Wifi Camera Uploads without Computer

* * Beatles-Beatles writes to tell us NewsDay is reporting that Kodak has released the first "computer-free wireless camera." The new widget can connect directly to the Internet wherever there's Wi-Fi available to download and e-mail pictures. Users can even use the camera to view photos stored in Internet photo albums via Kodak's Easyshare Gallery service.

Comments

clever maneuver

[Douglas Simmons]

Apple made a product that seemlessly connects users to their online service, and iTunes as I understand it, and I'm guessing as a result, has a 90% marketshare of online music sales. Though the ability to "view photos stored in Internet photo albums via Kodak's Easyshare Gallery service" without a computer involved is an untapped market, you can expect other companies to follow Kodak's lead. But, in addition to having a great brand, Kodak will dominate this new market largely because they got there first. From the article: "Cameras, I believe, are moving from the wired world towards the wireless world," said Lee, director of consumer services at InfoTrends. "It's not going to happen this year but, starting next year, you're going to definitely see some more cameras coming that incorporate wireless-transfer capabilities."

No FTP upload?

[TuxPaper]

The provided URLs don't say whether it allows FTP upload, so I'd say no.

Ahh, businesses always thinking about the users, by leaving out obvious features so that they can sell services that provide those missing features.

Re:That's interesting, but...

[Douglas Simmons]

Nikon's D2X, the holy grail of cameras, can upload wirelessly via ftp when in range. All I'm seeing in the article is that the camera forces you to use some service that they offer, something more annoying than straight up FTP. Nothing to see here. What am I missing?

Tactical possibilities in conflict situations

[Kream]

Coming from a country where major riots and civil disturbances have flared up several times in a decade, and where the electoral process in certain areas is inflected with violence, this may be a very positive development.

Visual documentation of violence, including street violence, is something that is very powerful in these circumstances. A network of WiFi cameras that connects to a battery-powered wireless switch(es) could turn this into an extremely powerful journalistic tool.

Journalists, especially some very courageous ones, have had their (expensive) equipment seized and smashed - even by the police. In effect, the very act of powerfull and provocative reportage causes the reportage to be fuitless. A couple of cheap wireless cameras clipped onto someone's lapel or mounted in places where there is a clear field of view could provide (highly incriminating?) video data even upto the moment the cameras were destroyed.

And think of the possibilities for exposing corruption. If you were to go to, say, a police station where you knew a bribe would be demanded of you, with the intent of secretly filming the proceedings, you'd be banking on the camera remaining undetected and being able to take the recording away with you. With a WiFi camera broadcasting to an Internet-connected laptop(s) across the street, things change quickly :)

Cheers,

Aniruddha "Karim" Shankar

Re:Tactical possibilities in conflict situations

[DrXym]

Except of course now you're expecting there to be wifi spots at the same places there are riots and civil disturbances. It's hard enough to find wifi access at the best of times, let alone in a pitched battle rolling back and forth between streets. And if there were, no doubt you'd have to stand quite still while your pics were uploaded which wouldn't necessarily be convenient at the time. If that weren't unlikely enough a totalitarian state is likely to have little internet access or extremely restricted access. On top of that is Kodak itself. Their site probably pitches itself as "family friendly" so you can bet that any civil disobediance pics would be wiped off their site without a second's thought.

I wouldn't diss the idea completely - after all if your camera would connect to an ad-hoc network you could perhaps arrange for someone with a PDA or small laptop to shadow you at some distance and broadcast the pics back to them, but it would still be an awkward arrangement. And its doubtful that this camera would help you do that.

Perhaps it's simpler and equally effective to use redundancy - multiple photographers, with each passing their filled memory cards to runners.

Re:That's interesting, but...

[NickFortune]

What am I missing?

Kodak thinks it has found a solution to plumetting revenue as everyone in the world suddenly goes digital. If everyone in the world pays five bucks a month rent^H^H^H^Hservice charge then even after T-Mbile takes a slice, Kodak are going to be happy unies once again. And of course you have these Kodak branded print kiosks as well.

I can't see it working myself, both for the reasons you describe, and for the fact that after paying $600 for the damn thing, I;d be anoyed to have to pay $5 a month to keep it working.

Especaially since the damn thing doesn't seem to have an option to talk to my computer direct. To say nothing of all the folks who already pay T-Mobile or similar for basically the same service for their phones...

Download pictures?

[John Hurliman]

Wouldn't a camera that could upload pictures be more useful? Sorry to be pedantic but this is Slashdot we're talking about.

Re:That's interesting, but...

[neonstz]

Well, with $5000 for the camera and $500 for the wireless addon, I don't think the target audiences for the D2X and the kodak product don't overlap.

The D2X is one heck of a camera, and if I ever get the money I'll replace my D70 with one...