[Macworld]

Post your comments for Rumor: Next-gen iPods to sport video cameras here

[jamus]

A GPS chip would be nice in the Touch to go along with the photos, but doesn't the iPhone use cell tower triangulation to get a GPS coord instead of satellites?

[Kennethfcooper]

I'm not buying it, unless it has the compass. :-)

[Chris Breen]

I was among the first to posit this "watch out Flip!" idea, but now that I've seen what the iPhone 3GS can do in regard to video, I've changed my tune. Unless Apple significantly improves that camera, Pure Digital has nothing to worry about.
Not only do the Flip MinoHD and UltraHD shoot in 720p HD versus the iPhone's standard def, but even the standard def video coming out of something like a standard Ultra or Mino is miles ahead of the iPhone's soft and ill-defined video.
So no, it's not about Pure Digital lowering the price of its cameras. Apple needs to raise the quality of its camera.

[Wondercow]

jamus said:

A GPS chip would be nice in the Touch to go along with the photos, but doesn't the iPhone use cell tower triangulation to get a GPS coord instead of satellites?

The first-gen iPhone did use tower triangulation but when the 3G (but second-generation....) was introduced Apple included a GPS receiver.

[mac4ever8]

That would be cool for IPod touch to have a camera on it. What about Apple putting bluetooth on the IPodtouch also. That would be great so that you can use a bluetooth headset. Just a something I thought would be cool. Not not something I hear as a rumor. So do not start one. I is something on my wish list.

[Chris Breen]

mac4ever8 said:

>What about Apple putting bluetooth on the IPodtouch also.

The 2G iPod touch already has Bluetooth on it. It's been activated with the 3.0 update.

[dean_o]

I hope the rumors are right -- I haven't upgraded my iPod since the black 5th gen iPod I bought a few years ago. I've been lusting after the iPod touch. Video would absolutely push me over the edge.
However...
Wouldn't the video camera need to include audio input to be viable? Wouldn't that place the iPod touch in a good position to be used as an internet phone, and wouldn't that potentially eat into iPhone sales and AT&T service contracts?
Does anyone really think that Apple is going to do anything with the iPod that would endanger the iPhone revenue stream? I don't.

[cv]

Yes, a video camera would require a built-in microphone.

The current iPod touch model already supports VoIP applications (like fring, Skype) with an external headset/microphone. However, since the iPod touch doesn't have an always-on data connection (or telephony), it's usefulness as a phone is limited. Plus, without multi-tasking, you can't run the VoIP application and do something else.

Assuming that the iPhone and iPod touch have similar margins, Apple probably doesn't worry too much about cannibalization of iPhone sales. There are about 30 million iPhones and close to 20 million iPod touches already. Remember that since carriers increased their subsidy of the iPhone hardware, Apple is no longer getting a cut of the carrier's revenue.

[GregoriusM]

The iPod touch hardly cannibalizes sales of the iPhone. In fact, keeping it close in specs/features to the iPhone without the phone part is, in my mind, primarily for those who don't want large monthly contracts.
I have a 2G touch, and will definitely get the next one that includes a camera and GPS.
But I won't get an iPhone for a year or two until the batter life is improved.
Greg

[nathanator11]

Why buy a Flip? I got a Kodak Zi6 (four mice) instead. It records HD, has a nicer interface, a bigger screen, and a much lower price than the Flip UltraHD (the most comparable model). It also has an SD card slot, making it expandable to 32GB. The Zi6 also has a much better Macro mode, focusing from 6 centimeters instead of the Flip's 1.5 METERS.
Flip UltraHD: http://www.theflip.com/productsflipultra.shtml#scene=sceneMain
Kodak Zi6: http://www.kodak.com...pq-locale=en_US
http://www.macworld....0/kodakzi6.html

[Chris Breen]

nathanator11 said:

Why buy a Flip?

This shall be revealed in an upcoming roundup of pocket camcorders.

[Hamranhansenhansen]

> So no, it's not about Pure Digital lowering
the price of its cameras. Apple needs to raise
the quality of its camera.
[/quote]
I don't think quality enters the equation at all. Consumers simply don't think that way. Most people are not even aware that audio or video can come in various quality levels. Even when you side by side it, many people will not get it. The iPod killed the (better audio quality) CD quite handily. And cell phone cameras that shoot ridiculously low-quality video are valued solely because they are built into the phone you already have with you. And the videos are valued for being candid, not for their production values.
And the key features of the iPhone camera are the sharing features, not the quality. The important part is that literally 1 second after you finish shooting the video, you can email or MMS it to a friend, or you can upload it to YouTube. The reason the editing features are there is specifically so you can shoot-edit-send. If you are going to import to a video editing workstation then you don't need the editing features on the iPhone.
I sent the first video I shot with my 3GS to a friend via email. He didn't comment on the quality at all, which was likely reduced automatically by the iPhone in order to send through email. He just wanted to get a 3GS so he can shoot video and send it via email.
Also, if an iPod user wants to upgrade the quality of their video, it's likely we're going to see a high-quality camera attachment for iPhone/iPod very soon now that the hardware is opened up to 3rd party developers. An 8 megapixel sensor and LED flash in an iPhone case would sell really well and the rest of the camera would run as an iPhone app.
As for Apple vs. Pure Digital: going forward, Apple can improve the quality of their camera simply by upgrading the mechanism, but there is no obvious way for Pure Digital to add YouTube upload and email/MMS send. The most practical way would probably be an iPod dock. Pure Digital's camcorder workflow is where Apple was with FireWire 10 years ago, so they are not even really competing yet with the iPhone's direct-to-Web workflow.

[Chris Breen]

Hamranhansenhansen said:

> I don't think quality enters the equation at all.

I've made the same argument. But I've tempered my position after seeing what the iPhone 3GS has to offer. It's not just inferior to the Flip UltraHD, it's really inferior to the UltraHD. So much so that I doubt seriously that, in its present form, it's going to dissuade someone from purchasing a point-and-shoot still camera or pocket camcorder. The low-light shooting is terrible, the audio's not great, and there's no zoom. Anyone expecting a video camera that they can use in anything other than ideal conditions is going to get frustrated in a hurry.

But, as I said in the piece cited above, there may come a day when it's good enough for the majority of people. And when it is, Pure Digital needs to have something more than a camera that fits in your pocket. (Like Wi-Fi capabilities, for example.)