Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: iPad  (Read 10802 times)
NBP
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 184


WWW
« Reply #20 on: January 29, 2010, 04:21:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Taking a step back from the hype & inevitable downer reactions, I think this device will actually be a big success given time. Echoing many, It's the content that will make or break it.

As for it having a place in our photography toolboxes, I'm not in the slightest bit bothered about  back up/ storage etc. Some kind of USB input would have been useful though.
I think it will be a great tool for viewing for clients/art directors in studio enviroments with LC remote etc & I'd like to see a serious version of PS, Lightroom & In Design etc for it as I think it's would be a great way for AD's to muck around with images & their layouts whilst shooting & be able to knock them back & forth with email etc.
Also a front facing cam for chat would also be an obvious addition next time.

It's by no means essential for me to have one yet so I'll happily wait, like i did with the iPhone, for a couple of revisions to come.

Overall though I think it's definately got legs & I like it.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2010, 04:21:43 AM by NBP » Logged
rolleiflexpages
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 164



WWW
« Reply #21 on: January 29, 2010, 09:09:13 AM »
ReplyReply

A quick look at the spec sheet of the iPad indicates to me that it is not very suitable for high-end photography. No FireWire 800 (or 400 for that matter) connection, no CF slot (or an ExpressCard that would enable this), ... So this is certainly not very usable as field storage for high end digital shooting. But then again, the thing was most likely not conceived for this purpose but is geared towards gadget-seekers.
Logged

Pascal Heyman - www.rolleiflexpages.com
Rolleiflex 6008 AF + DB20p, Rolleiflex Hy6, Leaf AFi-II 7
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 987


WWW
« Reply #22 on: January 29, 2010, 01:37:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Apple became a gadget company since the iPod. I wouldn't be surprise that eventually they venture into the video-game market.  
Eduardo

Quote from: rolleiflexpages
But then again, the thing was most likely not conceived for this purpose but is geared towards gadget-seekers.
Logged
Jeremy Payne
Guest
« Reply #23 on: January 29, 2010, 01:42:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: uaiomex
Apple became a gadget company since the iPod. I wouldn't be surprise that eventually they venture into the video-game market.  
Eduardo

Already happened ... Haven't you seen the legions of kids playing games on their moms' iPhones?

The Parental iPhone seems to be the primary backup to the Nintendo DSi for the 5-9 y/o crowd ... with Brickbreaker on the Blackberry as the last resort ...
Logged
david o
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 310



WWW
« Reply #24 on: January 29, 2010, 06:01:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Already happened ... Haven't you seen the legions of kids playing games on their moms' iPhones?

The Parental iPhone seems to be the primary backup to the Nintendo DSi for the 5-9 y/o crowd ... with Brickbreaker on the Blackberry as the last resort ...

yeap...

when I would have love to see a tablet/macbookpro under steroid that I could have wirelessly plug to a screen at home, and then my touch screen become my keyboard and my graphic tablet... that would have been something...
Logged
CBarrett
Guest
« Reply #25 on: January 29, 2010, 06:20:32 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been waiting for a new Mac Pro forever.  The average product cycle is about 260 days and the current offering is over 300 days old... granted they're just waiting for the 6 core processors, but I'm pretty damn frustrated with Apple right now.  The announcement of this toy just adds to that frustration.  They used to make their money on the high end machines, but it's become obvious that the App Store is where the money's at.
Logged
gavin_stok
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


WWW
« Reply #26 on: February 02, 2010, 05:55:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: CBarrett
They used to make their money on the high end machines, but it's become obvious that the App Store is where the money's at.

If you believe Apple (and I rarely do these days), the App Store is not making them much money as yet.

From http://www.t3.com/news/itunes-and-apple-ap...nge-that?=43335 dated 26 Jan 10:

CFO Peter Oppenheimer said of the services: “Regarding the App Store and the iTunes Store, we're running those a bit over break-even, and that hasn't changed, We're very excited to be providing our developers with just a fabulous opportunity, and we think that's helping us a lot with the iPhone and the iPod touch platforms."

Given Apple's limited involvement I fail to see why they aren't profiting from it. Longer term, and if the iP(h)ad becomes popular, it should become much more profitable.
Logged

Gavin Stok Photography:
http://www.gavinstok.com/

Blog - by photographers for photographers:
http://blog.gavinstok.com/
gwhitf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 820


« Reply #27 on: February 02, 2010, 09:03:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: John-S
Watch the iPad launch video on the Apple site. That's where Steve Jobs has stated that they are a mobile devices company. Laptops, ipods, iphones and soon to be ipads are where they make their money now. Macbooks outsell their other desktop platforms.

It's changing so fast. I now think of the Imac 27" as their tower. When I think of the actual towers, I think of the Edsel.

Portable and lightweight is the word.
Logged
shutay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 02, 2010, 09:03:25 AM »
ReplyReply

In terms of technology, I'm glad someone finally put together (what I presume to be) a well built piece of hardware. To me, the iPad represents where the 10" or close to A4 sized tablet has to be in terms of build, weight, thickness, basic specifications and so on, but the lack of Flash compatibility in the browser and multitasking makes the software a disappointment for me. It's amazing how many websites won't work properly without Flash. Even the lowly Nokia N810 Internet Tablet with it's 400MHz processor runs regular YouTube properly (i.e., not HD content of course). Presumably, they also built the Apple A4 processor to make it that much harder for someone to get Linux running on it too. I'm sure it does what it was made for really well. I guess Steve Jobs quite possibly was having trouble reading text on his iPhone these days and asked the kids at Apple to come up with a bigger one that he could read more easily? Just kidding.
Logged
cjmonty
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 93


WWW
« Reply #29 on: February 02, 2010, 10:34:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: narikin
use a windows 7 tablet - much better answer, very powerful and cheaper.

The point of the iPad, and the aspect that will make or break it as a product, is the fact that it is not a computer.  

If you tether a netbook to your camera, attached to your tripod, you have a underpowered computer running full-size programs intended for proper use at a desk.  Even Canon's DPP is a full size raw conversion program that you can use to tether.  It would tax even the fastest lil netbook.

Suppose instead that someone made a smaller, more manageable App that only handled camera interface on the best touch screen available, and you can see why it might be worth $500.  It would not be an "almost good enough" computer.  It would be a very, fast, very focused digital photography aid.  

Thats the only promise I think this has for professionals- that and portfolio viewing.

If you think $499 a lot of $ for a better workflow, try the $600 Canon wireless remote or $1200 wireless file transmitter.  Yikes!
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controll...p;modelid=15710

Logged
BJNY
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1112


« Reply #30 on: February 02, 2010, 10:39:58 AM »
ReplyReply

iPad Pro?

http://www.techcrunch.com/2010/02/01/apple-tablet-os-x-ipad/
Logged

Guillermo
Scott O.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 312


WWW
« Reply #31 on: February 02, 2010, 10:58:09 AM »
ReplyReply

To me, the main use of the iPad would be for backup in the field instead of using a laptop.  But it doesn't seem to support RAW files, much like the iPod didn't support RAW files.  If this is the case, then the product is of very limited usefulness to me.  And with the limited storage space, it would need to have the ability to attach via USB to a small external drive.  So, all things considered based on what I know now, I doubt if I will be buying one.  At least until v.2 is released!
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3944



WWW
« Reply #32 on: February 02, 2010, 10:37:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Sometimes a video speaks more than a thousand text jokes


http://www.youtube.com/v/8eF0y0IfpPU&r...color1=0xb1b1b1

Edmund
« Last Edit: February 02, 2010, 10:38:37 PM by eronald » Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
Jozef Zajaz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 260


« Reply #33 on: February 04, 2010, 05:36:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: PetterStahre
It could be the ultimate tethering and portable hard drive/backup system. But from what was announced yesterday, I believe there's nothing of particular interest* (for pros, that is). (Still I want two, but that's another subject

* They say you can already connect to cameras via USB. It would be interesting to now exactly what functionality is already there.

// Petter

http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/control...2FABC3CE1BC569A
Logged
Fritzer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #34 on: February 05, 2010, 02:46:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Re. the OP: it can't be used in professional photography at all, it really is a shame.

I don't think that will ever change; for tethering there are no apps, Raw isn't supported, the processor is slower than a netbook's, and the (phone) OS is not likely to run any regular programs in the future, just downsized iApps .
It's a closed-system, consumer-only device ; only time will tell, but I think , even if it sells, the majority of buyers might run into usability issues very quickly.
Logged
selsoe
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #35 on: February 06, 2010, 08:18:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Fritzer
Re. the OP: it can't be used in professional photography at all, it really is a shame.

I don't think that will ever change; for tethering there are no apps, Raw isn't supported, the processor is slower than a netbook's, and the (phone) OS is not likely to run any regular programs in the future, just downsized iApps .
It's a closed-system, consumer-only device ; only time will tell, but I think , even if it sells, the majority of buyers might run into usability issues very quickly.

Of course there are no tethering apps because it's a new platform, but vendors are free to make them. What do you mean RAW is not supported? If you make your own app, you can support RAW all you want. The processor is very capable considering the device. No it's probably not as fast as a netbook processor, but then again it's not running an OS that's designed to run on much larger machines (like netbooks are). That's why it probably will respond much faster than most netbooks. If by regular programs, you mean desktop applications, you're right, it'll probably never run those and thank god for that. They are made for keyboard and mouse, not your finger. However, it will run up(!)sized iPhone apps and apps made directly for the iPad. Apple for instance made its office suite, iWork, for iPad and it seems very promising.

The system is just as closed as the iPhone - but despite it being "closed" as you say, the iPhone is probably the most versatile and capable handheld computer platform in the world today, simply because of the amount of apps available for it. That gives you many choices you don't get from other "open" platforms. And what do you mean by usability issues? You can say many things about the iPad, but the usability is one of its most guaranteed strengths.

I think the iPad could be a great device for various kinds of photography apps. Don't expect to see a full blown RAW converter in the iPad platform though. Decoding a RAW file is just too heavy a task to make it run satisfactory on a device like the iPad. That also means that you probably won't see it talking directly to a camera without a computer to decode the RAW files in between. But as a large preview pad like the ones that exist for the iPhone today it should be great.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2010, 08:25:01 AM by selsoe » Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5124


« Reply #36 on: February 06, 2010, 12:07:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: selsoe
The system is just as closed as the iPhone - but despite it being "closed" as you say, the iPhone is probably the most versatile and capable handheld computer platform in the world today, simply because of the amount of apps available for it. ...

I think the iPad could be a great device for various kinds of photography apps. Don't expect to see a full blown RAW converter in the iPad platform though.
I mostly agree: many iPad Apps will come, but photographic Apps will be limited by factors like lack of multi-tasking and the low-power, lower-performance processors. Indeed, Apple clearly has no interest in the iPad displacing sales of its more expensive MacBooks, let alone replacing MacBook Pros.

One iPad use I can see is as a "thin client" (VNC): as a highly mobile interface to a "real" computer over WiFi or 3G connection. The hand-holdable mobility could be useful even if the other computer is in the same room. And there are already VNC Apps for iPod, which will surely be enhanced for iPad.

My guess: Apple will soon add touch features to Mac OS X (at this year's Apple Worldwide Developers Conference, June/July), catching up with Windows 7 on that front, and with that will launch an iPad App to allow remote use of Mac OS X computers. And maybe also some touchscreen Mac OS X hardware products; even a higher-end, full-featured Mac OS X "iSlate"?
Logged
narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 854


« Reply #37 on: February 06, 2010, 12:23:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Jozef Zajaz

yes, like I keep posting, the answer is here with us right now - its good Tablet PC's. they have EVERYTHING a pro photographer needs, including the exotic requests - like Firewire, super Bright Outdoor touch screens, convertible tablet forms that can hang from a tripod, solid state drives, 8Gb memory and the same range of fast  to ultra fast intel processors that are in Powerbooks.  Two hard-drives if you want mirror back up? - yes; removable extra batteries? - yes.

I like Apple too, but.. its time to stop being a zombie and realize what we want is here already, and ready to use.
Windows 7 is great, set up for mobile/touchscreen, and works with C1Pro right away. why are we bothering discussing the disappointing iPad?

Look at Fujitsu, Lenovo and HP. all have the answers out now, at bearable prices.
Logged
Thomas Krüger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 452



WWW
« Reply #38 on: February 07, 2010, 01:16:59 AM »
ReplyReply

The ExoPC is another tablet with a netbook processor:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/06/exopc-t...e-world-to-see/
http://www.exopc.com/en/exopc-slate-comparison.php
Logged
selsoe
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #39 on: February 07, 2010, 01:41:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BJL
I mostly agree: many iPad Apps will come, but photographic Apps will be limited by factors like lack of multi-tasking and the low-power, lower-performance processors. Indeed, Apple clearly has no interest in the iPad displacing sales of its more expensive MacBooks, let alone replacing MacBook Pros.

One iPad use I can see is as a "thin client" (VNC): as a highly mobile interface to a "real" computer over WiFi or 3G connection. The hand-holdable mobility could be useful even if the other computer is in the same room. And there are already VNC Apps for iPod, which will surely be enhanced for iPad.

My guess: Apple will soon add touch features to Mac OS X (at this year's Apple Worldwide Developers Conference, June/July), catching up with Windows 7 on that front, and with that will launch an iPad App to allow remote use of Mac OS X computers. And maybe also some touchscreen Mac OS X hardware products; even a higher-end, full-featured Mac OS X "iSlate"?

How are photographics apps limited by the lack of multitasking?

As for your guess: I'm pretty sure that won't happen. Mac OS is a desktop OS that doesn't present itself to a tablet format in its current form (just as Windows doesn't IMO). Honestly I don't see the point of having a full blown laptop running a desktop OS but without keyboard and you have to navigate it with your finger. Why not just use a laptop then?

If I'm ever going to buy a tablet, it has to (in the words of Steve Jobs) do things better than my laptop does. A tablet running a desktop OS won't do anything better than my laptop - in fact quite the opposite.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad