Then there are the pressures. If you have actually seen underwater housings for cameras you will know they are rather bulky and set you back around $3000 - $4000 for a decent one.
It's possible it was designed to be durable and pressure tests were done in a water tank. That isn't uncommon but underwater cameras are a little too specialised for me to believe Apple is making one.
That reminds me of when I was a salesmen in an electronics department while I was in University. A guy came in looking for a waterproof case for his camcorder. I went into how expensive they probably were, but that I hadn't ever seen one. I also got into the fact that if he was planning to use it in the ocean, then I thought that perhaps looking for one that was specifically made for that would make sense, as the salt water might corrode some seals. No, he says, salt water seals aren't important..he just wants to use it alone in the shower. I had no idea what to say to that and our conversation sort of ended there.
<strong>LOL! Not sure if that's a true story or not, but that's just about the funniest post I've seen here in a LOOoNG time.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>Someone that knows more on the subject will have to address this but the problem I always saw with Apple designing a camera for underwater use was the optics.
All the optical parameters are completely different underwater than they are in air and he doesn't mention the use of different lenses. I suppose you could convert it electronically but how well that would turn out I have no idea.
Then there are the pressures. If you have actually seen underwater housings for cameras you will know they are rather bulky and set you back around $3000 - $4000 for a decent one.
It's possible it was designed to be durable and pressure tests were done in a water tank. That isn't uncommon but underwater cameras are a little too specialised for me to believe Apple is making one.
I have always wondered why there weren't camera/camcorders around though.
I think you're thinking too 'high end'. If Apple produce a waterproof camera it is likely only to be useful for shallow swimming, splashproof etc. You can buy numerous $5 disposable cameras that will do that.
The difference being of course that you break open the unit to remove the film from a disposable.
I just can't see a waterproof ubercamera with DV and still capabilities from Apple. Think of it this way, even if you subscribe to the opinion that Apple can make a waterproof camera work at the right cost you have to consider the disadvantages of doing so. It limits your design possibilities tremendously, take an innovative idea like the iPod thumbwheel, you rule that sort of thing out completely. And for what? so that 1% of users can film themselves getting soapy in the shower!?
I just can't see a waterproof ubercamera with DV and still capabilities from Apple. Think of it this way, even if you subscribe to the opinion that Apple can make a waterproof camera work at the right cost you have to consider the disadvantages of doing so. It limits your design possibilities tremendously, take an innovative idea like the iPod thumbwheel, you rule that sort of thing out completely. And for what? so that 1% of users can film themselves getting soapy in the shower!?
Unless there are no wheels or buttons. There are plenty of examples of touch technology that can be waterproof at say 5 to 10 feet. Think of on/off button of the Cube, the PowerBook trackpad, the 20GB iPod wheel (there is no wheel, just a surface), or even a thin touchscreen glass that covers display LCD, or even perhaps a small touch display like the Color Palm.
If this camera is all enclosed into a single unit, then its possible. Its not all science fiction. The iPod, in a sense, is water-resistant. Smooth stainless steel, with flat clear plastic, with covers for your Firewire port, and no noticable entry point for water. Maybe its like the iPod. But mostly water-resistant...
Unless there are no wheels or buttons. There are plenty of examples of touch technology that can be waterproof at say 5 to 10 feet. Think of on/off button of the Cube, the PowerBook trackpad, the 20GB iPod wheel (there is no wheel, just a surface), or even a thin touchscreen glass that covers display LCD, or even perhaps a small touch display like the Color Palm.
If this camera is all enclosed into a single unit, then its possible. Its not all science fiction. The iPod, in a sense, is water-resistant. Smooth stainless steel, with flat clear plastic, with covers for your Firewire port, and no noticable entry point for water. Maybe its like the iPod. But mostly water-resistant...
Yes interesting you should say that because I had thought about that myself and I'm not sure but I figured that touch technology wouldn't work under water. Isn't it something to do with electrical resistance of air being much higher than that of our bodies which are 70% water? I assumed that water being a better conductor than air would change this.
Another point is that it is commonly recognised that a user likes tactile feedback from things like switches, dials and buttons, they like to be able to 'feel' that they have pressed something.
The iPod caters for this need partly with its 'clicker' sound when you turn the thumbwheel, the feedback from the wheel isn't very tactile but the clicker helps to compensate, you can hear that you're turning it even if you can't feel it very well.
It isn't impossible for Apple to produce a camera of this nature, but it would restrict their design possibilities significantly if they chose to make it dual environment.
But if you are Jonathan Ive and was asked from the Steveness:
"I see a camera, a digital one. One that takes both still and motion. Its self enclosed with a huge storage capacity. Battery life of all day. Its simple. Its beautiful. A child can operate it and it must be durable. It must be able to withstand an occasional drop in the swimming pool or drop on a sandy beach. Jonathan, this is what I see, make it so."
Wow, I got excited. It would be nice if Apple did produce a camera. I think they could make a killing design.
Yeah, there's a bunch of stuff I'd like to see Apple design. A camera would be nice and if it was submersible I can imagine it looking like an electric bar of soap which has a certain appeal.
... No, he says, salt water seals aren't important..he just wants to use it alone in the shower. I had no idea what to say to that and our conversation sort of ended there.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[quote] an electric bar of soap which has a certain appeal. <hr></blockquote>
Comments
<strong>
Then there are the pressures. If you have actually seen underwater housings for cameras you will know they are rather bulky and set you back around $3000 - $4000 for a decent one.
It's possible it was designed to be durable and pressure tests were done in a water tank. That isn't uncommon but underwater cameras are a little too specialised for me to believe Apple is making one.
[ 10-20-2002: Message edited by: Telomar ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
That reminds me of when I was a salesmen in an electronics department while I was in University. A guy came in looking for a waterproof case for his camcorder. I went into how expensive they probably were, but that I hadn't ever seen one. I also got into the fact that if he was planning to use it in the ocean, then I thought that perhaps looking for one that was specifically made for that would make sense, as the salt water might corrode some seals. No, he says, salt water seals aren't important..he just wants to use it alone in the shower. I had no idea what to say to that and our conversation sort of ended there.
<strong>LOL! Not sure if that's a true story or not, but that's just about the funniest post I've seen here in a LOOoNG time.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Unfortunately, it is very true.
<strong>Someone that knows more on the subject will have to address this but the problem I always saw with Apple designing a camera for underwater use was the optics.
All the optical parameters are completely different underwater than they are in air and he doesn't mention the use of different lenses. I suppose you could convert it electronically but how well that would turn out I have no idea.
Then there are the pressures. If you have actually seen underwater housings for cameras you will know they are rather bulky and set you back around $3000 - $4000 for a decent one.
It's possible it was designed to be durable and pressure tests were done in a water tank. That isn't uncommon but underwater cameras are a little too specialised for me to believe Apple is making one.
I have always wondered why there weren't camera/camcorders around though.
[ 10-20-2002: Message edited by: Telomar ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think you're thinking too 'high end'. If Apple produce a waterproof camera it is likely only to be useful for shallow swimming, splashproof etc. You can buy numerous $5 disposable cameras that will do that.
The difference being of course that you break open the unit to remove the film from a disposable.
I just can't see a waterproof ubercamera with DV and still capabilities from Apple. Think of it this way, even if you subscribe to the opinion that Apple can make a waterproof camera work at the right cost you have to consider the disadvantages of doing so. It limits your design possibilities tremendously, take an innovative idea like the iPod thumbwheel, you rule that sort of thing out completely. And for what? so that 1% of users can film themselves getting soapy in the shower!?
It's not good design sense.
[ 10-21-2002: Message edited by: fridgemagnet ]</p>
<strong>
I just can't see a waterproof ubercamera with DV and still capabilities from Apple. Think of it this way, even if you subscribe to the opinion that Apple can make a waterproof camera work at the right cost you have to consider the disadvantages of doing so. It limits your design possibilities tremendously, take an innovative idea like the iPod thumbwheel, you rule that sort of thing out completely. And for what? so that 1% of users can film themselves getting soapy in the shower!?
It's not good design sense.
[ 10-21-2002: Message edited by: fridgemagnet ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Unless there are no wheels or buttons. There are plenty of examples of touch technology that can be waterproof at say 5 to 10 feet. Think of on/off button of the Cube, the PowerBook trackpad, the 20GB iPod wheel (there is no wheel, just a surface), or even a thin touchscreen glass that covers display LCD, or even perhaps a small touch display like the Color Palm.
If this camera is all enclosed into a single unit, then its possible. Its not all science fiction. The iPod, in a sense, is water-resistant. Smooth stainless steel, with flat clear plastic, with covers for your Firewire port, and no noticable entry point for water. Maybe its like the iPod. But mostly water-resistant...
Just thinking outloud
[ 10-21-2002: Message edited by: JPF ]</p>
<strong>
Unless there are no wheels or buttons. There are plenty of examples of touch technology that can be waterproof at say 5 to 10 feet. Think of on/off button of the Cube, the PowerBook trackpad, the 20GB iPod wheel (there is no wheel, just a surface), or even a thin touchscreen glass that covers display LCD, or even perhaps a small touch display like the Color Palm.
If this camera is all enclosed into a single unit, then its possible. Its not all science fiction. The iPod, in a sense, is water-resistant. Smooth stainless steel, with flat clear plastic, with covers for your Firewire port, and no noticable entry point for water. Maybe its like the iPod. But mostly water-resistant...
Just thinking outloud
[ 10-21-2002: Message edited by: JPF ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes interesting you should say that because I had thought about that myself and I'm not sure but I figured that touch technology wouldn't work under water. Isn't it something to do with electrical resistance of air being much higher than that of our bodies which are 70% water? I assumed that water being a better conductor than air would change this.
Another point is that it is commonly recognised that a user likes tactile feedback from things like switches, dials and buttons, they like to be able to 'feel' that they have pressed something.
The iPod caters for this need partly with its 'clicker' sound when you turn the thumbwheel, the feedback from the wheel isn't very tactile but the clicker helps to compensate, you can hear that you're turning it even if you can't feel it very well.
It isn't impossible for Apple to produce a camera of this nature, but it would restrict their design possibilities significantly if they chose to make it dual environment.
But if you are Jonathan Ive and was asked from the Steveness:
"I see a camera, a digital one. One that takes both still and motion. Its self enclosed with a huge storage capacity. Battery life of all day. Its simple. Its beautiful. A child can operate it and it must be durable. It must be able to withstand an occasional drop in the swimming pool or drop on a sandy beach. Jonathan, this is what I see, make it so."
Wow, I got excited. It would be nice if Apple did produce a camera. I think they could make a killing design.
<strong>
... No, he says, salt water seals aren't important..he just wants to use it alone in the shower. I had no idea what to say to that and our conversation sort of ended there.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[quote] an electric bar of soap which has a certain appeal. <hr></blockquote>
There is a disturbing theme developing here.