Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Maybe it will ship with a camera or maybe they decided to not ship with a camera to satisfy business and government need for security. I understand that Apple supports disabling of the camera in the iPhone for military clients.
 
Maybe it will ship with a camera or maybe they decided to not ship with a camera to satisfy business and government need for security. I understand that Apple supports disabling of the camera in the iPhone for military clients.

I would love to see some documentation on this. I wonder if it is a software thing or if they actually remove the camera for the military. I would like to have an iPhone with no camera...
 
iShoot Pad

Maybe it will ship with a camera or maybe they decided to not ship with a camera to satisfy business and government need for security. I understand that Apple supports disabling of the camera in the iPhone for military clients.

Disabling, not leaving it out for everybody else. I read an article in The Economist about how the US Army uses iPhones and other gadgets, because they are cheaper and almost just as good as 'professional' equipment.

On the same principle, they also use Xboxs to build supercomputers. The Xbox is subsidised by MS I think, so they must be losing money. Anyway, my point is that it would be stupid to ruin the iPad for millions because of a few tens of thousands. I suppose, any non-camera version can end up in the army and in poorer countries or in specialist markets.
 
No... At the iPhone OS 4.0 event in March (before the iPad is released), they will show off iPhone OS 4 with multitasking and show it off with the iPad using videoconferencing.

Then the iPad will be released shortly after in late March, with a built-in camera of limited utility. The iPad gains videoconferencing abilities in June when iPhone OS 4 is final and ships. You will be able to call and share your screen with the 2010 iPhone too.

They can't show off videoconferencing or the camera now because videoconferencing requires multitasking (it's not much use otherwise). The multitasking interface isn't a feature of OS 3.x

There will only be one revision of iPad in 2010.
I'm pretty sure you are correct about OS 4.0, not too sure about the camera. Possible but I wouldn't say any better than 50:50 chance.
No offense but from a developers standpoint that's seriously flawed.
Why? None of the software they are building on 3.2 will fail to run on 4.0 and there will be several months between the iOS 4.0 announcement and its release, so they'll have time to test and update any apps. Pretty common timeline for the iPhone world.

It requires a case change to incorporate the antenna, and includes a GPS which is not present in the WiFi-only model. So that plus the radio/modem chip for cellular, $130 seems about right.

Also, price it just a couple bucks more and no one buys the WiFi-only version!

They build the entire 3GS for <$180 by most estimates. This includes the case, screen, memory, CPU, wifi, BT, etc, etc. The radio and associated equipment is likely in the $12-20 range, at best. If Apple had been smart, imo, they would have asked ATT to cut them in on a small amount of any data plan purchases (ala the iPhone model) and simply subsidized the 3G in every device.
 
I honestly don’t understand this obsession with cameras on computers. My desktop monitor has a built in web cam, I have never used it. My laptop has a built in web cam, I have never used it. My $500 Sony digicam takes spectacular photos I rarely take it with me.

My three year old Sprint PCS Samsung Rant has a 2 mega pixel camera that I use every day to load photos directly to Facebook, Twitter, & Flickr. Photos come out very nice in well lit situations and of course outside.

I guess my point is unless you can put the device in your shirt pocket what good is a camera in the first place. How stupid would you look holding up a iPad to take photos.
 
I can't help but think it's an ambient light sensor.
al1.jpg

al2.jpg
 
How about this theory...

The iPad was always designed to have a camera. It has a place for the camera in the frame, there is a clear spot for it on the bezel, there are hooks in the software. Then the camera supplier says they can't meet demand. The camera is left out of the keynote and online specs so Apple does not promise something they may not be able to deliver.

If the supplier is able to ramp up, it ships with a camera. If not, not.
 
gizmodo and engadget had hands on with the iPad neither reported anything about a camera. I think they would have seen the camera.
 
cameras.............i said it 5 months ago...when the ipod touch came out....


except this time i am gonna buy the iPad....due to it's wireless technology from at&t....


i need data..:p
 
optional

i honestly beleive that a camera is going to be an option like on macbooks you can "build your own". I have a feeling it will be similar with the iPad :apple:
 
Ahhh planned obsolescence. Apple should've made this less obvious, it's not like there's any shortage of people willing to take their products apart to look at the guts of it all.
 
The more I think about the fact that they released a brand new device that was hyped to the nth degree on an incremental update of the iphone OS, the more I think that we have only seen the tip of the iceberg. Appl ehas been very clear that their devices are all about software so the hardware introduction is more about getting the specs out there so developers can resize and build new apps. The software upgrade, however, is where the bog event will be.

That said, while I hope that there is a camera lying in the bottom portion of the iceberg, I have a hard time beliving that there is. Video conferencing on a phone, however, is much more iportant than video confencing on a tablet. After all, a phone is a communications device so that is the more likely place to introduce it.

We shall see. More likely multitasking and new GI/widgets. Especially since the iPad curiously lacks weather and stock apps.
 
What's the possibility that the early prototypes had the camera and therefore the casing had the notch for it... but they determined in real use that the fixed camera, or a camera in that position wasn't ideal and they pulled it last minute? They may have figured it would be better to have some new "revolutionary" camera behind the screen but they couldn't make the release date to include it?.... so in other words it is a spot for a camera... though perhaps it'll never actually be used? Just throwing out an uneducated speculation. :D
 
I think it is clear that Apple originally intended to have a camera in the iPad. However Apple are also a company that would not want to implement a feature that worked poorly. I am not a video compression expert, but I know that to compress video well so that you can stream over WiFi or 3G the software compares each frame and looks at the information that moves from frame to Frame. If you have a stable camera on say a desktop mac or notebook then the compression software only has to worry about what is moving ( the face), on a handheld device like the iPad the whole frame is probably moving, and I suspect the video quality was poor. I belive that is why it was pulled. Yes I know that many phones have video camera capability, but these issues will not appear to be so bad as the screen resolution is a lot less.

Yes you can dock the IPad, but that defeats the purpose of it in the first point. Apple don't want people to say 'the web cam quality sucks'

This is just my theory on why you will not see an iSight in the iPad.

Agree with the exception that there will never be an iSight. IMO, there will be a iSight in the 3G iPad at first, as we will have multiple carrier choices by then. Yes, including CDMA IMO. The big black strip that everyone loves on the top of the 3G pics looks like 2 receivers to me.

If the device can be spread over enough seperate networks the video quality will be up to Apple standards. Nowhere in the presentation was there ever any indication that video was a "never" option. Just not on 1-27-10. :apple:
 
That said, while I hope that there is a camera lying in the bottom portion of the iceberg, I have a hard time beliving that there is.

I think it's pretty clear that the iPad was designed with videoconferencing in mind, given the obvious accommodation for it in the frame construction and the demonstrated hooks in the OS. I don't know why it wasn't introduced, but it's readily apparent that it was or is part of the plan.

Video conferencing on a phone, however, is much more iportant than video confencing on a tablet.

Not on MY phone. I need it on my iPad though.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.