Thanks to Alan Reiter for outing yet another clueless analyst saying that camera phones are just a fad. How do these people get jobs as analysts? Once again, as all the camera phone naysayers seem to do, Avi Greengart from Jupiter compares camera phones to regular cameras and points out that the resolution isn't as good. As Reiter points out, the resolution is getting better very quickly (and this follows the classic disruptive technology trend lines). However, from my standpoint that's not even an important point. The problem is focusing on this being a camera and not (as is the case) a connected camera that you always have with you. It's the two other parts (connected, always with you) that makes a camera phone an entirely different beast than a camera. Suddenly, it allows people to do things entirely unlike a regular camera - and that's where the real benefits will appear. Already, we're seeing simple applications like the ability to use a camera phone as a barcode reader to get more info about a product, and news organizations are letting people upload "on the spot" photos of breaking news stories. This isn't about "resolution". Update: And, then, there's John Dvorak's latest column (found at Engadget) suggesting that camera phones "should all be confiscated immediately and crushed by a steamroller in a public square." Way to show how you understand the power of new technology. Who let the Luddites in?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Feinstein And Rogers Try To Scare Americans With Ooga Booga Terrorism Threats
- Lessons Learned From Adam Lanza's Video Game Obsession: Blame Dance Dance Revolution
- Editorial Claims Houston Prosecutors Are Pushing Through Nearly 1,000 Sex Trafficking Indictments Every Day
- Where Is The 'Free Trade' In The TPP IP Chapter?
- Sandy Hook Video Game Prompts Everyone To Get Everything Wrong