Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Samsung Unveils Windows Phone 8 Device and Android-Based Camera

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the still-waiting-on-that-android-based-toaster dept.

Windows 179

MrSeb writes "Today Samsung joined Nikon in announcing an Android-powered camera. The Samsung Galaxy Camera weighs 305g, features a 16-megapixel CMOS sensor, 21x super zoom lens, a quad-core 1.4GHz SoC (probably Exynos 4), 8GB of internal storage, and runs Android 4.1 Jelly Bean. This compares with the Nikon S800c which also has a 16MP CMOS sensor, along with a 7x zoom f/2 lens and runs Android 2.3 Gingerbread. Since neither unit has shipped, we don't know anything yet about how good they are as cameras, but we do know that the companies are trying to regain some of the ground they've lost to smartphones by integrating sharing right into their cameras. For photographers, there are a couple of critical questions about these new models: First is whether these cameras will have enough additional functionality to justify the added cost and weight when most people already have a serviceable camera in their phone. Second, and more importantly, there is still a big question mark hanging over Nikon and Samsung's long-term intentions for Android. If Android cameras are just standard point-and-shoots with a smartphone OS bolted on for sharing, that'll be a wasted opportunity. It would have been easier to create a camera that instantly tethered to a smartphone instead, and let the phone do all the work. There is an exciting possibility, if Nikon and Samsung do this correctly and allow low-level access to the camera functions via Android, to really unleash the power of Android to enable new photographic solutions." Samsung has also taken the wraps off the ATIV S, the first smartphone running Windows Phone 8. It has a 4.8" screen, NFC support, and a microSD card slot. Samsung plans to start shipping them in Q4.

cancel ×

179 comments

Android Based Camera (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172247)

So they deleted the phone button?

Re:Android Based Camera (3, Funny)

lord_rob the only on (859100) | about 2 years ago | (#41172349)

I suppose they'll file a patent on "the process of digitalizing an object" when you target it and focus it then press the "take picture" button. Apple will have pain to start their iCam then.

Re:Android Based Camera (0)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#41172851)

iCam [petapixel.com] ... Photoshopped? I've seen worse...

Re:Android Based Camera (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172475)

Yeah, they call this one the Samsung Galaxy Fuck You Apple. And, of course, Apple is already preparing a lawsuit over the concept of, as Tim Cook put it in his response to the news, "it's... um... pictures... on a device. Yeah, pictures on a device. There's some patent or something we own on that, I'm sure", and bribing a patent-holder to shill for them at the trial from the jury box.

Re:Android Based Camera (5, Funny)

RenderSeven (938535) | about 2 years ago | (#41172749)

I would buy a "Samsung Galaxy Fuck You Apple". Not sure what it is or what it costs, but I'm pretty sure I need at least two of them. Are the specs going to be better than the "Google Nexus Fuck You Apple" or the "HTC Retribution Fuck You Apple"?

Re:Android Based Camera (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41173789)

It is truly gorgeous. If you check on the windows phone blog they've actually rounded the edge of the glass. I hope they have a patent for that- Fuck You Apple.

Re:Android Based Camera (1, Funny)

leromarinvit (1462031) | about 2 years ago | (#41174009)

Not sure what it is or what it costs, but I'm pretty sure I need at least two of them.

I hear the price will be approximately $999,999,999.99. Or free with a million year contract!

Re:Android Based Camera (2)

plover (150551) | about 2 years ago | (#41172497)

So they deleted the phone button?

If you miss it, you can install skype on it from the Android Market.

PDA (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#41173325)

Delete the cellular voice call button from a smartphone and you have a PDA. It worked for Palm and Microsoft before the rise of smartphones, and it worked for Apple with the iPod touch.

Re:Android Based Camera (3, Interesting)

yuriyg (926419) | about 2 years ago | (#41173423)

It looks like it's a proper camera, with proper optics:

features a 16-megapixel CMOS sensor, 21x super zoom lens

I, for one, welcome our social cloud overlords, and look forward to sharing my pictures to [G+ | Facebook | Twitter | Picasa] directly from the camera.

Re:Android Based Camera (2)

Anthony Mouse (1927662) | about 2 years ago | (#41174033)

It looks like it's a proper camera, with proper optics

But it also seems like they're missing the point. OK, so actual photographers need better optics than you find in the typical phone. So why don't they just make a phone designed for photographers, which includes a camera with better optics and a more professional photography UI?

Or to put it a different way, this interesting product is conspicuously missing the ability to make cellular voice calls for no apparent reason.

Plan B (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172285)

Goes to prove that successful companies always have a Plan B, or C, or D....

The loss to Apple and the $1 billion fine were damaging, as will the product ban be, but it’s good to see Samsung had Windows Phone and a non-phone Android device in their back-pocket. Plus let’s not forget their TV and home appliance businesses.

Re:Plan B (5, Insightful)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#41173143)

i'm guessing that Microsoft is paying some very serious money to hardware manufacturers to build Windows phones. I can't see them doing it out of any vision of the platform succeeding.

Re:Plan B (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41173177)

Goes to prove that successful companies always have a Plan B,

it’s good to see Samsung had Windows Phone

HAHAHHAHHAHAH!

hahhahhahhahahahah HAHAHA

Well, I suppose Plan B is an abortion pill..

Oh Yay (0, Troll)

joeflies (529536) | about 2 years ago | (#41172297)

More ads instead of stories

Re:Oh Yay (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172451)

Press Ctrl+W on your browser to eliminate all ad stories.

Story was about Android, Soulskill changes title? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172465)

While the article was about an announcement, and thus pretty fluffy, why did souskill add the shit about wp8 from spamworld?

Re:Story was about Android, Soulskill changes titl (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172887)

This site has strayed far from "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters". The problem seems to be a change of direction from within, with external forces at work too. Pro-MS and anti-Apple seem to be the bulk of the agenda. It feels like an invasion of "free speech".
Submissions and moderation are corrupted. There's censorship and it feels like troll-farms have unleashed new crops. There's not just spamminess but junk-science too.

But back on topic, I think those new Windows 8 phones look really spiffy. With the blue background I never feel far from the comfort of basking in familiar blue-screen pleasure.

Re:Story was about Android, Soulskill changes titl (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 2 years ago | (#41173705)

This site has strayed far from "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"

I love this variation on the "Goodbye Cruel World" troll post.

The old grey lady ain't what she used to be, ain't what she used to be.

first (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172301)

post

Me thinks MS paid much for this. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172355)

Samsung figured what is one more phone to make with all the others. Especial when the OS provider will pay so much to have their OS run one of the cool kids.

DSLR (1)

RazzleFrog (537054) | about 2 years ago | (#41172367)

It's be more interesting when they can do this with DSLRs.

Re:DSLR (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about 2 years ago | (#41172477)

Why? I don't really understand why people want their cameras to be general purpose computers to start with. I guess the snapshot set like to be able to post things online right away, but a camera that tethers to your phone, as the summary suggests, seems a better solution for that. But why would I want my DSLR to run Android?

Re:DSLR (4, Interesting)

RazzleFrog (537054) | about 2 years ago | (#41172545)

It's not about general purpose computer but I can think of a few advantages:

- Touch screen vs ridiculous amounts of buttons.
- Easier ways to change settings that aren't changed frequently but are now buried in crazy hierarchical menus.
- Time lapse photography (most DSLRs require an Intervalometer)
- More complex control over slave flashes

A lot of photographers shoot tethered to a laptop as it is. This would hopefully eliminate that, too.

I am sure other serious photographers can think of dozens of other reasons. It's not that I want to browse the web on my camera.

Re:DSLR (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172599)

Panasonic has a DSLR with touch screen

Re:DSLR (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41173949)

> Panasonic has a DSLR with touch screen

Panasonic does not have DSLRs, they have several DSLMs (M=Mirrorless) and many compacts and superzooms that have touch screens and flappy panels.

They also have WiFi enabled cameras (FX90 and SZ5) and Android and iOS apps that connect to give remote viewing and operation.

Re:DSLR (5, Insightful)

rbgaynor (537968) | about 2 years ago | (#41172631)

Buttons, knobs, and scroll wheels are one of the best things about a DSLR - there is no way I would want them replaced by a touch screen.

Re:DSLR (1)

RazzleFrog (537054) | about 2 years ago | (#41172659)

The only things I need a button or knob for are adjusting aperture and shutter speed. I have no problem with adjusting other things using a touch screen.

Re:DSLR (1)

Nkwe (604125) | about 2 years ago | (#41172813)

The only things I need a button or knob for are adjusting aperture and shutter speed. I have no problem with adjusting other things using a touch screen.

A dedicated (physical) control for exposure and flash compensation is pretty nice as well.
I assume that you also include the shutter, focus, and zoom as items that physical controls work better for.

Re:DSLR (2)

NIK282000 (737852) | about 2 years ago | (#41173685)

Cameras aren't general purpose devices, why would they need a general purpose OS? Buttons and knobs make for easy and fast adjustments without having to look at the camera. As soon as you have to take your eyes off the subject/out of the view finder you have negated any of the advantages that android could bring to a DSLR/Mirrorless camera. Keep the gimicky stuff in the phones and point and shoots.

Re:DSLR (1)

fa2k (881632) | about 2 years ago | (#41172761)

Maybe obvious, but if my experience with remote controls is anything to go by, touch screens suck when you're not looking at them. I'd definitely want to have a good number of buttons around.

Re:DSLR (1)

RazzleFrog (537054) | about 2 years ago | (#41172785)

Well like I said - the stuff that you are changing constantly - like aperture and shutter speed - you need to have the same controls for. And maybe even still basic functionality in the existing buttons but more advanced in the touchscreen. I mean as somebody who loves playing with HDR I would love more complex and flexible bracketing options without having to do anything but click my cable release because every time I have to touch the camera again there is a risk of movement.

Re:DSLR (4, Informative)

batkiwi (137781) | about 2 years ago | (#41172979)

- Touch screen vs ridiculous amounts of buttons.

I understand that moms and pops buy DSLRs, but for their primary audience this is a bad thing. It's a feature that the more expensive cameras have more buttons. I started out an ameteur, and the 2 reasons I chose a canon 60d over a canon 550d were the size (the 60d is bigger, fits better in your hand) and that it had an extra wheel and about 5 more buttons.

Buttons/sliders I need to have available without looking:
-ISO
-focus (seperate from taking photo)
-meter/take photo
-choose focus point quickly
-choose full autofocus quickly (so seperate from choosing a single point)
-aperture
-shutter
-metering mode

- Easier ways to change settings that aren't changed frequently but are now buried in crazy hierarchical menus.
- Time lapse photography (most DSLRs require an Intervalometer)
- More complex control over slave flashes

I agree with all 3 of these 100%. It could also possibly give the ability for "better" or more customisable in-viewfinder UIs.

Time lapse is one that always comes up, and "magic lantern" supplies.

Re:DSLR (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 2 years ago | (#41172565)

But why would I want my DSLR to run Android?

So you can Photoshop your pictures as you are taking them . . . ?

. . . maybe there would be an intelligent "Add Angolina's Leg" button . . . ? That would have been a hoot and a half with the Prince Harry fotos . . .

Re:DSLR (2)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 2 years ago | (#41172571)

What I'd like on my cameras is a low-level slave mode: it could still work with cameras if one was set as the master and others became the slaves -- you could use all their sensors for 3-D lighting analysis and distance/depth analysis, as well as true HDR, panoramics, and time-synching video. with spatial awareness.

I don't want my camera to become the editing and publishing tool (really... those features in prosumer models are just more junk I have to wade through to adjust my settings and take my shot; I'd rather not have it), as a computer is much better at editing and publishing.

But imagine a fleet of cameras at a public event, all with GPS, tethered together. You could even do a live feed, switching between views in real-time, as well as stitching together really innovative stills.

Re:DSLR (1)

RazzleFrog (537054) | about 2 years ago | (#41172729)

I agree on the editing right now but what if Nik decides to start developing Silver Efex for droid or Photomatix puts HDRPro on there. Right now the editing tools suck because they are put there by Nikon or Canon. With an Android OS you have a world of top notch developers adding new functionality.

Re:DSLR (2)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 2 years ago | (#41173779)

I agree on the editing right now but what if Nik decides to start developing Silver Efex for droid or Photomatix puts HDRPro on there. Right now the editing tools suck because they are put there by Nikon or Canon. With an Android OS you have a world of top notch developers adding new functionality.

The editing tools suck because you're editing in variable light on a tiny screen. Having powerful software isn't going to fix this.

Although I guess it would be neat to create a few intelligent post-process templates on your computer and upload them to your camera to selectively apply.

Now... if the Nikon and Canon devices started running Android with a high-definition touch screen and had a viewing hood, third-party lightroom software might start to look desirable, as well as support for the other features I suggested. For editing though, it's still going to be a pain with the small screen and a finger or stylus.

Make your own menus! (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 2 years ago | (#41172741)

Why? I don't really understand why people want their cameras to be general purpose computers to start with.

It's not that they necessarily want the cameras to be computers. It's that they want a different specialized device than the manufacturer chose.

Haven't you ever looked at a camera menu and thought, this is horrible, I could do better? Potentially with an Android based camera you could totally replace the native menu structure with your own.

The key would be that you have to be able to get input from all camera controls (every wheel, button and slider) in any app. Then you could have a variety of applications to fully dedicate the camera to a specialized task.

This would really bring a lot of excitement back into DSLR's (or mirrorless cameras, don't want to leave them out) in a market that is increasingly tantalized by the huge number of ways they can make use of a camera on a smartphone.

Re:Make your own menus! (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about 2 years ago | (#41174095)

Ah, got it. Selling DSLRs to people who take pictures as if they were using their smartphone.

Yes, the menus aren't great. Having said that, I don't know many shooters who actually use the menu very often.

Re:DSLR (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 2 years ago | (#41172809)

Because the software is usually shitty: you're buying the phone for the hardware. I have a sony DSLT that I love, except for one thing. Exposure bracketing is limited to 0.7 EV. It will take pictures over a wider range of exposures, the problem is that it will only do that for automatic HDR, and will not save the pictures it took. Those HDR images are automatic, and always look shitty. I want to save the three bracketed pictures over a wider range and use the software on my computer to get a good control over the various options. But I'm limited to an extremely narrow range of exposures I can manually work with.

There was some suggestion that this was intentional, to make the cheapest version of the camera less attractive. Maybe, but it's also possible that it was simply an poor design, since it's not like the upper models were really advertising the wider ranges.

Other cameras have the ability to install your own firmware. I forget which brand it is, but you can give yourself manual controls on a compact digital camera, the likes of which are normally only found on much more expensive, bulkier DSLs. These cameras have better software options than my camera does, despite being much more expensive.

Re:DSLR (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172941)

Other cameras have the ability to install your own firmware. I forget which brand it is, but you can give yourself manual controls on a compact digital camera, the likes of which are normally only found on much more expensive, bulkier DSLs. These cameras have better software options than my camera does, despite being much more expensive.

Think you meant less expensive, and you're probably talking about CHDK [wikia.com] for Canon cameras.

Re:DSLR (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about 2 years ago | (#41174079)

Yes, the software on many cameras isn't great, but the solution to that isn't making the thing a general purpose computer. Compared to the OS a camera needs to run Android is big, complicated and requires a lot of expensive hardware. You don't cram all that into a camera just to fix a few UI issues.

Re:DSLR (1)

xaxa (988988) | about 2 years ago | (#41172521)

You can already buy an SD card with an integrated WiFi chip: http://uk.eye.fi/ [uk.eye.fi]

Put that in the DSLR, and set up your phone as a hotspot. Problem solved?

(I haven't tried this, the eye-fi card is a bit too expensive to buy when I don't really need it. I have seen one demonstrated though, a laptop picked new photos up straight away from the camera.)

Re:DSLR (4, Informative)

RazzleFrog (537054) | about 2 years ago | (#41172567)

I have the eye-fi card and never use it. Far too slow to be of real benefit during a shoot. If the demo you saw did it straight away they were likely shooting at some unbearably low resolution. Makes much more sense to shoot tethered.

Re:DSLR (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172627)

DSLRs are old, obsolete tech. It's about the hybrids now.

Re:DSLR (1)

RazzleFrog (537054) | about 2 years ago | (#41172681)

Spoken like a real non-photographer. Do you really think that photographers are going to abandon the thousands of dollars of equipment just for a more compact size?

Re:DSLR (1, Insightful)

Abreu (173023) | about 2 years ago | (#41172983)

Photographers are like guitarists. They are stuck with 60 year old technology because that's what they are used to, and because the kinks and failures on that old tech (vacuum tube distortion, lens flares, etc.) are so ingrained in our culture that new tech has to imitate them in order to satisfy the artist.

Still need to carry 2 devices (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172375)

I don't get it. Why delete the phone?
I've been waiting for someone to put a proper phone in a proper camera, but neither Nikon nor Samsung are doing it
Nokia 808 pureview looks like a much better idea, only it's on a dead end OS

Re:Still need to carry 2 devices (1)

knarf (34928) | about 2 years ago | (#41172697)

I don't get it. Why delete the phone?

Maybe because of the scourge of tech: licensing fees?

It might well be quite a bit cheaper to produce a phone-less camera - albeit with 3G connectivity - than one which includes traditional voice service...

Of course this being Android, it would not surprise me if you could just add Phone.apk and TelephonyProvider.apk to get a working phonecamera... It already has a microphone and a speaker after all. No earpiece though so you'll always be on speakerphone...

Re:Still need to carry 2 devices (1)

MrDoh! (71235) | about 2 years ago | (#41172845)

Or bluetooth perhaps. One of the reviews said it did 3g for data, so if bluetooth is supported, paired up, use GrooveIP over the 3g connection, and you've got a phone!. Would prefer a regular samsung phone with that lens (or a camera with a real phone).

Carry 2 devices to avoid $$$ per year (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#41173483)

Why delete the phone?

Because not everyone wants to have to pay hundreds of dollars per year for yet another phone line.

Re: a proper phone in a proper camera (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41174065)

> I've been waiting for someone to put a proper phone in a proper camera,

http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/29/android-phone-lumix-camera-panasonics-lumix-phone-101p-for-japan/

There's Serviceable and then .... (3, Insightful)

fm6 (162816) | about 2 years ago | (#41172439)

...whether these cameras will have enough additional functionality to justify the added cost and weight when most people already have a serviceable camera in their phone...

Yeah, if you only want to take quick snapshots and you don't care about the quality, any phone camera will do. But even among phones, camera quality varies.

For a long time, I carried a Motorola Droid X with an 8 MP camera. I didn't buy it for the camera, but having the camera made me fall into the habit of taking pictures whenever I saw something interesting. (I'm a serious pedestrian living in a town with a lot of interesting architecture and views.) The results were pretty cool [bit.ly] .

Then I had to replace the phone with a Motorola Triumph with a 5 MP camera. Picture quality suffered. Wouldn't have mattered so much to me if the previous camera hadn't introduced me to the joys of casual photography. When I have the time and money, I will certainly buy a more serious camera and take some classes.

Will that camera be Android-powered? The way the article goes at it (is there enough added functionality?) is exactly backwards. It assumes you live in an Android-powered world and are looking for the best way to integrate your picture-taking into it. For my part, I'll look at all low-end cameras, Android or not, and see which has the physical and electronic features that will work for me.

I suspect that Android is overkill for a dedicated camera and that one of those special purpose, nameless OSs that most cameras come with will suit me better. But I'm withholding judgment until the time comes.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41172705)

Still rollin' on the DX myself, just upgraded to AOKP's ICS ROM so it's going strong, gotta love that 8MP camera!

Going through your photos, I have to ask - does everyone in Portland own a VW, or just almost everyone?

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

fm6 (162816) | about 2 years ago | (#41172839)

Huh? I didn't take that many pictures of cars to begin with. And no, VWs are not that common here.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41173045)

Noticed a couple of shots with 2-3 vee-dubs in frame, thought it was kinda funny.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

fm6 (162816) | about 2 years ago | (#41173193)

I'm not seeing them. Perhaps you're mistaking other compacts for VWs? Portlanders do tend to drive those. Part of it is our proverbial greenness, but also the narrow streets in the older neighborhoods are a pain to drive a big car through.

All of which applies only to the part of PDX west of Oregon Route 213. East of it is technically the same city, but things are more car-centric. Naturally, there's a big cultural gap, with them viewing us as airheaded treehugging socialists, and us viewing them as knuckle-dragging tea-baggers.

Actually, I've only lived here for a year, but I think I have it right.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

farble1670 (803356) | about 2 years ago | (#41172707)

For my part, I'll look at all low-end cameras, Android or not, and see which has the physical and electronic features that will work for me.

i think that misses the point. why did you end us using your phone-based camera so much? part of it is that it's always with you, but the other big factor is that you get all of the photo-based utilities available to android ... whether it be online storage, sharing to facebook, or photo manipulation, auto upload, and so on.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

fm6 (162816) | about 2 years ago | (#41172865)

And I think you missed my, or maybe just didn't read far enough. If I'm going to spend hundreds of dollars on a dedicated camera instead of getting by on my phone camera, I must be a serious photography. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I can't see serious photographers working with the simple-minded photo software that runs on mobile devices.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

DarthBling (1733038) | about 2 years ago | (#41172733)

...taking pictures whenever I saw something interesting. (I'm a serious pedestrian living in a town with a lot of interesting architecture and views.) The results were pretty cool [bit.ly] .

You've got some wonderful shots of Portland there. Very nice!

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

fm6 (162816) | about 2 years ago | (#41172873)

Thanks. This town pretty much demands to be photographed.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

nschubach (922175) | about 2 years ago | (#41172735)

One thing I always hated with Camphones in general is the awful bloom... also, I totally wanted to see a pile of dog shit at the end of that "smell this" arrow.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

fm6 (162816) | about 2 years ago | (#41172911)

Unless your eyes are better than mine, my phone cameras seem to be bloomproof.

The "smell this" pointed to some really nice flowers, which east-side PDX has in abundance during spring. Sorry, no dog poop, the yuppies in my neighborhood are uptight about such things. As am I, come to think of it.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (2)

Local ID10T (790134) | about 2 years ago | (#41172829)

Agreed.

Having the camera integrated into the phone has made me more likely to take snapshots of things. But, I still carry a camera when I am planning on taking pictures. My camera takes better pictures than does my phone.

I do not care what OS runs on my phone, as long as it is a good phone. I have found some neat things to do with my Android phone (terminal, web browsing, taking pictures, echolocation, games, etc.) but I need it to be a good phone.

I do not care what OS runs on my camera as long as it is a good camera -although having it run Android means the apps to integrate it with G+, or Flickr, or DropBox, etc. already exist and likely will come pre-installed. As someone who's photos primarily exist on a bunch of SD, Micro-SD, and CF cards in my desk drawer... having pics automatically show up in a folder somewhere is useful. It could also be useful in the case of something bad happening to my camera while I am out taking pictures of something interesting.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

fm6 (162816) | about 2 years ago | (#41173101)

If the non-phone features of your phone are that unimportant, why not carry a feature phone and save money? But all those apps are important, or you wouldn't bother. And in that case you should care about what OS you use, since that determines which developer/user ecosystem you participate in.

And if you honestly don't care about that, then why don't you have an iPhone? They do have many technical and usability advantages. I can say that without being accused of being an Apple fanboy, since the ecosystem issues guarantee that I will never own an Apple mobile device of any kind.

The camera is a different matter simply because it's likely to be your secondary mobile device, and you don't need both of them to be an application platform.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

Local ID10T (790134) | about 2 years ago | (#41173259)

The phone is primarily a phone, the camera is primarily a camera. The other shit is not important... they are toys. Why do I bother? I like to play with toys. I am a tech-geek after all.

I do not use iShit for personal reasons -I am related to one of the executives who decided he did not want relatives working there for fear of us reflecting poorly on his shining godliness. So. I am biased. The tech is good, but I choose not to use it.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

fm6 (162816) | about 2 years ago | (#41173485)

So this is actually all about a personal animus against Apple. Kind of lame of you to pretend that you had an actual opinion.

Re:There's Serviceable and then .... (1)

Local ID10T (790134) | about 2 years ago | (#41173613)

What is the problem?

I openly admit my choice of non-Apple products for my personal use is based on feelings for a relative of mine and not on a technical reason (and really has nothing at all to do with Apple, the company).

It in no way invalidates my opinion that the OS choice for a camera is not nearly as important as is its' functionality as a camera, but that there may be some neat features that can result from said OS choice.

You are acting like a bit of an asshole here...

2 devices in your pocket (1)

migmog (40610) | about 2 years ago | (#41172443)

So, you still need a phone for phoning, but now you get to play angry birds on your camera?
Can't they just keep the phone?

Re:2 devices in your pocket (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172651)

Apparently, it worked for the iPod. It's just as useless. (No, it hasn't got bigger space than phones, since proper phones have a card slot, and a single card can probably already take all of your [compressed] music collection anyway.) (And don't get me started on Apple's shitty D/A converters and head phones.)

Re:2 devices in your pocket (1)

profplump (309017) | about 2 years ago | (#41172891)

You think the iPod has bad analog audio, listen to the of a Droid III some time. The noise floor is so high it's absolutely unusable at low volumes. I had to switch to BlueTooth just to be able to use the thing at night at reasonable volumes.

Re:2 devices in your pocket (1)

farble1670 (803356) | about 2 years ago | (#41172739)

RTFA. 3G/4G optional. so no, you don't need a phone. if you are a photography buff, this can be your phone.

Re:2 devices in your pocket (1)

migmog (40610) | about 2 years ago | (#41172803)

Actually I did RTFA both here and on DPReview. And same for the Nikon.
It only works as a phone if you are happy to do all your phoning on skype.
Which I'm not.

Avoiding the Android patent minefield? (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#41172445)

I think I rather give Apple a billion every year than make Windows phones.

Nikon and Samsung are missing the point (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 2 years ago | (#41172447)

They're losing ground to camera phones - so they apparently came to the conclusion the reason for that is the OS that's on some of those phones? They've completely (and obviously) missed the point.

Re:Nikon and Samsung are missing the point (2)

Bill Dimm (463823) | about 2 years ago | (#41172601)

You're assuming that this device is intended to (probably unsuccessfully) take market share away from camera phones. More likely, it is intended to take market share away from other (non-phone) cameras by adding functionality that they lack. For example, if the camera has a GPS it may be able to display a map with your photos organized by where they were shot, similar to turning on the "photos" option in Google maps. Such functionality would presumably be much easier to add as an app on top of Android rather than building it from scratch on a simpler phone OS. Of course, what functionality they really plan to add is an open question since the article doesn't say very much.

Re:Nikon and Samsung are missing the point (1)

symbolset (646467) | about 2 years ago | (#41172623)

Maybe. But one of those bad boys is still going under my tree.

One big reason is the software (5, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 2 years ago | (#41172649)

They're losing ground to camera phones - so they apparently came to the conclusion the reason for that is the OS that's on some of those phones?

A different take is that they realized people like to take photos with smartphones because of the large choice ot applications you have to take the photos. Some apps do filters, some do panoramics, some do selective coloring, etc.

When you can do all that right as you are taking an image, who wants a boring old camera where you do that later?

I think it's about as good idea as can be had to revive the concept of a separate compact camera, which otherwise will be totally subsumed by smartphones in short order.

What would be really interesting, is a DSLR that you could program in this way... You could even have the normal camera control software just as one app, but allow people to write others. As long as other apps could take input from all controls on the camera you could get some great alternate takes on control software for a DSLR.

Re:One big reason is the software (2)

scot4875 (542869) | about 2 years ago | (#41173759)

Or they realized that people like to take photos with smartphones because they're already always carrying a smartphone. Adding these apps to high end cameras isn't going to suddenly convince your average Joes to go out and buy expensive, bulky cameras en masse.

I think the realization has become, "Hey, we have a device here with a screen and a processor. We already have the capability to run a more fully-featured embedded OS. Why maintain our own OS when we could just concentrate on our own interface on top of Android?"

The same thing is happening with high-end audio equipment. The hardware to run it is so cheap there's practically no reason to not just run Android on anything with a decent processor.

--Jeremy

WP8 SD card - removable? (1)

Zinho (17895) | about 2 years ago | (#41172461)

On the topic of the SD card for the ATIV S, is it going to still be non-removable [slashdot.org] ? There was a bunch of tooth-gnashing here on Slashdot over that for WP7, but I suspect Microsoft doesn't figure the general public cares (or understands) it well enough to make them change it for WP8.

I just skimmed the article, and it doesn't even really say if the ATIV S has an SD slot, just that WP8 allows for one. If I were new here I might wonder how that got into the summary...

Re:WP8 SD card - removable? (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | about 2 years ago | (#41172525)

No, WP8 has full externally accessible SD support. It's not confirmed yet, but the language used at the developer's conference implies WP8 will have mass storage support as well for the SD card, with the ability to transfer files from phone to phone or phone to PC (or vice versa).

What this enables that’s different than what Windows Phone 7.5 has today is that an end user can add a micro SD card months after they buy the phone expanding their storage and then they can use it to transfer contents between their PC to their phone, from phone to phone, it can be used a distribution vehicle for apps and it supports all of things in a very natural, integrated way in the Metro experience.

Re:WP8 SD card - removable? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172751)

No sane person would buy a WP (phone) anyway. Unless that person has its primary residence on the dark side of the moon, or is a huge masochist.

Re:WP8 SD card - removable? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41173463)

No sane person would make that comment.

Customers wanting a WP7/WP8 port of an app (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#41174089)

No sane person would buy a WP (phone) anyway.

Unless they have customers who are clamoring for a Windows Phone port of a given application.

WiFi and cellular connections (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172471)

The camera comes equipped with WiFi, and 3G or 4G cellular optional. Nice. An app that allows direct uploading from the camera to flickr or dropbox will be a great feature, especially against those authority figures who would wish to delete your photos when they don't like you taking pictures in public areas.

Re:WiFi and cellular connections (2)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 2 years ago | (#41172635)

The camera comes equipped with WiFi, and 3G or 4G cellular optional. Nice. An app that allows direct uploading from the camera to flickr or dropbox will be a great feature, especially against those authority figures who would wish to delete your photos when they don't like you taking pictures in public areas.

Yes, but automatic upload means that your credentials are stored on the camera... so if instead of destroying it they grab the credentials and use them to access and wipe/close your account, including all the stuff that has nothing to do with the current event, well, it seems to me that'd be even worse.

Re:WiFi and cellular connections (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 2 years ago | (#41172683)

Even better would be an app that did live streaming of video to a server, so even if the camera is smashed everything recorded to that point is safe somewhere.

Or have the ability to stream higher quality video to some storage attached over local WiFi if the camera could do an ad-hoc network. Then a partner nearby could keep the storage on them in case you were arrested.

An Android based camera could be a great idea (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 2 years ago | (#41172531)

Think of this - an Android based camera, that had way more RAM than a smart phone so that image editing applications had a lot of headroom to play with, and an additional SDK with extra hooks into the camera controls.

You could do apps with custom capture abilities (based on time interval, or accelerometer changes). You could do apps that could slide into the image pipeline to do corrections to the image based on camera movement.

It might provide enough reason for a person to buy a standalone camera again, as long as the quality was significantly higher than most phones and as I said you had extra abilities to integrate with the camera controls through an SDK.

I don't program Android apps at the moment but being able to program custom apps tailored for just a camera would probably be too interesting to resist.

They could even have a camera specific app store...

The Qualcomm question (5, Interesting)

jphamlore (1996436) | about 2 years ago | (#41172609)

I can't believe how terrible the mainstream coverage is of the current smartphone news. Why is no one analyzing the real technological battle being waged and the apparent winner, Qualcomm.

Half of the summaries of the announcement simply say that the Ativ S is "dual core," as opposed to I suppose "quad core." What does that mean? I instantly thought, are they using the Qualcomm processor, perhaps even the Qualcomm Snapdragon S4? But then I also knew that since it was a Windows Phone, there is quite the chance it has to be Qualcomm, the one maker Microsoft currently supports.

For this generation of phones, not only is Qualcomm making many of the baseband chips, certainly those for LTE multimode, but they're also successfully selling the entire SoC even in European markets? For Android, Samsung has already had to produce different phones same model Galaxy SIII, one for the US with Qualcomm processors, one elsewhere with its presumably preferred own ARM processor.

Articles such as http://www.visionmobile.com/blog/2009/02/nokia-st-ericsson-qualcomm-broadcombye-bye-texas-instrument-and-hello-to-the-new-nokia/ [visionmobile.com] claim that in the previous generation "Nokia was designing the core chipset and letting Texas Instruments finish the integration and physically produce the chips: Nokia has been mastering the whole hardware IP of its phones, and has not been relying on generic chipsets for the vast majority of its production, with all the margins this implies ..." Qualcomm and Nokia settled their lawsuit in July 2008, but look what has happened since then. Now it is Nokia that for the Lumias and presumably for their next generation Windows Phones are having to rely on Qualcomm processors and chipsets.

The mainstream press for some reason has missed the single biggest IP story the past decade, one that has destroyed at least one major company Nokia and has established another Qualcomm as a re-emerging hegemon on a world-wide scale. It should be obvious that if one tries to predict the future, the Chinese at least are not likely to meekly accept a Qualcomm monopoly without somehow getting their own capacity to export similar technology, which then leads one to read about China's TD-LTE ongoing effort, and other companies trying to partner with the Chinese in one last stand against Qualcomm.

There's a lot more going on in mobile IP struggles than what is happening with a certain company with a fruit in its name.

Great post (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 2 years ago | (#41172783)

It has really gone under the radar that Qualcomm is now kind of the deFacto provider of cell communications chips, Apple uses them also.

I was going to post before that even though the summary didn't state it explicitly, it looks like the new WP8 phone will support LTE because of the Qualcomm chip it uses. But you have provided a more thought-provoking context around that fact...

Re:Great post (2)

jphamlore (1996436) | about 2 years ago | (#41173403)

Every time I google I find another interesting story that was lost in regular news: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/08/02/fujitsu_nec_docomo_mobile_chip_venture/ [theregister.co.uk] At the start of this year it was supposed to be Samsung, Docomo, Fujitsu, NEC, and Panasonic in alliance to develop an LTE alternative chipset to Qualcomm. Then only a few months later that alliance fell apart. Now beginning in August Fujitsu, NEC, and Docomo are allying by themselves to form a new joint venture.

So where does that leave Samsung? Perhaps Samsung has already made its peace with Qualcomm, as indicated by its producing Windows 8 Phones, with supposedly many more on the way customized for the US market, and by its using Qualcomm's SoCs in its Galaxy SIIIs sold in the US. But it is hard to imagine Samsung being satisfied with being dictated to in this one technology versus its apparent mission to acquire competence in every other aspect of manufacturing electronics.

Also to remember how we got here, backwards compatibility with previous generation radio tech is how next generation tech is sold. Qualcomm had an inherent advantage over say Nokia in the US at least because of Qualcomm's role in CDMA. The patent fight between Qualcomm and Nokia was caused by the expiration of a 15-year cross-licensing agreement. So now years later we see Qualcomm leveraging backwards compatibility with 3G or 2G either CDMA or GSM-based while pushing its own LTE chipsets. The one limitation is how many frequencies can one chipset support, which presumably is increased with each process shrink. Whoever controls the previous generation with mobile radio technology should have a great shot at controlling the next generation.

And at that point governments start making it their business much more than which phones are being sold.

Android is going to take over the world (3, Interesting)

rastoboy29 (807168) | about 2 years ago | (#41172721)

I really expect some kind of Android derivative desktop OS to be popular by 2020.

btw am I the only one who would like to see OSS repos become common on Android?  Play store is all fine and good, but I prefer to run software where I can see the source.

Re:Android is going to take over the world (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41173115)

Hell yes we need aptdroid!

What nerve!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41172821)

Days after being bitch-slapped by the largest (thus best) company in the world, these retards have the gall to announce new smartphones, when they should be making a b-line out of the industry already.

I think we should pressure North Korea to invade the south for stepping on good, decent American intellectual property.

Why would Nikon ship Android 2.3?? (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 2 years ago | (#41172893)

When I first read about the Nikon Android camera, I was interested to see what it could do.

Then, I read it was shipping with 2.3. That seems crazy if you are hoping to get advanced application support from Android developers.

Samsung is doing this right, shipping the most recent Android and all of the API improvements that entails. In a camera where the whole point of being is to run custom applications, why would Nikon hamstring themselves against potential competition? If I were looking to write an app targeting a camera specifically I would totally ignore the Nikon.

Looking at the Interface (2)

guttentag (313541) | about 2 years ago | (#41172909)

Photo of the back of the camera [extremetech.com]

Looking through the apps on the screen, you've got (in order of appearance):
  1. Contacts
  2. Messaging
  3. Photo Wizard
  4. Video widzard" (WTF is a widzard?)
  5. Gallery
  6. Camera (Oh look! It takes pictures too! Neat! Why isn't this first on the list?)
  7. Instagram
  8. Music
  9. Videos
  10. Clock
  11. Calculator
  12. S Planner (I often thought this would be a useful feature in a camera so I could plan my day around developing photos... not much use for it now, though)
  13. Memo
  14. S Voice
  15. Dropbox
  16. My Files
  17. Samsung Apps
  18. Play Store
  19. Settings

Usability FAIL. It looks like you've got two competing app stores on your camera (Google's and Samsung's), and how are you going to find your files (is it in my files? gallery? dropbox? Oh, wait, maybe they're in camera?)? It never ceases to amaze me that huge corporations spend all this money developing and releasing these products and it's like no one ever bothered to pick it up and try to use it first. They work so hard to copy Apple, and they can't even do that properly.

I have a Samsung home theater system with an "iPod Dock" that disables the iPod interface and starts playing the first song on the device in alphabetical order. To choose another song, you have to hit the >> button, wait two seconds for it to load and then a few more seconds to figure out if it's something you want to listen to. With over 2,000 songs, it takes about 15 minutes to find a song on-demand.

I have a Samsung TV that doesn't come with a printed manual. Users are expected to read it on the TV, yet the manual includes a troubleshooting section devoted to "The TV will not turn on." If you can't get the TV to turn on, you can't read the manual. I guess they expect you'll go back to the store and read the manual on the floor model to get your TV to turn on. Or you figure out that they have a very nice PDF file on their Web site.

The Frankencamera (1)

itsownreward (688406) | about 2 years ago | (#41173199)

The Frankencamera [stanford.edu] might give you an idea what this would be good for, especially this video [stanford.edu] .

Re:The Frankencamera (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41173943)

Absolutely. That's what I was trying to get at in the article with the Camera 2.0 link. It could get really interesting...

wait... (1)

hugortega (721079) | about 2 years ago | (#41173809)

the camera is white with rounded corners...

Hell patent system.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...