David Coursey, well known technology writer, doesn't understand the value of camera phones or how they are changing communications. David in November 2003 wrote a column about camera phones (that I critiqued) and four months later he demonstrates that he still doesn't understand the dynamics of use or ramifications.
In his AnchorDesk column today he criticizes the resolution of today's VGA camera phones -- not taking into consideration the higher quality phones already available.
Coursey says, "I just think that, if God wanted telephones to be cameras, he wouldn't have given us separate eyes and ears. OK, maybe that's not the best analogy.
"But when you can get a much better camera, one that fits in a pocket or purse and actually takes decent photos for not much money, well, why would you care about a cut-rate camera in your phone?"
God has nothing to do with it
Hey David, if God had wanted you to speak with other people across long distances, he would have given you a really loud voice so you wouldn't need a cellular phone at all.
David is not just looking at camera phones in terms of today's quality; he's also not looking at how people are finding them useful, regardless of the poor quality photos.
He writes, "But I've found that the fun of the camera phone wears off quickly. The first few times one of these gizmos arrived at my house for review, I dutifully ran out and shot a bunch of pictures and sent them to friends.
"But the process was cumbersome, and the results not much better than the fuzzy pics my friend sent me. It wasn't too long before I stopped thinking of these phones as cameras."
Stopped thinking
Perhaps that's the operative phrase -- "stopped thinking." Firstly, I have tested numerous camera phones and it's pretty easy, not cumbersome, to take and send a photo. Some camera phones are better than others, but it doesn't take a rocket science to figure them out.
Secondly, David should see the photos from one megapixel and two megapixel camera phones. Indeed, he should see some of the better photos taken even with today's VGA cameras.
(To be fair to David, I can't wait for VGA camera phones to die and be supplanted by one megapixel handsets with good quality lenses.)
Think omnipresence and applications
Thirdly, David should learn how people are using camera phones for valuable applications in real estate, construction, emergency medical care and, even, his own profession of journalism.
Fourthly, camera phones will be taken everywhere, not like digital cameras. How many people carry digital cameras (no matter how small they are) with them all the time -- the way they carry cellular phones?
Omnipresence -- tens of millions, hundreds of millions of people carrying wireless imaging devices for taking still photos and, with many handsets, videos -- changes communications.
Time heals cluelessness
David's not stupid. He understands technology (except for camera phones!). He'll "get it" eventually.
But for someone who should look at an industry from a global perspective and also ponder the future, he's fallen down on the job when it comes to camera phones.
Agree -- Coursey is usually better than this but here he looks ridiculous.
Posted by: gyaku-zuki | Wednesday, March 10, 2004 at 08:16 PM