We’re just two days away from Apple’s WWDC keynote where it’s expected to show off the next generation iPhone hardware. Not surprisingly, pictures are starting to surface on the web of the purported device — a French site, Nowhere Else, has a bunch of them, that have since been posted elsewhere. Who knows if the pictures are real or fake — it seems like just as often these days people yell “Photoshop,” when the product is actually real as the vice-versa situation. But real or fake, I have to say that I hope they’re real for one reason.
While at first glance, that device looks nearly identical to the current iPhone (it seems like that will definitely be the case), there is one big difference: A front-facing camera. This is interesting to me for two reasons, because it could jump-start two trends: Mobile video chatting and the self-picture.
Now, there are a few other devices capable of doing mobile video chatting, but none have taken off yet. But an Apple chat app built exactly like its iChat app on Mac computers, could change that immediately. Just imagine placing a call to another iPhone user (or maybe even someone using iChat on their computer) and being able to hit a button and see their face. It’s something that seems like an obvious direction to go in, and there’s been talk about it before, and patents filed indicating such functionality.
Assuming this new iPhone is significantly faster than the current model, it certainly seems like a possibility. But there’s a major x-factor pointing in the direction of why this won’t happen: AT&T. Considering that it gets all worked up when developers try to create a Sling app that can stream video over its 3G network, and blocks it (it’s Wi-Fi only), just imagine what it will think about two-way live streaming video chat.
Of course, that stance is pretty ridiculous considering that AT&T allows the Sling app to work on other phones on its network. But given what it knows about how much bandwidth iPhone users use versus the other smartphones out there, AT&T made a play to attempt to salvage its often sketchy network. But it’s possible that if AT&T really is doing massive upgrades to its network to get ready for this new iPhone which will supposedly connect to the Internet at higher speeds, that the company could allow video streaming as long as it’s from Apple. After all, it doesn’t want to piss off Apple, lest it expands its business to other carriers, like Verizon, as well.
Or Apple/AT&T could just say that this mobile video chatting is limited to Wi-Fi, like the Sling player is. But that would be pretty lame.
But it seems logical that sooner or later this functionality will come to the majority of smartphones. And you can bet that Apple wants to be credited with jump-starting this trend. And I think it would work because while video chat is cool on the computer (most people still seem to be impressed when they see a video iChat for the first time), it sucks being tethered to a desk and chair to use it. Using it on the go could be much more interesting. Naturally, some people would hate such a feature, but it would be one of those things that eventually became a norm, I think. It wouldn’t replace straight-up voice calling obviously, but it would be a nice option.
The other trend I noted above is one that is actually already alive and well: Self-picture taking. People have been doing this a lot pretty much since the dawn of the digital camera since you can immediately take a picture, see how you look, then delete and re-take if it’s bad. And people seem to love doing it on the iPhone already, as you can see clearly on all the web’s photo sharing sites.
But as it stands right now, you either have to take the picture in a mirror, which just looks odd because you’re holding your iPhone in the picture — and you’re well, taking a picture in a mirror of yourself. Or you have to hold the iPhone away from you to snap the shot. But that often results in a crap picture because the iPhone’s camera sucks and doesn’t have a steady-cam features (though it seems likely that the new one will).
But a forward-facing camera could be a game-changer for the vain — which, come on, we all are in some regard. And it’s something that Apple already has experience with thanks to its Photo Booth program which is included in OS X. For those that haven’t used it, basically it just allows you to use a computer’s camera to take a picture of yourself and you can do weird things to the picture like give yourself a giant head. I could definitely see Apple including that same funtionality on the iPhone.
So again, I don’t know if these latest pictures are legit at all. They look pretty good, but there is odd issues with focus, blurriness and illuminated dots. But that really doesn’t matter, eventually I think Apple will add a forward-facing camera to the iPhone to lead the way in the mobile video chatting and self-picture trends — it just may not be announced this Monday.
The camera should be on a hinge, and there should be a switch to swivel it from back to front.
I could file a provisional patent on this in about 5 minutes, but I will not. I have filed full patents on some much better stuff.
Go ahead and use that and give me credit.
Mobile phone engineers are so stupid. Jesus. they focus on looks instead of functionality.
Uh – there are already phones that do that.
I’ve never seen a cell phone with a hinged camera that swivels from back to front.
Why don’t you post some links. I’m not excluding the possibility that they exist, at the same time I am calling you on your BS.
I have not done any diligence on that, and diligence is a huge part of publishing an invention. It is the “history” part of the application.
The first that I know of was the Samsung SGH-V200, launched in 2003 (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1000000091,2135642,00.htm). At least a handful of other Samsungs have had it since,
Another popular one is the LG CU500 from 2006, which I still see all the damn time (http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/lg-cu500-at-t/4505-6454_7-31987406.html).
Pwned.
(Hey Greg!)
LOL, Nice try Chris. Try to take credit for something that has been out for over 6 years. Thought you had one there huh.
Sorry man, but swivel cameras definitely exist:
http://www.amazon.com/HP-PhotoSmart-Mobile-Camera-camera/dp/B000HHHTOQ
yeah…im really hoping he is joking right now.
This has been done before. Had it on my old Samsung A900.
Wow, we’re all so impressed by how smart you are, Chris. Really, we are.
The last thing Apple wants in its designs are moving parts. The fewer, the better, not just from an aesthetic standpoint, but also from a practical standpoint. Look at the current iPhone and MacBook… things of beauty. Of course, it sometimes comes at a price, but they are not trying to please everybody. Sony has done that swivel camera things yeeears ago on its tiny laptops anyway. The fact that you indirectly called Steve Jobs an idiot when it comes to designing a product (yes, he has the final say) is interesting. As for diligence when it comes to patent filing, nobody in their right mind really does that before filing, as it is a freakin’ waste of time. You can always add references and claims later.
There you go… http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000659UUK.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg
@Chris,
You are in stone age, or you are stoned. Already those swivel cam phones are there in market. Patetented as well.
http://unlimitedcellular.com/p-1944-samsung-a610-rotating-camera-cell-phone-for-verizon.aspx
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2004/0107537.html
I guess that’s why it’s not in the iPhone.
Somebody else patented it and they’re too cheap to license it.
Oh well.
No, actually you were wrong.
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=20040107537&OS=20040107537&RS=20040107537
This patent was filed in 2003, but NOT approved.
It is only pending.
snap, you lose. Somebody could wedge in at the last minute and claim prior art if they have such evidence at this point.
This is the stage called published for opposition, where people may oppose it before it is approved.
Why aren’t my posts on firefox showing up???
At any rate, here it is from IE. Next I’m going to try my t-mobile phone, this is just silly.
No, actually you were wrong.
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi…..0040107537
This patent was filed in 2003, but NOT approved.
It is only pending.
snap, you lose. Somebody could wedge in at the last minute and claim prior art if they have such evidence at this point.
This is the stage called published for opposition, where people may oppose it before it is approved.
Let me try without a hyperlink
appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=20040107537&OS=20040107537&RS=20040107537
This patent was filed in 2003, but NOT approved.
It is only pending.
snap, you lose. Somebody could wedge in at the last minute and claim prior art if they have such evidence at this point.
This is the stage called published for opposition, where people may oppose it before it is approved.
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=20040107537&OS=20040107537&RS=20040107537
The. Patent was applied for but noy approved.
Apple is probably too cheap to license it.
So you were wrong. And btw it must have been a good idea because somebody shelled out the cash to file
The patent was applied for but not approved. Look it up.
iphone sucks, and att sucks.. why would u put up with crappy customer service and dead slow speeds… and a phone that sucks in quality and no keyboard…
the iphone is dead, long live android… everyone in the know knows that.
No background processes… is the final nail in their coffin
it would be nice, but I think I would rather they just made the camera on the back worth a damn. Im sick of taking low quality pics on this thing, but its so nice to be able to take a pic right in the facebook app and post it there(or the same in many other apps)
I totally agree. The quality of the front facing cameras are typically terrible with even less resolution. A swivel may not make sense, but I am sure they could even look into a way that a camera works in two directions!
Honestly, I am just waiting to see if the new iPhone is worth waiting until September for (when my Sprint contract is up), or if I should just get a Palm Pre now.
I mispelled my own name *facepalms*
revolutionary new design!!
oh wait, looks exactly the same.
ill take a pre or two. (only “downside” is it doesnt have 100k fart apps and horrible games for it)
*Only downside is that after Monday, the Pre will be miles behind as it lacks video recording, let alone front-facing live video recording. But since it’s the looks you only apparently care about, go on and get your Pre. It’s so shiny, you can see yourself in it! Who needs a camera to see yourself when you’ve got a Pre!
It’s all about software, dude. case is largely irrelevant.
I just want this one : http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/02/NewiPhoneSpecs.jpg
yes, that would be nice. instead, I do expect it to look largely the same.
I know, and this why I certainly will be disappointed Monday !!
I should have never seen this concept :’(
It looks good but it is obvious that its author has never designed real mobile phones. As a starter, the edges are way too angular for an object that you have to hold for long periods of time in the palm of your hand. There is a reason why the second generation iPhone became even more curved than the original one.
I do agree that it should have a frontal camera, and I’m sure it will have one. Can’t wait. Really.
http://www.twibeo.com
The Twitter and FriendFeed combo.
Although that first photo is CLEARLY fake (see the screenshot I took within the SKYPE app.. icons clearly match – http://i39.tinypic.com/2yuj7mu.png) I completely agree with every reason you’ve given for them to include it.
1. Rumor has been that the bezel will be changed to black. Sure, this could (and probably is) merely for a more cosmetically appealing look, it could be that way because looking at someone on screen is easier with this? This is one of my lesser supported points, but you get it..
2. I believe there were some rumors that 802.11N will be introduced with this model. Other than being able to download movies and tv shows from the iTunes store faster, it opens up the ability for video chat (combined with faster hardware this thing boasts apparently.)
3. The most important point – Apple could pioneer a front camera on the phone not just resting on iChat-like capabilities, but also stuff they’ve pioneered on current macs: photobooth app.
this thing is going to kick the pre’s ass so effing hard…sooo efffing haaaaard.
“A few other devices [are] capable of doing mobile video chatting”
should read
“Almost every 3G device…”
Such services have failed dismally over the last 5 years or so. But not for want of handset capabilities.
However, in 3G, video calling is a circuit-switched standard, not packet-switched. Your point about AT&T and Wifi would only be relevant if Apple decided to completely ignore 3G standardisation and build a walled iChat garden.
Not only would that lose you the ability to video call any other handset (without cumbersome gateways), but it would have missed the opportunity to use all the latent network circuit infrastructure that’s there just for this purpose – well, at least in Europe.
True, I’d much prefer if Apple did not take the walled iChat garden approach.
Here in Australia 3G phones with video calling have been popular for some time and most networks have the capacity to support decent quality video calls and they are usually charged the same rate as voice calls. iChat would be a nice extra feature, but being able to videocall everyone else with a non-Apple 3G handset would be much better!
Is anyone actaully going to buy the Palm Pre….cmon….from what I see that thing is a like brick. I honestly think the iphone is at the max thickness that is tolerable at the consumer level..(businesses may tolerate a bulkier phone..aka crackberry) but that PRE is not svelte at all.
AT&T actually launched a video streaming service called Video Share a few years back but it never caught on probably due to data speed. There is an LG has made phones to support their Video Share service: http://www.amazon.com/LG-Xenon-GR500-Phone-Blue/dp/B0024NL7AI
This would be greate for those calls back to “home base” about which color/size/style should I be getting. Or letting a friend see an event as it happens. Or…
But there’s a catch, as I assume that this will only work from iPhone to iPhone (or perhaps iPhone to iMac/MacBook). What we really need is a standard for EVERYONE to implement.
Like a fax machine, it becomes more and more valuable as more and more people have them.
Video chat would murder anything within a 6 month radius….
They have been talking about selling video landline phones for years – never took off. I use Skype regularly for business, I have a webcam, as do most the people I work with, I don’t recall ever being asked to turn it on while we talk, nor would I particularly want to, or want someone else to. It will take off to some degree with the cool kids, but really, the lame quality that is likely and the fact that you are basically just going to be looking at someones face on a small screen (which gets old fast) I think it is highly unlikely it will become a massive thing. Especially with the likely costs associated.
How about if we actually just get a good camera. The one on the current iPhone is just plain crap!
Other phones already have 3.2 megapixel cameras and flash and the iPhone, which is considered to be the best smartphone out there, is lagging way behind.
Good post, MG. I have a lot of thoughts about how people use video and why they don’t use it more. I think that Apple is going to shift the market quite a bit with this release. I’m pretty excited about it.
Agree, a frontal camera would be great. But then it should support Skype or another service used by the rest of the world. If it can only reach iChat users, like 5% of the people at best, it seems rather superfluous.
Front-facing cameras have been the norm in Japan for ages and nobody is ever using them.
The phone sex implications alone…
Indeed.
Hey Siegler, have you ever left the good ole’ US of A?
In Asia (not sure about Europe) at least every single 3G phone have had a front facing camera for years, even my crappy old Sony Ericcson Z610i.
This is not an Apple invention, let’s not even get started.
Right, as I said, there are other phones out there that do it — nor did I claim this would be an Apple invention. But what I am saying is that just like many other things that people tried to do first (mp3 players being a big one), Apple tends to do these things well, so I could easily see them leading the way on this — hence the “kick-start” phrasing.
Ok, I see what you are saying. You may be right, though I question if people really want to video chat. That capabilbity existed for a long time. You remember the AT&T dedicated videophone that was out like 10 years ago? No videochat/conferencing device has ever taken off outside of corporate meeting rooms.
I tend to disagree. We tried out video calls on our Nokias (6120c and N95), it worked great, but that month’s bills: Ouch! End of experiment.
The “innovation” that would see video calls succeed is reasonable pricing from the carriers.
Carrier in US / UK are relatively very expensive when compared to third world countries.
most US carriers essentially treat customers as to Slaves with all those 3 year contracts.
Apple lures customers with false prices.
Things like this will never work in 3rd world country.
Must suck having respond to ass holes who did not read your entire article huh?
Must suck having respond to ass holes who did not read your entire article huh?
apple is only one who can really do 2way video chat gread. i imagine this would be pretty huge. i’ve been qik’ing for the iphone and even this model handles it pretty well over 3g.
if kids get into it, they might use it more than txt.
front facing camera also opens the door for lots of new app ideas.
True.
video chatting on a phone?
Forget it.
People on the phone don’t actually hold the phone in their hands and look at it. They look at the newspaper, at the TV, at the hot-chick-who-just-passed-by. Do you really want to video chat with somebody (which is everybody in this case) when they’re not even looking at you?
Some things are amazing on paper but just fall flat in the real world
That’s why in Japan and many other places in the world have this new-fangled thing called “video conferencing” on their phones for years now. Not a proof of concept – it’s already in the real world.
America is just finally playing catchup (hopefully with the video chatting if it does indeed launch with the new iPhone).
Agreed, Apple usually only do things properly or not at all. Which is why my guess is that if the new phone does have a front facing camera you will only be able to use it over WiFi and to snap some vanity pics.
3G is just not enough bandwidth to get a high quality voice and video feed. You need about 200kbps of stable upload for that, and that’s more than most actual 3G upload speeds.
In my experience (in the UK) a good rule of thumb for broadband bandwidth is: actual upload speeds are about 15% of the actual download speeds which are about 50% of what the provider advertises. So a 4mbs connection will provide 2mbs download and 300kbps upload.
I think with 3G the actual to advertised downloads rate is far worse. About 20-25% even. The 7.2mbs 3G dongle does not provide anything near that speed.
And for video chat to function smoothly you are working on a fraction of the actual upload speed as bandwidth fluctuates so much.
Which to me all means 3G will not handle video chat. And thus if Apple did allow 3G video chatting it would go the same way as all the other phones already mentioned in the comments.
That’s why my bet is that it be WiFi only and we’ll have to wait for 4G to video call on the run.
Frontal cameras have been around for ages! My current LG viewty U990 has a frontal camera for video chat in addition to the main camera on the back. I thought it was pretty cool the first time I used it although it’s not actually a very useful feature. It’s quite hard to hold the phone comfortably throughout a coversation in a position that doesn’t result in some extreme close up/ugly/staring up your nose type shot.
Maybe Apple’s implementation will be better than others, but I don’t see how they’re gonna get round that problem..
don’t understand why people are so thrilled by the iphone… It’s so expensive but still so limited…
Front facing cameras for video calling are an ancient concept. As soon as the 3G network was launched in the UK people had this capability (at least 5 years ago) and it hasn’t taken off. It’s a neat concept but today’s uses for video calling feel more about novelty than anything else, and that soon wears off.
Secondly, it would be very odd for Apple to be making decisions based on what AT&T wants. The iPhone is a hot enough property that people will change networks to have one and AT&T knows it. And there us, of course, the matter of the rest of the world and the network providers Apple works with there…
Ian Hendry
CEO, WeCanDo.BIZ
http://www.wecando.biz
There’s a very good and simple reason why video chat on phones hasn’t taken off. Men don’t want to show their partners a ‘cool new feature’ that allows their partners to be able to see where they are. End of.
While I would like a front camera, there still needs to be on the back. I take more shots of things around me than I take of me. Taking a picture of something else would become difficult with a front camera. And unless AT&T is going to let people do video chat over the air and not limit it to WiFi it isn’t worth. Especially not until their 3G network gets better.
“But there’s a major x-factor pointing in the direction of why this won’t happen: AT&T. ”
Oh yes, brilliant conclusion Mr Siegler, AT&T rules the whole world. Oh wait, there’s no AT&T network outside small country called US…