Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Apple camera coming?

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Apple camera coming?

 
 
SMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-24-2012
On 8/20/2012 4:52 PM, Alan Browne wrote:

> I'd discount the "dslr" bit. If it comes from Apple, it'll be a P&S -
> and likely a pretty good one.


I can see Apple wanting to do in cameras what they did in printers with
AirPrint. Get some of their technology inside the camera. I.e. cameras
that can print directly to AirPrint enabled printers, or stream
wirelessly to an iPad without the need for an actual computer or other
device in-between.

I would worry than an actual Apple camera would be an excellent product
in terms of actually taking photographs, but with specific limitations
that would annoy people. I.e. no memory card slot, no user-replaceable
battery, etc..
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-24-2012
In article <5037b763$0$70349$(E-Mail Removed)>, SMS
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I would worry than an actual Apple camera would be an excellent product
> in terms of actually taking photographs, but with specific limitations
> that would annoy people. I.e. no memory card slot, no user-replaceable
> battery, etc..


if the battery lasts longer than a full day of shooting, who cares?
most people don't have spare batteries for their cameras. it's the same
as phones.

no memory slot would be an issue, but that's highly unlikely for a
camera.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
SMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-24-2012
On 8/24/2012 10:43 AM, nospam wrote:

> if the battery lasts longer than a full day of shooting, who cares?
> most people don't have spare batteries for their cameras. it's the same
> as phones.


I've never met anyone on a trip that didn't carry a spare camera
battery. It's far more common than a spare battery for a phone. It's
quite easy to go through one battery in a compact camera in less than a
day. Furthermore, since cameras aren't subsidized by a wireless carrier,
people keep them longer than a phone so it's more likely that the
original battery would need to be replaced during the life of the product.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-24-2012
In article <5037c537$0$70409$(E-Mail Removed)>, SMS
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > if the battery lasts longer than a full day of shooting, who cares?
> > most people don't have spare batteries for their cameras. it's the same
> > as phones.

>
> I've never met anyone on a trip that didn't carry a spare camera
> battery. It's far more common than a spare battery for a phone. It's
> quite easy to go through one battery in a compact camera in less than a
> day.


that only means the batteries are too small. if a mythical future
camera has a longer lasting battery, then that issue goes away.

i bought a spare for my nikon slr. i get over 1000 photos per charge
and have needed the spare *once*. it was a waste of money. most of the
time, i shoot 200-300 photos per day. it's not an issue.

> Furthermore, since cameras aren't subsidized by a wireless carrier,
> people keep them longer than a phone so it's more likely that the
> original battery would need to be replaced during the life of the product.


subsidy has nothing to do with it. people replace phones even if
they're not subsidized. people keep computers longer than they do
phones and those have internal batteries, and not just from apple
either.

the batteries in macbooks and iphones are rated for 5 years. that's a
long time for a camera.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-25-2012
SMS <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 8/20/2012 4:52 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> I'd discount the "dslr" bit. If it comes from Apple, it'll be a P&S -
>> and likely a pretty good one.

>
> I can see Apple wanting to do in cameras what they did in printers with
> AirPrint. Get some of their technology inside the camera. I.e. cameras
> that can print directly to AirPrint enabled printers, or stream
> wirelessly to an iPad without the need for an actual computer or other device in-between.
>
> I would worry than an actual Apple camera would be an excellent product
> in terms of actually taking photographs, but with specific limitations
> that would annoy people. I.e. no memory card slot, no user-replaceable battery, etc..


Airprint was a sweetheart deal with HP. In order to use Airprint, you MUST
buy a HP printer as Airprint only prints to HP printers. Unfortunately, for
HP printers break down quickly and have a host of other quality issues.

An Airphoto feature using HP cameras would hasten Apple's death by two
years.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-25-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Airprint was a sweetheart deal with HP. In order to use Airprint, you MUST
> buy a HP printer as Airprint only prints to HP printers.


complete utter bullshit.

where the hell did you come up with that garbage?

airprint is supported by hp, epson, canon, samsung, brother, dell and
lexmark. basically, everyone.

and if that's not enough, older printers that predate airprint can be
made airprint compatible by installing software on a computer.

> Unfortunately, for
> HP printers break down quickly and have a host of other quality issues.


more rubbish.

> An Airphoto feature using HP cameras would hasten Apple's death by two
> years.


apple is nowhere near death, no matter how much you want it to be.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-25-2012
nospam <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Airprint was a sweetheart deal with HP. In order to use Airprint, you MUST
>> buy a HP printer as Airprint only prints to HP printers.

>
> complete utter bullshit.
>
> where the hell did you come up with that garbage?
>
> airprint is supported by hp, epson, canon, samsung, brother, dell and
> lexmark. basically, everyone.
>
> and if that's not enough, older printers that predate airprint can be
> made airprint compatible by installing software on a computer.
>
>> Unfortunately, for
>> HP printers break down quickly and have a host of other quality issues.

>
> more rubbish.
>
>> An Airphoto feature using HP cameras would hasten Apple's death by two
>> years.

>
> apple is nowhere near death, no matter how much you want it to be.


http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2373145,00.asp

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2774449?start=0

http://www.macworld.com/reviews/coll.../airprint.html

Learn to read "nospam".
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-25-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >> Airprint was a sweetheart deal with HP. In order to use Airprint, you MUST
> >> buy a HP printer as Airprint only prints to HP printers.

> >
> > complete utter bullshit.
> >
> > where the hell did you come up with that garbage?
> >
> > airprint is supported by hp, epson, canon, samsung, brother, dell and
> > lexmark. basically, everyone.
> >
> > and if that's not enough, older printers that predate airprint can be
> > made airprint compatible by installing software on a computer.
> >
> >> Unfortunately, for
> >> HP printers break down quickly and have a host of other quality issues.

> >
> > more rubbish.
> >
> >> An Airphoto feature using HP cameras would hasten Apple's death by two
> >> years.

> >
> > apple is nowhere near death, no matter how much you want it to be.

>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2373145,00.asp


2 years old and the list is longer accurate.

also:
Apple has said that compatibility will eventually extend to printers
from other manufacturers.

> https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2774449?start=0


1.5 years old and points out that airprint is open to any manufacturer.

> http://www.macworld.com/reviews/coll.../airprint.html


there's a canon printer in that list!

so much for hp only. you just proved yourself wrong, and they're all
old printers anyway. the list is obsolete.

> Learn to read "nospam".


take your own advice.

airprint is open to anyone. hp just happened to be the first printer
company to support it. other companies added it later and now they all
have it.

<http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/AirPrint>
<http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/j...intCompatibili
ty.do>
<http://www1.lexmark.com/en_US/soluti...s/mobile-print
/airprint/index.shtml>
<http://welcome.solutions.brother.com...faq/faq/000000
/002800/000064/faq002864_000.html?reg=us&prod=mfcj835dw_us&c=ca&l ang=en

full list of supported printers, so far:
<http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4356?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US>

for older printers, install an airprint client on a computer and share
an existing printer.

once again, airprint is without question, not hp only.
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-25-2012
On 8/24/2012 1:43 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <5037b763$0$70349$(E-Mail Removed)>, SMS
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> I would worry than an actual Apple camera would be an excellent product
>> in terms of actually taking photographs, but with specific limitations
>> that would annoy people. I.e. no memory card slot, no user-replaceable
>> battery, etc..

>
> if the battery lasts longer than a full day of shooting, who cares?
> most people don't have spare batteries for their cameras. it's the same
> as phones.
>


1. Sometimes a charger is not taken on an overnight trip

2. sometimes the battery does not last for a full day of shooting.

3. How did you determine what most people do?




--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-25-2012
In article <5038f26b$0$6401$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>, PeterN
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >> I would worry than an actual Apple camera would be an excellent product
> >> in terms of actually taking photographs, but with specific limitations
> >> that would annoy people. I.e. no memory card slot, no user-replaceable
> >> battery, etc..

> >
> > if the battery lasts longer than a full day of shooting, who cares?
> > most people don't have spare batteries for their cameras. it's the same
> > as phones.

>
> 1. Sometimes a charger is not taken on an overnight trip


whose fault is that? don't blame the manufacturer if the user is too
stupid to not bring a charger when they might need one.

plus, it will probably charge of usb, so the chances are very high they
already brought a charger for another device. many hotels and even some
cars have usb ports, so they probably don't need a separate charger in
the first place. if they brought a computer, they definitely don't.

> 2. sometimes the battery does not last for a full day of shooting.


rarely. most people don't shoot thousands of photos a day.

you do realize that if this mythical camera had an internal battery, it
would be designed to last for a full day in typical shooting (perhaps
more), not an hour or two, right? the ipad gets over *ten* hours of
battery time.

will it last long enough for everyone? no. nothing is perfect. if it
has removable batteries and you brought one spare and needed a second,
you're in the same boat. plus you have down time to swap, which may
happen at an inopportune time. meanwhile, the vast majority won't find
it to be a problem.

> 3. How did you determine what most people do?


industry studies. almost nobody buys spare batteries. many companies
are moving to internal batteries, including samsung, dell and motorola.
it isn't just apple.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple sues Apple over iPod GraB NZ Computing 2 03-29-2006 08:49 PM
Apple iPod trash, like all Apple products Rich DVD Video 8 02-27-2006 01:32 AM
Apple Camera - digital stills camera for cctv Socrates Digital Photography 2 07-28-2004 04:11 PM



Advertisments