Apple prepping iPod nano with camera, three new iPhones - report - Page 2

I'm just commenting on the landscape vs vertical position of a camera, or the iPhone, when taking pictures.

Most compact cameras, the ones with those little lenses, have them at the top right side, looking at the front of the camera.

That's an excellent point.

Indeed, I had a nagging suspicion that there was something amiss with folders of iPhone photos and was never able to put my finger on it..... now I know!

You mean fourth-generation iPod nano.

Perhaps ipods get the 3.2, while the Iphone receive the 5.0 megapixel camera's?

Now why would Apple think the public needs a Nano with a camera? You can't send the pics -so why go through the hassle? I agree with the poster who says all phones already have them and you can send them both MMS and download them bluetooth. Just doesn't seem very practical.
And what about the lawsuits when people start snapping those pics at the gyms?

Perhaps we're going stumpy again...

1.5:1 makes no sense to me (except that some still cameras use that ratio). All new TV production is 1.79:1 and movies are either 1.85 or 2.39:1, except for some European productions where some are 1.66:1. Only pre-1954 movies are 1.33:1. You don't want to letterbox such a small screen. While 1.5:1 is better than 1.33:1, it's still not wide enough.

zo ɟo zuǝ
(¡ʇıɯɯɐp) uʍop ǝpısdn ǝɹ,noʎ 'ou

which is pretty much like what some of the stuff you come out with

I don't buy it, at least not until we see some "fake" pics, you know the ones that have been right for how many years now, but the crazies still shout "FAAAKE!" like the are the godz of photoshop

haha isn't this one of them?

EDIT: if you search over to iLounge, you will notice that this informant has been 100% accurate in the past. iLounge doesn't report often due to the fact they're very very careful about public image it seems, but when they do post, its generally quite accurate. The 4th Gen rumors came from there.

Well iLounge was certainly 100% right on their review of the new shuffle- they panned it.

Except the fact that the iPhone and iPod touch use this ratio?

iPhone is a computer in many respects. Look back ten years at the mobile industry's hardware and software. Consider what we currently have......now look ahead five to ten years. I foresee the waning importance of the home desktop in the future as these little devices become more capable/powerful.

Who here thinks the matte black back looks kick ass besides me!

You can use the pics once you get to iTunes on your computer. Who knows, maybe they will be getting WiFi?

anyway, you can take pics at the gym with your phone.

aahh, the Thot Plickens!

Phones are banned at my gym.

The 3:2 ratio is that of the (D)SLR camera. Movies are different to pictures: you don't shoot movies in vertical orientation. And a 1.8:1 or 2.4:1 ration would look silly for portrait photos.

Must be because something about you makes them nervous....

No- more like they're banned so people can't be be blabbering on them like they way you post your thoughts on here incessantly.

if this is a change that can be done, why does everyone squawk when there are rumors of an iPhone pad or nano with a larger/smaller/different aspect screen, claiming such a change would require a rewrite of the whole phone OS?

is it because the phone has a touch screen and the other pods don't? how exactly does that make the resolution/dimensions issue so much different?

besides: 1.5:1 is the same as 3:2 and 6:4. 4x6 is a pretty standard print format. And while people talk a lot about 8x10 prints, many printers today utilize paper that can produce an 8 x 12 for the same price (they print the 8x10 on 8x12 paper and trim the unused waste) and for a variety of reasons the 8 x 12 is a superior format to 8x10.

Teckstud, I am accepting applications for a website forums bodyguard. Will you protect me from the unwashed masses?

Unless you shoot portraits for a living.

iPhone and touch, one would hope.

What if it's a portrait of a landscape?

You mean the one that would have gone out of business 5 years ago without the iPod?

This is quite funny actually:

"countries with the most capable wireless networks, like the United States"

If there is a western country that does not have particularly capable wireless networks, it is the United States.

Just to put 7,2 MBit into perspective: In Sweden two major operators (3/tre and Telia) both offer mobile broadband at up to 21 MBit.

4th generation networks aiming for speeds well in excess of 100 MBit are being deployed towards the end of this year with commercial launch in 2010.

So you mean your guess is that the reason Apple gave for the switch is the correct reason for the switch? Way to go out on a limb there

Yeah, I thought that's what it must have been, pity they couldn't have stuck to the original 1/4 plastic design though. It did look (& feel) nice.


Hehehe. Well I do make a mean fake: http://www.jimzip.com/gallery/ (At the bottom. )

But please, I prefer the term 'designer'. 'God' is just much too lofty!

Jimzip

True, true.

Still, MOST pictures are taken in landscape.

Bullshit, as usual.

You have no understanding whatsoever of the company you love to comment on.

Australia has 14-20 Mbps (I think) but only through 1 carrier.

The screen only works without gloves.

True enough for me. (In pre-digital days, I used to moonlight as a photographer selling 'landscapes' for office foyers, postcards and calendars).

But a sampling of our photo collection (of over 40,000 shots), shows that my wife (a newspaper reporter) takes, albeit by a small margin, MOSTLY portrait photos.

People f in the sauna at my gym.

japan has had high speed for years now. this seems like a good list if you want the speicifcs to your question answered: List_of_HSDPA_networks

i guess pertinent to you living in america with an iphone: "AT&T is operating a 3G/HSDPA network, called BroadbandConnect, currently in most metropolitan markets. Speeds up to 7.2 Mbit/s are available in most markets. Areas that use UMTS instead of HSUPA as the uplink protocol are limited to 1.8 Mbit/s speeds."

Regardless of the speed these networks have offered, in relation to phones there are no chipsets Im aware of that can take the 20Mbps speeds and sure the weak ARM processors and low RAM could even handle that much data at one time at this point. Wes these radios as USB and EC/34 cards first where size and power usage is less of an issue.

lol was thinking the same thing....I thought it was just recently that the iPhone 3G was able to be released in North America. Oh btw, 4G is already being demoed in many places i.e. Korea and Japan.

Try an TI OMAP3640.

However you've answered your own argument it's not a "weak ARM processor" and "low RAM" that are the problem it's the fact that since you only really need about 5Mbit/s even for high quality video streaming and in the absence of a large screen and flash you don't even need 5Mbit for a decent web experience. What on earth is the point in building a handset that drinks power servicing a 20Mbit/s channel when you can just build it in to a laptop instead since the only current application for that amount of bandwidth in a mobile device is tethering it to a laptop?

Also as has been pointed out even 7.2Mbit/s is mostly marketing lies in order to actually get that you'd have to have utterly optimum radio conditions and be the only connecting terminal and therefore get all 15 downstream channels available to HSDPA. As soon as someone makes a voice call *wham* you lose a channel. Current standards can get as far as 21Mbit/s but the same comments apply. Interim standards before LTE might get to 42Mbit/s

As far as can be told iPhone 3G has a 3.6Mbit/s HSDPA capability which is the commercially sensible thing to do since:

- It takes less power to run the radio
- Even on a 7.2Mbit/s capable network the vast majority of the time you *won't* be under optimum radio conditions and will be connecting at a lower speed
- Even in locales with advanced HSDPA rollouts (UK Voda has had it for at least 2 years) generally 7.2Mbit/s (or faster) service is only available on city centres terminals in sub-urban areas are still only going to be connecting at 3.6Mbit/s or lower.

Apple are selling a product which fulfils a function rather than engaging in pointless specification willy waving. If the are updating the radio to 7.2Mbit/s that will mean that they have got agreement from the telcos to build out 7.2Mbit/s to a point where it is worthwhile having it in the terminal.

delete