Camera devices vs. non-camera devices

[Darius Wey]

I know that many of you loathe the idea of cameras in phones with the burning passion of a thousand dying suns, but it kinda looks like they're here to stay.

:rofl:

I don't loathe it, but they're not THAT bad. Bear in mind that they only exist to provide a quick snapshot of anything. It's there if you need it, but it doesn't replace your standard camera. :)

However, a phone is a phone and many people out there question why phones in the market now come preinstalled with all these new technological enhancements. A phone is merely there for you to take calls after all. :)

[Kati Compton]

I don't loathe it, but they're not THAT bad. Bear in mind that they only exist to provide a quick snapshot of anything. It's there if you need it, but it doesn't replace your standard camera. :)

I don't think it's a question of whether or not it's useful, but some people have jobs that will not allow them to bring any photographic devices to the office. So, if the PPC has a camera in it, they can't bring it to work. That means that if they want to have a PPC during the day, they can't have a cell phone or PDA with a camera. It's not a question of *want*, it's a question of *can't*.

[Darius Wey]

I don't loathe it, but they're not THAT bad. Bear in mind that they only exist to provide a quick snapshot of anything. It's there if you need it, but it doesn't replace your standard camera. :)

I don't think it's a question of whether or not it's useful, but some people have jobs that will not allow them to bring any photographic devices to the office. So, if the PPC has a camera in it, they can't bring it to work. That means that if they want to have a PPC during the day, they can't have a cell phone or PDA with a camera. It's not a question of *want*, it's a question of *can't*.

Fair point. In a couple of places I visit, I actually can't bring a camera either, yet they do not bother about searching.

[Kati Compton]

Fair point. In a couple of places I visit, I actually can't bring a camera either, yet they do not bother about searching.
What would happen if you whipped out your cameraphone to make a call in front of a security guard after you're already in the building? Does it get confiscated? Do you get kicked out? Do you get arrested for corporate espionage because you snuck a camera device onto the premises when they clearly don't allow it?

[Darius Wey]

What would happen if you whipped out your cameraphone to make a call in front of a security guard after you're already in the building? Does it get confiscated? Do you get kicked out? Do you get arrested for corporate espionage because you snuck a camera device onto the premises when they clearly don't allow it?

Actually, you get prosecuted and face legal action. Only if you take a photo though.

[gorkon280]

What would happen if you whipped out your cameraphone to make a call in front of a security guard after you're already in the building? Does it get confiscated? Do you get kicked out? Do you get arrested for corporate espionage because you snuck a camera device onto the premises when they clearly don't allow it?

Actually, you get prosecuted and face legal action. Only if you take a photo though.

And there lies the point....just because someone has a camera in thier phone, does not mean that they will use it to break the law....kind of like the folks fighting P2P because they can be used for illlegal MP3 trading. Just because you have the technology doesn't mean you will use it against your company. Companies should punish those who are sneaking the data out and not those who are not but I know that is a hard thing to do. If I ever was confronted about my camera phone, I would simply just stash it in my bag or pocket the next time I go into work. I am fortunate in that they do not have metal detctors or Xray machines at work.

[MarcTGFG]

more and more I get the impression here, that the PPCT community is obsessively agitating against cameras in PPCs. Thats something I dont hear in any other place/community I visit. This thread actually got hijacked by this rather OT question! :-(

All the other pda & tech enthusiast sites like gizmodo, engadget, brighthand, ppcw.net etc. have a much less biased approach to cameras.

Why is that so? Are only IT professionals from big US companies visiting here?

In my 36 years of life I have never ever been at a place where I couldnt bring a camera in. And as a computer journalist I have visited quite a few...

[Kati Compton]

And there lies the point....just because someone has a camera in thier phone, does not mean that they will use it to break the law....kind of like the folks fighting P2P because they can be used for illlegal MP3 trading. Just because you have the technology doesn't mean you will use it against your company. Companies should punish those who are sneaking the data out and not those who are not but I know that is a hard thing to do. If I ever was confronted about my camera phone, I would simply just stash it in my bag or pocket the next time I go into work. I am fortunate in that they do not have metal detctors or Xray machines at work.
Of course that is ideally what they *should* do. I'm not saying that what happens now is right. But if I worked for a company with that rule, and I didn't want to quit my job, most likely there's nothing I could do about it. Many places even *having* the camera is an offense because it's a violation of their rules. And there, if I didn't want to get fired, I couldn't bring my phone or PPC unless it didn't have a camera. Again, I'm not saying it's RIGHT, but that it is just the way things ARE in some places.

[surur]

more and more I get the impression here, that the PPCT community is obsessively agitating against cameras in PPCs. Thats something I dont hear in any other place/community I visit. This thread actually got hijacked by this rather OT question! :-(

All the other pda & tech enthusiast sites like gizmodo, engadget, brighthand, ppcw.net etc. have a much less biased approach to cameras.

Why is that so? Are only IT professionals from big US companies visiting here?

In my 36 years of life I have never ever been at a place where I couldn't bring a camera in. And as a computer journalist I have visited quite a few...

When I go on prison visits they wont let me take in my camera phone. But then they wont let me take in my phone or my pda either. In fact all computers (and even thumb drives!) are banned.

Thats the only area I attend thats restricted in this way, but as they dont let in anything in any case I dont lose anything by intergrating.

Surur

[Kati Compton]

more and more I get the impression here, that the PPCT community is obsessively agitating against cameras in PPCs. Thats something I dont hear in any other place/community I visit. This thread actually got hijacked by this rather OT question! :-(
And I'll split it when I have a chance, but unfortunately I don't have time now... It takes longer to split a thread than to post. ;)

The reason it's agitating is that if all PPCs have cameras, a lot of users will not be able to use a PPC at work. It's not a question of like or dislike. It's a question of (sometimes unfair) rules at businesses or government locations.

So it's not that people are obsessed with cameras, it's that they're obsessed with PPCs and want to bring them to work. With more and more devices including cameras, it's severly cutting back on the possibilities. It the trend continues, there may come a point when a lot of people need to switch back to paper. :(

Oh, and I don't *personally* have this problem at work, but a place I used to intern (Motorola Corporate Research) no doubt has some rules about this. And if I visit government national laboratories for work purposes in the future as I expect to, I'm pretty confident I will not be able to bring a camera device with me.

[dean_shan]

more and more I get the impression here, that the PPCT community is obsessively agitating against cameras in PPCs. Thats something I don't hear in any other place/community I visit. This thread actually got hijacked by this rather OT question! :-(

Actually this comes up everytime a device with a camera is posting on the front page. There is always those that say "Would be great but take out the camera. I cannot have a camera. Why do they feel the need to put a camera in this thing?". And those others reply "Built-in cameras are so cool. They come in handy when you need to take a quick snap. Who wouldn't want a camera in a phone/ppc?". I used to reply with my view on the subject but have grown tired of doing so every two weeks. I just read other argue back and forth, using the same arguments they did last week.

[Kati Compton]

Thread split from here:

http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=290148#290148

[Kati Compton]

Actually this comes up everytime a device with a camera is posting on the front page. There is always those that say "Would be great but take out the camera. I cannot have a camera. Why do they feel the need to put a camera in this thing?". And those others reply "Built-in cameras are so cool. They come in handy when you need to take a quick snap. Who wouldn't want a camera in a phone/ppc?". I used to reply with my view on the subject but have grown tired of doing so every two weeks. I just read other argue back and forth, using the same arguments they did last week.

... But... But... Pat started it! 8O :oops: :wink:

[JustinGTP]

I, for one, am for cameras in devices. They add convenience to my life, they do not affect my employment, and they do not give me a criminal record.

-Justin.

[KimVette]

What would happen if you whipped out your cameraphone to make a call in front of a security guard after you're already in the building?

It depends.

If you're dealing with a corporate client, you could simply lose your contract. Or, they may just grumble and ask to hold your phone until you leave the premises and not bring that phone back.

If it's the Federal Government and you're a DoD contractor working in a restricted/classified area, you will at minimum lose your contract and clearance, and could very likely be facing federal charges and spending time in prison.

I'm about to upgrade phones so I can get GSM coverage where the original TDMA protocol is not covered by my carrier, but I can't bring the new phone phone (V400) with me (see above paragraph) while working on the base. It's a bummer, because any phone that is halfway decent nowadays has the camera. I don't particularly want a camera, but unless I take a crap phone (or simply stick with extremely outdated technology) I don't have a choice. :(

[maximus]

Our data center is enforcing no-camera, no-recording-device policy.

But I have been successfully taking a motorola V600 into the premises for the last several months.

The secret is : duct tapes. Apparently the security guards are not as advance as expected, they only looks for devices with lens. I placed a black duct tapes on top of the lens, and the security guard let it pass :mrgreen:

[Darius Wey]

Different companies set different policies on the possession of cameras of all sorts. Half the time, the restrictions aren't linked to the corporate sector. In the medical industry, bringing a camera into some places can bring about all sorts of trouble. However, with all the new devices that have cameras in it, it is hard to screen every single person. That is why in most cases (in a non-federal government working environment), for those that have cameras in their phone, they are usually just expected to abide by the rules and not put themselves at risk. If you decide to take a photo, that risky action was conducted by you, so you're responsible for your own actions. Why you would want to take a walk on the wild side and not abide by company policies is anyone's guess! Personally, if they don't want people taking pictures, I wouldn't. You know, this is one funny thread topic. I have no idea what we're ranting on about anymore. :lol:

[Sven Johannsen]

I, for one, am for cameras in devices. They add convenience to my life, they do not affect my employment, and they do not give me a criminal record.

-Justin.

I, for one, am for optional cameras in devices. They add inconvenience to my life, they do not affect my employment but Icannot have one where I am employed a majority of the time, and I would not violate the rules so they would not give me a criminal record. Unfortunately, cameras are typically bundled with other desireable features that I do want. Cameras in devices do limit my choices. Note the HP 3115 and 3715. They are essentially the same PPC but the latter has a camera, and also significantly more memory and a larger battery capacity.

[JustinGTP]

The point of my post was to relate to others the fact that my personal opinion is not to be confused with others' personal opinion. The way I see it, I do not want to argue with others about their opinion on the camera issue, so I don't know why you just debated that with me :S. I bolded I, me and my because that is exactly what I was trying to accomplish - that is how the cameras affect me!

-Justin.

[KimVette]

Well, it looks like the camera in the phone will be a non-issue. The *bleeping* DoD used us to develop a spec then took our spec and went with somebody else, ****bleeping**** *bleeep****

[Sven Johannsen]

The point of my post was to relate to others the fact that my personal opinion is not to be confused with others' personal opinion. The way I see it, I do not want to argue with others about their opinion on the camera issue, so I don't know why you just debated that with me :S. I bolded I, me and my because that is exactly what I was trying to accomplish - that is how the cameras affect me!

-Justin.

I took it to be an indication that cameras were not an issue to you, therefore they should not be an issue. Apologies if that was not the intent. I likely took it that way because of the many posts that do lean that way. Not neccessarily in this particular thread. I don't think my post was really intended as a debate, just my personal opinion as opposed to yours.

[surur]

I took it to be an indication that cameras were not an issue to you, therefore they should not be an issue.
.
.
I don't think my post was really intended as a debate, just my personal opinion as opposed to yours.

There is a point thought, that if you add up all the posts recounting the personal inpact of cameras in other devices, you are likely to come out with a large majority that are not affected in any way, and some positively affected.

They say the market is the ultimate democracy, and it may be speaking now.

Surur

[surur]

Im just repeating a post from smartphonethoughts, but I think its relevant to pocketpc cameras also, related to the Camera devices vs non-camera devices debate.


For those sceptics who thought the Samsung 3.2 megapixel CAMERAphone was just a flash in the pan, here comes the proof that a camera CAN be intergrated into a phone and still make a reasonable device that does both well.

http://www.mobilemag.com/content/images/3263_super.jpg

http://www.mobilemag.com/content/images/3263_large.jpg

Specs from MobileMag (http://www.mobilemag.com/content/100/340/C3263/)
Aside from the impressive 1.9-inch large LCD display, 2 megapixel CCD camera with built-in flash, auto focusing and 9 shot continuous shooting mode, the P1’s TTS functionality will allow for almost any type of text message to be heard. From multimedia appliances sending you messages, to everyday emails, the P1’s voice synthesis software will convert the message into an audible voice for you to hear. This is all possible because of the MSM 6100 chip, it stores a 28,000 word Electronic Dictionary including definitions and pronunciations and capable of speech synthesis, all packed into a 15.8mm handset.

From Infosync (http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/5397.html)
The phone measures 91.8 x 51.8 x 15.8 mm and weighs in at 97.9 grams. That's surprisingly light for a phone that sports a 2.1 megapixel camera in back. The camera, of course, can record both still images and video clips. To support the camera, Curitel has packed it with 128 MB of flash ROM and 64 MB of RAM, as well as support for mini-SD cards.

Most usual phone functionality is present, including SMS/EMS/MMS messaging and polyphonic ringtones. Talk time is rated for 2.2 hours with 150 hour standby.

The Good quality cameras in cameraphones are coming.... (actually they are here already)

As Willaim Gibson said "The future is already here, it's just not evenly distributed."

Surur

PS: Yes I know the keypad is very weird. Lets not get distracted by their industrial design choices. The point is that phone OEM's want a chunk of the booming digital camera market, and they know they wont get it with crappy CMOS VGA cameras.

[maximus]

http://www.mobilemag.com/content/images/3263_super.jpg

2 megapixel, mp3 player, mini SD slot. Very nice.
Is this CDMA or GSM ?

[Sven Johannsen]

There is a point thought, that if you add up all the posts recounting the personal inpact of cameras in other devices, you are likely to come out with a large majority that are not affected in any way, and some positively affected.

They say the market is the ultimate democracy, and it may be speaking now.

Surur

I wouldn't disagree, except that it is personal. I would suggest that those that are in situations where there use of such technology is restricted to the point of making it pointless to have, may not be here to complain about it. If I worked at a place 8x5 that prohibited cameras, I would not have a camera phone, nor a camera PDA. That would limit me to the most basic of those devices, and I likely would not have developed the love of them that I have.

I think the market is fascinating. I see little posted except how crappy the average camera phone pictures are, yet the 'market' tends to indicate the populace is in love with them. Could it possibly be that the marketing guys have managed to make enough folks believe that, and that peer pressure then takes over, in the age group this is targetted at? Could it be that the revenue from picture mail is an incentive to keep the 'fad' alive?

I just don't see many folks over 30 walking into T-Mobile and saying, "Hey, what have you got that takes pictures?" I do see, "Oh, it takes pictures too, cool."

I'm not arguing against cameras in devices, I'd just like the option of a full featured device without one.

[Radimus]

That is funny, I'd like a bluetooth phone with almost 0 additional features.

I LOVED the nokia 8260, but even that had too many features.

Something like:
100 item address book w/ multiple phone entries
slimline or cigarlike
autolocking keypad or flip/slide cover
bluetooth
vibrating alert
LOUD ring
standard charging port
standard headset jack

I want a phone that is a phone, and a PDA that does everything

[surur]

Something like:
100 item address book w/ multiple phone entries
slimline or cigarlike
autolocking keypad or flip/slide cover
bluetooth
vibrating alert
LOUD ring
standard charging port
standard headset jack


This sounds like a reasonable feature set. If they make it out of platinum (like the siemens fashion phones) then they will even be able to make some money of it.

Something like this?

http://in.yimg.com/xp/reuters_ids_new/20040122/3422765096.jpg

Surur

[Sven Johannsen]

Phone? Oh, wait there it is. There is a phone ;)