Why would anyone buy an iFrame for $500? Something that just sits there and displays pics? Huh, I'd rather have an iCam with an iApp for video conferencing.
Yea, I heard the arguements over and over. My bet is Apple will produce digital lifestyle products. They sell ideas, they don't sell products. You buy a digital camera to keep memories, you buy camcorder for those special times with family.
This is very different than a printer or scanner rebranding OEMs. (dell using Lexmark for their printers)
This path is the one that make sense. The first was the iPod (music).
Next will be a phone (communication), camcorder (video keepsakes) and camera (memories). The better designed lifestyle products can lead to more sells to the Mac.
Barto has it right on the iFrame, it is too much of a novelty device and would be too expensive. I think that the time is just too early for these devices. When Xerox or one of their competators perfects e-paper, and gets the tech down enough in price then they might be more practical since this technology does not need electricity to maintain the picture, but with current LCD technology this would be a major drawback. Yea, people might buy one, but in your house how many picture's do you have on display? Would you replace all of them with an iFrame? I dont think many people would.
<strong>Apple has only made one agreement with PIXO, and that's for two devices: an audio player, and a combination audio player and communication device with numerous technologies.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Tsk tsk. You're embellishing, young man. The agreement allows Apple to use Pixo's technology in two devices, end of story. There's nothing specific about a "communication device."
i want the photo in iFrame to be able to change as often as i set it to.
yes, these exist right now. yes they are very expensive, but i want a big one, or two.
by the way, Mr. Bill Gates has a kind of such a device on some of his walls in his beautiful house (which, as we know from architosh was designed on a mac...). the way it works in his house is that when a guest comes to his house, the guest is given a device that he can strap to his belt, he inputs the name of his favorite artist, whether it be gaugin or weegee, or the type of art, such as impressionism or fauvism. and as that guest walks into a room, the picture on the wall of that room changes to a random file in the category that he chose.
this is impressive, actually, not for the tech that goes into it, but because he and his wife own the company that owns the digital rights to the representations that are used.
The iBot is a firewire webcam that's been out for some time now. It supposedly pushes 640x480x30 frames/sec. I haven't seen them for < $95 though.
I'd love a reasonably (< $200) priced LCD picture frame that I could load. That would be great for my desk at work, since I only have enough space for one picture frame.
I really dig the iPod, but why doesn't it have an FM tuner? I'd love it if it was able to record a la Archos MP3 player, that would be great when jamming with friends, but lack of FM tuner is pretty much a deal-breaker for me. After all, the iPod started off as a Walkman on growth hormones, why wasn't this feature in there from the beginning?
There is no way on earth that Apple will produce a still or DV camera. The idea that they could compete in any way in these markets is ludicrous.
iFrame is it. People have the wrong idea about what this is for. Its not for hanging on the wall, its for carrying around and showing your friends and family. Just as digital camera replaces its analogue counterpart, the iFrame is for boring people with your pictures like you used to do with prints from the store. Plug it into the TV for slideshows with soundtrack. Maybe even DV and Sorenson/MPEG4 movies. (20Gig gives around 90 minutes DV).
If Apple makes Bluetooth standard, like another thread suggests, I think it will be a iPOD+iFrame+iPhone combo device. Priced around $500.
This makes much more sense and the price is logical. You are getting a MP3 player, a decent phone and a decent sized screen (4" diag would be enough) to carry your pictures around. You can sync wirelessly with iTunes, iCal, I photo and address book using iSync.
edit:
Even if you drop the phone bit, it is still a very attractive device.
I have no experience in selling electronics, so I don't know if this is the SMART thing to do, but it does seem the obvious approach: Don't create an entirely new product, but instead tack extra features into the iPod, as Apple has been doing with contact info, for example. Make some slight hardware changes and some software additions that still preserve the iPod's primary identity as a cigarette box-sized MP3 player, and the iPod will continues its snail's pace metamorphosis into a PDA-- albeit a PDA that retains a more compelling set of features for the AVERAGE consumer than do most. More of a personal digital entertainment center, actually (PDEC?). If the new role is embraced by the iPod's market, then more drastic changes can be made to more completely adapt the device. Those who want a portable computer will still buy themselves a Pocket PC, but most people don't want the flexibility of function provided by a pint-sized computer enough to be willing to pay for it, nor do most people feel the need to enter data into Excel while standing. Why not, to start, just improve the iPod's screen somewhat and let it sync with iPhoto in a manner similar to the way it now syncs with iTunes? Would there be any reason why a similar capacity to store and view film clips couldn't be added as well? How about: 1000 music videos... in your pocket.
All the iPod needs is an input system. If that could be accomplished cleanly, it would be a great pda-device. I would love to be able to add a contact on it whilst on the go.
<strong>There is no way on earth that Apple will produce a still or DV camera. The idea that they could compete in any way in these markets is ludicrous.
iFrame is it. People have the wrong idea about what this is for. Its not for hanging on the wall, its for carrying around and showing your friends and family. Just as digital camera replaces its analogue counterpart, the iFrame is for boring people with your pictures like you used to do with prints from the store. Plug it into the TV for slideshows with soundtrack. Maybe even DV and Sorenson/MPEG4 movies. (20Gig gives around 90 minutes DV).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple competed with other mp3 player manufacturers and has a huge chunk of that market. They didn't create some crazy new player. They took the basic design and added a slew of little enhancements that make a big difference.
You talk about hooking up an an iFrame device to a TV, but most still cameras already do this. Apple could do precisely what you are looking for with a still camera (other than putting in a decent sized LCD)
The iFrame idea hasn't caught on, and I doubt it will for a loooong time.
What's the point of buying an iFrame with an expensive TFT and expensive mini-HDD? The Ceiva frame already on the market is already $149 with a subscription...It would be more without the subscription. The TFT is tiny too. If you want to be able to add a soundtrack to the frame, you're probably going to want to add speakers too. And then the 20 GB HDD...that'll add $300+ to the cost alone. The processor required to decode movies or do nice dissolves will also be a hidden cost. Pretty soon you'll have a tablet PC than isn't much cheaper than an iBook. I'm not keen on scuffing up my LCD just so I can navigate and input characters with a stylus (inferior to a mouse and keyboard.)
At this point, why bother? Apple should just work harder trying to make the iBook a little bit cheaper.
Now let's see where I'm going with the still camera idea. Having the camera able to output fancy slideshows with soundtracks is not a bad idea. Of course, such a camera would have a FireWire port. Imagine if you could hook-up an iPod to it so you could stream/copy the soundtrack right off the iPod. Or if you could store and play slideshows and photos off the iPod. QuickTime has this cool ability to present slideshows written in XML for example.
Comments
<strong>
And support for these cameras already existed in 10.1.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think you're wrong about this.
Anyway, Eugene and I obviously have different opinions on this, and I've said before I was one of the people who thought the iPod was a bad idea.
This is very different than a printer or scanner rebranding OEMs. (dell using Lexmark for their printers)
This path is the one that make sense. The first was the iPod (music).
Next will be a phone (communication), camcorder (video keepsakes) and camera (memories). The better designed lifestyle products can lead to more sells to the Mac.
Its just a hunch
<strong>Apple has only made one agreement with PIXO, and that's for two devices: an audio player, and a combination audio player and communication device with numerous technologies.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Tsk tsk. You're embellishing, young man. The agreement allows Apple to use Pixo's technology in two devices, end of story. There's nothing specific about a "communication device."
i want one. i want even two.
i want the photo in iFrame to be able to change as often as i set it to.
yes, these exist right now. yes they are very expensive, but i want a big one, or two.
by the way, Mr. Bill Gates has a kind of such a device on some of his walls in his beautiful house (which, as we know from architosh was designed on a mac...). the way it works in his house is that when a guest comes to his house, the guest is given a device that he can strap to his belt, he inputs the name of his favorite artist, whether it be gaugin or weegee, or the type of art, such as impressionism or fauvism. and as that guest walks into a room, the picture on the wall of that room changes to a random file in the category that he chose.
this is impressive, actually, not for the tech that goes into it, but because he and his wife own the company that owns the digital rights to the representations that are used.
thnx
I'd love a reasonably (< $200) priced LCD picture frame that I could load. That would be great for my desk at work, since I only have enough space for one picture frame.
I really dig the iPod, but why doesn't it have an FM tuner? I'd love it if it was able to record a la Archos MP3 player, that would be great when jamming with friends, but lack of FM tuner is pretty much a deal-breaker for me. After all, the iPod started off as a Walkman on growth hormones, why wasn't this feature in there from the beginning?
iFrame is it. People have the wrong idea about what this is for. Its not for hanging on the wall, its for carrying around and showing your friends and family. Just as digital camera replaces its analogue counterpart, the iFrame is for boring people with your pictures like you used to do with prints from the store. Plug it into the TV for slideshows with soundtrack. Maybe even DV and Sorenson/MPEG4 movies. (20Gig gives around 90 minutes DV).
This makes much more sense and the price is logical. You are getting a MP3 player, a decent phone and a decent sized screen (4" diag would be enough) to carry your pictures around. You can sync wirelessly with iTunes, iCal, I photo and address book using iSync.
edit:
Even if you drop the phone bit, it is still a very attractive device.
[ 10-03-2002: Message edited by: Jamil ]</p>
[ 10-03-2002: Message edited by: Apple Fuji ]</p>
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
<strong>There is no way on earth that Apple will produce a still or DV camera. The idea that they could compete in any way in these markets is ludicrous.
iFrame is it. People have the wrong idea about what this is for. Its not for hanging on the wall, its for carrying around and showing your friends and family. Just as digital camera replaces its analogue counterpart, the iFrame is for boring people with your pictures like you used to do with prints from the store. Plug it into the TV for slideshows with soundtrack. Maybe even DV and Sorenson/MPEG4 movies. (20Gig gives around 90 minutes DV).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple competed with other mp3 player manufacturers and has a huge chunk of that market. They didn't create some crazy new player. They took the basic design and added a slew of little enhancements that make a big difference.
You talk about hooking up an an iFrame device to a TV, but most still cameras already do this. Apple could do precisely what you are looking for with a still camera (other than putting in a decent sized LCD)
The iFrame idea hasn't caught on, and I doubt it will for a loooong time.
What's the point of buying an iFrame with an expensive TFT and expensive mini-HDD? The Ceiva frame already on the market is already $149 with a subscription...It would be more without the subscription. The TFT is tiny too. If you want to be able to add a soundtrack to the frame, you're probably going to want to add speakers too. And then the 20 GB HDD...that'll add $300+ to the cost alone. The processor required to decode movies or do nice dissolves will also be a hidden cost. Pretty soon you'll have a tablet PC than isn't much cheaper than an iBook. I'm not keen on scuffing up my LCD just so I can navigate and input characters with a stylus (inferior to a mouse and keyboard.)
At this point, why bother? Apple should just work harder trying to make the iBook a little bit cheaper.
Now let's see where I'm going with the still camera idea. Having the camera able to output fancy slideshows with soundtracks is not a bad idea. Of course, such a camera would have a FireWire port. Imagine if you could hook-up an iPod to it so you could stream/copy the soundtrack right off the iPod. Or if you could store and play slideshows and photos off the iPod. QuickTime has this cool ability to present slideshows written in XML for example.