What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
183 Comments
- what5987, on 06/22/2009, -9/+144720p is saved for the iPhone 3GSHD you goofs.
- Duffle, on 06/22/2009, -14/+100Well if they had 720p recording now, what would they put in the next revision?
- gaymathman, on 06/21/2009, -21/+77I don't really see the loss here; the Iphone video is for more spur-of-the-moment events that you might happen to pass by and wish to record. As it is a phone, the camera is decent but not great; if you want 720p video, you might as well use a device that can capture it well. The optics and image sensor on the iPhone are probably pretty cheap to keep costs down, as it isn't intended to be used as a primary camera or video recorder, so artifacts would probably start to show at such a high resolution.
- KSUdesigner, on 06/22/2009, -10/+58How else will they get you to buy the next version–the iPhone HD?
- MScrip, on 06/22/2009, -7/+50>> but I feel the fail here is that Apple shouldn't neuter that technology"
Neuter what technology?
The chip can handle HD video... but the optics can't... so they chose not to enable HD video.
The iPhone 3GS would need both a fast chip AND a good lens system. It doesn't have both... so it doesn't do HD. - moisie, on 06/22/2009, -4/+36Recording would kill the battery.
Playback would kill the battery.
Playback wouldn't be improved on the device as it would have to be scaled down since the display isn't 720.
Storage would be terrible unless the device was empty to start with.
Ultimately, until all these thing are resolved which would mean radically improved hardware and expense, there is no realistic point in including this. Just because they can is not a good enough reason. Before the iPhone we just had a load of companies jamming as much technology into a phone as they could but without the software or support of other areas of the hardware to truly take advantage of things, thus rendering them useless for everyday use. Apple don't include features unless they feel they can do them justice.
If you need HD video recording get a dedicated device. - dhmlco, on 06/22/2009, -0/+31Can the CAMERA record 720p video? Can the bus move the video to the chip fast enough? Can the processor encode and then ship it off through the back side bus to the FLASH storage system fast enough? Can the battery keep up with all the above?
I'm sure the CHIP can do it, but that doesn't mean the rest of the system can support the chip. - inactive, on 06/22/2009, -3/+30I can stick a firecracker in my ass, but i dont
- Nevrast, on 06/22/2009, -0/+27How about a remote?
- Spamcan, on 06/21/2009, -8/+34A 720p camera costs more, eats up more storage and running the processor at full speed to record would eat up battery life which bad enough as it is. Can you really blame Apple for not releasing a souped up iPhone with 128GB of flash memory and a 720p camera if it would die after recording 20 minutes of video and costs $600 subsidized? I'm just happy to finally be moving from EDGE to 3G when my 3GS finally arrives. By the next time I upgrade I fully expect 720p recording, but not now or next year.
- Dantehman17, on 06/22/2009, -16/+40Nothing pisses me off more than people complaining about the ***** NOT on their iPhone.
- Hegemony, on 06/22/2009, -0/+20Yeah, we're getting a laugh out of this now, but just you watch. In a year that's going to be the name of the next iPhone.
- agaudet, on 06/22/2009, -7/+27This is a non story as the 3 mega-pixel (still) camera is not capable of 720p video recording >.>
my 5 mega-pixel (still) camera doesn't capture 720p video either so whats the story? apple chose to limit some of the features to save power for longer battery life? wow who cares - jerryjamesstone, on 06/21/2009, -20/+39Ya, but I feel the fail here is that Apple shouldn't neuter that technology, leave it up to the user. They allow you to switch between 3G and Edge. The users know the cost: power vs. speed. Why not have that same option?
- wilhoitm, on 06/22/2009, -2/+21Duh, it is a compromise because it uses too much power!
- sirmasterboy, on 06/22/2009, -0/+17Exactly, it can't take 30 3MP images per second.
- MaxxusFlamus, on 06/22/2009, -1/+18the camera itself is capable of taking 3MP at full resolution, but it can't take video at 720p, at least, not up to apple's standards, likely due to the way it transfers data off of the sensor. Case in point- the jello effect that you see in the Nikon D90 and D5000.
- KSUdesigner, on 06/22/2009, -2/+13FTA: "Apple has thus far decided not to take advantage of these HD capabilities for video recording, as the iPhone 3G S video camera will only capture clips in VGA-quality."
You're not going to fix that problem with a firmware upgrade. Sounds to me like that would require new hardware. - spookyttws, on 06/22/2009, -1/+11It can, but it just doesn't feel like it. The 3GS isn't a monkey, here just for your enjoyment.
- kreatre2007, on 06/22/2009, -3/+13bitch bitch bitch. The new iPhone kicks ass, but instead of enjoying it, some people have to piss and moan. Why would anyone want to use a phone to shoot a 720p video? The video feature is for more spur of the moment events the same as the camera. Would a photographer use an iPhone camera to shoot professional quality photos?
- nelsenbrazill, on 06/22/2009, -2/+10the display isnt even 720p. so it would have to downscale for live viewing, and playback.
- btraxx, on 06/22/2009, -0/+8My phone doesn't record video and my video camera doesn't make calls. I'm pretty amazed with the current technology at times.
- BIOHazard87, on 06/22/2009, -2/+101080p ;)
- bbeep, on 06/22/2009, -2/+9It's better for them to advertise it as VGA and it delivers good results for VGA than to advertise HD capability and it delivers poor HD, even if the hardware available COULD do it. Think of the negative press it would generate and how it would hurt sales.
- DeadFox1, on 06/22/2009, -1/+8@reddy- haha what else could it be for?
- evil-doer, on 06/22/2009, -1/+8looks like some apple fanboys are digging you down. you are absolutely correct, this is a hardware limitation of the camera. not software.
- AdmiralAcbar, on 06/22/2009, -1/+7Actually, 1080i > 720p.
1920 * 1080 / 2 = 1 036 800
1280 * 720 = 921 600 - belfastbiker2, on 06/21/2009, -8/+14I'm sure the Jailbreakers wil sort this. :)
- airsofter48, on 06/22/2009, -1/+7Yeah, the iPhone HD. Can't wait.
- johnpaul191, on 06/22/2009, -0/+5My guess.... 1) bandwidth of transferring the video (the phone lets you upload it to youtube, me.com etc)
2) it would fill up the phone pretty quick
3) it can capture at 720, but maybe the phone chokes when trying to do the light editing you can do? - KSUdesigner, on 06/22/2009, -1/+6That's the version after the next one. ;)
- michaelbeck, on 06/22/2009, -2/+6You people amuse me. Try reading up on camera technology before you post and look like an idiot.
There is a big difference between Still and video. Take the Cannon 5D mkII for example. It can shoot 21.1 mega pixels, but can only do 1080p video. (and at a fairly high compression at that). There is Heat, Data rates, Rolling shutter, storage capacity etc... just because the chip can process the data doesn't mean anything else in the chain can preform at that level. - videodroner, on 06/22/2009, -0/+4I agree with virtualball. If you have to do HD recordings, you might as well just buy a real camera. I'd save the space on my phone for other junk.
- qwertydvorak, on 06/22/2009, -1/+5"but I feel the fail here is that Apple shouldn't neuter that technology"
maybe they aren't. they could have gotten a deal working with a company that makes those chips. maybe the chips failed testing at the higher resolutions, but they work just fine at iphone resolutions.
think back to processors. overclocking relies on the fact that a processor can do much more than the stamped on speed, only if you keep it cool enough. a company selling pc processors might just down clock those to sell them. a company that only makes hd video chips could easily sell the ones that aren't up to spec for a lighter load type of purpose. - thecompkid, on 06/22/2009, -0/+4So, this is what you switch to now that you can't complain about it not having copy and paste? You're going to complain that it didn't have copy and paste at some point in the past, and this is somehow relevant to the current situation?
Switch to "can't play Flash", it's the only one you have left to milk. - inactive, on 06/22/2009, -0/+4The iPhone GT, then GTS, and eventually GTX.
- GreenDots, on 06/22/2009, -1/+5If you think a 12mp Kodak compact takes good quality video, you are in no position to be judging cameras (or camera phones...)
- Zippo, on 06/22/2009, -1/+5The battery life would go down the drain if it could actually record 720p.
- AmusedToDeath, on 06/22/2009, -1/+5You *can* jailbreak and record video on the 3g, but there's no point because the quality sucks serious ass. Drops frames like a mofo.
- YoGramMamma, on 06/22/2009, -0/+4has no one here actually used of the Flip Mino HD camera? Its pretty small, much smaller than an iPhone, though thicker.
and if you had used it, you would know that the 4GB hard drive holds about an hour of HD (720p video) at 30fps and the battery lasts forever. In decent light it looks amazing for its lens size and caliber. The files are nice flexible .mp4 files right from the cameras internal memory without any extra conversion.
So why is everyone claiming that it would kill the battery and eat up the storage?? Even the 16gb iPhone 3Gs would have 4x the storage space of a FlipHD cam and those things pack some wicked punch for their size.
I'm pretty sure apple just wants to have some upgrade path for the next version of the iPhone. Pretty simple. - virtualball, on 06/22/2009, -1/+4It's a phone that needs a slimmer camera lens so it can still fit in its case. A 720p video camera lens would NOT fit in the iPhone. If you want an HD camcorder, go out and buy one. This is a phone.
- srodolff, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3It's amazing that all the pundits want the iPhone to do everything else besides being a decent phone.
- JEH225, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3why would they need to do 60fps? 23.97 would be fine
- supermanred, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3That could be it too. Would probably kill the battery in 30 minutes too. Same reason they dont have multi-tasking on the iPhone, though Im sure it could...then it would be a 3 hour use phone like the Pre when you keep apps running.
- Philbert, on 06/22/2009, -1/+4How much HD video do you really think you could store on it though? And you think iTunes takes a long time to sync or back up now, just imagine when you want to grab that one clip you shot of your friend singing really bad karaoke and it takes an hour to transfer a 2 minute video.
- michaelbeck, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3Thank you.. Just because the chip is capable does not mean anything else n the chain is.
The sensor in the camera is capable of capturing a still at that rez, but can it's rolling shutter cmos keep that up @30fps? Can the phone itself write the data that quickly? - t0ny, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3Fake. The sound is very muffled and you can here something the sounds like a bag at one point. I bet he has it in a plastic bag or something.
- rdas7, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3It's still not an HD camcorder. @virtualball's point stands.
- MacParrot, on 06/22/2009, -1/+4They film it with iPhones?
- thecompkid, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3Yeah, it's pretty annoying when people, thinking they're such elite hackers, look up the spec sheet for a chip and go "OMG FM TUNER 802.11N USB 3.0 UWB 1080P 50000000ghz!!!!!11!".
Mobile processors are designed to be used in a broad range of devices, so when a spec sheet says that the iPhone's processor is capable of such and such a feature, that doesn't mean the rest of the iphone is capable of it. -
Show 51 - 100 of 187 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is