Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 7. It needs cameras
February 9th, 2010
Daniel Eran Dilger
Here’s segment seven in my series taking on iPad myths: no the iPad doesn’t need a camera for video conferencing.
Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch
Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped and under-delivered
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 5. It’s just a Tablet PC or Kindle
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 6. It needs HDMI for HD video output
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 7. It needs cameras
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 8. It’s a curse for mobile developers
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 9. It can’t multitask
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 10. It needs Mac OS X
.
Dear gadget spec people: 7. It’s a myth the iPad needs a camera and other peripherals built in.
Spec-oriented gadget people often really don’t like Apple because the company doesn’t cater to their specification numerology game. Apple didn’t release any irrelevant details about how much RAM was in the iPad nor how many transistors were in its new A4 custom processor. Apple relies entirely upon utility, not upon numerical puffery, to sell its products.
Where is the iPad’s camera? There’s a lot of iPhone apps that make some use of the camera, and there’s some evidence that Apple may get a camera into the iPad before it ships, just as its expected to add a camera into the next revision of the iPod touch. However, the camera-free iPod touch has become extremely popular without a camera, so its a bit of a stretch to suggest that the lack of one on the iPad is a deal breaker.
A built in camera?
The iPad doesn’t really need a camera built-in because it has the ability to work with external peripherals wirelessly. An enterprising third party should be able to create a Bluetooth camera that works as both a general camera, a front facing conferencing camera, and whatever else users might want a camera for. A built in camera on the iPad would only limit what users could do with it. The same goes for other devices.
Additionally, many iPad users will also be carrying an iPhone or some other camera phone. It’s much easier to grab a photo or video from a mobile phone and then wirelessly deliver it to the iPad than it would be to hold up a tablet-sized device while awkwardly trying to shoot a picture or a video sequence.
Of course, had Apple included a camera in the iPad as demonstrated, all the pundits would be dashing to their typewriters to explain to us why this will prevent it from being attractive to corporations, because some have security policies that forbid the use of cameras. That’s what they complained about the iPhone, despite the fact that pretty much every phone has a camera.
Getting nowhere with flattery
Using the iPad’s camera connector, any other external camera can also be used to fill it up with photos on the go. But there’s also another good reason why users probably won’t be too excited about trying to video conference from an iPad: it simply presents a terrible camera viewing angle when held as a tablet device.
Unlike the MacBooks and their roughly eye-level, forward-facing iSight, the iPad would typically be held and used at a very unflattering angle for taking pictures and especially videos visible live to the party on the other end of a call. Most people seem pretty resistant to the idea of video conferencing as it is; throwing in a tragic camera placement on a tablet isn’t going to improve things.
Peripheral potential
Additionally, beyond the camera and other built in devices, the iPad doesn’t need a USB port (as some critics are weeping about) because it already has USB signals exposed on the dock connector, just like every other iPod and iPhone. And really, the iPad doesn’t need anything built in, because Apple designed iPhone 3.0 to work with external peripheral devices via USB or Bluetooth.
It can also interface with other devices via WiFi, just as it does with Apple’s Remote app to control Apple TV. This appears to be a secret to many pundits. Use it, and you’ll wonder why nobody is crowing about Apple delivering the first multitouch remote control that makes navigating through menus on your HDTV feel downright futuristic. Another company might be hyping that free app as a major product offering.
Still, the iPhone Remote app only gives a glimpse of the kind of sophisticated control surfaces third parties could deliver for the iPad. Among these, of course, is the ability to manage complex interaction with a real camera for podcast recording, or even a small wireless cam that could be placed at a flattering angle for recording directly to the iPad. If, that is, anyone actually does want to video conference with it.
Pingback: Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 8. It’s a curse for mobile developers — RoughlyDrafted Magazine()
Pingback: Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil — RoughlyDrafted Magazine()
Pingback: Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 5. It’s just a Tablet PC or Kindle — RoughlyDrafted Magazine()
Pingback: Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 6. It needs HDMI for HD video output — RoughlyDrafted Magazine()
Pingback: Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 9. It can’t multitask — RoughlyDrafted Magazine()
Pingback: Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch — RoughlyDrafted Magazine()
Pingback: Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped and under-delivered — RoughlyDrafted Magazine()