Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Irfaan 5057 days ago
I'm confused - the author assumes an android powered camera should have the same usage expectations as a tablet or phone...

And that's a terrible mistake. I don't care how capable my Angry Birds experience is on my camera. I care about applications written to enhance the photo-and-videographic functionality of my camera.

I'm fine with Nikon throwing on a custom launcher, if that's what they need to do to work around Android's touch-focus. I'm fine (and in fact, prefer) folks authoring applications specifically to the Nikon camera's interface.

And there's so much opportunity to extend a camera's capabilities, once it can run 3rd party applications. Auto stitching panoramas. Unwrapping spherical maps. Chromakeying. Instagram-esque filters. Subject tracking. Realtime preview and control over wifi and bluetooth via companion devices. Panning motor control. Multiple camera's automagically synchronizing. Etc etc.

The author uses Parrot's Asteroid car stereo system as an example for how a non-standard usage and non-standard UI are bound to fail. But that's a really weak comparison. Who do you think is more likely to grow a robust 3rd party ecosystem - a one-off experiment in a crowded, cost-sensitive market (a $350 device for bleeding edge enthusiasts), or an oft-upgraded stable of professionals who are already spending multiple thousands on equipment to be more productive?

The alternative is Nikon creates their own OS and development environment. But why compete with a flourishing platform, when you can just simply use it?

1 comments

He's also got a most other things wrong. For instance, he claims that Android doesn't have good support for hardware controls.