Slashdot Mirror


Is the Bar of Soap Tomorrow's Smarterphone?

Barence writes "Researchers at MIT have developed a gadget that knows whether you want to use it as a camera or smartphone, just by the way you're holding it. So, if you hold the device, dubbed the Bar of Soap, out in front of you like a camera it will automatically bring up an LCD viewfinder. However, if you then switch to holding it as you would a mobile phone, it will bring up a touchscreen keypad instead. The Bar of Soap utilises a three-axis accelerometer and 72 surface sensors to track the position of the user's fingers and its position."

141 comments

  1. Great by clarkkent09 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I look forward to the day when I wont have to face the arduous task of pressing the camera button when I want to switch to camera mode. And I am sure I won't look like an idiot twisting and shaking my phone back and forth, trying to get the damn camera on (like with iPhone switching portrait/lansdcape mode) because the feature will work flawlessly every time. Sorry, I tend to be in a sarcastic mood early in the morning. Yes, I know it's 1pm.

    --
    Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    1. Re:Great by NonUniqueNickname · · Score: 3, Funny

      At least you won't have to twist and shake like an idiot for very long. Newer camera-phones enter camera mode pretty fast, less than 10 seconds.

    2. Re:Great by Mozk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know people with bad vision who hold out their phone in much the same way as I imagine one would to switch to camera mode in this device, so I could see problems with this. Honestly it's not that hard to push a button, and a lot of phones have a dedicated button to bring up the camera interface.

      --
      No existe.
    3. Re:Great by Cillian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And I wonder how much all this extra tech/sensors adds to the price...... Personally, I'll go for the switch and keep the cash. I mean, sure, shiny stuff is cool, but if that's the best they can think of to do with the tech... *sigh*

      --
      -- All your booze are belong to us.
    4. Re:Great by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Funny
      Hmm...sounds like a PITA.

      Have they never seen anyone lay down while they talk on the phone. I'd be pissed if I was laying down, heard the phone ring, picked it up, and when I said hello, I heard the fscking thing taking pictures of my ear.....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    5. Re:Great by Locke2005 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I am sure I won't look like an idiot Hey, you already look like a schizophrenic when you walk down the street talking loudly into the bluetooth headset that nobody can see... how can you possibly look any worse twisting your phone around when you want to take a picture? Perhaps the cell phone manufacturers are just trying to avoid being mandated to produce a loud "shutter" noise every time you snap a digital pic -- a feature I'm sure people that take snaps of animals will absolutely love.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    6. Re:Great by dns_server · · Score: 2, Informative

      i have heard that accelerometors are only about $2-3 in volume so they are cheap.

    7. Re:Great by Firehed · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Less than 10 seconds is fast? I know I'm used to the responsiveness of an SLR, but IMO camera-phones are still worthless until they can at least match the start-up speed of a normal point and shoot.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    8. Re:Great by davester666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Which translates into $20-$30 dollars added to the retail price of the phone...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    9. Re:Great by AnarkiNet · · Score: 1

      Don't forget to round up to the $50 mark.

    10. Re:Great by kaosfury · · Score: 1

      Why is this scored as Troll? He has a good point.

      --
      "Trust that little voice in your head that says 'Wouldn't it be interesting if...' and then do it." - Duane Michals
    11. Re:Great by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Now that's just gross exaggeration!

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    12. Re:Great by Chabo · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know it's 1pm.

      I don't live in your time zone, you insensitive clod!

      --
      Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
    13. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just tried, out of curiosity, how fast my current camera phone (Samsung SGH-G800) switches to the camera mode.

      Quite exactly 3 seconds from moving the lid off the lense (which can be done as I remove the phone from my pocket) to it showing image on the screen. It is well fast enough. And at 5 megapixels, the quality is well enough for my normal use (IE. sharing the photos of different events with my friends).

      There are problems, sure. It's not yet a real camera. The video works really great (but at just 320x240 resolution) but when using the normal camera... Flash is quite dim. And very minor movement ruins the images. I was at a party where I took 45 photos with it. I deleted 25 of them the next day just because of those were too unclear. (granted, I was drunk when I took them)

      Even so, camera phones have came a LONG way in the last year or two. They are no longer worthless as they used to be and in a year or two more, I am sure they will completely overthrow any normal digital cameras for ordinary use (professional photographers being exception)

    14. Re:Great by camperdave · · Score: 3, Insightful

      i have heard that accelerometors are only about $2-3 in volume so they are cheap.

      So, only about a thousand times as expensive as a switch, then?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    15. Re:Great by nautsch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hmm. I still hope, that people will get that megapixels are NOT an indicator for the quality of the picture.

      --
      If you find a typo, you may keep it.
    16. Re:Great by omeomi · · Score: 1

      Less than 10 seconds is fast? I know I'm used to the responsiveness of an SLR, but IMO camera-phones are still worthless until they can at least match the start-up speed of a normal point and shoot.

      While not blindingly fast, the iPhone starts up the camera mode in approximately the same amount of time as a lot of point and shoots. Maybe a bit longer, but it's certainly not 10 seconds. SLR is obviously in whole different category.

    17. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but will it still pocket Dial?

    18. Re:Great by AdmiralWeirdbeard · · Score: 2, Funny
      laf. from the article:

      Unfortunately, the disparate demands of the individual interfaces has remained a barrier to complete convergence.

      yes its shocking that the interfaces of camera and phone have not suddenly become identical simply because of the possibility to sell them in the same enclosure. *gasp*

      --
      Come read my stupid blagablog. Rants and Giggles
    19. Re:Great by againjj · · Score: 2, Interesting

      To bolster your comment, I note that they state that there is only a 70% accuracy (at this time) which goes to 90% if it is trained to a specific user. Not exactly very reliable.

    20. Re:Great by PuckSR · · Score: 5, Funny

      I agree...

      Have you heard about the new computer interface devices called "mice"? They try to interface with a computer via movement of the device across a flat surface rather than just typing in a command. Absolutely useless, and I bet they don't work worth a crap

      "There is no evidence that people want to use these things."--John Dvorak(discussing the computer mouse)

      Useless and silly technology!

    21. Re:Great by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Hrrm, my Sidekick Slide (which isn't all that great) takes about 1 second to give you a working camera...

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    22. Re:Great by Pentium100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Megapixels are an indicator of quality, just not the main or single one.

      The quality of the lens and sensor, also the size of the sensor also matters as much as (or more than) the megapixel count, but still, if a camera had a perfect lens and a 75mm sensor, but a resolution of only 320x240, it may actually do worse than a cameraphone with it's tiny sensor and a below average lens but 5mpx... Shooting in low light would be a different matter...

    23. Re:Great by aywwts4 · · Score: 1

      In good cameras perhaps the difference between 7, and 12 MP camera is really just optics and CCDs. But when you are talking about Camera-phones it is back to the late 90s, the difference between VGA (.3) 1.5, and 3 megapixels is a massive shift. Especially since they usually all have the same crappy optics.

      --
      Web Developers: Celebrate to our roots! Animated Gifs and Tiled Backgrounds, dont let our history die!
    24. Re:Great by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Funny

      (like with iPhone switching portrait/lansdcape mode)

      One of my first experiences with an iPhone was a coworker trying to show me a picture of their son. They'd taken the picture with a different camera, held sideways, so it showed up sideways on the screen. So he rotated the phone. And the iPhone obliged by rotating the picture 90 degrees so that his kid was still sideways.

      Needless to say, I was deeply impressed. ;)

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    25. Re:Great by he-sk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Broadening the focus on technical properties other than megapixel still misses the point that people take pictures and not cameras. The fact is that no technical property is a good indicator of the quality of a picture, because technology improves and changes all the time. Restricting yourself to an old and/or lofi camera can be lots of fun and that's the real challenge: making good pics with any camera.

      --
      Free Manning, jail Obama.
    26. Re:Great by zippthorne · · Score: 2, Funny

      And net profit!

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    27. Re:Great by Pentium100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is true, but sometimes (at least I) take photos that would have no "artistic" value, but only for informational purposes, for example taking a photo of a page of text (using a phone as a scanner), the requirement here is that the text is readable, which depends a lot on technical properties of the phone (one phone I had couldn't take a clear picture of text, either the page is too close (out of focus) or it is too far away (too few pixels per character)).

      And yes, a cameraphone will never be as good as a DSLR camera, but I have trouble putting a DSLR camera in my pocket... Also video cameras with photo capability are better than phones, for example my Handycam DCR-HC90E takes 3mpx photos that are way better than the 3mpx photos my Nokia N93 takes. On the other hand the N93 fits in my pocket, while the Handycam does not.

    28. Re:Great by he-sk · · Score: 1

      I think the other error is far more likely, because when a vision-impaired person brings something in their hand to their face they look down and therefore the phone will be in an angled position. But what happens when you want to take a picture of something in that position?

      On the other hand, using both hands to hold a camera steadies it which leads to better pictures. The device could use its surface sensors to enforce this behavior (whenever possible), subtly helping people making better pics.

      --
      Free Manning, jail Obama.
    29. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woosh

    30. Re:Great by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Or infinitely more expensive than a 'camera' icon on the screen.

    31. Re:Great by chris.evans · · Score: 1

      if ((callnprogress) && (horizontal)) { camera=!camera; }

    32. Re:Great by jsiren · · Score: 1

      And how do I twist and shake it to take a photo in a portrait format?

      I tagged this "rubegoldberg".

      --
      Usage: km/h for speed (kilometers per hour); kph for very slow impulses (kilopond hours).
    33. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that then you'd have an ugly switch, something that most of todays smartphones and a lot of cameras are increasingly avoiding.

      As opposed to accelerometers, which more and more phones are adding anyways, and most cameras have in some fashion(to detect if you're shooting landscape or portrait)

      Which brings me to my concern.. what happens if you want to shoot a portrait shot?

    34. Re:Great by phulegart · · Score: 1

      I'd agree with you that it is not that hard to push a button... I mean, you STILL have to push a button to take the picture... but the fact that there was a need, and this this app was developed to suit that need, proves that it *is* too hard to just press a button.

      --
      "I love deadlines. I love the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." -D. Adams
  2. Here come the shower pics. by commodore64_love · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I can't wait for teen girls & college women to carry their "bar of soap" into the shower, and while washing accidently press the "take picture" and "send" buttons.

    Of course most women do that anyway. They've created a whole new category called "mirror teens".

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    1. Re:Here come the shower pics. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      However it was mistaken as a bar of soap. You will either a black screen as the skin has blocked all the light. Or the shower stall.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Here come the shower pics. by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      People generally don't talk on the cell phone when they shower... and if you have a camera with you in the shower/bathroom, something funny is going on already.

      Beyond making it far to noisy to hear (or be heard), most cell phones don't do well in the presence of water.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  3. Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Bar of Soap utilises a three-axis accelerometer and 72 surface sensors to track the position of the user's fingers and its position."

    And what's the advantage over using a single "surface sensor" (i.e. a button)?

    1. Re:Better by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      And what's the advantage over using a single "surface sensor" (i.e. a button)?

      It's more hip ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:Better by Wildflowers · · Score: 1

      It's definitely cooler.

    3. Re:Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but what it really needs is more cowbell.

  4. I'm curious by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    In what position do I need to hold it in order for it to know that I want it to vibrate instead of making noise when somebody calls?

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:I'm curious by stargrazer · · Score: 1

      The position where sunlight doesn't reach it.

    2. Re:I'm curious by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      That it explains it -- this girl obviously had one of these phones!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  5. what if? by sl0ppy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    what if i want to take a picture of something in front of me, on my desk, while i am sitting down. i've actually done this a few times, so it's not too much to ask.

    hopefully there will be an easy override button i can press?

    sometimes gadgets try too hard to be "smart", and end up infuriating the end users.

    1. Re:what if? by hobbit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Quite. Not to mention that if you ask a teenager to mime "taking a picture", they'll probably mime holding an object in portrait orientation and pressing a button on the side nearest them. Whereas twenty/thirtysomethings will probably mime pressing a button on the top of something in landscape orientation, and forty-and-up-somethings will probably mime holding something up to their eye.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    2. Re:what if? by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      ... and the rest of us will just say it, and refrain from gesticulating like a mental patient.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    3. Re:what if? by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Nah. I've seen plenty of over-40s using cell phone cameras and modern digital cameras and plenty of teenagers witih real cameras. I'm in the middle category, but I still hold something up to my eye. SLR is the only way to photograph. If you've ever tried to take a picture in a dark environment, you understand why. There's nothing quite like a bright LCD panel leaving you unable to see for 45 seconds after you put the camera away to guarantee that you WILL get mugged in NYC.... :-)

      It's not that I don't have a cell phone with a camera. I do. I just think the picture quality sucks, so for anything that matters, I'd rather use my Digital Rebel XTi with an image-stabilized 17-85mm lens.... I'm pretty sure I'd still feel that way if I were a teenager. I also have an HDV camcorder, use a FireWire flash card reader (USB is too slow), and use Macs. If you're taking pictures to last a lifetime, you should make them good pictures. :-)

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    4. Re:what if? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what if i want to take a picture of something in front of me, on my desk, while i am sitting down. i've actually done this a few times, so it's not too much to ask.

      I'm sure your secretary would appreciate it if you did not post such pictures of her on the internet anymore anyway, so really it's still a win.

    5. Re:what if? by hobbit · · Score: 1

      When you say "plenty", do you mean "the majority of"?

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    6. Re:what if? by hobbit · · Score: 1

      Surly pre-teen, eh?

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    7. Re:what if? by chris.evans · · Score: 1

      user override.

    8. Re:what if? by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Yes, pretty much every teenager I've ever known has used a real camera (either digital or film) for taking photos when on vacation. In fact, I can't think of even a single counterexample. Cell cameras are for pictures you don't care about, not for real stuff. :-)

      Compounding the problem with the original premise, cell cameras and digital cameras started becoming popular at about the same time, so if you assume that people's first cameras will determine their response to that sort of question, the window between people holding up digital cameras and holding up cell phones is very small. Digital cameras weren't really targeted towards the consumer mass market until the late 90s, and I don't remember seeing more than a handful of non-geek people who owned them before about '01 or so. By 2002, camera phones were starting to show up on the U.S. market.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    9. Re:what if? by hobbit · · Score: 1

      I never claimed that teenagers had never used a real camera. Ready my original post again.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    10. Re:what if? by phulegart · · Score: 1

      Hmm.. well, I'm in the US, I went to a High School for a career day demonstration, and I had an old Pentax K-1000 with me. The first kid to ask about it did not believe that it did not have an LCD screen, nor that it was not a DSLR. I did not meet one kid that day at that high school that had heard of 35mm film, or had touched a camera that used film.

      So your example is most definitely not the norm. Neither is mine.

      --
      "I love deadlines. I love the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." -D. Adams
    11. Re:what if? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and anyone older than that gets out the paintbrushes & easel :)

  6. Joy by illegalcortex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Please god, no. I already curse my iPod Touch frequently enough when it decides how to rotate the screen for me. For example, ever try web surfing while lying down? What I wouldn't give for a "lock screen orientation" button.

    1. Re:Joy by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Funny

      What I wouldn't give for a "lock screen orientation" button.

      If you needed such a button then Steve Jobs would have provided it for you. Clearly you aren't using your iPod in the correct manner ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:Joy by solune · · Score: 1

      Wow. Every time I hear something else about the iPhone I feel even better about not getting one when I had the chance

    3. Re:Joy by hobbit · · Score: 1

      Ditto. Although I'd rather have a status setting that would cause the OS only to signal a change in orientation after a "shakedown" in the new direction (like a sort of directional shake, such as you would make if you were trying to get wet sand to collect at the bottom of a glass).

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    4. Re:Joy by tomcode · · Score: 1

      That's so intuitive, I won't even bother explaining it to you.

      --
      f u cn rd ths u cn gt a gd jb n cmptr prgmng
    5. Re:Joy by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I know it sucks.

      Try turning it sideways (top pointing right), then flipping clockwise so the top is pointing down. You get landscape mode, and it's facing the proper way.

      OT I know, but maybe it'll help. I wish somebody made a jailbreak thing that would disable/enable rotation, shouldn't be too hard to do.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    6. Re:Joy by illegalcortex · · Score: 1

      Problem is, I want it portrait mode. Basically, just like I'd read it standing up.

    7. Re:Joy by illegalcortex · · Score: 1

      Getting it for free through work takes a bit of the edge off the frustration.

  7. Too smart phone by nizo · · Score: 4, Funny

    No matter how smart this phone is, you still shouldn't drop it in the shower.

    1. Re:Too smart phone by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      I can think of several reasons someone might want to do that. At the very least it would help you make better shock sites like Goatse.

    2. Re:Too smart phone by chris.evans · · Score: 1

      u friend emails, is that really your bum ?!?!

  8. that's going to make for some interesting goofs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Talk about an utterly subjective and intuitive line of guesswork.
    Some will be obvious 99% of the time, others it'll be random guesswork on the part of the device as it won't know what it's relationship is to the rest of your body and the world. Just imagine trying to take pictures from odd positions. (around the corner, from your purse so he doesn't notice, etc.)

    It will absolutely need a manual override or there are going to be a lot of strange mistakes.

    1. Re:that's going to make for some interesting goofs by Mozk · · Score: 1

      The article quotes 70% accuracy, which means it doesn't work once every three times you use it, or 90% if trained.

      Engineers from MIT intend to solve this problem by allowing the device itself to work out what you intend.

      And since when did computers start doing what they think I want and not what I tell them to do?

      --
      No existe.
    2. Re:that's going to make for some interesting goofs by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      Take the 'I' out of your perspective and think in terms of general population, who do not want total control over their devices and would actually like a bit of "mind-reading." Maybe then the potential future uses would be clearer.

      Or maybe not - you're on Slashdot, so you may have the fairly typical "I hate any interface newer than 1970" thing that happens around here.

  9. Oblig. tag by Eudial · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why isn't this tagged "dontdropthesoap"?!

    --
    GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
  10. Needs work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the article:

    However this method does have its downside. Because of the varying ways people hold devices, it's only accurate 70% of the time, though this figure hits 90% if the Bar of Soap is trained with a specific user.

    So even if it's "trained" with me, it will exhibit the incorrect operation 10% of the time.
    This device needs a fair bit of improvement before it's marketable.

  11. Alternate application... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Now what would be really interesting is if they added a mode that responded as such:

    a. Phone rotated 90 degrees such that the lens is pointing toward the sky

    b. Phone senses me taping it to my shoe

    c. Phone takes snapshots every few seconds.

    I'm an avid Upskir^H^H^H^H^H^H shoe-point-of-view sky photographer. It would really make my life easier.

  12. And what about... by thesolo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you want or need to take a picture/video discreetly? Now you're stuck holding it way out in front of you, giving away the fact that you're filming/taking photos?

    I've snapped photos and video before by keeping the phone up against my ear like I was on the phone, but aiming the lens at the subject and tapping the button on the side of the phone. I know other people have done the same to film their local police using a taser on someone. If the cops know you're filming, they're likely to try to take your cell.

    1. Re:And what about... by mea37 · · Score: 1

      On the one hand, I think this is a pretty useless "feature", likely to cause more trouble than it solves. (By that I mean, I think it's likely to cause quite a bit of trouble when it mis-interprets what I want it to do, and I don't think it solves anything at all.)

      But on the other hand, I see several of these "what if I want to do X or Y with it?" questions... and to me the answer is pretty obvious: If you want to do X or Y, this isn't the gadget you should use to do it. That isn't what this thing does. Not every invention has to be useful for every application.

  13. What's so bad about... by Logical+Zebra · · Score: 1

    ...pushing a button on the side of the phone to switch to camera mode?

    Isn't this kind of a like a Rube Goldberg device?

    --
    I have a bad feeling about this...
    1. Re:What's so bad about... by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 1

      One thing I like about the N73 is the camera lens cover. Not only does it (attempt to) keep dust off the lens when it's not in use as a camera, but also sliding the cover open automatically activates camera mode. Easy to use AND functional at the same time.

      Of course, it does take 5 seconds to actually *load* the camera... that's one of the things I don't like so much.

  14. Potential for fail... by reality-bytes · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Okay, so not epic fail, but a bit of a potential fail if they manage to come up with yet another phone which despite having a really cool feature where it can change modes just due to it's orientation.... it still takes a bloody eternity to switch modes.

    Perhaps I'm the only one. Perhaps everybody else's phone can go from dial-a-pizza to 6-gigapixel with motion-stabilisation in 0.001 seconds but every handset I've tried has something between an annoying and an interminable wait before the thing actually starts functioning like something approximating a camera.

    If I really cared about taking reasonable quality photos on the spur of the moment, I think I'd still carry a dedicated digital camera.

    --
    Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
    1. Re:Potential for fail... by Chabo · · Score: 1

      I was telling one of my co-workers that my eventual plan is to buy a new thin point-and-shoot, and a digital SLR, and carry the point-and-shoot everywhere, then take the SLR if I knew I was going to be taking photos.

      He reaches behind him, pulls a strap over his head, and sets a pretty expensive-looking SLR on the table. "I carry this around with me wherever I go. I didn't think I was going to be taking any photos today, so I don't have my lens bag with me."

      --
      Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
    2. Re:Potential for fail... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      true. monday I've tried to take e photo of an ambulance cutting. traffic over some rails running along the road and failed due to Corners startup time

    3. Re:Potential for fail... by maxume · · Score: 1

      I hope he didn't make you sex.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  15. Finding Reception by Maladius · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm definitely foreseeing a problem when you hold the phone out in front of you and move it around to try and find reception. That's a very similar position to the one you would use for picture taking.

  16. horrible idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How am I going to take pictures of women's cleavage while pretending to text NOW?

  17. What if you want pictures of shoes? by erroneus · · Score: 1

    If for some reason you want to use your phone or camera in positions or ways that might be confused for other uses? How would the phone work in zero-G? Nice idea, but I hope you get your patent fees back...

    1. Re:What if you want pictures of shoes? by plutoXL · · Score: 1

      How would the phone work in zero-G?

      Is that your usual prerequisite when purchasing a mobile phone?

    2. Re:What if you want pictures of shoes? by Chabo · · Score: 1

      He doesn't have to be an astronaut to find that a valid question. Maybe he's a skydiver?

      --
      Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
    3. Re:What if you want pictures of shoes? by AaxelB · · Score: 1

      He doesn't have to be an astronaut to find that a valid question. Maybe he's a skydiver?

      You reach terminal velocity pretty quickly while skydiving, probably within a few seconds (it's hard to tell when you're falling, naturally, but they say the first 1000 feet take 10-11 seconds and each subsequent 1000 takes 5.5 seconds). Of course, if you wanted to take a picture of the plane just after you jump out (which is an awesome view, by the way), this phone would probably shit itself.

    4. Re:What if you want pictures of shoes? by Chabo · · Score: 1

      Now I've never been skydiving, but wouldn't you still feel weightless after reaching terminal velocity?

      --
      Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
    5. Re:What if you want pictures of shoes? by AaxelB · · Score: 1

      Well, it still "feels" somewhat weightless to a person, but that's just because you can both see and feel (from the rushing wind) that you're falling from the sky. A true zero-g feeling in your stomach is pretty similar to the high-on-adrenaline feeling in your stomach. Looking just at the forces involved, though, it's pretty much the same situation as lying facedown on a bed. You've got a force from below (the air/bed) which is equal to your weight, so you have zero acceleration.

  18. If its over my head.. by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Will it show a picture of a brick on the display?

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  19. Idea for a useful app by jasonw754 · · Score: 1

    I already have an idea for a useful app for a phone with 72 surface sensors that can detect the position of the user's hand - detect the size of the hand and if considerably smaller than an average adult-sized hand, immediately lock all functionality.

    1. Re:Idea for a useful app by Chabo · · Score: 1

      I have freakishly small hands, you insensitive clod!

      --
      Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
  20. Kids don't want to hold a phone like a camera. by pavon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My younger brother got a new touchscreen phone the other day and was complaining about how the camera button was in a horrible spot, and was hard to use without pressing other buttons. I picked it up and held it sideways like a camera and none of my fingers came close to touching any buttons, except for the camera button that was under my right index finger right where the shutter button should be.

    Me: Seems fine to me.
    Him: Why would anyone want to hold it like *that*?

    I still can't convince him to to not hold it like you would when taking a picture with a flip-phone.

    1. Re:Kids don't want to hold a phone like a camera. by DnemoniX · · Score: 1

      Did your brother ride the "special" bus by chance?

    2. Re:Kids don't want to hold a phone like a camera. by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      c'mon, everyone knows that when you're taking photos for your myspace, portrait mode is preferable.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    3. Re:Kids don't want to hold a phone like a camera. by kaizokuace · · Score: 1

      Also with flash right into a mirror.

      --
      Balderdash!
  21. Can it detect you drunk-dialing and lock the keys? by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

    That would be incredibly useful.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  22. This will suck... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

    This will suck for people who like to take portrait-oriented photos more than landscape photos.

    Also, last I checked, my mouth was not on my neck directly below either of my ears.

    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  23. Re:great for checking who is calling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but now it's a camera

  24. Reception Problems by strimpster · · Score: 1

    I can see a problem if you are trying to get service for your phone, but every time you hold it up and away from your body to try to get better reception it goes into camera mode. Come on now, I can't be the only one that does that lol...

  25. How about... by Twillerror · · Score: 1

    a phone that doesn't drop calls...or if it does try to reinstate the call automatically.

    I'm all up for all these gadgets and gizmos, but I really want the phone part of my phone to get some priority.

    If the phone is in my pocket automatically put it on vibrate. Or if it detects loud noise like a car radio change the ringer.

  26. Cost Cutting over-engineered devices by solune · · Score: 1

    72 Touch sensors = 1 (or 2) light sensors by the ear-piece.
    When the ear speaker receives insufficient light, it's a phone.
    A front-mounted light sensor, mounted near the lens, perhaps, acts as control. If intensity doesn't match, phone, if yes, camera, screen comes on.

    1. Re:Cost Cutting over-engineered devices by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Most people I know don't put the phone to their ear until after they've dialed.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:Cost Cutting over-engineered devices by kaizokuace · · Score: 1

      And some after I've picked up and have said hello 10 times! jerks!

      --
      Balderdash!
  27. please no by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

    As a former user of the first-generation T-Mobile Sidekick, a mobile phone with dimensions extremely similar to a Dove bar (soap not icecream), I hope this concept is not adopted by phone manufacturers.

    That thing was a joy to thumb-type on, but as a telephone it sucked donkey rocks.

    1. Re:please no by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      Thankfully, Dove is not soap so I guess we have nothing to worry about.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    2. Re:please no by nsaneinside · · Score: 1

      I was going to assert that I have indeed dropped Dove in the shower, when I made a horrifying discovery:
      Not only is Dove indeed soap, but it probably runs Windows.

      I feel ...violated.

  28. Track This You War Mongers: +3, Helpful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or maybe to sense a grenade toss.

    Take my Auto Loan, Please !

    Yours In Communism,
    Kilgore Trout

  29. camera OR phone? by nautsch · · Score: 1

    What if i want a phone without a camera?? What will it do if I hold it like a camera?

    Dear mobile phone producers. Forget the camera thing. Build phones.

    --
    If you find a typo, you may keep it.
  30. Wow! by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    SO much more practical than, say, pushing a button.

  31. A solution looking for a problem by Zouden · · Score: 1

    On most phones, you can activate the camera with one button press. How, then, is it better to use "a three-axis accelerometer and 72 surface sensors"?

    --
    "A week in the lab saves an hour in the library"
  32. Wake me when it's a watch by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    I refuse to buy a new watch, or a new cellphone or digital camera, until the day that a cheap one appears that is all three.

    Having to carry yet another thing that can be easily lost is just an accident waiting to happen.

    Dick Tracy had it right.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  33. Best ever design by know1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sony cybershot. Pull the lense cover down, goes into camera mode, with a button wierd you would expect it. Web browsing screen orientation is changed only by user demand - press asterisk to switch. I'm posting this comment from it now. Best ever.

    1. Re:Best ever design by know1 · · Score: 1

      Shit, i meant where, not wierd. Owned by predictive text

  34. Most of the newer smartphones can do that already. by zullnero · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Quite a few that are in production or are set to be released utilize almost the exact same technology to reorient their screens and do a whole lot of other things. It doesn't take much to use that same accelerometers to do the exact same things that the article is talking about. The reason a lot of companies haven't gone quite as far as these researchers have is because enabling that by default is kind of a nuisance in practice. But it wouldn't be a bad option for some if they were used to it and wanted to minimize button/tapping/navigational interaction.

  35. I can see this one coming... by limekiller4 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ZzZzz...

    ring
    ring

    *yawn. [fumble for cell on nightstand.] "Hello?"

    *snap snap snap

    "What the...??" [pressing "send" by accident]

    Now naked pics of my wife are all over the internets. Great.

    --
    My .02,
    Limekiller
    1. Re:I can see this one coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen naked pics of your wife all over the internets, but what does that have to do with TFA?

  36. Does this mean.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't take pictures of my ... ehh.. FEET? I do love taking pictures of my feet and monitoring their GROWTH.

    Seriously silly.

  37. Bah... by Murpster · · Score: 1

    I'm holding out for one of these. According to a TV show in 1997, it will be(en) invented by next year. http://www.openthefuture.com/images/globallink-readius.jpg

    1. Re:Bah... by Murpster · · Score: 1

      I should say I mean the device on the left, which is a (just about real these days) fictional device from "Earth: Final Conflict" and not the goofy e-book reader on the right.

  38. Re:Most of the newer smartphones can do that alrea by know1 · · Score: 1

    See post above yours called best design ever

  39. Note to software developers by Simulant · · Score: 1

    Until you've perfected mind reading, please stop assuming you know what I'm trying to do At the very least, please provide a "no second guessing" mode. Microsoft, this especially means you.

  40. What about *those* photos. by PaganRitual · · Score: 1

    If I'm aiming the phone straight up in the air, can it tell if I've lowered the phone much closer to the ground? And that there is reduced light where I'm aiming? Just curious.

    Although on the plus side, when you're busted, without touching anything you can bring the phone up as you would be normally talking and go "Look, it's in phone mode, don't know what you're talking about. Nice dress."

  41. iPhone accelerometer by speedtux · · Score: 1

    That's my experience as well: the iPhone accelerometer is useless and a nuisance.

  42. Re:Great... Twist and Shake? Sounds like... by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    Twister in the shower... Just don't DROP this phone in the shower... it might require mental AND physical gymnastics to use it properly...

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  43. Ugh... by Cam42 · · Score: 1

    Can you imagine "hey man, that's a cool phone" "yeah check out the touch screen!" *holds up phone* *Phone switches to camera mode* "Oh crap." *Next day* "Hey man, wanna take a picture of this cool rock?" *turns phone down 90Degrees* *phone switches to text mode* "Oh, great" Thanks, guys. This is exactly what I want to happen.

    --
    Warning, the above comment may contain sarcasm. Don't say I didn't warn you.
  44. Only a three-axis accelerometer? by NerveGas · · Score: 1

    I guess that makes it useless to the working time-travelor, then.

    --
    Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
  45. And of course ... by fractalspace · · Score: 1

    If you hold it up against your head, it will turn into a regular ordinary bar soap, for all your cleaning needs.

    1. Re:And of course ... by dhammabum · · Score: 1

      No, it will exude body cleanser or shampoo depending on whether it is in contact with skin or hairy area. Turning into a bar of soap, now that is silly....

      --
      I am not a robot. I am a unicorn.
    2. Re:And of course ... by PPH · · Score: 1

      But what then if you drop it in the prison shower?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  46. Re:Can it detect you drunk-dialing and lock the ke by FrameRotBlues · · Score: 1

    Depends on if you need a ride or not. And exactly what kind of ride you need.

  47. What mode ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... will it be in whe I hold it down low, pointing up someone's skirt?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  48. Please do this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To any manufacturer shipping such a phone, please also include a button to manually switch from camera mode to phone mode, so I can override the phone when it misinterprets my actions. Oh, and I also use it as a camera 5% of the time and a phone 95%. Please factor such logic into your algorithms.

  49. Poor naming choice.... IMO. by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Unless it's actually waterproof, which I doubt.

  50. Why? by StormySees · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Why does the general populous feel the need to have a 14-in-1 device that can save your life, take family photos, keep you entertained, tell you how to get home from the place you work everyday, make sure your mom knows you didn't crash your car into a ditch on the side of the road when you don't call her the instant you pull into your driveway, give you directions for making supper, and, after you cycle through 5 layers of menus, call your best friend?

    I don't get it. I'm all for cool new trinkets, but if you want a phone, buy a phone. The cameras are great for emergencies or cute moments, but even the best ones can't compete with a real camera.

    So, what is my point? Since the camera isn't why you're going to buy the thing, why waste money on it? Get the free phone or one with a rebate from your carrier (they come with decent cameras now) and get a real camera. The "smart phone" aspect is just going to drive you insane with this one when it doesn't work, anyway.

    --
    This mad science is getting out of hand!
  51. 72 sensors by tzot · · Score: 1

    How drop-resistant are they?

    --
    I speak England very best
  52. Is the Bar of Soap Tomorrow's Smarterphone? by pnet · · Score: 1

    microshaft sidewinder freestyle pro game controller used the same technology eh? no 2000_xp-drivers though. looks sad all-alone in the drawer like that...kinda like this--> :-(

    moved on to ubuntu :-)