What is Digg?40 Comments
- GameDNA, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I am really surprised that people have not mentioned the possible downsides. Your camera could potentially be broadcasting your images to whomever is listening. I wonder how it keeps hackers and such out.
Even with the downsides, given the choice between a 1GB and 1GB w/ Wifi. I would pick the WIFI one. I simply hate looking for my camera cable every time i want to dump pictures. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Cool stuff. i wonder how much battery it'll eat up.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+51GB SD card with built in Wifi? this is Awesome news!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7To shoot photos and upload them straight to the web sound amazingly cool and so useful!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5also sounds like yet another device meant to make us even more lazy :-P
- chench, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This is pretty cool. $100/gig for starters means it wont be long till I can afford one! :-)
- xaxa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4But how secure is it? Presumably there's something to stop anyone with a laptop stealing your photos (or worse, deleting them).
- Yankees368, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4So will there be an antenna or anything on this card? I know that almost all cameras have no room for a slightly larger card. And what about interference with the inner workings of the camera? How do you get the pictures off the card and onto a network. Will it just show up as a networked drive?
If this thing actually works, I want one. - alceria, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I remember when I was still carrying a Palm around how badly I wanted sandisk to release a wifi SD card that would work with the Palm OS.
Using one for photo transfers would be great, if the speed was good. It would make it much easier to share photos with friends - it would be cool if you could transfer stuff to other people with digicams/PDAs/phones with wifi storage too. That way if one person took the best photo at a get together, they could transfer it to everyone at once immediately. No more waiting until Monday morning's email to see the drunken antics from your last office party. :)
And the annoying issue of turning on your camera and remembering your card is still stuck in your computer would be gone. Luckily I always have a couple CF cards on me, but I'm sure one day I'll get burned by that. - Mousse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Eye-Fi?
http://www.glumbert.com/media/eyefi.html - ChoadNamath, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I don't get how they think that a normal 1 GB flash card costs $100. You can get a 2 GB card for $40-50. Or a 4 GB card for that $100.
- RadiatedAnt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4these are the type of reasons my wallet has cobwebs....(sigh) =)
- PunchMeIBleed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3sounds great, should help those with USB ports all the way in the back
- Phyltre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm not getting my hopes up too high. So far, all the cameras/drives that have advertised integrated bluetooth filesharing have offered up heavily glitchy systems, and cut battery time by ~1/3. I've read reviews where the reviewer was unable to make the transfer happen in the time allotted.
Of course, this isn't just a camera, but there better be a simple 2-click interface for transfer...and not more than a 10% hit on the battery. - Iseman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It wouldn't be that hard to make is more secure. They arent going to expect all of their customers to be using an un-encrpyted network. There will more than likely be a file on the card that will hold your network information (hopefully in an encrpyted file) and that will allow the card to access your network. I just wonder what kind of range it will have...would be kind of nice to be able to shoot more than 30 seconds of video! Cant wait to give it a shot though! I think my wallet can wait though....
- koregaonpark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It also removes the BlueTooth factor, which is painstakingly slowwww.
- koregaonpark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Hahahahaha.... definitely what this is about Mousse!
- ChiKoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is amazing!
- nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2802.11[what?]
That said, yes it's a very cool idea. - mastercheif, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2 How is this going to work? Is the SD card going to have a built in batery? Will the camera have to support it like the kodak ones?
- FelixdaaHack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Eye-Fi Snarfing (TM...j/k)...coming to a town near you
- antdude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Would there be security/encryption?
- SilentNess, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Hello, new to this...anyway anything to make my life more cordless the better. Funny stuff Mousse.
- HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2bullcrap.
If it isn't plugged into the camera, it needs to have not only memory, but Wi-Fi, a net server and also a battery and very probably charger, all in a tiny SD card slot. And all without adding significant cost to the card!
No way. This device is either complete vapor or the extra cost and size is hidden somehow. Perhaps it has to plug into some machine to get power, just not the one you are accessing it from.
I just don't see how you are going to fix a meaningful battery into an SD card. - cg0def, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2dude learn to read. Traight to your computer is QUITE different from straight to the web. You cannot upload anything from the card. You can only download from it and then using your computer do whatever you want with the data. Not too different from what you can do no if you had an SD reader. This card ONLY eliminates the need for a SD reader.
- n8gray, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So does this require support from the camera? If not, how do you signal that you want the photos to be uploaded? Does it have a built-in webserver?
- PhonicUK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Old news, I've seen these for ages - no digg...
And even before these, most PDAs have 2 slots (SD+CF) so you could use better versions of each - skipere, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'll give a try with my treo 650 anh then comment, sound like a good thing .
- IcanFLY, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1And they work pretty lousy too (weak signal and slow), but I agree this article is useless.
- HighDecibel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I get the feeling there's gonna be some equivalent of the RIAA...for photographers, and stealing of photos...
- pabster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Gawd, can't believe this is front page news.
SDIO WiFi cards have been out for YEARS for PDA's.
Nothing to see here, move on. No digg. - HighDecibel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Surely if its plugged into the camera it doesnt need a battery, just needs to drain power from the camera, enough to transfer photos.
- KenG6, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1802.11g
http://www.eye.fi/ - robwistar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@shiptoshore:
come on, "wifi" clearly means 802.11. it's for wireless routers. it's a cool idea. get off your horse. - RadiatedAnt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2If they're geeky enough to carry a laptop to the beach whille war(walking)?! searching for broadcasting wifi cameras, hell I would personally give them a copy...sex on the beach and all ;)
- cg0def, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1LOL as if the wireless connection used in this wouldn't be slow. Also the latest revision of Bluetooth ( the one used in most newer phones is fast enough for transfering data ). It is only the older versions that are painfully slow.
- sariel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Why is this written down as the innovation of the century? All they did was copy what others have been making for YEARS.
Example (look at date):
http://www.pocketgpsworld.com/socket-sdio-wifi.php
http://www.expansys.com/forumthread.asp?code=121110&thread=10
http://www.mobiletrax.com/ml/2003archives/200301_2.html (with storage, search for sychip)
The *only* difference is the price....but after several years, you'd expect prices to go down, wouldn't you? - sh0k, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Wouldn't Bonjour be better suited for this?
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is