Whether or not this is actually the device, (and hopefully people can stop drooling now, haven't you folks ever seen a girl before?) is its size feasible? Could this have anything to do with the long speculated-about Raycer situation? could their smarts be tooled to MPEG encoding?
I personally think the picture is a hoax, but the idea is plausible.
<strong>Whether or not this is actually the device, (and hopefully people can stop drooling now, haven't you folks ever seen a girl before?) is its size feasible?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, all they saw was a girl's nose and they starting soiling themselves.
[quote]<strong>
I personally think the picture is a hoax, but the idea is plausible.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think a digital still camera is the next logical step for Apple but I doubt it would also do video. Sony's top of the line DV cameras that can do both video and stills are well over $1200 and only have 1 megapixel sensor.
<strong>and hopefully people can stop drooling now, haven't you folks ever seen a girl before?</strong><hr></blockquote>
There is three things on the picture: A "device", a girl and a lawn. By focusing on the girl I hopedto get the point cross that the two other things was uninteresting. When someone mentioned the lawn I actually started to write a post discussing different types of grass and whether it needed some water. I hoped to get my point across: That the "device" is a interesting as the wild life on Wall Street.
And hopefully people can stop drooling now, haven't you folks ever seen a shaked picture of nothing before?
In all of my thoughts I've had about "lucida", or "Apple iCam" rumors, I thought about the foveon chip, which is obviously WORLDS ahead of the other chips in use out there.
I'm not sure about the technical matters involved with the whole CCD thing, and whether those are the same type of chips used in digital cameras, but it would be very Apple-like to include not one, but three (3) Foveon chips in lucida, one to replace each CCD sensor that is normally used.
I know it would be costly, but I doubt we'll see Apple release a hybrid digital camera/dv cam for less than $700, considering the general cost of high quality digital camcorders.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but using three Foveon chips,(supposing the Foveon really rivals 35mm pics) wouldn't this make it possible to have a video camera that (somewhat) rivals a film-based camera in quality? Plus, you could select any random frame of your footage after the fact, and have a high quality still on your hands, without having to go to the trouble of actually stopping filming to take a still, or having to press another button to capture a still. If I'm totally off the mark then let me know...
I doubt Apple will go for a HD based storage solution, unless they could do something along the order of between 60 - 120 GB. They could do 60 with current laptop drives, but 120 would require quite a large device. I think they'll go with a proprietary tape standard.
<strong>In the first "iCam" pic, the entire image was blurry.
The second "iCam" pic shows a sharper image of the girl, but the "iCam" remains blurry.
One presumes Noahj has a clear image of the "iCam," but is obscuring the image of the "iCam" intentionally.
Wonder why? </strong><hr></blockquote>
Let me clear one thing up, as much as I would love to have access to super secret new Apple hardware, I do not. That is not my picture, nor did I take it or was I associated with it. Hope this did not ruin your day.
Uh, um, on topic: That image is so obviously Photoshopped.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Now Belle, you know I have no mistress but you. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />
Um, yeah, on topic was it? Definately photoshopped. Whether it is to protect the innocent or just to phony it up is in question slightly...
<strong>Now Belle, you know I have no mistress but you.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmph. So where are the flowers? The chocolates? The trysts in secluded hotel bedrooms?
[quote]<strong>Um, yeah, on topic was it? Definately photoshopped. Whether it is to protect the innocent or just to phony it up is in question slightly...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah, sorry, couldn't be bothered reading the other eight pages about this piece of utter nonsense.
It's a big fat phony. Jake Lloyd's acting in Phantom Menace is more convincing.
I'll bet my boots that many of the believers in this thread were also present in that old iWalk thread...
Could someone please pluck the crows, roll the pastry, and prepare the oven? Thank you.
And amazingly enough, people thought this was my picture???
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I guess it was me that started it I looked at the adress for the original picture (ftp://noahj.homeunix.com/Pictures/icam.jpg=) and thought "Aha. NoahJ doesn´t cover his tracks very well" but of course it could have been anyone.
And after this service announcement I will leave you two to yourselves
Put it like this, i wouldn't be worried if i was the girl (with looks like that, who would? ). They are not going to go chasing her directly, but rather the person who originally leaked the pics and prototype. Ooops to that person...
low-fi</strong><hr></blockquote>
Of course she should not be worried. The pic is most likely a fake. But if it is real, the person in the photo and the background would provide a pretty good idea of who took the picture. And the person who took the pic is also likely the person who distributed it. (likely only a few people, or groups of people would be allowed to test the prototypes. They could just round up all of those people that were testing the camera on the lawn of the Apple campus, and those that were with miss Lucida. This would probably narrow it down alot)
Comments
<strong>
They make YourDailyMac look good.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Someone needs to calm down.
J :cool:
I personally think the picture is a hoax, but the idea is plausible.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
<strong>Whether or not this is actually the device, (and hopefully people can stop drooling now, haven't you folks ever seen a girl before?) is its size feasible?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, all they saw was a girl's nose and they starting soiling themselves.
[quote]<strong>
I personally think the picture is a hoax, but the idea is plausible.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think a digital still camera is the next logical step for Apple but I doubt it would also do video. Sony's top of the line DV cameras that can do both video and stills are well over $1200 and only have 1 megapixel sensor.
[ 06-03-2002: Message edited by: apple.otaku ]</p>
<strong>
Actually, all they saw was a girl's nose and they starting soiling themselves.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>and hopefully people can stop drooling now, haven't you folks ever seen a girl before?</strong><hr></blockquote>
There is three things on the picture: A "device", a girl and a lawn. By focusing on the girl I hopedto get the point cross that the two other things was uninteresting. When someone mentioned the lawn I actually started to write a post discussing different types of grass and whether it needed some water. I hoped to get my point across: That the "device" is a interesting as the wild life on Wall Street.
And hopefully people can stop drooling now, haven't you folks ever seen a shaked picture of nothing before?
[ 06-03-2002: Message edited by: Anders ]</p>
[ 06-03-2002: Message edited by: apple.otaku ]</p>
<a href="http://www.macobserver.com/article/2002/06/03.6.shtml"; target="_blank">Mac Observer Report</a>
i really don't care if this is the new super secret solid state hd-cam for 499 bucks or not. i'm not a nerd. we'll buy it anyway.
however, i do appreciate the fact that the girl is extremely beautiful.
lucida, whoever you are, we should meet. i'm not joking and not 16 anymore.....
She is actually a part time professional model.
And that iCam looks a hella lot like a light meter to me....
MSKR <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[ 06-03-2002: Message edited by: Masker ]</p>
I'm not sure about the technical matters involved with the whole CCD thing, and whether those are the same type of chips used in digital cameras, but it would be very Apple-like to include not one, but three (3) Foveon chips in lucida, one to replace each CCD sensor that is normally used.
I know it would be costly, but I doubt we'll see Apple release a hybrid digital camera/dv cam for less than $700, considering the general cost of high quality digital camcorders.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but using three Foveon chips,(supposing the Foveon really rivals 35mm pics) wouldn't this make it possible to have a video camera that (somewhat) rivals a film-based camera in quality? Plus, you could select any random frame of your footage after the fact, and have a high quality still on your hands, without having to go to the trouble of actually stopping filming to take a still, or having to press another button to capture a still. If I'm totally off the mark then let me know...
I doubt Apple will go for a HD based storage solution, unless they could do something along the order of between 60 - 120 GB. They could do 60 with current laptop drives, but 120 would require quite a large device. I think they'll go with a proprietary tape standard.
<strong>Is Lucida your girlfriend NoahJ?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Umm, since I am married, no.
<strong>Umm, since I am married, no.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Mistress, then?
Uh, um, on topic: That image is so obviously Photoshopped.
<strong>In the first "iCam" pic, the entire image was blurry.
The second "iCam" pic shows a sharper image of the girl, but the "iCam" remains blurry.
One presumes Noahj has a clear image of the "iCam," but is obscuring the image of the "iCam" intentionally.
Wonder why?
Let me clear one thing up, as much as I would love to have access to super secret new Apple hardware, I do not. That is not my picture, nor did I take it or was I associated with it. Hope this did not ruin your day.
<strong>
Mistress, then?
Uh, um, on topic: That image is so obviously Photoshopped.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Now Belle, you know I have no mistress but you.
Um, yeah, on topic was it? Definately photoshopped. Whether it is to protect the innocent or just to phony it up is in question slightly...
<strong>Now Belle, you know I have no mistress but you.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmph. So where are the flowers? The chocolates? The trysts in secluded hotel bedrooms?
[quote]<strong>Um, yeah, on topic was it? Definately photoshopped. Whether it is to protect the innocent or just to phony it up is in question slightly...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ah, sorry, couldn't be bothered reading the other eight pages about this piece of utter nonsense.
It's a big fat phony. Jake Lloyd's acting in Phantom Menace is more convincing.
I'll bet my boots that many of the believers in this thread were also present in that old iWalk thread...
Could someone please pluck the crows, roll the pastry, and prepare the oven? Thank you.
<strong>
And that iCam looks a hella lot like a light meter to me....
MSKR <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[ 06-03-2002: Message edited by: Masker ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Damn, I was close. I thought it was an electronic tape measure.
<strong>Hmph. So where are the flowers? The chocolates? The trysts in secluded hotel bedrooms? </strong><hr></blockquote>
I knew something was missing. Oh well.
[quote]<strong>Ah, sorry, couldn't be bothered reading the other eight pages about this piece of utter nonsense.
It's a big fat phony. Jake Lloyd's acting in Phantom Menace is more convincing.
I'll bet my boots that many of the believers in this thread were also present in that old iWalk thread...
Could someone please pluck the crows, roll the pastry, and prepare the oven? Thank you.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And amazingly enough, people thought this was my picture???
As far as the eating crow was concerned, they were going to do that if it turned out to be real not fake. Skimming does not work for you does it?
<strong>
And amazingly enough, people thought this was my picture???
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I guess it was me that started it
And after this service announcement I will leave you two to yourselves
<strong>
Put it like this, i wouldn't be worried if i was the girl (with looks like that, who would?
low-fi</strong><hr></blockquote>
Of course she should not be worried. The pic is most likely a fake. But if it is real, the person in the photo and the background would provide a pretty good idea of who took the picture. And the person who took the pic is also likely the person who distributed it. (likely only a few people, or groups of people would be allowed to test the prototypes. They could just round up all of those people that were testing the camera on the lawn of the Apple campus, and those that were with miss Lucida. This would probably narrow it down alot)