). That said, I still love my iPod touch second generation.
As for the iPad, I am planning on waiting for the second generation release because Apple always has significant improvements from the first generation to the second (look back to the first iPods, the first iPhone, and the first generation iPod touch).
Always remember, the future of these devices could be very surprising, this is a start of a new generation of devices. Think about what the fourth generation iPad or the third generation Google Tablet will be like. Every option has potential.
I think the introduction of a tablet device from Google is great. Mainly because I think it will force Apple into really keeping their iPad updated.
My friend has the new motorola phone that runs Android OS, and I found the OS a joy to use. It wasn't as refined as iPhone OS, and it didn't respond as well and such, but I think that the Android OS will be a serious competitor once it reaches version 4 (just as iPhone OS is about to). That said, I still love my iPod touch second generation.
As for the iPad, I am planning on waiting for the second generation release because Apple always has significant improvements from the first generation to the second (look back to the first iPods, the first iPhone, and the first generation iPod touch).
Always remember, the future of these devices could be very surprising, this is a start of a new generation of devices. Think about what the fourth generation iPad or the third generation Google Tablet will be like. Every option has potential.
His original argument to me was to show users outside of Macrumors wanted a camera. I posted several articles proving my point.
Did Apple have a choice here? I'm not being rhetorical... Could Apple have used Google as their ad source?
My gut feeling is that no, that would have diced the pie up too small. Right now it's 60/40 between developer and Apple. Based on a quick web search, it looks like Google give publishers about 70-80% of ad revenue, but nobody knows for sure. Assume Apple could land a bulk deal at 80%, or equivalently, Google takes 20%. Apple could continue to encourage developers with 60% of ad revenue with a 60/20/20 model, which would cut Apple's revenue in half, or take Google's cut from the developer making it a 40/40/20 model and reducing developer adoption.
I guess the question boils down to whether it would have been worth it to Apple to pay half of their ad revenue in protection money to Google, and avoid a confrontation, or to increase the incentive to developers to use non-Apple/Google ad engines for the same reason.
