Why the iPad we have seen will not be the final product. Thoughts?

[anthonymoody]

I can't remember a single product that Apple has released that had new, or hidden features, that weren't present in the pre release announcement

If I'm wrong I'll hold my hands up, but I think all this speculation is nonsense. We'll have to wait for revision 2 to see what Apple will, and can do, differently.

All you guys have extremely short memories.

Here's a relevant example to point to: YouTube. YouTube for the iPhone was not announced or even hinted at during the original iPhone keynote. It wasn't until some time later, but was still prior to the iPhone's launch that the announcement was made and the app shown. Speculation at the time was that YouTube was not ready at the time of the keynote since they'd yet to convert all their videos into an iPhone compatible format.

But regardless of the reason for the staggered announcement, it's clear that there's precedence for this to happen.

The 3.2 SDK is wrapped in Apple's usually tight NDA but devs are bursting at the seams with what's there, and we've heard/seen "evidence" of some of it: 6 apps in the dock, video chat calls, web file downloads, a rudimentary file system, network printing, etc. Will all of it be on the iPad when they ship? Only time will tell. My guess is some additional stuff will be, and some won't be.

But let's not say that it's impossible because it hasn't happened before. It has happened before.

For my part, I believe the next rev of the iPhone and OS4 will be announced in late March, right around the time the wifi iPads ship. The iPads will ship with 3.2, with 4 becoming available in late June coinciding with shipping on the next gen iPhone.

My $.02.

 

[OllyW]

I can't remember a single product that Apple has released that had new, or hidden features, that weren't present in the pre release announcement

If I'm wrong I'll hold my hands up, but I think all this speculation is nonsense. We'll have to wait for revision 2 to see what Apple will, and can do, differently.

The MacBook Pro was announced in January 2006 with 1.67 & 1.83 GHz processors. By the time they shipped in February, the processors have been boosted to 1.83 & 2.0 GHz.

The original iMac was shipped with a faster modem than the one announced and early Power Mac G4s were shipped with slower processors than originally announced.

 

[j_maddison]

I'm failing to see the logic behind a Youtube app on the iPhone delivering a hidden features precedence? It was just an app, a good app and a handy one, but just an app none the less.

I agree it's perfectly feasible for apple to release a new app at launch, but doubtful they'll release new functionality

Maybe we're just arguing semantics and perception, to you it's clear that Youtube was something more, but to me it was just an app release. Who's right? Perhaps we both are, it would be nice to see something new in the final iPad release, but I think I'd bet my house on the fact we wouldn't. I do like to be disproved though, I don't have any ego in that respect

 

[anthonymoody]

...I'd bet my house on the fact we wouldn't. I do like to be disproved though, I don't have any ego in that respect

I'll PM you with my address so you can mail me your keys.

 

[SteveSparks]

All you guys have extremely short memories.

Here's a relevant example to point to: YouTube. YouTube for the iPhone was not announced or even hinted at during the original iPhone keynote.
My $.02.

I think software changes could be made, I was specificially thinking about a hidden suprise of a camera.

I would like to be wrong....

 

[j_maddison]

I'll PM you with my address so you can mail me your keys.

Haha nice one

 

[j_maddison]

The MacBook Pro was announced in January 2006 with 1.67 & 1.83 GHz processors. By the time they shipped in February, the processors have been boosted to 1.83 & 2.0 GHz.

The original iMac was shipped with a faster modem than the one announced and early Power Mac G4s were shipped with slower processors than originally announced.

Shhh, you're destroying my argument

 

[OllyW]

Shhh, you're destroying my argument

It's only a house.

 

[Gav2k]

If there was going to be one on the demo. Main reason being that there is no chance apple would lose the chance to make money from pre dev on apps being able to use them like skype etc so stop wishing for something that just isn't going to happen.

 

[anthonymoody]

Love a little levity in the morning.

What's great is that for my needs the iPad is great as is. SO much so that I intend to use it as my primary machine from Day 1, retiring my MBP for good. (I will keep my household iMac and continue to use it as the central media store/sync hub).

I have a really good handle on what I use my MBP for so I'm more than comfortable making this choice. That said, I also look forward to the inevitable improvements we'll see - in the OS, with apps, and ultimately in hardware - whether these come before launch or not

 

[dan5.5]

the OS is most likely a beta of sorts, but the hardware is final

 

[RidleyGriff]

Just to be a total conspiracy theorist...

Apple doesn't want to lose iPhone sales between now and the the announcement of the new 4.0 model.

If Apple is intending on supporting video conferencing for both iPhones (remember the A+ update?) and iPads, it would obviously be a huge part of the 4.0 upgrade.

So what does Apple do if they want to show off video conferencing for iPad without tipping their hand and instantly halting iPhone sales?

Well, they can't really. If they show it off, and release a 4.0 SDK, the news becomes about iPhoneOS 4.0 instead of iPad. iPhone sales slow. Hype gets misdirected. Bad quarter.

If they show it off, then release the 3.2 SDK, everybody wonders why. Realize Apple is hiding something. "Are they hiding something because a video cam iPhone is coming?" Same result, but with negative press added to the mix.

The best they can do, is show a version of the current OS, running some of the native iPad apps, but with all of the 4.0 features pulled out of it. Save all THAT thunder for the iPhone announcement. They think with the RDF and the nature of the iPad itself they can create enough buzz (and they've more or less been correct).

No, of course, the same scenario plays out if they're just trying to hide some other features of 4.0 that have nothing to do with secret video cameras... but one can still dream...

 

[CylonGlitch]

RidleyGriff, I like the way you think. Let's keep playing this game. What if the killer feature is that there is no camera in the iPad, BUT the iPhone 4.0 will have one and if you have a iPad it will use the iPhone camera via Bluetooth to do video conferencing. Thus you an position the iPhone camera the way you want while using the pad to see yourself and the other end.

This gives people a reason to buy BOTH the iPad and the iPhone 4.0... Sales soar!

 

[anthonymoody]

RidleyGriff, I like the way you think. Let's keep playing this game. What if the killer feature is that there is no camera in the iPad, BUT the iPhone 4.0 will have one and if you have a iPad it will use the iPhone camera via Bluetooth to do video conferencing. Thus you an position the iPhone camera the way you want while using the pad to see yourself and the other end.

This gives people a reason to buy BOTH the iPad and the iPhone 4.0... Sales soar!

This does remind me of an issue that's been raised here re: a camera in the iPad. And that is - camera aiming/positioning and user experience. Without the ability to aim the lens separately from the iPad itself - whether by auto-tracking (cool!), manually, or shake-control type software - you'd have to hold the iPad pretty still. And even then, you might also have to hold it further from you than you would otherwise care to hold your iPad.

I'm sure if anyone can surmount this it's Apple. But I wonder if this also helped delay the camera introduction.

 

[admanimal]

What if the killer feature is that there is no camera in the iPad, BUT the iPhone 4.0 will have one and if you have a iPad it will use the iPhone camera via Bluetooth to do video conferencing.

I'm not sure if the practical bandwidth of bluetooth is substantial enough for streaming video. A more likely solution would just be a camera attachment for the dock connector (like someone else on the forums mocked up).

 

[agkm800]

Apple has to manufacture hundreds of thousands of units in China and bring them to the States and distribute to all the Apple stores around the country within 50 days or so. Do they even have time to make any changes?

 

[melman101]

Apple has to manufacture hundreds of thousands of units in China and bring them to the States and distribute to all the Apple stores around the country within 50 days or so. Do they even have time to make any changes?

Very good point. I like this one. But one hopes.