Since the iPad and iPhone SDKs are so very close in core functionality, SDK Miners have been trying to unearth something (anything!) we didn’t already know about the iPad. I suspect most people simply glance over these reports, shrug, and move on without comment. After all, we’re a bit tired of tablet rumors by now, right? But looking at some of the comments in the articles (linked below), there are some people who take it all very seriously indeed. And that’s probably a mistake, as I’ll explain shortly.

Before I do, here’s a quick rundown of what we think we know so far from the SDK Mining that has happened in the last five weeks.

January 29

Engadget confirmed that the OS SDK contained support for Video Calling, File Downloads, SMS and even Handwriting input;

We’re told that there are hooks to accept and decline a video conference, flip a video feed (which suggests a front-facing camera) and — most importantly — run the video call in either full screen mode or in just a portion of the screen. That means you’ll be able to chat and do other things at the same time, which could mean there’s at least some type of multitasking going on here.

Engadget’s Nilay Patel adds in an update;

…there’s a spell checker with multiple dictionaries and user-added entries (huzzah!), much richer text support for apps, the ability to selectively draw to external displays (using the VGA or component adapters, we’d imagine), location-aware ads in Maps and possibly other programs that use the Maps API, file upload ability in Safari, a modifiable cut / copy / paste menu, and, most interestingly, prototype support for a “handwriting keyboard.” Maybe we’ll see some stylus action on this thing after all.

In all, Patel lists no fewer than 18 new discoveries, though many of them are pretty dry and technical.

After that, things fell quiet for a while, until just this week.

February 20

9to5Mac reported discovering a set of icons in the 3.2 SDK it believes are “pretty definitive evidence” for video calling functionality in a future iPhone or iPad device.

Image by 9to5Mac

It also found strings of code that refer to iChat, too, but didn’t speculate further. It did say;

While it is possible that Apple brought code over from its Mac telephony products, it is unlikely that they also built icons and compressed them into the iPad SDK for such a product if it weren’t being built for future release.

February 23

MacRumor’s Arnold Kim added to the fresh wave of SDK Mining reports with this graphic of the icons used in the video chat functionality;

Image by MacRumors

Kim writes;

It seems Apple built in API support to test to see if your iPad had a Front Facing Camera, Zoom and a Camera Flash. The front facing camera would, of course, be used for video chat, while Zoom and Camera Flash are often requested features for the iPhone’s camera.

Given the size of these buttons, they were intended for use on the the iPad’s screen rather than the iPhone. We’re not sure why these features were dropped…

And finally, just today, MacNN brings us news of (wait for it) advanced wallpaper options.

Image by MacNN

Well. Be still my beating heart. From MacNN;

In the current iPad simulator, users can now set separate lock- and homescreen wallpapers, reflecting the iPad’s ability to keep wallpaper active while navigating icons. In case the difference doesn’t matter, another button applies the same wallpaper to both screens.

The Disappointment of SDK Mining

While it’s fun to poke-around in the code (in the absence of an actual iPad to play with, it’s the next best thing!), SDK Mining often leads to disappointment. An operating system — even a ‘small’ OS like the one found on the iPhone or iPad — is hugely complex. It’s the end-product of years of development. In that time, as hardware and software prototypes came-and-went, functionality was added and removed, supported and dropped, many times over. This is common to any OS development process.

We need to be careful when reading breathless reports of “hidden” functionality in the iPad (or iPhone) SDKs. In the reports above, the code references camera features, proving that, at some point, Apple’s developers seriously explored that functionality. That doesn’t mean a camera is guaranteed to appear on the iPad. (For instance, just because I once learned how to ride a bike, it doesn’t guarantee I’ll become an avid cyclist.)

So let’s enjoy the speculation — but not get too worked-up over what it might mean. After all, it might never happen.

In one fell swoop, Apple has put an end to the “speculating.”

Stating that their “holiday line-up is set,” Bill Evans, an Apple spokesman, has put to bed the rumors that were circulating Apple news sites stating an update to the iMac and Mac mini was coming. The source, a comment made by David Sellers, believing that Apple would refresh the aforementioned models to bring them in line with the recently updated MacBook/MacBook Pro as early as next week, was relayed across the Apple blogosphere with much vigor. However, in speaking with Sellers, we were able to confirm that it was pure speculation on his part.

While there is no doubt in our minds that a refresh would have been welcomed, that is obviously not going to be case. So, if you were hoping to get an NVIDIA-powered Mac mini or a DisplayPort toting iMac before Christmas, best not hold your breath, but chin up, there’s always Macworld.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks

Okay, so why on Earth would Apple do this? John Gruber of Daring Fireball seems to think that Apple is simply unifying the iPhone OS and Mac OS branding, and this is probably the simplest and most logical explanation. But another part of me wonders if Apple is up to something else.

This is the part where I come up with some absurd speculations.

Has anyone noticed that Apple has been remarkably silent in regards to the Psystar Open Computer? I’m not the first to speculate this, but maybe Apple is testing the waters to open up Mac OS X to the wider world beyond Apple-branded Macs. Would it hurt Apple’s hardware sales? Maybe. But I think Apple makes good enough hardware that many would want to buy an Apple-branded machine regardless.  Also, opening up OS X to the wider PC world would allow Mac OS X to compete in areas that Apple hardware doesn’t compete in (in other words, another company could sell a $400 desktop system with Mac OS X preinstalled, while Apple sticks to the mid-range and higher-end of the market). And maybe removing the “Mac” from Mac OS X is a strategic move so Apple can spread OS X without diluting the Mac brand. You want OS X? You can choose from a number of PCs with OS X installed. But if you want a Mac, you still have to buy through Apple.

Will this actually happen? I’m not holding my breath. But with Steve Jobs, you never know what’s next. Sure, he killed the clones in the late 90s, but a lot has changed since then.

So is dropping the “Mac” from OS X a sign of things to come? Or is it just to unify the marketing between the Mac OS and iPhone OS? Stay tuned.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Mobile Q4: All Eyes Were on Android, 4G and the Rising Tablet Tide
• Report: A Mobile Video Market Overview
• In Q3, the Tablet and 4G Were the Big Stories

AppleInsider is reporting that Apple’s yearly back-to-school buy a Mac and get an iPod special may be starting early this year, and may be extra special. Speculation puts the price point at about a $199 mail-in rebate. It would be nice if the rebate were enough for an iPod Touch or even an AppleTV. Of course, you do have to buy an iPod and that adds to the total cost with the hope of “free money” later.

The idea of adding cost to an already expensive product begs the question about adding AppleCare to your computer/iPod purchases. After hearing some horror stories about AppleCare, I am seriously debating getting it when I purchase my iMac later this year. Though, I know there is some good anecdotal evidence as well. What are your experiences? Feel free to link to blogs with testimonials.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks

Jing’s image editor is lightyears away from being as awesome as that of Skitch, so beyond the ability to grab a screen capture, there’s little similarity. However like the MySkitch service, you can quickly upload your pictures and video to an online storage service. The video capture function seems slightly limited, in that you select a part of your screen, and [from what I could tell] it doesn’t allow the option to follow your cursor around. Additionally, the video is compressed into a .swf Flash format. That’s ok for embedding in websites, but limiting if you want to do much else with it.

Limitations aside, Jing is a really nice collection of tools and services for those who want to produce screencasts and take screen captures to share easily. Jing is available for both Windows and OS X. For now it’s free, but based on this quote,

It’s something we want to give you, along with some online media hosting, to see how you use it. The project will eventually turn into something else.

I’m weary of a bait-and-switch down the road. Ok, maybe bait-and-switch is a bit of a harsh term. Likely this method of product offering is just a good way to determine product and service placement for future projects. But I read it as the service not remaining in this format forever, but only for the data-collection period. Anyway, my conspiracy theory be darned, it’s worth a try.

On a side note, I’ve got a handful of Skitch invites if anyone wants them. Email me. I’ll post whenever I get more, but for now they’re all gone.

Oh, and incidentally, I still used Skitch to grab/post the Jing graphic for this post.
hahaha

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce

iTunes is obviously a companion to the popular iPod music player (though I’m not sure ‘popular’ cuts it with more than 100 million sold in the past 5+ years…), but gives a decent view into the simplicity that the marriage of Apple hardware and software are known for. The iPod has proven to be somewhat of a ‘gateway drug’ in terms of converting users of the mp3 player to Apple computer owners. (see, Halo Effect as a Business Model)

Safari (version 3, beta) was released to the public not quite a month ago on both the OS X and Windows platforms. The Windows version was immediately found to be quite buggy, but was just as quickly patched-up. It is beta software afterall, and that’s the purpose for which it’s been released! But now Windows users fed-up with Internet Explorer can get a taste of the speed and ingenuity that Apple offers in it’s wide array of software products on the Apple platform.

So back to the question at hand: What may be Apple’s next software release for the Windows platform?

The knee-jerk answer might be, “Well iLife of course!” There are however, a couple problems I see with this answer. First off, it costs money. Granted, $79 for the amazing range of functionality and consumer-power-tools that iLife includes (iPhoto, iTunes, iMovie HD, GarageBand, and iWeb) is a steal, but when Windows and 3rd party developer offer similar software on the Windows platform (in many cases, free or nearly so), it may be a hard sell convincing a Windows-user to plunk down the money. The second, and much larger problem, is that iLife is so simple because of it’s tightly-knit connection with the Apple-developed hardware platforms. The user experience is heightened ten-fold when all their hardware works seemlessly with their software. Without direct control over the wide array of hardware that Windows users are working on, iLife may seem more like a black eye than a reason to take the next step into the Apple World.

iWork may be slightly more viable as a Windows software offering from Apple. There’s less hardware integration to hold it back, but it relies quite heavily on Core OS X functionality, not to mention the tie-ins with the iLife apps. The design capabilities are extremely easy and fun to use, but there could be an awful lot lost in translation without the operating system and ‘companion’ applications support found on the OS X platform. Oh, and it’s also $79, so there’s that fiscal barrier-to-entry yet again.

There are a host of other applications that Apple puts out that may be hits on Window as well – Final Cut, Motion, Shake to name a few – but I believe there are three keys to the most plausible answer. The software in question needs:

1. To be interesting to a large cross-section of the user population
2. To be free, or nearly so
3. To create a desire to move to the Apple platform completely

Based on these criteria, I believe Xcode will be the next software offering from Apple for the Windows operating system. Software developers are becoming a dime-a-dozen (not a bad thing, mind you) and the number of Windows devs around must be tremendous. (At WWDC 07 there were many comments about the huge number of developers – new to the platform – that were there.) Xcode is currently offered for free under the Apple Developer Connection, so it wouldn’t require potential developers to ante-up just to see if they liked it. And most importantly, the great tools that Apple builds to hook-into the vast power and functionality of OS X should be a great argument for a developer to make the Switch and pounce on a new Mac.

I realize there are many more requirements behind the scenes for something like Xcode to work as intended, on Windows, but I wouldn’t put it outside Apple’s reach. They’ve shown their desire and commitment to powering their company forward, and I feel Xcode on Windows is the next big step they’ll take in doing so.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Why iPad 2 Will Lead Consumers Into the Post-PC Era
• The Near-Term Evolution of Social Commerce
• Content Farms: The Players, The Benefits, The Risks

Chris postulates the iPhone as being the vehicle Apple will use to create a converged communications device. Huh? Basically, All you as the user of the [iPhone] device care about is calling Bob. You don’t care if you’ve got cell coverage, or wifi access, or where Bob is currently located, you just want him on the other end of the line. The idea being that iPhone takes care of the behind the scenes using SIP (open, worldwide technologies as opposed to various national networks) to connect you from anywhere, on any connection, to anyone.

“Apple could easily roll out its own SIP infrastructure as part of the .Mac framework, increasing their chances of providing a superior out-of-the-box experience, while promoting the .Mac brand to … competitive usefulness. From here, the sky’s the limit as to what Apple can do, leveraging iPhone’s brand and near ubiquitous and still increasing WiFi penetration. Forget about fighting over 3G vs GSM. WiFi and IP are universal WorldWide.”

Chris puts it much more eloquently than I do, and makes some very thought-provoking points. His argument is solid enough that I really could see Apple going in this direction. (Guess they’ll have to wrestle with Cisco over that whole iPhone thing again, should they go for the VOIP space, but that’s another story altogether.)

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Mobile Q4: All Eyes Were on Android, 4G and the Rising Tablet Tide
• Report: A Mobile Video Market Overview