Talk:iPad

iPad 2?

Should we include some unconfirmed information on the iPad 2? According to Gizmodo, the iPad 2 should be thinner and lighter, include two rear and front-facing cameras and a higher-res display. They are to start production in early 2011.

Please note that these are only rumors. If we do decide to include them in this article, we should mention this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctyonahl (talk • contribs) 21:10, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I think it's viable to present the coverage of rumors; Apple is like this. Anyway, as long as we have sources, we're OK. ǝɥʇM0N0^farewell 01:12, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

No. Absolutely not. WP:CRYSTAL: nothing goes up without an official announcement. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 22:20, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

HTH, I see no problem in adding mention of the rumors, *as* rumors—coverage of the rumors is fine. @theM0N0 22:57, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think rumours should be included... -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 23:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I do, as they are perfectly notable. mono 02:18, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Mono is completely right. In fact, it is conceivable that an article could consist entirely of rumor as long as it met the general notability guideline. Marcus Qwertyus 02:13, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

But I don't see that these rumours are notable enough for Wikipedia - otherwise we'd have articles for every product that had ever been rumoured. Wikipedia is not the place to support Apple's marketing machine. I find it a bit mad that iPad 2 was redirected - are we going to create iPad 3, iPad 4 etc redirects, due to being possible future products?

What we currently have in the article seems reasonable - though I'd argue it should be integrated into the main text, rather than needing a special section. Mdwh (talk) 22:09, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Heh, now I see that someone already has created iPad 3 as a redirect - although I see that this was done more to prevent people from creating the article, so yes, I see that as being a valid argument for preferring redirects to delete, in that if we deleted, someone would inevitably recreate it. Mdwh (talk) 22:13, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

It's official. The iPad 2 was announced today with delivery March 11, 2011. Please update.173.58.53.212 (talk)

Deletion request

Of note there is a deletion request for iPad 2 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IPad 2. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Wrong Date

In the Technical specifications the date for release of Ipad 2 says 2010. It's 2011 now. I would fix it but the page is locked. 24.87.16.83 (talk) 06:52, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done Marcus Qwertyus 06:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Tech specs

Specs list the iPad2 with a 1GHz Apple A5 (unsourced). Analysis shows it is dynamically clocked to 900MHz however: http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/12/ipad-2-specs-discerned-900mhz-arm-cortex-a9-and-powervr-sgx543m/ Suggest correcting or is there a source for 1GHz as per 1st gen iPad? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.25.236.226 (talk) 17:02, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

The line in the article "Without modification, and with the exception of websites, it will only run programs approved by Apple and distributed via its online store." is not quite correct. There are many companies that have in-house (or consultants) that have written apps for use that can be loaded onto the device and not go through the store. While commercial apps must be approved, those created by any developer can be run on any iOS machine they send the code to (if they include that machine's info in the provisioning file), or they can be installed by Enterprise developers from one of the many tools available for the purpose. Only buying from the App Store is only true of commercial apps sold (for free or for a price) through the store. The enterprise program is documented by Apple at Tsmyther (talk) 09:55, 11 April 2011 (UTC)Smitty

Images

Hi all. I want to have a discussion regarding image use, and what constitutes a good image. In the infobox, we prefer to have a clean, straight-on shot, but it is most important to show the holistic product, including the user interface. Therefore, Evan-Amos's image is currently unacceptable but can potentially be superior to the current image. There are many images that technically infringe copyright, but are tagged as free and available on Commons. Perhaps of the least concern is the image previously used to illustrate reading a book, with a copyrighted contemporary work. Although I have let Evan-Amos's replacement stand, after the infobox it is often helpful to show the product being used, rather than in a vacuum. Please be courteous when adding/replacing images. Also, most copyright violations do not require right-this-moment attention, and can be dealt with by discussion. Therefore, I have protected the page for an hour, which with hopefully give Evan-Amos time to make a version suitable for the infobox. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 18:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Trout accepted. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:51, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Nice new image. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Would it not be possible to show the iPad displaying a Wikipedia page? Some iPad browsers can be configured to not show the top toolbar, if the browser's copyright is an issue. --NellieBly (talk) 21:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

That isn't really very interesting or worthwhile - you may as well show the device off. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 23:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

File:IPad 2 White Front.jpg

Also available in orange?!

The iPad 2 image, IPad_2_White_Front.jpg, is awful! The white balance is way off, leaving the device looking a peculiar shade of orange. Even the caption says, '..available in black and white (shown).' Shown?! Also, the full size image looks like it's been upscaled from a low-res photo taken using a mobile phone camera. No offence meant to the perpetrator photographer! :) nagualdesign (talk) 03:16, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll post an image of mine as soon as I unbox it on Thursday, assuming no one has uploaded a better one. Jackster (talk) 18:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Cut iPad 2

How about Cuting all of the iPad 2 info because that it has it's own page. If there is any info that isn't in the page, I will add it in the page. ~~Awsome EBE123 ^talk_Contribs 13:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Then this page isn't a summary of all the iPad models. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:41, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Exactly. Even iPhone, which summarizes four models, includes information specific to each. Meanwhile, the fate of iPad 2, unlike iPhone 4, is undecided. I realize that you're acting in good faith but removing iPad 2 from this article would undermine the deletion discussion. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 15:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC

I didn't do it yet. ~~Awsome EBE123 ^talk_Contribs 22:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

the usual solution to this would be to leave summary of the information here. ` DGG ( talk ) 23:51, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

That's assuming iPad 2 stays. Most of it is crud, and the content that isn't crud can be moved here, and most of it already has been. If iPad 2 is deleted, all relevant information goes here, but integrated with the rest of the article. It gets its own section in History, since it cam chronologically later, but the information on the device itself should not segregate generations. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 00:24, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Digital Rights Restrictions?

The iPad article refers to DRM as Digital Rights Restrictions and The iOS page specifically refers to Digital Rights Management IOS_(Apple)#Digital_rights_management when they are talking about the same concept as the iPad section on Digital Rights Restrictions includes a link to the iOS DRM section. It seems like Digital Rights Restrictions is some sort of euphemism of sorts. If you search for "Digital Rights Restrictions" using a search engine, the top links all refer to Digital Rights Management. Shouldn't the iPad article be changed to be uniform with the iOS page? Tall Midget (talk) 05:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Looks to have been done. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 06:31, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Someone got a wee bit confused and munged Digital Rights Management (a term favored by many rightsholders) with Digital Restrictions Management (a term favored, it seems, by some in the free-and-open movement). Regardless, whomever did this made a bit of a mess. I--and someone before me--cleaned it up a bit. Anyone else game to take a shot at it? — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 06:33, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

No section On Designer?

That's odd, amazingly there doesn't seem to be any mention of the designer, I can only assume that's deliberate? Twobells (talk)

Edit request from Bpedigo, 4 April 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

It would be useful if an edit was made with new information as to the power usage shown from this link: http://www.energy-meter.org/electronics/ipad-power-consumption-while-charging/ Tests showed the device using 10W of power while charging.

Bpedigo (talk) 21:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 Not done "The iPad is designed to be charged with a high current (2 amperes) using the included 10 W USB power adapter." pretty much says the same exact thing.--Terrillja _talk 21:34, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Reference to 'fondle slab' / 'Jobsian fondle slab'

This is a widespread, and growing popular usage term for the iPad, originated by the technical publication, The Register (http://theregister.com) but now more generally used as a common name for tablet PCs in general and iPad tablet PCs in particular. As such it should at least be referenced in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.107.224 (talk) 20:48, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

It's a derogatory term used by exactly one website and a handful of blogs. I submit that it is of no measurable encyclopaedic value or interest, IMHO. Bonusballs (talk) 22:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

This isn't worthy of inclusion. Its rather odd tbh. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:29, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Jdb8167, 19 April 2011

This line is accurate:

Some models also have a 3G wireless data connection which can connect to HSPA data networks.

But it is incomplete with the introduction of the iPad 2. There should be a note about EV-DO 3G as well. Suggested edit:

Some models also have a 3G wireless data connection which can connect to HSPA or EV-DO data networks. Jdb8167 (talk) 14:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done — Bility (talk) 17:32, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

To add to article: Bicycle accessories

I'd like to see a subsection that goes over bicycle accessories about the iPad. Specifically, a bicycle dock where you can dock your iPad on the handlebar of your bike, therefore work on it at the same time that you pedal your bicycle.

Would anyone find any info about this? It would be some good info to add. Thanks. --70.179.169.115 (talk) 11:05, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I think this wins a prize for the most moronic thing I've ever heard of a cyclist doing... -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 11:09, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure I can already guess why you think so, but in case it's surprisingly different, what makes you say that? --70.179.169.115 (talk) 12:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Also, it is THE way to receive turn-by-turn navigation while pedaling. You'd hate to get lost and without a fully-working GPS app. --70.179.169.115 (talk) 12:49, 25 April 2011 (UTC)