If the lack of a hi def camera on the rear of iPad is going to prevent you buying one, then you don't understand what iPad is, and I'd advise nit buying one. For the sixteen million happy users who have iPad one, I wish you well firing up a computer just to check yr email or browse the web.
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.
Next-Generation iPad With 1-Megapixel Rear Camera and Case Cover Proximity Sensor?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If the lack of a hi def camera on the rear of iPad is going to prevent you buying one, then you don't understand what iPad is, and I'd advise nit buying one. For the sixteen million happy users who have iPad one, I wish you well firing up a computer just to check yr email or browse the web.
People, I understand the reason for a 1mp rear camera. The same reason the camera on the front may be 1mp too. My MBP has only a VGA FF camera. 1mp is 1280x960. Even though that is not large on a desktop, that res is higher than the current iPads res, and iPhones retina display. So the 1mp rear camera may be for face-time too. Just like the feature on the iphone where you can tap the camera icon on the screen during a video chat, and the two cameras switch.
Unless this is a 1mp PHOTO camera only?
Unless this is a 1mp PHOTO camera only?
I would have left your post alone but since you gave actual reasons to use the iPad (vs. implying "Magic") - I generally use my smart phone to check email - don't have to lift the heavy iPad just to check emails. Browsing the Web - the 11" MacBook Air wakes up instantaneously and provides more functional web browsing at mere additional .33 kg.
The fact remains that there has been no point in using the iPad - except novelty. But there is nothing wrong in 16M people paying their own money for novelty (and some more for accessories
).
Because Honeycomb has those things?
And, btw, "no gestures" is nonsense. Gestures are coming, just not in 4.3. Apple releases a feature that breaks some apps, and you complain. Apple takes time to allow devs to test a feature, and you complain.
I would have left your post alone but since you gave actual reasons to use the iPad (vs. implying "Magic") - I generally use my smart phone to check email - don't have to lift the heavy iPad just to check emails. Browsing the Web - the 11" MacBook Air wakes up instantaneously and provides more functional web browsing at mere additional .33 kg.
The fact remains that there has been no point in using the iPad - except novelty. But there is nothing wrong in 16M people paying their own money for novelty (and some more for accessories
oh...i agree! i LOVE that 11" MBA! *drooool*
Article = Troll Bait!
This article is doing nothing but attracting crazy comments!
This is such a weak prediction that has not followed ANY of the other rumors. I don't see how any regular here can even questions the silliness of this claim.
9-5-Mac MUST be hurting for attention... so, they toss out a junk claim and watch the sharks feed. UGH!
It's all rumors people... and this one is particularly weak.
Humm... do you think I made my point?
This article is doing nothing but attracting crazy comments!
This is such a weak prediction that has not followed ANY of the other rumors. I don't see how any regular here can even questions the silliness of this claim.
9-5-Mac MUST be hurting for attention... so, they toss out a junk claim and watch the sharks feed. UGH!
It's all rumors people... and this one is particularly weak.
Humm... do you think I made my point?
If it's the same set up as an iPod Touch I don't see it being that a big deal. I have a DSLR anyway. I see these cameras as input devices for cool apps. Not necessarily for taking photos for printing. Whether it's an app that uses the camera to control other devices, or for scanning barcodes of things, augmented reality, etc. As long as it's high enough res for use with nifty app features it sounds fine with me. The cameras on the iPod Touch seem to do a good job for those types of things. Personally I would use the iPad at home anyway. I'm not expecting to go around using it to take high res pictures. I'm curious, have any of the other "tablet makers" announced how high the camera res will be on their devices?
They're halfway there. They retooled a lot of the apps to work with the iPad, but there's still some little things that make it feel like a blown up iPod Touch. Comically spaced out icons, tiny lockscreen slide, the way it still feels like mainly a single app a time device, etc. The gestures in 4.3 were beginning to address some of those issues.
3D isn't a gimmick when done right to enhance the experience. If Apple sticks with their grid icons, it will work extremely well with 3D, especially with the way the apps/menus pop in and out.
Last edited:
You guys are a bunch of silly dodo birds! What are you going to do, run around the world taking pictures with your iPad? Do you know how silly that's going to look? Why would you need a high-MP sensor on the rear facing camera on a product that isn't practical for taking photos?
Methinks the front-facing camera is simply there to provide FaceTime functionality of switching cameras to show the other party what you're looking at. It can also provide video for augmented reality applications. However, I don't think the camera is meant to be a high quality photo-taking device. Isn't that what cameras are for?
You guys act like you're really planning on running around town with the biggest, tackiest camera in the world to take photos. Get real!
Methinks the front-facing camera is simply there to provide FaceTime functionality of switching cameras to show the other party what you're looking at. It can also provide video for augmented reality applications. However, I don't think the camera is meant to be a high quality photo-taking device. Isn't that what cameras are for?
You guys act like you're really planning on running around town with the biggest, tackiest camera in the world to take photos. Get real!
Anyone who has seriously spent time using it as a e-reader can tell you. The fonts are not nearly as sharp as on other devices such as the Kindle. Your eyes will get tired much quicker reading on the iPad than on a Kindle. I really like my iPad, but when I really want to spend time reading one of my eBooks, I break out the Kindle.
personally i feel there is not too much of a need for a rear camera. but if u did have one it should be better that one mp. to hold up a big ipad and take a pic is just not too practical unless the camera is very good quality.
Along with a few others on this topic, I really don't see practical uses for a high megapixel camera on the back of an iPad. I fully believe that the front facing camera is a great addition, but the back... not really necessary IMO.
The sensor seems like a no brainer!
Agreed.But some people feel every single spec must be maxed out whether it's useless overkill or not.5MP camera with a 1/4 inch lens?Pretty much overkill.As others have said,it will be fine for bar codes,snaps for inventory,facetime,etc.Not really a device for regular photography.A good quality 1MP camera takes fine snaps that will print nicely as regular snapshots.That's what my iPhone is for!
Love the proximity sensor,I've forgotten to sleep it when closing it before.
The ipod touch still camera is garbage. They may as well not include one than put that worthless thing on and claim it has a camera. The resolution isn't the issue, it's the fact that it can't take a non blurry photo not totally crammed with noise.
webman2k said:So, before complaining about the lack of a powerful calendar on the back, ask yourself if you'd ever use it.
But I want a powerful calendar on the back!
But I want a powerful calendar on the back!
AND a powerful calendar on the front!
So, if you were an engineer and were told to put in a place holder for a piece of hardware which you hardly knew anything about what value would you use -- 20 megapixel, 10 megapixel, or 1 megapixel? I thought so. That one megapixel comment may mean nothing.
Well, IF this is true. It's a deal breaker for me. APPLE, IF you're going to put a camera into a 5,6,7, or $800 device, don't put a toy camera in it. 1MP is NOT enough. I bought the iPod Touch with the crappy cam but I won't get this one.
This time around there is competition, and not crappy competition, real competition. Please Apple, don't lay a turd on the back camera.
Hey SJ, Get well soon.
This time around there is competition, and not crappy competition, real competition. Please Apple, don't lay a turd on the back camera.
Hey SJ, Get well soon.
Tablet tech is more than a novelty. It's the first step in seeing low spec laptops and netbooks being phased out of the market. Especially with the onslaught of Android tablets on the way, touch screen tech will start to make sense once developers get their head around it.The fact remains that there has been no point in using the iPad - except novelty. But there is nothing wrong in 16M people paying their own money for novelty (and some more for accessories
I respect your opinion, but I totally disagree. Some of that 16M, it's more for a showcase, but for me; it does more than act as a novelty. For education, can be the digital chalk board, for business - it can potentially make it easier for business to run on the go and for general consumers; can do all sorts.
First of all, a camera is nice because the best camera is always the one you have with you. Beyond that it would be nice to have a camera if only to document things. On FaceTime to show the environment I'm in. For example when visiting a work site, a factory or laboratory. Or if I'm working with small parts you could have the iPad set up on a stand and hold the parts near the camera and quickly add pictures to a presentation or Pages document. This would work with jewelry, gems, minerals, machined parts, etc.
It doesn't have to be a 12MP high end camera. 1MP is maybe adequate, 2 or 3MP would be nicer. More important is low noise, low light sensitivity, low distortion lens.
First of all because it would make the iPad look about like a printed book or magazine. The text would be crisp and the pictures and drawings would be awesome. This would help a lot for easing eyestrain.
Second, it opens up whole worlds for technical viewing. There are endless cases of images that cry out for viewing in greater detail. If iPad 2 gets double resolution it would immediately show up in optical and electron microscopy labs around the world. There are all sorts of mapping applications that produce detailed charts that would benefit from more resolution. Photographers would jump at this. People working on technical drawings, fashion design, industrial design and architecture would love to have a chance to view things in great detail. That is one of the wonderful things about the iPad. It is an isolated display that you can hold and interact with and share with a small group.
I would have left your post alone but since you gave actual reasons to use the iPad (vs. implying "Magic") - I generally use my smart phone to check email - don't have to lift the heavy iPad just to check emails. Browsing the Web - the 11" MacBook Air wakes up instantaneously and provides more functional web browsing at mere additional .33 kg.
The fact remains that there has been no point in using the iPad - except novelty. But there is nothing wrong in 16M people paying their own money for novelty (and some more for accessories
No point in "anyone" using the iPad, or just no point in you using it, since you happen to have a more expensive, less accessible alternative (which few of those 16M people probably own)?