iPad Offers Little for Photographers

Steve Jobs unveiled the Apple iPad today, igniting tech news with excitement, skepticism, and prolific ragging on its name.

Apple’s iPad marketing team insists that the iPad is a groundbreaking piece of technology, fusing laptop, smartphone, and e-reader capabilities.

It certainly appears to be innovative technology fit for the future. Brent Spiner, famous for his role as Data on Star Trek: The Next Generation, tweeted that the iPad looks like something from the Enterprise. Jason Kincaid of TechCrunch mused about all the possibilities the iPad opens for book publishers, interactive media, and most importantly, developers who can harness the power of the iPad app. Though old media (namely print) might continue to fall away, but if publications can tap into “hybridized content” – text, photos, video, interactive stories – they might even convince readers that their content is worth paying for.

However, before that conversation can even begin, is the iPad itself worth its weight in bills? TechCrunch also reports that the iPad appears to not run Flash and will only be offered through the 3G network of AT&T. Gizmodo has a running list of gripes against the iPad’s failings, including the fact that it does not have a built-in camera.

For photographers, the iPad might be a promising tool, but currently offers very little. Though Apple claims the iPad is “the best way to view and share your photos,” it appears to be a glorified interactive digital picture frame, or at best, a redesigned touch version of Apple’s Quick Look. All starting at $499.

The Apple website hails the iPad as being “the best way to experience the web, email, photos and video. Hands down,” but reveals that the only way to get photos onto the iPad is by syncing with a computer, downloading from email, or purchase the Apple Camera Connection Kit separately. Extra cost just to take advantage of the advertised feature? Sounds like a deal breaker.