This does truly suck. I think, in the Installer (for the jailbroken amongst us), there might be a mail enhancer that allows this. I will check this out. If it is there, then Apple should really include this as this is a basic feature that ALL phones have.
This is the craziest thing I have ever heard of until I went to Kuwait. They charge you almost for even looking at your phone. I thought the US was a bit behind but the ME and Gulf are truly behind when it comes to billing practices.
It's not behind, it's just different. Most US users would tell you that they prefer the way we do it, and everyone else says the same thing about their system. Fact is both systems have ups and downs, and in the end the operator is going to get paid one way or another. I certainly like the fact that a land line can call any number in the DC, Virginia and Maryland area pretty much and not have to worry about being charged a penny for it. So in the US you get unlimited going out from land lines, and pay for it on the cell end. In the Eu you get unlimited incoming on the cell and you pay for the outgoing. I don't see how anyone can really think that's the craziest thing they ever heard.
Yes. If I were Apple and had only one cell phone to cell I'd not include it. Here's why:
GPS sucks a battery when in use so it's time of use is limited
Adds additional cost and size for a feature that I think is more for adding to spec sheet than anything else
The Google Maps location finder is accurate enough as a starting points
It allows Apple to ad GPS next year when the other major changes will be Flash capacity
(I know a lot of you are glad I don't work for Apple )
I agree with you in so far as the GPS unit may add to the current design and therefore increase the phone's footprint / mass.
However, the accuracy of LBS against GPS is not accurate enough if you want to embed geo-tags to photos. A great example of geo-photo tagging is this mash-up from google: Earth Album http://www.earthalbum.com/
And I just don't think that to get this level of engagement LBS will cut it.
I mean, I take the point that on holiday, a rough LSB reference (you are in Paris, France) may be enough to tag a photo and jolt a memory. But for geo-tagging to really take off, you need to say that this picture is on the corner of Westminster and Bank (London) and here is the latest billboard campaign (for example).
Essentially geo-tagging needs to be to-the-meter accurate for it to be truly useful.
IMO, thoughts?
Can you explain why you think it needs to be so accurate? I think even within 100 meters, geo location would be plenty good enough. The only thing I think really needs 1m accuracy is maybe archeological work.
Even standard GPS is almost never that that accurate. It looks like a standard GPS device can be off by as much as 15 meters and that is still be within normal parameters.
My whole post is speculation on why i don't think Apple will add true GPS. Point four is speculation based on the fact that Apple will try to get you to upgrade you iPhone as often as they can and a 4G iPhone is a long way off. They an always a faster 3G chip but it will be awhile before the 7.2Mb/384Kb limit of the S-GOLD3H is reached here in the US with AT&T. Other countries' networks may get Apple to upgrade the chip faster but the US is still their main focus at this point, it seems.
Can you explain why you think it needs to be so accurate? Even standard GPS is almost never that that accurate. It looks like GPS can be off by as much as 15 meters.
It's difficult to explain, and i guess boils down to to personal expectations. An example is if you wanted to share your photos with the web, and you wanted to show what the north face of the empire state building looks like then GPS would be a better solution than GPS. in my experience GPS can tell if you are at the front of a building rather than the rear.
Google Maps with photos (under the 'more' button) shows how useful accurate geo-photo tagging can be.
Ultimately, it doesn't make a whole lot of difference between GPS and LBS in built up areas. I guess deep down, I just want true GPS to be in the next-gen iPhone!
My whole post is speculation on why i don't think Apple will add true GPS. Point four is speculation based on the fact that Apple will try to get you to upgrade you iPhone as often as they can and a 4G iPhone is a long way off. They an always a faster 3G chip but it will be awhile before the 7.2Mb/384Kb limit of the S-GOLD3H is reached here in the US with AT&T. Other countries' networks may get Apple to upgrade the chip faster but the US is still their main focus at this point, it seems.
Good point. At the end of the day Apple is a business and I think a staggered bit-by-bit features add-on would be definitely more profitable.
I think also that you only can play "well this is a first release, of course there are going to be features missing" card once. If the iPhone mk II doesn't cover all bases, it will lose credibility.
Seems to me geotagging photos would be pretty useless without GPS...
I'd be happy with an approximate location.
Not that I don't know where I am - but a quick search for "all photos taken at my home" would be useful (of course... takes lots of smarts on the backend to define where "at my home" is).
Quote:
Originally Posted by fabsgwu
I agree, especially since having GPS turned on takes extra battery juice, and you have to have a clear line of sight to the sky to allow the receiver to 'see' 4 satellites that allow the phone to determine its location.
Yeah, I wonder how they'll pick a sweet spot between power efficiency and location specific.
When roaming, we don't want data connectivity, so I guess it'd be better to use GPS than wireless signals to calculate location. Though I suppose for photos it could conceivably record the wireless access points and cell towers it can see and lookup the actual location later (if the software was written that way).
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
I have never not known where I took a photo. Even a week or two or three later I always know. I mean, I was there. I took the photo. The pictures are downloaded in chronological order. You guys must smoke a lot of weed.
For anyone who already tags their photos meaningfully, it wouldn't make much difference. You could even help identify wireless access points by having your phone associate the unknown access points with the location information you enter :-). Of course if you simply don't care about finding photos by location then none of this matters.
If the software is ever up to it, it'd be very interesting if I uploaded my photos to Flickr or .Mac, complete with the location and direction of the shot, and it found any shots other people took in that same location (especially anyone who has a shot of me).
what are the chances that Apple will add GPS, bluetooth, maybe even a camera, to the iPod touch? anyone?
I wonder why no-one (except you) is asking interesting questions like this!? The technology has reduced in size, Apple is looking at a new, thicker (to handle 3G/GPS?) iPhone... but what is happening on the iPod Touch front!?
I personally don't like the chances of GPS in the iPod Touch. Bluetooth will depend on the SDK - if developers can do more with Bluetooth on the iPhone then it'll be very useful to have Bluetooh on the iPod Touch.
That said... I really don't know what we will see.
....Perhaps they'll give it some phone functionality (eg: the iPhone's headset socket so that VoIP applications will operate? - or maybe handsfree speaker/mic for iChat?).
....Perhaps a new dock to give the iPod full AppleTV functionality (why shouldn't it do everything the AppleTV does, but at SD quality?)
There's many things I'd like to see, but Apple has a way of focussing on just a small subset and doing it really well, so it'll be interesting to see what happens.
Can you explain why you think it needs to be so accurate? I think even within 100 meters, geo location would be plenty good enough. The only thing I think really needs 1m accuracy is maybe archeological work.
There is currently a growing industry of golf course GPS range finders, costing from $200
to $500. It would be cool to have GPS in an iPhone and be able to add a golf course
range finder app for about $20. ( 1 meter accuracy would be required to make it useful)
Wrong way around! A-GPS is vastly better than GPS. It improves accuracy and dramatically improves time to fix.
It downloads ephemeris and almanac data via the internet instead of over the satellites (A GPS satellite takes 30 seconds to transmit just 1500 bits). It can then use the satellite information in less than 5 seconds, and is likely to be usable in poor conditions in 10-15 seconds - as opposed to minutes if it had to wait for this data from the satellites.
A Nokia N95 takes around 3 minutes to fix on pure GPS - and around 7 seconds when you allow it to connect to the internet for A-GPS.
If the software is ever up to it, it'd be very interesting if I uploaded my photos to Flickr or .Mac, complete with the location and direction of the shot, and it found any shots other people took in that same location (especially anyone who has a shot of me).
I didn't want to let that comment go by unnoticed. How cool would that be?
1472 songs in an 8GB iPhone?! Wow. No jazz or classical there.......
What's the big deal? I have about 1040 songs or so and it's only about 3 GB or so. I don't listen to jazz or classical though.... I listen to rock, metal, punk, and pop-rock.
What's the big deal? I have about 1040 songs or so and it's only about 3 GB or so. I don't listen to jazz or classical though.... I listen to rock, metal, punk, and pop-rock.
Good for you!
The 'big deal' would only make sense to you if you listened to a lot of jazz and classical (I am not at all saying you should. In any event, it was meant to be a tounge-in-cheek comment, so no need to take it so seriously).
Wrong way around! A-GPS is vastly better than GPS. It improves accuracy and dramatically improves time to fix.
It downloads ephemeris and almanac data via the internet instead of over the satellites (A GPS satellite takes 30 seconds to transmit just 1500 bits). It can then use the satellite information in less than 5 seconds, and is likely to be usable in poor conditions in 10-15 seconds - as opposed to minutes if it had to wait for this data from the satellites.
A Nokia N95 takes around 3 minutes to fix on pure GPS - and around 7 seconds when you allow it to connect to the internet for A-GPS.
Interesting that right smack in the middle of Washington DC, the signal strength is not exactly saturating is it?
I know it could be inside a building, but even with the (few) limitations of existing iPhone software - the coverage compared to Verizon is just awful, I don't care that much - but I sometimes still feel guilty about dumping Verizon - each time I feel I'm somewhere in the 'burbs - and get little or no signal
I don't mind a thread jack?I'm guilty of it myself from time to time?but usually there is a catalyst in the thread that warrants it. Where is this coming from? Did you post on the wrong thread?
That was in reference to the screen capture of the new software being in DC with low bars
That was in reference to the screen capture of the new software being in DC with low bars
Thank yo Mstone. I gave up the effort, after being accused of thread-jacking (when the thread was only 1 comment old! by someone who admitted to doing the same from time to time, but then properly kept to the subject of geo tagging in his references to sms, mms and where to get free tunes.
Thank yo Mstone. I gave up the effort, after being accused of thread-jacking (when the thread was only 1 comment old! by someone who admitted to doing the same from time to time, but then properly kept to the subject of geo tagging in his references to sms, mms and where to get free tunes.
No need to be sore. I only asked you to clarify as your posting made no sense to me.
No need to be sore. I only asked you to clarify as your posting made no sense to me.
You could try a bit harder before scolding him. I mean, he said low bars in Washington DC. A moment of thinking would have lead to, "hmm, I wonder if that map in the picture is of Washington DC".
I'm glad to see Apple finally catching up to the Nokia n810 with geotagged images.
Comments
This does truly suck. I think, in the Installer (for the jailbroken amongst us), there might be a mail enhancer that allows this. I will check this out. If it is there, then Apple should really include this as this is a basic feature that ALL phones have.
This is the craziest thing I have ever heard of until I went to Kuwait. They charge you almost for even looking at your phone. I thought the US was a bit behind but the ME and Gulf are truly behind when it comes to billing practices.
It's not behind, it's just different. Most US users would tell you that they prefer the way we do it, and everyone else says the same thing about their system. Fact is both systems have ups and downs, and in the end the operator is going to get paid one way or another. I certainly like the fact that a land line can call any number in the DC, Virginia and Maryland area pretty much and not have to worry about being charged a penny for it. So in the US you get unlimited going out from land lines, and pay for it on the cell end. In the Eu you get unlimited incoming on the cell and you pay for the outgoing. I don't see how anyone can really think that's the craziest thing they ever heard.
Yes. If I were Apple and had only one cell phone to cell I'd not include it. Here's why:
- GPS sucks a battery when in use so it's time of use is limited
- Adds additional cost and size for a feature that I think is more for adding to spec sheet than anything else
- The Google Maps location finder is accurate enough as a starting points
- It allows Apple to ad GPS next year when the other major changes will be Flash capacity
(I know a lot of you are glad I don't work for AppleI agree with you in so far as the GPS unit may add to the current design and therefore increase the phone's footprint / mass.
However, the accuracy of LBS against GPS is not accurate enough if you want to embed geo-tags to photos. A great example of geo-photo tagging is this mash-up from google: Earth Album http://www.earthalbum.com/
And I just don't think that to get this level of engagement LBS will cut it.
Plus, point 4 is pure speculation.
I mean, I take the point that on holiday, a rough LSB reference (you are in Paris, France) may be enough to tag a photo and jolt a memory. But for geo-tagging to really take off, you need to say that this picture is on the corner of Westminster and Bank (London) and here is the latest billboard campaign (for example).
Essentially geo-tagging needs to be to-the-meter accurate for it to be truly useful.
IMO, thoughts?
Can you explain why you think it needs to be so accurate? I think even within 100 meters, geo location would be plenty good enough. The only thing I think really needs 1m accuracy is maybe archeological work.
Even standard GPS is almost never that that accurate. It looks like a standard GPS device can be off by as much as 15 meters and that is still be within normal parameters.
Plus, point 4 is pure speculation.
My whole post is speculation on why i don't think Apple will add true GPS. Point four is speculation based on the fact that Apple will try to get you to upgrade you iPhone as often as they can and a 4G iPhone is a long way off. They an always a faster 3G chip but it will be awhile before the 7.2Mb/384Kb limit of the S-GOLD3H is reached here in the US with AT&T. Other countries' networks may get Apple to upgrade the chip faster but the US is still their main focus at this point, it seems.
Can you explain why you think it needs to be so accurate? Even standard GPS is almost never that that accurate. It looks like GPS can be off by as much as 15 meters.
It's difficult to explain, and i guess boils down to to personal expectations. An example is if you wanted to share your photos with the web, and you wanted to show what the north face of the empire state building looks like then GPS would be a better solution than GPS. in my experience GPS can tell if you are at the front of a building rather than the rear.
Google Maps with photos (under the 'more' button) shows how useful accurate geo-photo tagging can be.
Ultimately, it doesn't make a whole lot of difference between GPS and LBS in built up areas. I guess deep down, I just want true GPS to be in the next-gen iPhone!
My whole post is speculation on why i don't think Apple will add true GPS. Point four is speculation based on the fact that Apple will try to get you to upgrade you iPhone as often as they can and a 4G iPhone is a long way off. They an always a faster 3G chip but it will be awhile before the 7.2Mb/384Kb limit of the S-GOLD3H is reached here in the US with AT&T. Other countries' networks may get Apple to upgrade the chip faster but the US is still their main focus at this point, it seems.
Good point. At the end of the day Apple is a business and I think a staggered bit-by-bit features add-on would be definitely more profitable.
I think also that you only can play "well this is a first release, of course there are going to be features missing" card once. If the iPhone mk II doesn't cover all bases, it will lose credibility.
Seems to me geotagging photos would be pretty useless without GPS...
I'd be happy with an approximate location.
Not that I don't know where I am - but a quick search for "all photos taken at my home" would be useful (of course... takes lots of smarts on the backend to define where "at my home" is).
I agree, especially since having GPS turned on takes extra battery juice, and you have to have a clear line of sight to the sky to allow the receiver to 'see' 4 satellites that allow the phone to determine its location.
Yeah, I wonder how they'll pick a sweet spot between power efficiency and location specific.
When roaming, we don't want data connectivity, so I guess it'd be better to use GPS than wireless signals to calculate location. Though I suppose for photos it could conceivably record the wireless access points and cell towers it can see and lookup the actual location later (if the software was written that way).
I have never not known where I took a photo. Even a week or two or three later I always know. I mean, I was there. I took the photo. The pictures are downloaded in chronological order. You guys must smoke a lot of weed.
For anyone who already tags their photos meaningfully, it wouldn't make much difference. You could even help identify wireless access points by having your phone associate the unknown access points with the location information you enter :-). Of course if you simply don't care about finding photos by location then none of this matters.
If the software is ever up to it, it'd be very interesting if I uploaded my photos to Flickr or .Mac, complete with the location and direction of the shot, and it found any shots other people took in that same location (especially anyone who has a shot of me).
what are the chances that Apple will add GPS, bluetooth, maybe even a camera, to the iPod touch? anyone?
I wonder why no-one (except you) is asking interesting questions like this!? The technology has reduced in size, Apple is looking at a new, thicker (to handle 3G/GPS?) iPhone... but what is happening on the iPod Touch front!?
I personally don't like the chances of GPS in the iPod Touch. Bluetooth will depend on the SDK - if developers can do more with Bluetooth on the iPhone then it'll be very useful to have Bluetooh on the iPod Touch.
That said... I really don't know what we will see.
....Perhaps they'll give it some phone functionality (eg: the iPhone's headset socket so that VoIP applications will operate? - or maybe handsfree speaker/mic for iChat?).
....Perhaps a new dock to give the iPod full AppleTV functionality (why shouldn't it do everything the AppleTV does, but at SD quality?)
There's many things I'd like to see, but Apple has a way of focussing on just a small subset and doing it really well, so it'll be interesting to see what happens.
Can you explain why you think it needs to be so accurate? I think even within 100 meters, geo location would be plenty good enough. The only thing I think really needs 1m accuracy is maybe archeological work.
There is currently a growing industry of golf course GPS range finders, costing from $200
to $500. It would be cool to have GPS in an iPhone and be able to add a golf course
range finder app for about $20. ( 1 meter accuracy would be required to make it useful)
Hopefully they won't rely solely on A-GPS.
Wrong way around! A-GPS is vastly better than GPS. It improves accuracy and dramatically improves time to fix.
It downloads ephemeris and almanac data via the internet instead of over the satellites (A GPS satellite takes 30 seconds to transmit just 1500 bits). It can then use the satellite information in less than 5 seconds, and is likely to be usable in poor conditions in 10-15 seconds - as opposed to minutes if it had to wait for this data from the satellites.
A Nokia N95 takes around 3 minutes to fix on pure GPS - and around 7 seconds when you allow it to connect to the internet for A-GPS.
If the software is ever up to it, it'd be very interesting if I uploaded my photos to Flickr or .Mac, complete with the location and direction of the shot, and it found any shots other people took in that same location (especially anyone who has a shot of me).
I didn't want to let that comment go by unnoticed. How cool would that be?
1472 songs in an 8GB iPhone?! Wow. No jazz or classical there.......
What's the big deal? I have about 1040 songs or so and it's only about 3 GB or so. I don't listen to jazz or classical though.... I listen to rock, metal, punk, and pop-rock.
What's the big deal? I have about 1040 songs or so and it's only about 3 GB or so. I don't listen to jazz or classical though.... I listen to rock, metal, punk, and pop-rock.
Good for you!
The 'big deal' would only make sense to you if you listened to a lot of jazz and classical (I am not at all saying you should. In any event, it was meant to be a tounge-in-cheek comment, so no need to take it so seriously).
Wrong way around! A-GPS is vastly better than GPS. It improves accuracy and dramatically improves time to fix.
It downloads ephemeris and almanac data via the internet instead of over the satellites (A GPS satellite takes 30 seconds to transmit just 1500 bits). It can then use the satellite information in less than 5 seconds, and is likely to be usable in poor conditions in 10-15 seconds - as opposed to minutes if it had to wait for this data from the satellites.
A Nokia N95 takes around 3 minutes to fix on pure GPS - and around 7 seconds when you allow it to connect to the internet for A-GPS.
Read post# 50.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Right_said_fred
Interesting that right smack in the middle of Washington DC, the signal strength is not exactly saturating is it?
I know it could be inside a building, but even with the (few) limitations of existing iPhone software - the coverage compared to Verizon is just awful, I don't care that much - but I sometimes still feel guilty about dumping Verizon - each time I feel I'm somewhere in the 'burbs - and get little or no signal
I don't mind a thread jack?I'm guilty of it myself from time to time?but usually there is a catalyst in the thread that warrants it. Where is this coming from? Did you post on the wrong thread?
That was in reference to the screen capture of the new software being in DC with low bars
That was in reference to the screen capture of the new software being in DC with low bars
Thank yo Mstone. I gave up the effort, after being accused of thread-jacking (when the thread was only 1 comment old! by someone who admitted to doing the same from time to time, but then properly kept to the subject of geo tagging in his references to sms, mms and where to get free tunes.
Thank yo Mstone. I gave up the effort, after being accused of thread-jacking (when the thread was only 1 comment old! by someone who admitted to doing the same from time to time, but then properly kept to the subject of geo tagging in his references to sms, mms and where to get free tunes.
No need to be sore. I only asked you to clarify as your posting made no sense to me.
No need to be sore. I only asked you to clarify as your posting made no sense to me.
You could try a bit harder before scolding him.
I'm glad to see Apple finally catching up to the Nokia n810 with geotagged images.
You could try a bit harder before scolding him.
I wouldn't exactly call my inquiry a scolding. Mstone answered the question I asked in one simple sentence.
A moment of thinking would have lead to, "hmm, I wonder if that map in the picture is of Washington DC".
AI didn't put the images in the forum posting, so I didn't see them until I actively looked for them after Mstone's post alluded to them.