AppleInsider StaffDuring a 90 second segment of his weekly Podcast show "Diggnation" this past Friday, Rose told viewers that Apple may be restricting third parties from authoring applications that run in both the foreground and background partly because it doesn't want a competitor to its own mobile iChat application that will do just that.
More specifically, he claims that a 3G version of the iPhone hardware due in a few months will employ two digital cameras situated back-to-back — one on the front side of the unit behind the transparent touch-screen, and a second one on the back of the handset as it exists today.
Combined with the mobile iChat application, the front-mounted cam will pave the way for live video conferencing over AT&T's high-speed 3G wireless network with computer-based iChat users, as well as other second-generation iPhone owners, according to Rose.
In the week's leading up to last year's iPhone introduction, the Digg founder cited sources in saying Apple would introduce the handset with a slide-out keyboard, two separate battery compartments, and make it available for both CDMA and GSM networks — all of which turned out to be false.
Despite those misses, Rose has made some accurate predictions in the past, most notably his last minute reports of an iPod nano ahead of the player's inaugural release in 2005.
Charles Martin
Stephen Silver
Sponsored Content
Amber Neely
Malcolm Owen
Andrew Orr
100 Comments
Hmm, I don't know how much weight this prediction holds. Dual camera seems kinda redundant to me and not very cost effective. Unless they bump up the quality of the still camera and use a dedicated lower quality VGA resolution camera for the video portion that would not add too much to the overall cost, then I can see this coming to fruition.
I don't care if it's just wishful thinking on his part or just to get more hits on his site or whatever. To me, it sounds like a great idea to have a videoconferencing iPhone for social and business interaction. The only problem now that the hype has started, if the 2-camera model doesn't get announced, then there's going to be a major letdown.
No doubt about it, Kevin Rose has stirred up a hornet's nest. He'll be condemned as a liar and an idiot. That's the price you pay for making off-the-wall statements based on probably somebody having a happy dream.
I agree - while it sounds cool it doesn't sound very practical and would tax the battery. And based on the Apple's history, I don't see a removable battery in the iPhone's future to offset this.
I don't think it's anything surprising, let alone off the wall. A vast majority of 3G phones have 2 cameras, one for video-conferencing and another for regular photo-taking like the current iPhone camera.
Likewise, video chat is not a rarity at all. It's not commonly used in many places due to high data charges, but the feature is already supported on most/all 3G phones.
If anything, perhaps this tells us that his 'sources' are mostly just educated guesses based on industry trends or just his wish-list.That said, one unique detail is that the front-facing camera is supposed to be behind the 'transparent' touchscreen. Again, could just be culled from the old Apple patent filing. But it's really interesting nonetheless.
I don't care if it's just wishful thinking on his part or just to get more hits on his site or whatever. To me, it sounds like a great idea to have a videoconferencing iPhone for social and business interaction. The only problem now that the hype has started, if the 2-camera model doesn't get announced, then there's going to be a major letdown.
No doubt about it, Kevin Rose has stirred up a hornet's nest. He'll be condemned as a liar and an idiot. That's the price you pay for making off-the-wall statements based on probably somebody having a happy dream.
Yeah, the two-way camera idea would be a great feature, but so far that's the only thing he's said that even comes close to how Apple actually likes to design their products. A slide-out keyboard? Who does he think he's kidding? Has he been drinking John Dvorak's Kool-Aid?
Let me be the first here to engage in such condemnation: I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and not call him a liar, but that means then that if he really does believe what he's spewing, then he really IS an idiot.
Oh, and Digg? Get real. I'm amazed that people waste so much time there... all it is is a bunch of whining and griping about everything that people think is wrong with the world. Has anything truly productive and useful ever come out of Digg? Not that I've ever seen.