• Your favorite








    , and
  • 3.2 SDK Shows iPad-Only Features, Possible Camera Support

    Developers and pundits are crawling all over the iPad SDK that Apple released to developers yesterday, and have found a few noteworthy items. While it was known that the upcoming 3.2 update to the iPhone OS will be iPad-only, what a closer look at the SDK revealed is that particular features shown in the iPad demo yesterday will not be supported by the iPhone or iPod, creating the possibility of separate app development processes for the two families of iPhone OS devices. Also a feature of the iPad emulator shows a "Take Picture" option, which has led to speculation that a camera may be included in a future model of the device.

    News that the iPad would run the iPhone OS was received with pleasure by many iPhone users who anticipated that some of the interface enhancements of the new device would make their way to its older sibling. A reading of the updated human interface guidelines for iPhone 3.2, though, indicates that two of the most interesting ones - split view (with separate sections of the screen showing different data) and popovers (floating fully-formatted menus) - are both listed as "iPad-only." While it's entirely understandable, since these features are really large-screen specific, this will lead to a "fork" for many developers who will now need to maintain separate iPad and iPhone/iPod versions of their apps.

    Also today, Greg Kumparak at CrunchGear was playing with the Contacts app on the iPad simulator bundled in the SDK, and noticed something that seemed a bit odd.

    Tucked away within the iPad's contacts application is an "Add Photo" button, purposed with.. well, adding photos. Everyone likes having photos assigned to their contacts, and there's more than enough space on this thing to sync photos of all your friends - so nothing too strange there. What is odd, however, is the prompt that pops up: do you want to "Choose Existing Photo", or do you want to "Take Photo"?
    It's entirely possible that this was an oversight on Apple's part, forgetting to take out a feature from the pre-3.2 SDK. However, it leaves open the possibility that Apple will support a built-in camera at some point in its roadmap for the product. Given that the absence of a camera was one of the sources of disappointment among many fans yesterday, it's likely something that Apple is at least considering as a future option.

    image via CrunchGear
    This article was originally published in forum thread: 3.2 SDK Shows iPad-Only Features, Possible Camera Support started by Paul Daniel Ash View original post
    Comments 33 Comments
    1. StealthBravo's Avatar
      StealthBravo -
      I would have liked to see a larger harddrive and webcam. But honestly I never use the cam on my MBP, so it really doesn't bother me. I think a lot of people were caught up in the hype
    1. adp's Avatar
      adp -
      Yeah, but another user who doesn't have an extra camera would have used it. I rarely use my iPhone camera, but as a company you want to attract the max spectrum of users. And honestly I don't think the iPad is capable of doing so. I think a larger HD and flash would have sold me. Multitasking will probably be achieved after jailbreaking (hoping here).
    1. StealthBravo's Avatar
      StealthBravo -
      Honestly I think you will see multitasking and flash with 4.0
    1. andypropaganda's Avatar
      andypropaganda -
      The iPad is a complete and utter failure and let down. If you like it, you're just too deep in the Kool Aid to see the truth.
    1. awesomeSlayer's Avatar
      awesomeSlayer -
      I am disappointed with this. Not even a bigger space than the iPod touch and not a lot of features or certain feature that will get me that. Rather get a netbook or a Mac mini.
    1. ctcnsf's Avatar
      ctcnsf -
      Quote Originally Posted by andypropaganda View Post
      The iPad is a complete and utter failure and let down. If you like it, you're just too deep in the Kool Aid to see the truth.
      The iPad is almost as ridiculous as when apple released the iPod Nano with a camera on the bottom of the device. Not to mention, probably the worst name I could imagine. Kind of funny how a few years ago saturday night live did a sketch about an "iPad" haha a link to it is below:

      [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lskbO1k9VO0]YouTube - MADTV-IPAD[/ame]
    1. The Maestro's Avatar
      The Maestro -
      I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say the ipad was a lot better before apple anounced it

      on another note the ipad will have flash eventually! adobe confirmed this so that's one disappointment down 27.4 to go
    1. moto_noob's Avatar
      moto_noob -
      yup. thats how they make their money, by upsetting the people that buy it first, then those people will ebay it and get the next gen, getting something that should have been there the first time. its all a scheme, i mean, since apple engineers are sooo innovative, they can't think of what should be in a product,takes them a whole nother year to figure it ??
    1. iLaw-One's Avatar
      iLaw-One -
      Quote Originally Posted by adp View Post
      Not an optical drive - but the ability to at least play back BluRay movies would do. Flash. Multitasking. Camera. Larger Hard Drive.

      I think these are all features which are technologically available, but we are unfortunately trapped in the Apple game. "Wait for the next update, replace your device. Repeat." It's something that happened with the iPod touch, and which I'm sure will happen with the iPad. For example, the 3G[S] camera - the technology for a 7MP camera is there, but we'll have to wait until the next update (perhaps) for this.

      This is what people here are talking about. We're not requesting a time machine - just things which are available in other devices. Is the iPad a good device? Yes. The iPad is definitely useful for some users (especially casual Apple users). But it lacked the expectations of many users who know what it could have been capable of.
      Quote Originally Posted by StealthBravo View Post
      I would have liked to see a larger harddrive and webcam. But honestly I never use the cam on my MBP, so it really doesn't bother me. I think a lot of people were caught up in the hype
      Quote Originally Posted by StealthBravo View Post
      You want an optical drive in this day and age? lol
      @ StealthBravo/ @adp - In answer to your question, YES an optical drive in this day and age...a blu-ray device/reader/player/whatever, is an optical drive...it reads discs with light!

      @ StealthBravo - Those who need and use a webcam should have it on the iPad or any other Apple made device...Nokia phones have had double facing cameras for ages.

      This forum is highly informative on everything Apple (Macs, ipods, iphones and now iPads ), let's keep it that way.
    1. rhekt's Avatar
      rhekt -
      i guess i am kind of surprised they didnt offer a built in camera like the MBP. seems kind of common place these days.
    1. etaxero's Avatar
      etaxero -
      maybe they did and we are forgetting the patent on camera lenses built behind the screen... let the conspiracy theories begin! lol
    1. deucalion0's Avatar
      deucalion0 -
      I said this before that the iPhone and iPad will have the same OS to begin then the iPad will go off on its on with its on variations leaving the iPhone out and vice versa. This is what they mean by based on the iPhone oS which makes this worse for iPhone fans who want so much for their device, can you imagine the iPad getting a cool software tweak the iPhone does not! I mean the iPhone was here first !!
      But the iphone that they may release in the summer will hopefully have a few new tricks up its sleeve to increase the desirability of wanting an iphone over the ipad.
      I decided that although it is cool the ipad I would never honestly have any use for it, none whatsoever.
    1. StealthBravo's Avatar
      StealthBravo -
      Optical drives are becoming obsolete on portable computers this day and age. They are bulky unneeded hardware and I am glad one was not added to the iPad. I would prefer not having one on my MBP to be honest. If they had added it then people would complain that the tablet was over an inch thick and weighed more. The idea is for a portable device. And if you had read my post, I said that I would have liked to see a web camera but its absence doesn't really bother me because I never use the one on my MBP. I also don't think HD is needed on such a small screen.

      I would love to have all the features that everyone else wants but I still see some value in the features that the iPad does have.