On Monday, July 29, 2002, at 01:40 , Tom Motoyoshi Kalland wrote:
> i'm not sure. i mean, the cameras surely have a communication value of
> sort letting people send pictures to each other. seems as a natural step
> forward from the message/mail services. as for the crappy mp3 players, i
> have to agree with you (if they had audio streaming and such, i think it
> would be suitable for a phone though... anything that has to do with
> communication fits a phone).
I am not opposed to sticking a camera into a phone per se (as long as
there is choice for those who don't want a camera in their phones). My
point is that phone makers should not loose focus over the core
telephony function of a phone in favour of a fashion feature.
So, no problem with non-telephony add-ons in principle, but phone makers
should do their homework on the telephony side. So far mobile phones are
incomplete on the telephony side of things. There is work left undone
and the danger is that this undone work is left undone if people start
arguing that camera add-ons are the non plus ultra while telephony is
not. Telephony remains the core function of a phone, that's why it is
called a phone. It follows that integrating telephony properly should
naturally come first and fashion add-ons should come thereafter.
Received on Mon Jul 29 17:33:05 2002