Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

As someone said before:

Front-Facing Cam and Flash are features of the new IPhone (4G).

The size of the accept/decline buttons is correct if you keep in mind, that the new IPhone will have a higher screen resolution and maybe a different aspect ratio.

I dont see such a big change (Cam/Flash) in a late IPad announcement, since the product shots/pictures are already online. Changes within the IPad's software are more likely since they only need to be shown in screenshots.

There wont be any changes to the body of the IPad in the 1st gen. That design and body is final.

Just my 2cents..
Jabba
 
Kelmon said:
You aren't going to use something as relatively unwieldy as the iPad for taking photographs
Click to expand...

Agreed!

Kelmon said:
and you aren't going to use the device for video conferences.
Click to expand...
Kelmon said:
I could see the point of enabling the iPad to connect to camera devices but actually putting cameras in the device itself makes no sense to me
Click to expand...

I fail to see your logic here. Why wouldn't you use it for video conferences? It's probably one of the only reasons I would buy it and use it for.

If you aren't going to use the device for video conferences / photographs, why would you see the point of enabling the iPad to connect camera devices but not want to put a camera in the device itself? :confused:
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

Kelmon said:
I consistently fail to understand why anyone would want a camera on the iPad, either at the front or back. You aren't going to use something as relatively unwieldy as the iPad for taking photographs (frankly, it's hard enough to prevent camera shake with the iPhone) and you aren't going to use the device for video conferences. I could see the point of enabling the iPad to connect to camera devices but actually putting cameras in the device itself makes no sense to me.

I'll also note that I have a pathological hatred of on-camera flash since they are guaranteed to make your pictures look horrible. Natural lighting with good high ISO performance is much more preferable, and off-camera flash can be fun.
Click to expand...

Who are you to say people won't video conference?
I'd guess many people would actually, myself included. Speak for yourself, not for others.
 
Reading this thread, and the many others just like it, quite a few things come to mind:

1. Apple withholding a camera until launch? Maybe. The reason why Apple need to pre-announce the iPad is the same reason why they pre-announced the iPhone, which is that the device needs FCC approval which is a public process (which is also why the iPad is not yet available for pre-order, Apple are not legally allowed to sell it yet). Now, if Apple wanted to keep ahead of the game, they might withhold a camera from the approval/pre-release models rather than give their competitors an extra two months to duplicate it. However, I'm not sure if Apple would be allowed to withhold hardware features from the FCC, which might put a dent in that theory. Don't forget that Apple are probably already manufacturing the iPad ready for next month's release.

2. Is this signs of a camera in the 4G iPhone? I'd say probably not. The next gen iPhone will most likely be running iPhone OS 4.0 (which I believe has already been seen tested in the wild). Although, maybe Apple are running 4G hardware on a more stable OS (3.2) for testing purposes.

3. I'm sure Apple deliberately leave these hooks in these SDKs and beta softwares. How better to do a controlled leak and drum up excitement for potential features?

4. A camera a killer feature? For some, I can see how it would be. But not for everyone. The iPad as announced is perfect for my SO, it would be great for me but I'm not sure how I can justify one when I intend to get the next iPhone in June/July (depends in part on what the UK pricing ends up as).

5. For me a major missing feature is a dock that lets the iPad charge in landscape mode, which would make it a far better digital photo frame.
 
I'm not fussed either way about a front facing camera in either the iphone or the ipad as I've never used one on any of the phones I've had in the past. I'm also not sure that the iPad is for me yet as I am hoping I can run a basic CAD program on it to conduct measured site surveys. However, I can see how a front facing camera would be useful or a must have feature for some people.

I have an idea of how this might go down at the WWDC when they do the iPad/iPhone announcement.

Steve Jobs on stage talking about the new iPhone and software as normal and towards the end as opposed to "one more thing", the iPhone he is holding rings and it's the other guy (can't remember his name - sorry) back stage making a video call. From an iPad! Crowd goes nuts and a screen pulls back to show the guy lounging on a couch using his iPad to speak to Steve.

Sounds good to me but then, most crazy things do. Probably won't happen, but one can dream.
 
Kelmon said:
I consistently fail to understand why anyone would want a camera on the iPad, either at the front or back. You aren't going to use something as relatively unwieldy as the iPad for taking photographs (frankly, it's hard enough to prevent camera shake with the iPhone)
Click to expand...

Okay, now you're just being ignorant. Camera shake is a side effect of dealing with the size of the instrument. A larger camera device would shake less, because your arm strength is balancing out the weight.

Small cameras shake more in our hands. Big cameras shake less.

ipad is bigger than iphone = less camera shake


And, regardless of the fact that the ipad camera optics/sensor wouldn't even compare, I take it you've never seen a view camera? They weigh about 10-15 pounds and are the standard in large format photography. Yes, they are VERY large and unwieldy. Probably the most cumbersome camera to use in present day, and they are used by film photographers every day.

Now please, stop talking about cameras.
 
muskratboy said:
of course it should have a camera. everything should have a camera. :)
Click to expand...

Especially guns. ;)


But seriously. Everybody knows Apple is already busy developing 4.0. And 3.2 and 4.0 obviously share a lot of new feature.

Everybody who develops software can guess that both of them are developed in the same repository. It's very hard to reliably prevent these data structures from being merged into the wrong branch.

So it's pretty much confirmed there will be devices with front-facing cameras and flashes soon. But will it be the iPad? I don't think so. But it certainly would be one of their biggest marketing coups, ever: Re-hype just before release.
 
More than front-facing or flash enabled camera i'd like to see an accessory that allows you to connect a dslr for tethered shooting with a well designed app.

This would pretty much render a laptop obsolete in the field.
 
Seriously, this is rubbish, where's the personal teleport system? I'd have expected that in this product, as it would certainly lower the irritation of having to carry around.

Chill out guys, if you don't like the product, sod off and buy something you do like. Apple like to push the envelope, but at the same time they're sensible to manage their product update pipeline. If they put everything they have in right now, they'd be fiddling around two years on the next version, which would have you lot rolling around moaning about a lousy update cycle.

Go have a beer or something and chill out.
 
MacRumors said:


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.

Article Link: iPad SDK Support for Front Facing Camera, Camera Flash, Zoom and Video Conferencing
Click to expand...

They dropped it so they can sell you two.

Apple always does this. That's how they make so much money.

They could have come out with the iPhone 3G first, but they made a bunch of BS about "being a battery hog". I love their products, but I often get frustrated with the way they leave out key features to force-buy upgrades.

FireWire anyone?!
 
Drinahn said:
Apple like to push the envelope, but at the same time they're sensible to manage their product update pipeline. If they put everything they have in right now, they'd be fiddling around two years on the next version, which would have you lot rolling around moaning about a lousy update cycle.
Click to expand...

Hardly 'pushing the envelope' if they're leaving out 'crucial' features just so they can have a steady update cycle and not be 'fiddling about in two years' :)
 
HiVolt said:
This is Apple, they always leave out features that make sense to the 2nd or even 3rd revision of a device.
Click to expand...

Ya, look at the iPhone, we are still waiting, multi-tasking, video chat, keyboard (a real one), etc, etc.
 
Drinahn said:
Seriously, this is rubbish, where's the personal teleport system? I'd have expected that in this product, as it would certainly lower the irritation of having to carry around.

Chill out guys, if you don't like the product, sod off and buy something you do like. Apple like to push the envelope, but at the same time they're sensible to manage their product update pipeline. If they put everything they have in right now, they'd be fiddling around two years on the next version, which would have you lot rolling around moaning about a lousy update cycle.

Go have a beer or something and chill out.
Click to expand...

Teleport:eek:

They will not sell a billion whatevers with that??!! If it does not make them a lot of money, Apple will not do it.:apple:
 
Am i the only one not bothered by the lack of a camera?

My friends/family will survice if they don't get my Skype calls.
Flash, however is a major miss.
 
Camera or no Camera?

At first when I read the posts, all 8 pages of it, I started to get pissed off by the device not having a camera, when the software would allow or mention the possibility. :( But on a second thought, I was wondering how many times I have used a webcam, I only used once, for a job interview, and that was it. I have 2 MBAs with camera, one Lenovo with the latest and greatest MS High Definition Camera (yeah, they have a 720p video cam), and I have a spare webcam in my home office, for what???

To talk and see my wife and kids when I am traveling? Perhaps when I start doing it again I might use it. For now, I am more interested if my phone carrier would allow tethering on my Iphone and the Ipad has a decent bluetooth stack, so I don't need to buy one that is 3G enabled, instead use my Iphone data plan when there is no connectivity with a Wi-Fi network. But I am veering off topic here.

I am willing to purchase the 64GB with no 3G for now, it does not make any sense to pay for two data plans.

My plans to use it is to read magazines, books, catch a flick, and do some surfing on the net. Good to go to the dentist, at the reception on a customer visit, while on a plane, or in bed without disturbing your partner. Difficult to rationalize its usage, perhaps it is just because I like new gadgets.:)
 
FrankieTDouglas said:
Quality? So I suppose this is why art galleries have had photo exhibitions based solely on cellphone photography? And perhaps this is also why there are now iPhone camera photography workshops?

Please, think, just a little bit.
Click to expand...

Well I'm sure some people have no idea about what image quality is, and they don't really care. I will always care about image quality and while I find cameras on small devices to be practical to take photos of documents and to show people what my room looks like, I don't see the point of using them for anything else.

Just because people thought it would be cool to have cellphone images in an art gallery doesn't mean that the images are high quality. Basically, they did that to show that low quality images can still be artistic.

But the quality of images taken with a cell phone or any other device that isn't primarily a camera will always suck. The lens is too small and it will always produce a ridiculous amount of vignetting, soft focus, and the small sensor will always be super noisy and you have no control over exposure times or ISO settings.

I see the point of a webcam, but not the point of a rear facing camera. Anyway, if you will have an iPad, you'll probably also have some super modern phone or maybe even an iPhone ALWAYS with you, so you'll always have a camera at hand.

And people who want quality that looks decent on anything bigger than a 5 cm screen will just have a real camera with them.
 
VoR said:
Hardly 'pushing the envelope' if they're leaving out 'crucial' features just so they can have a steady update cycle and not be 'fiddling about in two years' :)
Click to expand...

Fortunately neither you nor I are responsible for the definition of "crucial" features. Let's see how it goes.
 
MacDawg said:
Rear facing camera?
Why? The thing would be way too big and clumsy to be a good camera
I would use my iPhone for that, or another camera
Click to expand...

I have a friend that earnestly believes that Augmented Reality is the killer app that's missing on the iPad only because Apple does not have a rear-facing camera.

I think he's nuts. Mainly because I can't imagine walking around holding an iPad in front of me, for really any reason. But he insists I'm just not getting it. Perhaps he's right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back