iPad SDK Support for Front Facing Camera, Camera Flash, Zoom and Video Conferencing

[lavrishevo]

iPad

It wasn't included on the first version so they could include it on the second to get you to ditch your perfectly good first version for the slightly upgraded second version with barely any time to spare before the third version comes out.

Yes my friends, it will follow the same model as the iPhone...

 

[marksman]

Holy crap I don't want them to put a flash on the iphone.

WTH

and I don't mean flash, like the Adobe Flash, I mean a freaking flash bulb light to make pictures easier to take.

What an ugly waste of space. I hope this is some kind of weird secret option. I would never want to ugly up an iPhone like that.

OMG OMG OMG

 

[s1m]

I've always wanted a camera on my laptop, imagining all the cool stuff I'd do. Then I got a MacBook Pro, and so far, I've never used my iSight.

Do you have family/friends interstate/international? if not then video conferencing may not be a requirement for you.

I think one market that people here aren't considering that MS actually have targetted through Project Natal are the teen girls - plug in their iPad and Tiffany can show Britney what she is wearing tonight so they don't clash...

If you have a cheap and simple device that can do video calls then the SMS generation will be on it immediately. Couple that with the sexting generation then you have a massive market...

 

[admanimal]

D
I think one market that people here aren't considering that MS actually have targetted through Project Natal are the teen girls - plug in their iPad and Tiffany can show Britney what she is wearing tonight so they don't clash...
.

What does Natal have to do with anything? You can do that with any old web cam and related software.

 

[shiseiryu1]

Camera is Needed...

I think that Apple should put a camera on the iPad if for no other reason than it gives consistency to their product lines. All of the laptops/iMacs have cameras as well as the iPhone and iPod nano. The only odd ones out are the iPod Touch and iPad. Including cameras in all devices will make their product lines consistent, which will make choices easier for customers and will also help developers by not having to worry about some of their (camera-based) apps being crippled on some devices.

 

[Jason Lee]

Do you have family/friends interstate/international? if not then video conferencing may not be a requirement for you.

I think one market that people here aren't considering that MS actually have targetted through Project Natal are the teen girls - plug in their iPad and Tiffany can show Britney what she is wearing tonight so they don't clash...

If you have a cheap and simple device that can do video calls then the SMS generation will be on it immediately. Couple that with the sexting generation then you have a massive market...

That's brilliant. I want a camera. Now.

Seriously, video conferencing might make more sense on an iPad than a laptop, and it kind of stinks that they didn't include it, but still, it's not really a big deal to me. Mostly want an iPad because I have close to three hundred books. Would be nice to have them all in one device.

 

[taskmanager]

I hope it does have a camera...

 

[jglavin]

People keep saying they would want it, but I can't think of why. I guess so you can give remote deviated septum diagnoses??

And here you are hinting at another possible use of the ipad by those folks that are affluent enough to afford a device to fit between their smartphone and their laptop.. sniff sniff

😀

 

[Mackan]

We're not sure why these features were dropped on the first version of the iPad, but we hope to see it again in future versions of the iPad or even iPhone.

Oh, not sure? Very diplomatic. But let me reveal the real reasons here:

We get the camera in iPad rev.2, and camera flash in rev.3. You know, cripple the first generation of the device, and a couple of years later you get the features that should have been there in the first place. All to make people buy new, each year. It's pure focus on profit.

 

[Darkroom]

iPhone OS (iPOS)

LOL

 

[deevey]

Pricing / Cameras etc .....

First off hi all, I don't post often here.

I'm thinking here, just like the keyboard, is there any reason a camera could not be an addon module that plugs into the connector ?

And I could be WAY off, but given the likelihood that this will be used in Education / Medical / Corporate environments where camera's, and cell phones / laptops with cameras are not prohibited, would it not make sense to have the camera as an "option"? This would be both in terms of revenue ($50 extra to apple for the pleasure?) and keeping the the unit camera free as per MANY corporate security regulations. Thus allowing the device a significantly it a larger possible share in the Government / Military / Financial markets which it may otherwise be excluded from ?

Sony used to have a phone (m600 i think) which was designed for these business markets, which was designed for this niche.

If it did have a built in camera (as small and hidden as the iphone) in a school environment where 30 or 40 people are tapping away and have the camera pointing (legitimately) underneath the next students desk ... well you get the idea of what "could" happen (and auto youtube uploading!)

If they don't release a camera on the shipped models, its my guess there will be an add-on ala isight following shortly.

Pricewise as a digital photo frame, yes its expensive, but as a multipurpose, business device, media player, browser and general bundle of goodness .. its actually damn cheap comparatively (Ar he'll you can always use RDP on it to check your downloads on your windows box or play the odd flash file 😛

Its a fact that crappy touch controllers exist in the entertainment and hospitality market that are much more expensive (for a '5 screen with standard "old skool" screen) that this will be able to replace almost overnight with the right developer.

Point of sales touch solution will I'm sure be next (currently $500 - $1000 for a Celeron based '10 touchcreen POS), this could be a huge winner, even controlling windows via terminal server would be better than the majority of touchscreen out there, maybe they can add a scanner which plugs into it !

Already bundles of music software makers are coming up with innovative ways to utilize the multitouch as live performance tools / DJ decks etc ...

Its my gut feeling that this will do for touch PC's what iphone did for touch interfaces and smartphones, its going to change how we interact with computers for a long time to come, not because they were the first to utilize a touch (or multitouch) interface, but because they made it so extremely easy for the novice to use.

its My 2 cents, who know's what will happen ... its Apple. Lets just just bow down to our shiny overlords and accept it must be THE solution. We all know the first second we get our greasy paws on one for ten minutes we'll be making excuses on why we need one ... "But Darling its only $500 and will save us a fortune in blagh blagh blagh"

Sorry for the long post, but its not often, and I think there is a few valid points in there.

Is there any reason they could not utilise some sort of IP camera tech in this ?

 

[wlow3]

Some people think that the next iPhone will have a front facing camera (it's taller a bit, maybe to make room for it). Maybe they don't want to mention it for the iPad because they don't want to tip their hand to a major new marque iPhone feature until l at least March when they typically announce the new iPhones. That press event could prove to be very interesting,

 

[aaarrrgggh]

...What would you rather have?

For $499, would you rather have a front-facing camera or an extra 32GB of memory?

Looking at the survey of interest levels strongly favoring the top and bottom price points, I would guess that Apple should keep the $499 version as-is, and go to 32GB with 3G for $599, and add a camera to a 64GB version at $699. Throw in a $799 version with 128GB of flash as well while you are at it.

Suddenly, you have created a compelling upgrade path that doesn't just cater to those who always just buy the most expensive version. The $799 version would have a lower margin than $699, but might do some interesting things to innovate in the space.

Personally, it is hard to justify any of the upgrades beyond 16GB WiFi as the price points make it feel like it is a bad investment, when a retail SD card is under $30 for 16GB. If the next version up had (at least) the 3G and camera, I might consider spending an extra $100... and then each step is easier to swallow.

 

[Thex1138]

Front Camera

Sit the iPad in the keyboard cradle... tap away...
The USB camera will NOT plug in to the already occupied port at the bottom.
Front face camera seems logical there.... whilst keying away your messages you can look at the web cam etc,..
If the keyboard is bluetooth and does not require port connection then is is possible that the camera could be mounted.

On the other hand holding the iPad which has camera on will provide snot-cam which is undesirable...

How many people might hold their iPad whilst holding the wired up camera or mounting it atop the iPad, connecting wire flopping around and either pointing it away or towards the owner for recording?
If it is not securely mounted on top then it will fall off if bumped or the user is moving to fast or whatever.
The proprietary Apple iPad Case shown also does not allow space for a clip-on web cam either...
In this upright position the camera add-on would be plugged in to the [now] side facing port and set on top of the iPad, if that was possible.... but even so it will still only provide a snot-cam view of the owner...

 

[RalfTheDog]

Used for schools.

The camera is for use by schools so they can take pictures of the kids at home.

My bet is that the non cell version will not have the camera, the 3G will.

 

[Plutonius]

Two words here

AT+T exclusivity

Apple will not risk cannibalizing the revenue it gets from AT+T until the exclusivity agreement ends. Many analyst are now saying that exclusivity will end in the summer of 2011 (not 2010) and I extremely doubt that you will see a camera in the iPad or iPod Touch till then.

 

[Scottsdale]

I'm not convinced the thing has no camera. I won't believe it until it's released.

It's literally a $5-$10 part, so it's not about saving money. The OS already supports a camera, so it's rather doubtful it's about software (though I suppose that's the only possible reason). Many, many apps in the App Store use the camera (even apps that don't "need" it, like games, utilities, etc.), and the App Store is the only market of software for the device.

It's just too convenient...a PR strategy to leave it out of the announcement, not mention it, get everyone buzzing about how awful it is, and then release it and say "we listened to customer criticism", when in fact it was planned all along.

It's a $5 to $10 part that people will buy a whole new iPad for with revision B or C. Apple is the KING of incremental upgrades. It is common knowledge that Apple uses each small incremental component for future sales as it knows people will buy one today without the camera, and those same people will buy a rev C with a camera just for that upgrade feature. Others will buy a rev B with Verizon 4G. Others will buy a rev C for some other feature that SHOULD have been included from day one. Don't count on Apple to include something that seems obvious now when it can make more money by releasing it on a future revision.

 

[Friscohoya]

I see everyone rattled up about the ipad not having a camera. Seriously, will people use it? You could argue "I'll use it for travel". Fine, I'll give you that one, but I myself don't travel without my family, and if I did, why would I want to see them??? I also don't see people get out a 10 inch tablet to take a picture, if you take out your damn iphone you may not look so retarded. If the ipad were to have a camera, I'd probably use it for the same thing I use my isight camera on my mac, to make sure I don't have snot in my nose before I talk to a girl 😛

If yiu can video conference while reviewing a document this thing would revolutinize business.

 

[jo0]

anyone want to know what it feels like to be raped by a major corporation? buy an ipad and bend over.

 

[Jaro65]

It's a Zen Profitability Thing: Design the third gen device, test for user experience, leak rumors of the design characteristics that eventually are dropped, sell the device to the same folks three times over.

Why only three times? 🙂

 

[Nostromo]

It's a $5 to $10 part that people will buy a whole new iPad for with revision B or C. Apple is the KING of incremental upgrades. It is common knowledge that Apple uses each small incremental component for future sales as it knows people will buy one today without the camera, and those same people will buy a rev C with a camera just for that upgrade feature. Others will buy a rev B with Verizon 4G. Others will buy a rev C for some other feature that SHOULD have been included from day one. Don't count on Apple to include something that seems obvious now when it can make more money by releasing it on a future revision.

It's more like the first version is a downgrade from the one that's actually supposed to be well equipped. Apple could sell the device with a camera, but it wants people to buy several in a row. That's a rip-off.

 

[Friscohoya]

I was thinking exactly this and thanks for posting. Beat me to it. This makes ever more sense for such a device. I wouldn't be surprised if it was included.

Update: here's the old Apple Insider post: http://www.appleinsider.com/article...lcd_display_that_also_takes_photos_video.html

I could see using this also for "white board" real-time conferencing via a VoIP type application (not sure if there are any for the iPhone today...). That'd be a killer feature for me (I have a love-hate relationship with flow charts....).

The combination of the A4 with PowerVR SGX SoC might mean this is patent is finally for commercialization. By some indications, the iPad was in development prior to the iPhone (i.e. consider the iPhone a scaled down version of the iPad instead of the other way around); it's just that the technology wasn't there to bring it to fruition.

It would be like the turtle com from ninja turtles. But as much as I would love it it ain't gonna happen. iSight maybe but this patent is from the future.

 

[gibbz]

anyone want to know what it feels like to be raped by a major corporation? buy an ipad and bend over.

yeah, okay 🙄

The fact people buy the device on their volition nullifies your crappy rape example.

It's more like the first version is a downgrade from the one that's actually supposed to be well equipped. Apple could sell the device with a camera, but it wants people to buy several in a row. That's a rip-off.

It isn't a rip-off. If the iPad meets your needs at the time of release, buy it. If not, wait until it does. If you have to a camera and buy one without, that is your fault, even if it is subsequently included in a future revision.

 

[Friscohoya]

Frankly, I think that the chances of including unannounced hardware components into iPad 1.0 this late in the game are unlikely.

Also, I think that last minute prerelease price changes to published pricing are also unlikely. Apple has probably forecasted sales and margins for the new device. iPhone OS 3.x already supported some of the software features mentioned.

Other than those, your post has conjecture worth considering.

Apple has already stated that they would drop the price if sales were slow.

 

[doctoree]

they were dropped to give Apple room for future improovements. Zhats why I would never buy the current iPhone or the first iPad.