Does iPAD even apply to us?

[Christopher Drews]

While the press release was pretty interesting, in the back of my mind I kept thinking how this device could not benefit the filmmaking/editing people.
I'm not trying to be a downer on clearly is an astonishing new product line but NO INPUTS?

Such a beautiful screen and yet no way to monitor from it.

What about as a wireless controller for Final Cut Pro? Using the pinch, zoom and rotate commands, I could clearly see how this would be useful to us.
Is screen sharing even possible on something that runs iPhone OS?

Finally, it's early yet, but I highly doubt this will play 1080P video. Even if it did, how would you install different codecs?

My overall thoughts are that this unit doesn't apply at all to the professional community.
-C

[Nick Gordon]

It's not being punted as a computer, but (although Apple don't use the word) as an appliance - designed to perform a limited set of functions extremely well but without the flexibility of a 'proper' computer.

And given that Apple ties down the iPhone/iPad OS very tightly indeed (no multi-tasking, no background processes, no direct hardware calls, very strictly managed APIs), I don't see that there's any prospect of pro video facilities ever appearing.

Shame really.

Someone will probably jailbreak it sooner or later, anyway.

[Robert Lane]

It's not designed at all to have any pro-based applications. Apple is clearly going after the e-book reader market (in various interviews Apple as much announced iPad to be a direct competitor to the Kindle, "by standing on the shoulders of Kindle and improving it..."), casual content viewer (movies, web videos), basic computing (email, web-browsing) and limited gaming with iPhone apps scaled up visually.

If Apple had designed the iPad to be more of a business device - or even "touch" the abilities of pro-apps - then they would have purchased this company and improved it's design:

Modbook - The first and only tablet Mac computer solution! - Other World Computing

Basically it's yet another "i-Toy", a scaled-up iPod Touch - but with no camera. Assuming the product takes off (which is highly skeptical considering the lack-luster response from media outlets and hardware bloggers) the only thing Final Cut users will find in the future is a Compressor setting optimized for iPad export.

[Simon Wyndham]

I don't see that there's any prospect of pro video facilities ever appearing.

I don't agree. It certainly won't have any pro apps on it (though just like the iPhone wait and see what third parties come up with). But I can definitely foresee them putting a version of iMovie on it.

Why? Well Apple have made a USB connector adaptor and an SD adaptor so that cameras can be hooked up to it directly to transfer photos. Those same cameras can also now record pretty good video, so it would stand to reason that Apple would take advantage of that.

(which is highly skeptical considering the lack-luster response from media outlets and hardware bloggers)

Trouble is Robert that most of those negatives are coming from people who are power users. They simply aren't thinking about this device in terms of non technically savie people. The sort who are always getting in a mess with Windows based systems, with files and documents scattered all over the place, trying to run apps from packages instead of installing them, and basically just ending up in a mess.

If all you ever do is email, the odd bit of word processing, using Facebook etc, and sharing your photos, the iPad serves that market nicely without the total clunkiness of a Netbook and all the problems of a windows based system that goes with that.

The iPad for me is an idiot proof way of computing for people who don't get aroused at the sight of a Unix manual.

[Andy Wilkinson]

I agree with Simon. It's a user friendly way of consuming/viewing content (web/e-mail, photos and video). I'll probably buy one for my 73 year old Dad as it's ideal for him (despite some excellent progress he's often now struggling with a windows laptop). I'll probably buy one for myself too, for "wooing clients with my slick demo/example videos on it" and web surfing in front of the fire/in bed at other times....that's if I can keep my kids and wife from nicking it!

I think it's a winning product - but I wasn't expecting it for power use and those that were were being unrealistic, in my opinion. Heck, I've got £7000 worth of new Mac hardware in my house already for power/video editing use, I'm just so happy that it's going to be so cheap! (well minus the necessary extras anyway). And I'm no Apple fanboy either. It's a tool with a very specific use just like any other, and in my circumstances it fits perfectly for the needs I envision for it.

[William Hohauser]

Let me throw in that it remains to be seen how the 30pin connector is activated either by hardware or the OS. Since keyboard input and data from a camera is accepted and it can output video to a monitor, we know that it's slightly more versatile then your iTouch or iPhone. Perhaps the larger form factor will allow for line audio inputs and maybe a live video stream from a camera. From working with a developer last year I learned that Apple prevents certain processor intensive tasks in the iPhone to avoid quick battery degradation or excessive heat issues that would cause an increased number of failed units that they would have to replace.

There are certainly things it can do now that would be a big help during a shoot even if it's just having a script that can be changed on the spot and have a shooting log attached. For me, just to be able to do non-video work in my edit room with the need for another computer station is a big plus. I'll take that MacMini and put it somewhere else. And I can do my on-sight engineering work, which requires a fair bit of web surfing and e-mailing, without lugging the laptop.

[Robert Lane]

Originally Posted by Christopher Drews

My overall thoughts are that this unit doesn't apply at all to the professional community.-C

To shorten my response from above: I agree, 100%

[Simon Wyndham]

To shorten my response from above: I agree, 100%

My only caveat to that is to look at the types of apps that applied to pro photographers appeared on the iPhone. I'm keeping my mind open because seeing how inventive people were with the iPhone I wouldn't want to say never.

[Evan Donn]

I think it's short sighted to look at the iPad at this point and dismiss it as a professional tool - it's all going to depend on the apps that are developed for it.

There are already iPhone apps for remote cursor control on a computer. You could do app specific control surface apps for it - Color, FCP, Motion, Logic, etc. Or simply do a generic control app which lets you create whatever control layout and application you want. Or use it with a Pogo Sketch as a graphics tablet for photoshop, etc. Cinemek is likely to do an optimized version of their iPhone storyboarding app. Maybe a full size slate app? Or a slate app which lets you load a song in and then plays it back with a countdown and timecode for lip-syncing music videos? Or a combination slate and shot logging app? Multitrack audio recorder/mixer, production document organizer/reader, camera control, etc. I'm sure someone will come up with more possibilities. Some apps, like a Color control surface, could be enough to justify the price of the hardware on their own, while for other uses it may be the combination of a few apps that makes it worth it.

[Shaun Roemich]

Originally Posted by Robert Lane

I
Basically it's yet another "i-Toy", a scaled-up iPod Touch - but with no camera.

Tsk tsk my learned friend... the iPod Touch doesn't have a camera. iPhone or iPod Nano...

[Jonathan Houser]

Originally Posted by Evan Donn

Cinemek is likely to do an optimized version of their iPhone storyboarding app. Maybe a full size slate app?

The iPad may not have everything I was hoping for. However, it does offer many cool things that make the apps we are currently developing much more dynamic. We are making an iPad specific version of Storyboard Composer as well.

Jonathan-

[Robert Lane]

Originally Posted by Shaun Roemich

Tsk tsk my learned friend... the iPod Touch doesn't have a camera. iPhone or iPod Nano...

My apologies; I was self-medicating my woes away by daydreaming of being able to actually see the BR copy of "Transformers" I was just given as a gift on my 30" inch ACD and "it just works" Mac. I'll just go to my corner now and tough it out on Win7...

[Andrew Kimery]

Out of the box I don't think the iPad has much to offer but once 3rd parties get a hold of it I bet we'll see a number of niche uses just like we do w/the iPhone/iPod Touch.

Two things that really put a wet blanket on the iPad for me though are no Flash support and no multi-tasking.


-A

[Robert Turchick]

well, I see it in use for professionals not as a production tool but as a business tool. Calendar, email, bookkeeping, invoicing, call tracking, proposal writing....this will most certainly be a part of my business! Rather keep that in my backpack than a $3000 MacBook Pro for all those tasks.
And I'd rather work in those apps on a larger screen than any phone offers!
Can't wait!!

[Dean Sensui]

The iPad is a delivery device. And for people like us, that's a potential avenue for delivering content and, maybe, generating revenue.

But here's a guy who was really disappointed when he realized its shortcomings:

YouTube - Hitler responds to the iPad