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 </strong><hr></blockquote>
Y'know, I never even realized that link went there. However, the file is not there anymore. Who deleted it, be honest!! I will have to check the logs and find out later... I had hope they would put it there but I don't know who did it....
I would like to go on record in this serious matter.
I would bet my degree and the money it cost that the pic and the device are utter, complete, total, fakes. no way in hell would Apple design something that looked like that, was that size or shape or finish (or blurry) and take semi-professional photos of something some are claiming to be a prototype. No way, no how, no when. Nope. Sorry. Never.
<strong>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.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ok, seriously, what would be the point of that? The whole idea of the x3 is that it captures 3 colour per pixel. Standard digital still cams have one ccd, capable of capuring on colour / pixel. High end Digital video cams have three sensors, in different positions , capturing a different colour each, after being split up by a prism. Combining the three allows for three colours per pixel also. If a single x3 chip captures three colours/pixel on one ccd, what would be the point of having 3 of them? I think you must be confused about how CCDs work.
Another cool benefit of the foveon X3 that I haven't heard mentioned yet is this: In order to get 3 colours / pixel in digital video, the light must be split up three ways, by a prism, providing only 1/3 the light to each sensor. As a result, 3CCD cameras don't work as well in low light. Foveon will provide the clarity of a 3CCD camera with the low-light sensititvity of a singel CCD camera. Not to mention the much smaller form factor required.
You're right, I wasn't clear on what CCD's did and how they worked. Thanks for clearing things up. <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />
It's a big fat phony. Jake Lloyd's acting in Phantom Menace is more convincing.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
that was acting???
[quote]
<strong>
I'll bet my boots that many of the believers in this thread were also present in that old iWalk thread...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
hey, belle, yeah, i was one of them too, and i'll admit to it. hell, for a fake, it was better than a lot of crap we've been seeded in the past. you know as well as i that it was a damn convincing fake, and had almost everyone who saw it thinking it was possibly real - in concept, if not form factor - whether or not some people thought the industrial design was apple-esque or not.
(y'know, it STILL cracks me up when people say "apple would never make anything like THAT!"... yeah, like anyone saw the new iMac design coming, even in mockups... people, don't even ACT like you have an inside track to johnny ive's left lobe).
it was only after a hell of a lot of people with more time than i have dissected the damn iWalk movies, down to the pixel and frame-by-frame, that the truth was revealed.
though i will say one thing that has been 100% proven on this and other apple rumor sites:
it's the best looking and sounding rumors and pictures that turn out to be fake. the worst and most unbelievable ones are usually legit.
That debunks nothing. Glove as it has been explained and hashed out and rehashed in this thread is NOT the same concept at ALL as this new Apple program. Besides... this was mentioned on MacMinute yesterday and was talked about in the last page of this thread.
All this does, if anything, is prove that there IS a chance for a "Glove," aimed at households/businesses/organizations of less than 10 licenses. After all, it would be stupid for Apple to introduce Glove for both institutions and education, because that would be MILLIONS of future operating system updates' sales lost. This is just Apple's preparation for Glove, as I see it.
i unfortunately do not remember which issues i saw it in. if anyone has some time to kill and access to a library (such as one in a university) they should be able to provide you with more details.
i also do not think apple has anything to do with it.
<strong>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><hr></blockquote>
I know. I asked for the crow pie to be prepared because after condemning the thread so completely I'm going to be eating it too if there's any truth.
Since this IS supposed to be a prototype, I'm sure they're more interested in the form factor than the pure physical details on the outside of it. In other words, I could see Apple releasing a camera like that. I wouldn't want to use it, I'll stick with my F100 (Thanks Moogs!), but it looks like an Apple thing to do with camera design.
*shrugs*
I don't see HOW it looks like a light meter though. My luna pro isn't even that big.. even with the spot meter attachment...
A sphere! allenmcjones said Lucida would be water proof. He said when we see it, we'll understand why. And wouldn't a ball shaped camera (not a disk like the photo posted here) be easy to hold and use?
The thing is going to be shaped like one of the Pro-Speakers!
<strong>Hey, now that you have condemned the thread we can all look forward to this new camera!! Thanks Belle!</strong><hr></blockquote>
The omens are not good. On several occasions I've said I'll pose naked on the lawns of 1 Infinite Loop, with just a [Insert name of rumored hardware here] to protect my dignity, if said product is released. So far, my dignity remains intact (Um, well, what little is left after the constant erosion caused by countless idiotic musings in my posts).
I'm not sure that I'll make such a wager this time. If iCam is real, it's awfully small.
I am not sure if this has been said but I am not willing to read nine pages just to find out but one thing that could debunk part of the Glove rumor is:
[quote]The license belongs to the entity and not longer for each piece of hardware. As long as you own the license, you can install it on all the machines you want, if you own the hardware of course.<hr></blockquote>
Unless Apple can make a real universal update for every new machine then this part of Glove could not happen. Ever try to install a Mac OS on a different machine from a CD that came with your computer? It will not work. Think about it...
The poster who started this forum has posted correct information. There will be a new apple based camera slated for MWNY. As far as the licensing terms his information was correct although I've been given the impression that the new licensing scheme will not come full swing until Jaguar, which may or may not make it to MWNY.
I do not really have any previous credibility to sight to "prove" my sources. I can only re-state that the individual who posted here was correct. I'm confident enough that I'm willing to bet one of the new cameras (or the price of it) with anybody. Any takers? If you lose you have to purchase one for me when they are shown at MWNY.
How do we even know that the disc-shaped camera is really from allenmcjones? All the stuff about it was posted by a new username. And who knows who uploaded it to noahj's ftp? What if SpyMac caught wind of this thread (which surely by 8 pages they would have), and decided to throw up one of their other mocked-up fakes that look completely stupid just to try to get attention (which is what they're for)? I'm sure that they wouldn't put any reference to SpyMac in them or anywhere surrounding them because they know we're not idiots. But we very well might be for believing this crappy ass photo was the "artist's rendering" allenmcjones was talking about.
<strong>Unless Apple can make a real universal update for every new machine then this part of Glove could not happen. Ever try to install a Mac OS on a different machine from a CD that came with your computer? It will not work. Think about it...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Would you care to explain retail boxes of MacOS X then? You certainly don't have to buy the one that specifically works on your model of computer... it's already a universal install.
Comments
<strong>
I guess it was me that started it
And after this service announcement I will leave you two to yourselves
Y'know, I never even realized that link went there. However, the file is not there anymore. Who deleted it, be honest!! I will have to check the logs and find out later... I had hope they would put it there but I don't know who did it....
I would bet my degree and the money it cost that the pic and the device are utter, complete, total, fakes. no way in hell would Apple design something that looked like that, was that size or shape or finish (or blurry) and take semi-professional photos of something some are claiming to be a prototype. No way, no how, no when. Nope. Sorry. Never.
Thank you, please continue.
<strong>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.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ok, seriously, what would be the point of that? The whole idea of the x3 is that it captures 3 colour per pixel. Standard digital still cams have one ccd, capable of capuring on colour / pixel. High end Digital video cams have three sensors, in different positions , capturing a different colour each, after being split up by a prism. Combining the three allows for three colours per pixel also. If a single x3 chip captures three colours/pixel on one ccd, what would be the point of having 3 of them? I think you must be confused about how CCDs work.
Another cool benefit of the foveon X3 that I haven't heard mentioned yet is this: In order to get 3 colours / pixel in digital video, the light must be split up three ways, by a prism, providing only 1/3 the light to each sensor. As a result, 3CCD cameras don't work as well in low light. Foveon will provide the clarity of a 3CCD camera with the low-light sensititvity of a singel CCD camera. Not to mention the much smaller form factor required.
edit: spelling
[ 06-03-2002: Message edited by: Steve's Job ]</p>
<strong>
It's a big fat phony. Jake Lloyd's acting in Phantom Menace is more convincing.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
that was acting???
[quote]
<strong>
I'll bet my boots that many of the believers in this thread were also present in that old iWalk thread...
</strong><hr></blockquote>
hey, belle, yeah, i was one of them too, and i'll admit to it. hell, for a fake, it was better than a lot of crap we've been seeded in the past. you know as well as i that it was a damn convincing fake, and had almost everyone who saw it thinking it was possibly real - in concept, if not form factor - whether or not some people thought the industrial design was apple-esque or not.
(y'know, it STILL cracks me up when people say "apple would never make anything like THAT!"... yeah, like anyone saw the new iMac design coming, even in mockups... people, don't even ACT like you have an inside track to johnny ive's left lobe).
it was only after a hell of a lot of people with more time than i have dissected the damn iWalk movies, down to the pixel and frame-by-frame, that the truth was revealed.
though i will say one thing that has been 100% proven on this and other apple rumor sites:
it's the best looking and sounding rumors and pictures that turn out to be fake. the worst and most unbelievable ones are usually legit.
[ 06-03-2002: Message edited by: rok ]</p>
<strong>Glove Debunked...
<a href="http://www.macobserver.com/article/2002/06/03.6.shtml"; target="_blank">Mac Observer Report</a></strong><hr></blockquote>
That debunks nothing. Glove as it has been explained and hashed out and rehashed in this thread is NOT the same concept at ALL as this new Apple program. Besides... this was mentioned on MacMinute yesterday and was talked about in the last page of this thread.
All this does, if anything, is prove that there IS a chance for a "Glove," aimed at households/businesses/organizations of less than 10 licenses. After all, it would be stupid for Apple to introduce Glove for both institutions and education, because that would be MILLIONS of future operating system updates' sales lost. This is just Apple's preparation for Glove, as I see it.
i unfortunately do not remember which issues i saw it in. if anyone has some time to kill and access to a library (such as one in a university) they should be able to provide you with more details.
i also do not think apple has anything to do with it.
<strong>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><hr></blockquote>
I know. I asked for the crow pie to be prepared because after condemning the thread so completely I'm going to be eating it too if there's any truth.
Skimming does work... sometimes.
<strong>
I would bet my degree and the money it cost that the pic and the device are utter, complete, total, fakes.
Thank you, please continue.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Let's see .. Beauty School tuition.. $250 US
Supplies $100... Cost of 20 # bond copier paper for diploma.. 5 cents....
Okay $350.05 is on the line here.. any takers?
MSKR
*shrugs*
I don't see HOW it looks like a light meter though. My luna pro isn't even that big.. even with the spot meter attachment...
[ 06-04-2002: Message edited by: M3D Jack ]</p>
Just letting you know.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
silly, maybe you should look again.
ciao,
michael
<strong>um, when did he say it was on the back cover? he just said it was in a "back issue."
silly, maybe you should look again.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Your turn. Bigger fish to fry, etc.
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
The thing is going to be shaped like one of the Pro-Speakers!
<strong>
I know. I asked for the crow pie to be prepared because after condemning the thread so completely I'm going to be eating it too if there's any truth.
Skimming does work... sometimes.
As does reading between the lines. <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />
Hey, now that you have condemned the thread we can all look forward to this new camera!! Thanks Belle!
<strong>Hey, now that you have condemned the thread we can all look forward to this new camera!! Thanks Belle!</strong><hr></blockquote>
The omens are not good. On several occasions I've said I'll pose naked on the lawns of 1 Infinite Loop, with just a [Insert name of rumored hardware here] to protect my dignity, if said product is released. So far, my dignity remains intact (Um, well, what little is left after the constant erosion caused by countless idiotic musings in my posts).
I'm not sure that I'll make such a wager this time. If iCam is real, it's awfully small.
[quote]The license belongs to the entity and not longer for each piece of hardware. As long as you own the license, you can install it on all the machines you want, if you own the hardware of course.<hr></blockquote>
Unless Apple can make a real universal update for every new machine then this part of Glove could not happen. Ever try to install a Mac OS on a different machine from a CD that came with your computer? It will not work. Think about it...
The poster who started this forum has posted correct information. There will be a new apple based camera slated for MWNY. As far as the licensing terms his information was correct although I've been given the impression that the new licensing scheme will not come full swing until Jaguar, which may or may not make it to MWNY.
I do not really have any previous credibility to sight to "prove" my sources. I can only re-state that the individual who posted here was correct. I'm confident enough that I'm willing to bet one of the new cameras (or the price of it) with anybody. Any takers? If you lose you have to purchase one for me when they are shown at MWNY.
How do we even know that the disc-shaped camera is really from allenmcjones? All the stuff about it was posted by a new username. And who knows who uploaded it to noahj's ftp? What if SpyMac caught wind of this thread (which surely by 8 pages they would have), and decided to throw up one of their other mocked-up fakes that look completely stupid just to try to get attention (which is what they're for)? I'm sure that they wouldn't put any reference to SpyMac in them or anywhere surrounding them because they know we're not idiots. But we very well might be for believing this crappy ass photo was the "artist's rendering" allenmcjones was talking about.
<strong>Unless Apple can make a real universal update for every new machine then this part of Glove could not happen. Ever try to install a Mac OS on a different machine from a CD that came with your computer? It will not work. Think about it...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Would you care to explain retail boxes of MacOS X then? You certainly don't have to buy the one that specifically works on your model of computer... it's already a universal install.