Reuters Reports Next-Generation iPad to Offer Front and Rear Cameras

[Popeye206]

Be sure not to buy the iPad 2 because the third one will have a holographic projector and be able to remotely control your microwave.

Darn! I didn't know that was coming! I'm waiting! Apple is just trying to manipulate us and line their pockets again holding out on the iPad 2.0 specs! I don't want to feel cheated by buying the 2.0 when 3.0 is coming!

People like the original poster make me laugh too. What do they expect? Technology to stand still?

 

[BC2009]

The ipod touch and ipad should have an option of GPS.

Are you saying that you should be able to get GPS in the iPad without upgrading to the 3G version? It would be cool if Apple added $20 to the price and put a GPS antenna in the WiFi iPad (and in the iPod Touch).

I purchased a 3G iPad for two reasons:
1) So I could get 3G internet access a few times per year when I needed it (i.e.: when the family goes on vacation or I go on a business trip)

2) So my iPad would not be crippled when it came to GPS-enabled applications like Find-my-iPad or Google Maps.

I don't expect Apple to raise the price point to allow for GPS enablement -- but the ability to link the device at the OS-level to a third-party bluetooth GPS receiver would be cool -- I'm betting said receiver would still cost you at least $50. I'm not holding my breath for Apple increasing the number of options for GPS.

 

[notjustjay]

Personally, I have no idea why I would want a rear camera on the iPad... but I'm excited to find out what uses app developers have in mind!

I didn't think I'd really use 3G much on my iPad, either... I fully intended to subscribe to one month of 3G service just to try it out, then cancel the subscription and stick to WiFi. Except that I've found it so darned convenient that I've kept paying every month.

And besides which, even for those of you who absolutely, truly, have no intention of ever using the camera -- how much does the camera component cost, really? $5 maybe? It's a non-issue. Just pretend it's not there if it makes you feel better.

 

[Popeye206]

Could all this iPad 2 rumors be caused by Apple´s competitors in order to slow down sales of iPads this holiday? I can see the headlines by all "forecasters": "Ipad failed sales expectations this holiday season"

The only flaw with that theory is it would hurt their sales too as I'm sure the 2.0 product will surpass most of what's out there. Again, Apple is a year ahead of the curve in experience with this device.

 

[shartypants]

Awesome, and a 12 megapixel camera please Seriously, what a cool camera that would be.

 

[kjr39]

I may be the only person excited about two cameras.

As someone that video conferences 2-3 times a week with parents to show them the kids, I'll now be able to continue to look at the screen while I point the rear camera to show what Jr is doing new this week.

 

[knucklehead]

Apple made rumor?

Could all this iPad 2 rumors be caused by Apple´s competitors in order to slow down sales of iPads this holiday? I can see the headlines by all "forecasters": "Ipad failed sales expectations this holiday season"

It might be to terrify people into buying the current iPad, so they wont have to deal with the horror of possibly having a back camera in the next revision ... potentially driving huge push up in holiday sales.

 

[Rocketman]

Similarly, I didn't buy the first iphone because it didn't allow mms (even though it was perfectly capable of it) which I thought was particularly disgusting of them. I wonder, how do all you guys feel about being exploited like this?

Simple. We buy whatever product best suits our needs at the time inclusive of other manufacturers.

But one item of note contrary to your claim, when we buy an Apple product, the features they actually claim it has, works, and additional features are added by Apple as they are debugged even after the sale. So the overall value is what causes some people to buy Apple products despite the limitations you note, thus annoying you.

Two birds with one stone.

Rocketman

 

[Arcadie]

for those wondering who uses the rear facing camera..
salesmen who need to copy documents.

when i was in the merchant service business, we had to have the business owner sign a contract then email it back to headquarters (usually in another state so u cant just drop em off). taking them home and scanning them was the norm, however that can be time consuming and you want to send them off asap to get the customer up and running within 24 hours. if i had an ipad, you could just take a picture and email the documents off right there. it would also prevent go-backs if something was missing.

 

[hayesk]

How is it about choice. If rumors are true, if I buy Ipad 2 I will have NO choice. It comes with two cameras and that's it. I will have to PAY for the cameras, whether I use them or not.

So what? You still have the choice to use it, and you still have the choice not to buy it. But come on, how much cost do you think the camera adds to the product?

 

[I is Mac]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)

The next iPad will have cameras? Wow that was so unforeseen...

 

[lazyrighteye]

How is it about choice. If rumors are true, if I buy Ipad 2 I will have NO choice. It comes with two cameras and that's it. I will have to PAY for the cameras, whether I use them or not.

The pricing will be the exact same for iPad 2 as they were for iPad 1. So, in a sense, you're paying more for less features on iPad 1 than you will be for iPad 2. That's the price we pay as early adopters. Anyone who has followed Apple longer than 6 months, knows this has [almost] always been the case. Generally speaking - the next version of Apple's hardware is typically thinner, more powerful, offers better power management and costs the same as the previously thicker, less powerful, less power efficient version. And this is no different across the spectrum of consumer product roll outs. From automobiles to TVs. Early adopters know they re paying a premium to be the 1st kids on the block with the shiny new toy. It's the follow-up version that has ironed out kinks, added some missing features, etc.

And this rear-facing camera debate is laughable. I see zero harm/issue with including one on an iPad. None. And yes, I totally get why some wouldn't want to use it as a point and shoot camera. I too probably wouldn't, but it does not meant I think it should be without the option. Much like the Weather app that comes bundled in iOS - you don't have to use the app [camera] if you don't want to. But I have no problem with that being a bundled option. Besides, as 80% of the replies here have indicated, there are so many more uses for a rear-facing camera aside form snap shots.

That said, it would be very Apple to include a front-facing camera on iPad 2 but save a rear-facing camera for iPad 3. Just because a feature seems obvious does not mean Apple will immediately include. Again, typical consumer product roll out says to trickle new features to ensure a steady revenue stream.

 

[hayesk]

With two cameras you can come close to taking a 360 degree panorama with one click.

I doubt it. The focal length on those cameras will give you nowhere near a 180° view required for panorama with both cameras.

 

[Mac-Mariachi]

Rear-Facing Camera

So people are whining about Apple adding a rear facing camera to the iPad?

If the iPad 2 came out a couple of weeks ago and it didn´t have the RFC, they sure would also be whining.

I can´t believe they whine about additional features for the iPad, I mean I never use the Video Display Port on my MacBook Pro but I´m glad it´s there just in case I ever need it.

I sure won´t be taking vacation pictures with my iPad but if I´m lying in my hammock in the backyard while surfing the net with my iPad and suddenly a UFO crosses through the sky, getting up and going for my regular camera or taking out my iphone from my pocket would mean precious lost seconds. Instead I just hold my iPad and take a picture and if they see me they will now we´re an advanced civilization that use cool gadgets.

So, RFC is nice, but I want to know what will the iPad 2 have on the inside (RAM, Processor, Screen, etc...)

 

[BC2009]

All my friends, and all the mindless hordes freaking out, frantically logging on the the apple store, lining up in the street, for the 1st gen apple this that or the other, made me laugh. When the first one came out, without a camera, I had that sinking feeling in my stomach: "apple, you bunch of stinking whores, you are exploiting your fans yet again. You will release the next generation with cameras, and all these suckers will go out and buy it again." And lo and behold, as with all apple products, it has come to pass. Similarly, I didn't buy the first iphone because it didn't allow mms (even though it was perfectly capable of it) which I thought was particularly disgusting of them. I wonder, how do all you guys feel about being exploited like this?

Wow. Mindless hordes, stinking whores, exploitation, suckers. All that vitriol and you missed fanboys?

Nah, it's people like you that make us laugh...as if waiting for the next generation is the only non-sucker thing to do. It's technology; the next one is always better than the previous one. Be sure not to buy the iPad 2 because the third one will have a holographic projector and be able to remotely control your microwave.

I've had the iPad since about Day Ten and it's really great as is. Ten million others agree. You, on the other hand, have had nothing. Fair to say we win, you lose.

Agreed..... There is always a trade-off. Cutting edge technology today (maxed-out RAM, fastest processor, dual cores) costs a premium and if Apple included every feature under the sun then everybody would complain that it costs too much. There is a balancing act to be had. When iPad was released, FaceTime did not exist -- it was slated for iPhone 4 (which is the right place to launch it because, well, it's a phone).

Personally, I like that Apple tries to find the balance between price and feature set -- sometimes I agree with their choices, and sometimes I don't. When I do agree with their compromises and I like the price, then I make a purchase. When I don't agree then I simply wait for the version that works for me or I purchase a competing product. I waited until iPhone 3Gs for my first iPhone because turn-by-turn navigation was a must for me (my last smartphone had it, and I would not give it up).

What I do NOT do is get all bent-out-of-shape inside, and then to make myself feel better insult those who actually purchased the device and are enjoying it. Folks like that are just jealous of those who have the device and are angry that they are being made to wait to get the features they want.

I have had iPad v1.0 since the first month it was released, and thus far I have heard nothing to make me say "I have to go out and buy iPad-2!" The actual kind of specs I am interested in for iPad-2 are dual-core/faster processor, more RAM, bezel gestures (to reduce fingerprints), SD-Card slot (to eliminate need for camera attachment), dashboard-style widgets, AppleTV features (control-by-Apple-remote-app/AirPlay receiver mode), kickstand, landscape dock connector, and an OCR-enabled receipt scanner with built-in feeder (though I know this will have to be a 3rd-party thing via bluetooth). I must say that cameras, front or rear-facing, are cool, but do little to excite me. Judging by the folks on this thread, I can tell I am probably in the minority on that view so it sounds like Apple is making a good decision to add cameras to the iPad.

 

[Lesser Evets]

... the addition of a rear-facing camera has been less certain, with some observers skeptical of the functionality of such a feature on a device with a much larger form factor than pocket-sized smartphones.

Yeah...because photos and video were NEVER made with large devices EVERY before...

Die.

The use of an iPad for shooting video/photos and editing them are perfect.

 

[JS77]

A rear facing camera? REALLY? Useless in a large iPad device. I may not buy one if it has this- really

Can't.

Understand.

People.

Like.

This.

 

[nelmat]

Indeed. Strange that people seem to be forgetting about FaceTime using both front and rear cameras...

Facetime doesn't have to use both front and rear cameras. (Look at an iMac or macBook). Most people can see the flaw in the rear facing camera for facetime - the device is going to be in your lap - who wants to see a shot of your groin?

Facetime will be enough of an ergonomic mess unless the iPad is on a desk or other stand - in which case, you might as well be on your desktop/laptop.

If the camera is the killer feature, i'll stick with iPad 1 - I would not want to use a device with this form factor as a camera or video conference tool - I have a camera and a desktop for that...

 

[nelmat]

Yeah...because photos and video were NEVER made with large devices EVERY before...

Die.

The use of an iPad for shooting video/photos and editing them are perfect.

Completely disagree - large cameras are designed to be held as such - the entire form factor of iPad needs altering before it's sensible to use it as a camera.

 

[ftaok]

For me, the question isn't whether the iPad2 will have a rear camera or not, the question is whether the rear camera is any good at all.

For me, the rear camera module on the iPod touch is lousy. Too few megapixels, constant focus, etc.

Hopefully, the iPad2 won't be so thin as to prevent a decent module from being used.

ft

 

[nelmat]

All my friends, and all the mindless hordes freaking out, frantically logging on the the apple store, lining up in the street, for the 1st gen apple this that or the other, made me laugh. When the first one came out, without a camera, I had that sinking feeling in my stomach: "apple, you bunch of stinking whores, you are exploiting your fans yet again. You will release the next generation with cameras, and all these suckers will go out and buy it again." And lo and behold, as with all apple products, it has come to pass. Similarly, I didn't buy the first iphone because it didn't allow mms (even though it was perfectly capable of it) which I thought was particularly disgusting of them. I wonder, how do all you guys feel about being exploited like this?

If I had wanted a device with a camera, I would have bought one. The iPad was perfect for my needs, it continues to exceed my expectation and requirements, it's a fantastic product which I would never use for video conferencing. If the only difference with the new version is a camera, i won't be rushing out again. I've been a first gen adopter of any product that has served a purpose for me - never regretted it and never had any issues.

 

[fergusjk]

Yeah...because photos and video were NEVER made with large devices EVERY before...

Die.

The use of an iPad for shooting video/photos and editing them are perfect.

hahahaha. But that device sits neatly on the shoulder (whilst breaking your collar bone)

 

[fergusjk]

I am chomping at the bit to get ipad 2. So much so I'm doing everything in my power not to just go out and get ipad 1

The most significant feature for me will be more memory and a retina display...

Now before everyone starts going on that iPad 2 will never have the 326 dpi (or ppi). It doesnt need to have that for a retina display.
RD is a function of how far you hold the device away from your eyes (retinas). iPhone 4 doesn't have a 'retina display' if you hold it half an inch from your nose. similarly iPad 1 does have a retina display if you hold it 6 feet away.

My guess is that iPad 2 will have a retina display based on holding it 25/30% further away than an iPhone... which means significantly less pixel density than 326 dpi (ppi),

 

[notjustjay]

hahahaha. But that device sits neatly on the shoulder (whilst breaking your collar bone)

Solution: bottom facing camera!

Stick the camera beside the dock connector.

Hoist iPad onto shoulder like a boombox.

Problem solved!

 

[notjustjay]

My guess is that iPad 2 will have a retina display based on holding it 25/30% further away than an iPhone... which means significantly less pixel density than 326 dpi (ppi),

I'm curious how Apple plans to pull off any kind of resolution increase. You can't just pick an arbitrary new higher resolution without providing some easy way for apps to scale up (or they'll all look like crap until rewritten).

One possibility is that the new display will be incrementally higher resolution (say, from 1024x768 to 1280x960). The old apps would run exactly as-is, but centered on the screen with a small black box around the sides. Older apps run just fine (just a bit smaller), but app developers may have to completely rewrite their apps to fit the new screen resolution.