In an interesting piece in EE Times they relate that when UBM Insights completed their teardown of the iPad they found an unpopulated area on the PCB next to the accelerometer which would fit a similar design of gyroscope to that found in the iPhone 4.

They even went so far as to trace the circuits from the empty space on the PCB back to the iPad’s Apple A4 processor and found that it closely resembled the wiring in the iPhone 4’s gyroscope setup.

The actual layout on the iPad PCB is for a different gyro than that used in the iPhone 4. But it matches what was probably the only unit available to Apple at the time they were prototyping the iPad.

This all seems to point to a gyro definitely being a feature of any iPad revision, and makes me think that we will most likely see an iPad with a gyro and RAM bump before we see a real version 2 iPad with a higher resolution display and cameras…

Does an iPad with a gyro make you glad you waited to buy and iPad? Or perhaps sad that you jumped the gun on a first gen iPad? Or will you just buy another? Do let us know in the comments.

DigiTimes are reporting today that Apple have an ARM Cortex-A9 based SoC for the next iPad. It gets a bit confusing with all the chips having ‘A’ designations. But the Apple A4 has an ARM A8 in it. So the ARM A9 is the next logical progression for Apple’s A5 SoC. SoC simply refers to the fact that the chip is a “System on a Chip”, and includes a GPU as well as other electronics to glue the CPU, I/O and GPU together. The GPU I suspect Apple will squeeze into the Apple A5 is a lot closer to what we have in our desktop machines today. It may even support full desktop OpenGL 3.x, not just OpenGL ES.

Another thing that Apple absolutely must do with the iPad is bring its RAM into parity with the iPhone 4, at 512MB. DigiTimes also confirm this for the next version of the iPad. Although I suspect we may just see a revision to the current iPad and a simple bump to 512MB RAM before we see any totally new devices with new silicon.

The really interesting news from DigiTimes, if true, is that Apple are not only going to revamp the existing iPad, but launch a 7 inch iPad with the same resolution as its 9.7 inch older brother.

Would you buy a 7″ iPad. Or is that too close to an iPhone in dimensions to interest you? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

Yet, that’s not to say there aren’t opposing points of view out there. Author, tech pundit, and cultural chronicler Cory Doctrow has come out against the iPad. You can read Cory’s piece from BoingBoing here. Windows author and expert Paul Thurriott and LifeHacker founder, blogger, and open source expert Gina Trapani have similarly come out discouraging immediate adoption of Apple’s new device. It’s unfortunate the criticism of the iPad has split down some traditional lines, Thurriott specializes in Windows and Trapani is a notable Google/Android booster, because what they have to say is interesting, well-reasoned, and worth entering into the discussion. The arguments against immediate adoption of the iPad can be broken down into the following general categories:

• You’ll get burned buying a first generation Apple product
• The iPad is another closed system
• The iPad doesn’t have an obvious niche
• The iPad is all hype and no substance

As you review these points, you see that while there is a bit of emotion infused in them, there is also some reason. The iPhone was released to much fanfare in 2007 at a premium price between $500 and $600 USD. The next year the iPhone 3G came out at $300 USD less for a faster, more robust system. That could lead anyone to believe Apple is playing the same game this time. In fact, evidence has already been found for the next generation iPad buried deep in Apple code.

It is true the iPad is another closed system. If you don’t like closed systems you certainly shouldn’t buy an iPad. End of story. Apple isn’t in the business of building a hackable, changable device in the iPhone and iPad platforms. They are intended as consumer electronics, not computers. Consumer electronics disguised as a computer but consumer electronics none the less. Do you want to hack your television? Do you rip apart your DVD player to overclock it? Of course not. This device isn’t made for those types of people. Apple is aiming the iPad squarely at my mother and father, grandmother and grandfather. The closed system protects them from fault and broken devices the same way the closed TV insures they can watch JAG without the need to solder circuits just to get the thing to operate.

Obvious niche? Well that’s where the iPad is like a computer. It’s not a single use device like a Kindle but instead encapsulates the functionality of many different devices into one package. It will fill the voids people leave for it much like the iPhone before it. Many people have said its just a big iPod Touch with a sneer in their voice. I say that’s precisely what it is and think that it’s an immense positive. I would love my iPod Touch to be that big.

I can’t argue with the last point. I’d say 70% of the people standing in line on Saturday where there thanks to Steve Jobs and the technology media machine. Apple knows how to move product. Whether you find that a positive or a negative is entirely up to you.

In the end, I think you need to make your own choices about whether you should or shouldn’t get an iPad. I’ll be honest with you, if I had $600 USD of disposable income I’d be first in line to get one. At this point it’s merely a financial decision for me. I’m saving my pennies and perhaps around Christmas I’ll buy one. But at least at that point I’ll be buying from a position of strength and not one of weakness. If anything, the most obvious reason against buying one is letting someone else be the guinea pig for your money.

Did you buy an iPad this weekend or did you abstain? Are you happy with your decision? Are you just saving your money and waiting for iPad 2G? Leave us a comment and let us know.