Good Camera Missing from IT's - Business or Engineering decision?

[neoluddite]

My work computing profile is highly mobile and active so business requirements for device support are straightforward:

- Moderate pic/video support of a standard for digicams in the 3 MP+, VGA 30 FPS with quality optics
- Sufficient processing support to modify then incorporate resulting pics/vids
- Light office app ability to produce docs, pages, drawings, spreadsheets, etc..
- Connectivity
- Full day+ battery life
- GPS
- Moderate cost, sub $1,000 US (replace after crash)

Usability requirements for the ideal device are:

- Large, highest resolution display a real pocket sized device
- Incorporated keypad in conjunction with the display
- Modular SSD option for secure, hardened, long-term personal data
- Minimal footprint, size and weight

Nice to haves:

- A/V out
- Dock ability with larger display, input options
- USB host, charging

Several notable devices are close in that they satisfy many of the requirements:

- Nokia N95, N82, E90
- I-mate Ultimate 6150, 7150, 8150
- HTC Tytn II, Dream?
- HP iPaq PDA's (upcoming)
- Eten M800 (weak camera support)

The N810 is so close that looking for a way to Velcro a slim-line cheap digicam to is attractive but one of the above devices will get the nod before that happens.

A fundamental question that keeps nagging is this:

Is the absence of a good camera from the IT line a business or engineering decision?

The next six months will see a device that satisfies the requirements listed above coming from companies other than Nokia.

Why?

[zerojay]

The tablets aren't meant for business. Plain and simple. The camera is only meant to be used for video calling, which means having a high resolution camera makes no sense (because sending a 3 megapixel camera image at 30fps isn't very good on bandwidth). It's just not meant to be used for taking pictures, which is too bad because I really like having a built-in camera... and I find myself using the N800's quite a bit even though it's not very good for pictures.

By the way, we've heard that the N810 camera might be a higher resolution than the one in the N800. Maybe VGA. Too bad it only faces the user though.

[TA-t3]

Well, I would actually argue the other way around - gadgets with cameras are _not_ business gadgets, they're consumer gadgets. I for one find the N800 excellent as a business gadget, what with email- and web access for business issues. Maemo mapper even helps me out while travelling on business (it's 3party sw but the point is the device can take such add-ons). It's admittedly weak on built-in PIM though.. which is more of a now long-in-the-tooth insistence from Nokia on what we're supposed to use the device for, more than any limit in the device itself.

p.s. I also use the N800 camera the way zerojay describes.. it's not bad as a simple always-at-hand still camera if just the light conditions are good (i.e. outdoors ok, indoors not ok.)

[zerojay]

Yeah, come to think of it, I didn't quite understand how a camera is needed for business (perhaps needed for his specific business though).

[iontruo2]

The tablets aren't meant for business. Plain and simple. The camera is only meant to be used for video calling, which means having a high resolution camera makes no sense (because sending a 3 megapixel camera image at 30fps isn't very good on bandwidth). It's just not meant to be used for taking pictures, which is too bad because I really like having a built-in camera... and I find myself using the N800's quite a bit even though it's not very good for pictures.

By the way, we've heard that the N810 camera might be a higher resolution than the one in the N800. Maybe VGA. Too bad it only faces the user though.

I agree. I haven't quite realized the video calling potential yet, but apparently one can Skype via video to another unit? I haven't found the option yet, just voip and text so far.

You make a good comment in regards to the camera idea being utilized for the N810.
I personally thought the 'pop out' rotatable camera of the N800 to be a better thought out concept.
Truly, once you have enjoyed a 7 or 8 mgpxl slim camera that fits in your pocket, why would one bother with anything from a 1.3 to even a 3?

[neoluddite]

I am a product designer and consultant.
It is very important to capture, frame out then communicate moderate quality pics, vids, graphics and ideas quickly.
For the industries I work with, it is better that this be done from the locations where the products are under design, development, production and use.
Mobility with moderate ability wrapped into fewer low cost devices in locations other than a cube, a coffee shop, on a couch or a train is far more important than the luxury of a slew of dedicated devices.
The firstest with the mostest has never been more true than now.

If the N95 or N82 were to be married to the IT, the potential would be huge.

Will that potential be realized or by other markets is another story....

[Jerome]

I think that the simple reason for the choice is that Nokia thinks you'll need a phone in addition to the tablet, and they already sell phones with built-in cameras.

A few other comments:

1: real cameras are much better than camera phones and cost a lot less.

2: the "E" line of Nokia phones is designed for business use. Most don't have a camera, because many companies do not accept visitors, or even their own personal, to bring in a camera (e.g. they don't want you to take pictures of their prototypes or new design). Having a camera in your phone is a problem for many people in business use actually.

[neoluddite]

.....

2: the "E" line of Nokia phones is designed for business use. Most don't have a camera, because many companies do not accept visitors, or even their own personal, to bring in a camera (e.g. they don't want you to take pictures of their prototypes or new design). Having a camera in your phone is a problem for many people in business use actually.

Camera and other types of recording device rules are very real however that argument would seem to be a dried herring.
In sensitive meetings in the situations I'm typically in, it has been the experience of myself and others that most devices are set aside save for those being used for the work and/or presentation. Typically, if you are allowed in with any device, it is with the understanding that you'll use it judiciously.

With regard to the business vs. consumer device debate, please remember one of the choices noted in the original post:

The flagship "E" phone put out by Nokia is the E90. It is very high on the shortlist with the price and release issues being the factors holding it back for the moment.
The E90 is proving to be a very capable pic/vid capture device that rolls up all but the larger screen (resolution being near that of the N810) and A/V out features.

And so back the original question:

Good Camera Missing from IT's - Business or Engineering decision?

FWIW, my uninformed SWAG:

- Full disclosure, I'm sure my invitation to Nokia's IT design roadmap review that will correct my ignorance is hung up in the spam filter and will clear any second now -

The current goal of the N810 is to grow a niche that develops the product to a more mature offering. If Nokia plans to open this up to a wider audience in the future, quality pic/vid capability will show up in conjunction with the ability to incorporate modular communications offerings as is now starting to occur in the UMPC market.

[ArnimS]

The firstest with the mostest has never been more true than now.


Good phrase.

Cost-wise the Nokia Tablets deliver a lot of bang for the buck, arguably double the value of competing devices. This is only possible with very cost-conscious hardware choices. Every thing you wish to add to them adds to the end-price and shifts it out of mass-market pricing range.

Do not use the tablet as a camera. People who want cameras have a wide range of expectations, generally higher than any embedded phone camera. Reviews of integrated cameras on phones and PDAs; they are dominated by comments like "camera could be better".

ORLY? Iz wroang - not at that price point. Pictures are too important for crapcams. I carry a Fuji F30: Top-of-class low-light capability, compact, highly configurable.

http://pupnik.de/pupnik_n770_streetlan.jpg
http://pupnik.de/pupnik_woods_mushroom.jpg
http://pupnik.de/pupnik_woods_meadow.jpg

[krisse]

Whatever the truth about businesses and cameras, Nokia definitely does cater for cameraphobic businesspeople. At least one model (the E50) is actually made in two versions: one with camera, one without, which both cost the same. The only reason they'd make a version without a camera that costs the same is because they believe some business people will see it as a benefit rather than a lost feature.

As for why "good" cameras are missing on the tablets, I'd say it's because they don't want to compete directly with their cameraphones. It's possibly the same reason why the tablets can't connect to mobile networks directly.

Yes, separate cameras are better than cameraphones, separate ANYTHING is better than a phone feature, but there's more demand for cameraphones than separate cameras so most people seem to prefer to lose a bit of quality for the sake of portability. It also means that you're ready to take pictures wherever you are, because your phone is always with you. Separate cameras were never as commonly carried as phones.

[YoDude]

Nokia sold 300,000 N800's and was surprised!..
It apparently didn't expect to sell that many

Perhaps you are looking at the N8** as a consumer device when in fact it may just be a hobbyist's device. It's production was not a current business decision but rather a decision that may affect future business.

With that said, given the constraints of your question (either this or that... kinda sounds like a lawyer making a case :) ) all production decisions regarding the N**'s would then have to be engineering. IMHO

I agree with zerojay regarding resolution vs. bandwidth. Perhaps it is for the same reason that these mega-pixel, purpose built cameras don't simply have WiFi chips.

[neoluddite]

Agree on the phone cam quality however it is improving at a quick clip.
Integration is a most desirable goal at the moment. Say what you will about the iphone, the ad where the dweeb talks about grabbing his keys, wallet and phone is right on the money except I hate to answer the phone when I'm working so if my next device is lacking, I'm okay with that.
Sacrebleu!!! What? No mobile? Yeah, I'm over it. Many places I wind up at (or want to wind up at) don't have reception for squanto anyways and it is kind of nice.

The Fuji looks like a good choice with a good price for that type of cam. My older Canon in the similar form factor died from exposure to sand after a trip to NZ with the laptop following shortly thereafter.
Am looking at the most recent generation of DSLR's for my high end cam.
Have not sprung for any replacements yet but will include the environment cases this go around for whatever I wind up with.

[iball]

Flat-out business decision.
How many Nokia phones currently have a 5MP or higher camera when compared to their entire phone line?
Very, very, very, very few and those that do have 5MP cameras are the top-of-the-line models like my N95.
That big-cam schizzle be expensive, yo.
Also, the IT line was originally envisioned to be an "Internet Tablet", to be used on the "Internet".
How many 5MP USB video cams do you see floating around?
Not to mention the low/poor quality of the vast majority of web-cam conferencing solutions out there.
Remember, kids, anything less than DEDICATED 384Kbps entirely for the AV stream is crap...I know, I've designed and set those things up before. Lower than 384Kbps both ways leads to the herky-jerky video you see on TV news shows when the reporter is calling in from a video phone.
Sure it's "doable" and a little fun, but you do NOT want to do long-term video calls with it.