I also hope that phone manufacturers STOP trying to “converge” walkie talkies with cellphones. Geez! That’s the most annoying thing ever!
To a certain degree, I’ve gotten used to people always talking on their cellphones and I can normally tune it out. However, with that annoying loud BEEP every 5 seconds, it’s impossible to ignore. Damn you BOOST MOBILE and NEXTEL!!! :evil:
About Phone/Cameras. Since cellphone batteries still generally suck, I wouldn’t want to use them as cameras for fear of not being able to receive an important call.
[quote author=“gr00vy0ne”]
About Phone/Cameras. Since cellphone batteries still generally suck, I wouldn’t want to use them as cameras for fear of not being able to receive an important call.
Another good point. However, isn’t it the same when you are performing a PDA function like data entry? Of course I am referring to missing an important call, not necessarily battery life.
[quote author=“TruthSeeker”][quote author=“gr00vy0ne”]
About Phone/Cameras. Since cellphone batteries still generally suck, I wouldn’t want to use them as cameras for fear of not being able to receive an important call.
Another good point. However, isn’t it the same when you are performing a PDA function like data entry? Of course I am referring to missing an important call, not necessarily battery life.
I would just argue that data entry is not a very battery intensive task unlike taking pictures. It’s not the same. Zooming, flash, and image processing is much more battery intensive. And yes, over time some of this will be optimized but not anytime soon.
[quote author=“TruthSeeker”][quote author=“Drachen”]
Digital cameras are a moving target too. 1Mpx camera phones are just hitting the market, but entry-level digital cameras are in the 2-4 Mpx range these days. That’s in addition to the cameras having decent flashes and optical zooms. The only camera phone I’ve seen that really tries to keep the camera form factor is the SE s700 and that’s still only a 1.3 Mpx camera, no optical zoom and I’m not sure it has a built-in flash or not.
There is a good point here. When tapeless digicams hit the market, and become very small, they will become difficult to displace by a phone. Throw in the fact that they will carry higher MP still shots, and I could see them being stand alone. So instead of one device, maybe we could settle for just two.
PDA / Phone / MP3 player / Radio / BT / MMC card slot for expansion / Speakerphone (check the upcoming Nokia 6230)
and…
Tapeless Digicam / 5MP camera (very small)
Its still integration nonetheless. How bout that, gentlemen?
I think there’s still room for the full-sized PDA and, of course, notebook. I also think that the camera/digicams could range right up to professional levels. Having your shots accumulate and display as thumbnails on a second device while you shoot would sell.
How about a full-sized pda with detachable phone? The phone would provide phone/MP3/radio in stand-alone mode. Connected (physically or wireless) they’d share memory and functions.
I think Sony should hire us all on as consultants and give us the first production units…
[quote author=“dbs”][quote author=“tifosiv122”]
IMO camera phones (real ones, not the crap thats being sold today) will only mainstream when the new Cell networks G-whatever allows for real-time video conference…then I think there would be a substantial market…but then again the camera would still be sub MP anyway…
Erik
I have to wonder, really. The picturephone, the videophone were all hard sells and failed. Video conferences and video chats are still “arranged” connections. Are you prepared to be on-camera every time the phone rings? Are you prepared to be rude and not turn on your camera? In a worst case scenario, are you prepared to explain WHY you won’t turn on the camera?
Beyond social dynamics, even with high speed networks and decent resolution, where’s the camera going to be pointing when the handset is to your ear? Of course you could use a headset and hold the phone in front of you or find some place to set it. A pretty much useless technology IMHO.
The failure of the videophones was due to two things.
1. Price - usually over $250 a phone.
2. Speed - Used standard phone lines that were slooow.
The G network cell-phones wont have either of these problems…the phones will be priced about what they are now and the G network is fast enough to stream video real well.
[quote author=“TruthSeeker”][quote author=“gr00vy0ne”]
About Phone/Cameras. Since cellphone batteries still generally suck, I wouldn’t want to use them as cameras for fear of not being able to receive an important call.
Another good point. However, isn’t it the same when you are performing a PDA function like data entry? Of course I am referring to missing an important call, not necessarily battery life.
Hey! I was the first one to say that both digi cams and phones take up battery life…
Not to mention battery life…both digicams and cell phones chew up battery life…having a decent camera and phone in one would require frequent charges or numerous batteries.
[quote author=“dbs”]I think there’s still room for the full-sized PDA and, of course, notebook. I also think that the camera/digicams could range right up to professional levels. Having your shots accumulate and display as thumbnails on a second device while you shoot would sell.
How about a full-sized pda with detachable phone? The phone would provide phone/MP3/radio in stand-alone mode. Connected (physically or wireless) they’d share memory and functions.
That’s why, even with its substantial warts, I still like Bluetooth. As more and more things go digital we’re seeing a bigger and bigger need for interconnectivity between devices. We’re seeing the same trend in the home, where the computer and the TiVo are talking to one another and people are using their home stereo speakers with their computer/iPod to listen to music over WiFi.
[quote author=“dbs”]I think Sony should hire us all on as consultants and give us the first production units…
Remember when Homer Simpson designed an ‘everyman’ car for his brother…?
[quote author=“tifosiv122”]
The failure of the videophones was due to two things.
1. Price - usually over $250 a phone.
2. Speed - Used standard phone lines that were slooow.
The G network cell-phones wont have either of these problems…the phones will be priced about what they are now and the G network is fast enough to stream video real well.
Erik
It was more than speed and cost, but I’ll get to that in a sec. Cost is still a factor. Both the equipment and wireless data services are expensive. Not, perhaps, if you can justify them for business, but for most folks they’re not worth the premium. This may change, but for now there’s still only so much bandwidth and they’re going to charge for it.
I still think the social dynamic is the real killer. What percentage of your telephone conversations would benefit from a visual connection? When you call mom? Most of my calls are around a minute. Connect, take care of business and say bye. I can’t number the times I’ve had to move to a quiet location to talk while I was out and about. In this case the call is an interruption and my interest is usually not in swapping smiling faces (besides the camera-seeing-me problem).
Oh, I can see a few places… hi dear, we’re in Paris now, isn’t the Tower lovely, framed by those trees? Or, yeah, I like the dancer in the middle… but for the most part I think it’s a solution in search of a need.
[quote author=“dbs”]It was more than speed and cost, but I’ll get to that in a sec. Cost is still a factor. Both the equipment and wireless data services are expensive. Not, perhaps, if you can justify them for business, but for most folks they’re not worth the premium. This may change, but for now there’s still only so much bandwidth and they’re going to charge for it.
I still think the social dynamic is the real killer. What percentage of your telephone conversations would benefit from a visual connection? When you call mom? Most of my calls are around a minute. Connect, take care of business and say bye. I can’t number the times I’ve had to move to a quiet location to talk while I was out and about. In this case the call is an interruption and my interest is usually not in swapping smiling faces (besides the camera-seeing-me problem).
Oh, I can see a few places… hi dear, we’re in Paris now, isn’t the Tower lovely, framed by those trees? Or, yeah, I like the dancer in the middle… but for the most part I think it’s a solution in search of a need.
Your in the minority. Cell phone usage is out of control. 3000+ minute plans are common, not only for business. Ask any female teenager how long she’s on the phone every month.
As far as data services go…some companies are cheaper then others…I pay $45 extra a month for unlimited internet on my phone from Verizon…I was told Sprint’s Version of this is less then half that…so the market out there now is cheap enough for anyone, IMO.
And, yes, I think video would add a new realm to talking and people would use it often.
In almost every sci-fi movie phones have video…it just seems right, and with technology that we know is available…its only a matter of time.
I don’t know about you, but even (especially?) on a long phone call, I’m always doing something else in addition to talking. I’d get kind of annoyed that my videophone locked me to sitting down in front of the video terminal. I couldn’t surf, cook or whatever. Considering their general hangups about their appearance, teenage girls would probably flee videophones.
