Slashdot Mirror
New Disposable Digital Cameras with LCDs
del_ctrl_alt writes "Pure Digital Technologies are set to introduce the world's first ever disposable digital camera [ed. note: see below], retailing in the USA for $19.99. Ritz, CVS, Disney World and Longs Drugs are all going to stock the 2-megapixel camera, which somewhat amazingly has a color preview screen and allows you to delete images before you take it to the store for processing (where you will receive a free picture CD along with your prints)." It's not the first disposable digital camera, which was hacked shortly afterwards, but these include a LCD display (they're made by the same company which made the first ones). Have fun!
How long before "disposable" becomes "free" with a simple hardware/software hack?
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
This is even a worse idea than the "2 day dvd lasting" media.
Why do this?
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
Finally my point is proven - this is what happens when the marketing department controls projects !!
[ Monday is a terrible way to spend one seventh of your life. ]
For exactly which economic bracket is $20 considered "disposable"? I consider myself middle-class, and I'm not going to throw anything away unless it cost under $8, if I can help it.
Hear that? That's the collective sigh of landfills across the nation.
How much do you want to bet that people will bulk buy these things just for the screens
hmm.. come to think of it.. i'll get my orders in now!!!
Tis, brakes that allow cars go fast!
huh? why exactly is it a _bad_ idea, if they just can make it profitable?
ever used crappy disposable cameras? the worst thing about them is that a lot of the pictures you take turn out as total crap. a preview screen on them would be a great improvement.
it's a replacement for MEGACRAPPYSHIT disposable cameras, and a lot of folk visiting disneyworld or whatever would like one of these. it's cheap for them(customers), so they don't have to have even any stress about if it breaks in the rides or if they lose it and yet they can take better pictures than with a normal disposable one.
20$ for a rent of a 2mpix camera and service to get the pics on a cd isn't _that_ bad at amusementparks & etc..
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Forget the 2megapixel camera, I want cheap LCD's.
Hopefully the hardware gurus recycle all of the parts, so we can have a webcam, a display, and a memory stick, all for the low low price of $20.00
A $20 color LCD for all your cool projects!
The benefit is being able to recognize, delete and re-shoot poor pictures, which is one of the big pluses of digital photography. The $7 35mm disposable, 24 pictures, might on average net you 8-10 keeper pics. With the digital version, you're guaranteed 25 pictures that you want processed, because you can keep re-shooting until you get 25 good ones. Net-net, probably close to break-even on cost (assuming my 33% estimate above) - coincidence? Also, while some processors don't force you to pay for pictures you don't like, that doesn't alleviate the "sighing landfills" issue. IF you are going to buy a disposable camera, then this would be the more environmentally friendly version, assuming the cameras themselves are recycled as advertised.
drink beer, and let the water run the mill
Why does society insist make making more and more degenerate retards? Like we need more ijits filling up web forums.
This whole retard movement just devolves us to jumping more conclusions that has lower and lower sense. Hence the saying "You've never taken a disposable film camera back to the drugstore!?!? WTF!?!?!?!".
Sound familiar? Back in the day, ALL slashdot posters were sensible enough to figure this was the same deal, flash substituting for film. You could blugeon someone senseless with your big antique camera and they would still be alright enough to know this. You can't do that with today's slashdot ijits.
Granted some "disposable" stuff do in fact get reused, such as moronic slasdot rants, but for others, we should actually take the time to decide if they are truly disposable.
Why do people insist on calling these cameras disposable?
The business model is basically to rent them out for a rather steep $20, which gets you use of the camera until you fill the on-board memory and then a CD with your images after.
My guess is that the retailers have a minimal markup on the camera with the expectation that they will make their money doing digital prints.
The manufacturer makes their money by being able to rent the same camera multiple times.
Certainly some of the cameras will be "lost" to hackers, but this is a cost of doing business and is probably far cheaper than creating and inforcing some sort of deposit mechanism since, for the average user, the "deposit" is the precious memories stored on the camera that they can only get back by returning the camera.
If "hacking" of the cameras become widespread, then one can expect that the company will either take action or go out of business.
If they take action, there will no doubt be much grousing among the slashdot community, but really, what right does a parasite have to complain when the host its bleeding dry seems to extingish it? Better to keep a low profile.
Sadly, durable stuff is likely to outlive its usefulness.
I've got an old Toshiba laptop somewhere - powered by a 7.14MHz 8086. The machine is heavily built and works fine, has decent battery life and, apart from being a bit grubby and yellowed, works just the same as it did when new.
Except it's almost entirely useless when it comes to working alongside modern computers. It and my modern iBook have no ports, disks or anything in common. I'd need a third computer to get data between the two.
Then there's digital cameras. I've got a Fuji FinePix 6900 Zoom, which I've had for a bit over two years now. It still takes really good photos, and continues to work extremely well, but I have a feeling I'll be replacing it because of obsolescence rather than it breaking.
I'm eyeing up Canon DSLRs, looking at new things they can do which my camera can't - new advances that simply hadn't been (affordably) available when my camera was designed. Long, low-noise exposures, high-capacity rechargeable AA batteries, higher resolution, and so on...
Technology advances ridiculously quickly. Yes, you can stick around with something prehistoric, but unless you have very limited needs you're likely to constantly lust after what's you're missing on a newer device. I'm not advocating disposable hardware, but at times I understand why things now are rarely (over-) engineered to last. By the time they break, they'll be dinosaurs surrounded by smaller, faster, cheaper descendants...
Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
Some people will only want the digital camera for special events like a hiking trip, geocaching, a birthday, camping, Christmas, etc.
Sounds to me like they've got a pretty solid market.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
This will replace the disposable film camera, which does NOT get recycled, and ends up in the landfill.
love is just extroverted narcissism
Why does society insist make making more and more disposable crap?
Because at the rate (this) technology is advancing, you might as well consider all digital cameras disposable within a few years. Also, there are people who demand desposable cameras so they won't be afraid to take it on their mountain climbing trip.
This whole disposable movement just evolves us to making more stuff that has lower and lower quality.
Yes, because we all know that this 2 megapixel camera with LCD display is of extremely poor quality as compared to the 1 megapixel cameras that cost several times more. (Won't even bother to tell you that these are returnable, not disposable)
Hence the saying "They don't make 'em like they used to."
Reminds me of another old saying, "Do not say, 'Why were the old days better than these?' For it is not wise to ask such questions." -- Ecclesiastes 7:10
it is not wise to ask such questions." People have been complaining about how good the old days were for 3000 years already. Maybe you should just accept progress and be happy with our improvements in medicine, travel, etc. (You can mod me down now, for mentioning the bible.)
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Marketting - Its a number that they can stamp on the front of the Unit, and to most people "bigger number" = "Better camera".
There are a few of us who would actually see the difference between a 2MP and an 8MP image, but you are dead right is stating that optics in a standard consumer grade camera probably aren't up to scratch.
Me, I'm waiting for a Canon's next- or next-next- generation EOS digital so I can use it with my existing lenses. In the meantime I have a shitty Kodak digital camera that I use for taking shots to post to the web.
Norman Cook's Ode to Sl
It'll cost 20 bucks at the local Rite Aid, but I can guarantee you that once past the gates of Disney, it'll cost at least 40 or 50. Or any other amusement park, for that matter. Enough that it'd negate any economy. But, you forgot your own camera, so you pay.
Actually, I envision the park security no longer allowing you to bring your own camera. You know, to improve safety and give you a more enjoyable experience.
Hey, a bottle of water costs 3 bucks in there.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
They don't. The shops which sell these things pay more than $20 for them. They can "sell" them at $20 because people have to return them to get their photos. Once they have the camera back, they can repackage and resell it again for $20. And again. And again. Until it gets too scratched up, dirty, or gross to sell any more.
There hasn't been some magical advance in technology to make these things so cheap. They aren't. It's just that there's a big incentive to return the camera (i.e., you can't get your photos if you don't).
Do you really think the camera shop just tosses a perfectly good, reusable digital camera in the trash after a single use?!
"Pure Digital's San Francisco offices are typical pod-style workstations, with computers and posters everywhere. Large images of waterfalls, mountains and beaches adorn the walls -- all snapped by a Pure Digital camera, which has the equivalent of a 2-megapixel sensor. A megapixel is a measurement of a camera's resolution."
What does "the equivalent of a 2-megapixel sensor" mean? Is it not 2 MP?
The article didn't mention anything about batteries; usually a big concern with digital cameras. Does the end user have to supply them? Are they built into the camera? What happens if they run out before your one-time use is done?
I agree with you, to a point...I would never be happy with a 1.2 megapixel camera. I like to be able to crop after I shoot pictures, and I like to blow up the occasional good one. On the other hand, for people who are just going to be printing snapshots to stuff in a shoebox or tack up on a bulletin board or something, high resolution just isn't all that important. For that matter, some people may only want to put the pictures on the web--in which case they'll probably downsample them further anyway.
There is also the issues of privacy when the pictures are of any, uh, salacious nature. How do you know your pictures won't end up where you don't intend?
This is an issue? People will drop off 35mm film at Wal-Mart that has their homemade porn on it. There always was the analog hole (*ahem*). Very few people bother to develop their own colour film, now or ever. Those same people will not worry about using their disposable digital to share their intimate moments with the clerks at the grocery store. Everybody else who wants to take their own naughty pictures will use Polaroid or buy their own digital camera. Home porn is probably not the target market for this technology....
~Idarubicin
I think you're significantly overestimating what's in there. Here's what's in the box: 8M RAM, 16M NAND flash, LCD, SMaL CCD, fixed focus lens, two alkaline batteries, and a bunch of surface-mounted components that are worth approximately zip.
Better cameras retail for under $100, so the total value of the parts in this one, new, can't be more than $40-$50. You really think there's anything worth more than a buck or two other than the LCD? I can't see there being much profit in eBaying these, especially after people start posting where you can get the bits cheaper yourself.
I'm sure individual tinkerers will buy a few, but I can't imagine that's going to be enough to hurt them.
Jesus Christ, I do need to drink my coffee in the morning. Talk about a complete brainfart.
I'd like to thank the first responder for being sensible and polite.
Fuck the rest of you.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Well one use (I could sell these by the dozen in the UK) is for nightclubs... you want the convenience of digital (instant review, quick uploading the morning after) but don't want to have hundreds of quids worth of equipment lost, stolen, trampled or dropped in a beer!