iPad Looks wise, which is sexier?

[januaryman]

Well, since I paid for the original, it is the best - had I paid for the sequel, IT would prove the winner. But seriously, the original in the apple case, black and not obvious (and so deters the snatch and run subway based thieves) is useful, utilitarian and unassuming while remaining a nice looking hunk of gadgetry. I did need to order a non-glare screen protector, not a cheapie, and since that application, it is great in almost all situations.

[SolRaven]

Originally Posted by januaryman

I did need to order a non-glare screen protector, not a cheapie, and since that application, it is great in almost all situations.

Which one did you order and how do you like it?

[JSWolf]

Apple has made a big mistake in making the iPad2 thinner. Because of this, they are unable to use the same camera the iPhone4 has. Using the original thickness, Apple would have been able to fit in a much better camera.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Apple has made a big mistake in making the iPad2 thinner. Because of this, they are unable to use the same camera the iPhone4 has. Using the original thickness, Apple would have been able to fit in a much better camera.

the iphone 4 is only 9.3 mm so the ipad2 isn't much less at 8.8mm. I doubt if this was the reason. .5 mm is almost nothing.

Dale

[kjk]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Apple has made a big mistake in making the iPad2 thinner. Because of this, they are unable to use the same camera the iPhone4 has. Using the original thickness, Apple would have been able to fit in a much better camera.

The cameras are disappointing. But personally, I'll take the thinness over the cameras. But, that's just me.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

the iphone 4 is only 9.3 mm so the ipad2 isn't much less at 8.8mm. I doubt if this was the reason. .5 mm is almost nothing.

Dale

But it is enough to prevent using the same camera. So what we get is a second rate camera. Mine you, the camera in the iPhone 3G I have is third rate if that good.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But it is enough to prevent using the same camera. So what we get is a second rate camera. Mine you, the camera in the iPhone 3G I have is third rate if that good.

I still doubt it. The iTouch is only 7.2mm thick so that is really thin. I think they just used it because it is cheaper and they could get by with it. Other than for viewing other people you are talking to many would figure you don't even need the second camera anyway on such a large device so why spend much money on it.

Dale

[kennyc]

Could be either way guys, but only way to know for sure is to look at the specific technologies and make measurements. I don't think any of us are going to do that, but if you want to I'd be interested in what you find.

[MsAstoria]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

I still doubt it. The iTouch is only 7.2mm thick so that is really thin. I think they just used it because it is cheaper and they could get by with it. Other than for viewing other people you are talking to many would figure you don't even need the second camera anyway on such a large device so why spend much money on it.

Dale

Isn't it the same camera as the Ipad Touch? I believe so. Consenses is it not good for stills but OK for video. I haven't tried out the video on my Touch yet as it's nothing but rain, rain, rain, here in PNW. It won't replace my 3 yo Kodak 6.1 megapixals camera, but then a higher pixal camera would raise the cost. I do love the sharp clear retina resolution on the touch. Wish it would come to the iPad, but again, I am sure cost is an issue. Ain't no Android tablet that can compete with iPad on cost so far and that's certainly one very good reason that the iPad is so popular.
I would like to try out a Xoom but no local store carries here in our little town. Lots of folks though are sold on them.

[DaleDe]

Yes, both cameras seem to be the ones used in the iPod Touch. I think a retina display on a device this large would be overkill since you don't hold it close to your face like you would a cell phone. But a higher display would have been nice. You need 1280 x 1024 to display 720p movies at full resolution. I really think they should have done that at least. Too high a resolution has huge processing overhead problems with no real benefit.

[SolRaven]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

Yes, both cameras seem to be the ones used in the iPod Touch. I think a retina display on a device this large would be overkill since you don't hold it close to your face like you would a cell phone. But a higher display would have been nice. You need 1280 x 1024 to display 720p movies at full resolution. I really think they should have done that at least. Too high a resolution has huge processing overhead problems with no real benefit.

I didn't think I would notice a difference. I just got my iPad today and there is some pixelation with some of the textbook print. When textbooks are formatted properly, it won't be an issue.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But it is enough to prevent using the same camera. So what we get is a second rate camera. Mine you, the camera in the iPhone 3G I have is third rate if that good.

The iPad 2 camera is worse than your iPhone 3G camera, JSWolf, at least for stills. Much worse than my 3GS.

[kjk]

nice roundup here: http://www.macworld.com/article/1585...ameratest.html

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by kjk

nice roundup here: http://www.macworld.com/article/1585...ameratest.html

Thank you!

[AprilHare]

Originally Posted by THE TERMINATOR

The sun will kill you, haven't you read about the guy who woke up after only 600 years and then showed himself in the light, now he's dead for a third time

And here I was thinking we all need vitamin D from sunlight to live!