Kodak Discontinues PalmPix Cameras

Posted By: Ed Monday, April 8, 2002 4:57:22 PM

According to a message on the Kodak website, the PalmPix line of digital cameras has been discontinued. No reasons were given. The company is still offering support to current owners.

Update: Kodak has no plans to release any more cameras for Palm's handhelds, according to a Cnet article. Instead, it will concentrate on its stand-alone cameras.

Kodak made several versions of the PalmPix over the last few years, the most recent of which worked with Palm's Universal Connector.

While some users enjoyed the portability of the PalmPix line, there were complaints about its image quality.

The most recent version of the PalmPix, which was announced a year ago, connected to the HotSync port via the UC and could take color pictures at up to 800 by 600 pixels. There were older versions for the Palm m100 series and the III series.

Kodak didn't respond to questions in time for this article.

It's possible that replacements are on the way. Last month, a Taiwanese company named Spectec announced that it had developed two digital cameras for the Palm m505 and m515 that use the SD slot. However, it is not yet known when these will be available.

Thanks to Bill Gamble for the tip. -Ed

Related Information:

Article Comments

 (39 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Comments Closed Comments Closed
This article is no longer accepting new comments.

Down

How about 'because they suck'

exiii @ 4/8/2002 5:25:39 PM #
I'm surprised they lasted this long.

RE: How about 'because they suck'
exiii @ 4/8/2002 5:27:21 PM #
Oops, did I say that outloud?

RE: How about 'because they suck'
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/8/2002 5:49:18 PM #
Yes u did

RE: How about 'because they suck'
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/8/2002 5:49:38 PM #
smart ass......oops...did i say that out loud?

They're not THAT bad
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/8/2002 9:51:08 PM #
I have used my PalmPix on my M505 for months. And while the quality can be less than desired when trying to get the right focus, I have taken some very good pics with it. Good enough to post on the web and use for pics on Ebay. No it is not great, but what do you expect from a Palm that wasn't designed to be a camera? The quality is probably as good as any "web cam" I have connected to my laptop. Don't get me wrong, I will be HAPPY for a better quality cam to come out for the UC series Palms, but I'll bet it will cost more than the PalmPix.

Sorry it's gone

I.M. Anonymous @ 4/8/2002 10:02:47 PM #
I bought one of the first PalmPix for use with my PIIIc and it had given me many hours of fun. I'm sorry to see it go. However, with the advent of phones and pdas integrated with cameras, perhaps it is inevitable.

RE: Sorry it's gone
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/8/2002 10:17:01 PM #
I'm not sorry, and I also wish built-in cameras would GO AWAY! If you want a digital camera, BUY A DIGITAL CAMERA. Prices are coming down significantly, and these units actually have a flash and decent picture quality. The appeal of the PDA-cam is strictly the "cool" factor for most people. It's a very small niche that actually has REAL use for them and finds them significantly more convenient than a conventional, SMALL digital camera.

This is the first death, and more will come. Look for the eyemodule to bite the dust soon, as well as the Sony MS camera. Good riddance.

RE: Sorry it's gone
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/8/2002 11:07:09 PM #
Camera on Palm does not has the same purpose as those digital camera with multi-mega pixels. Just like we won't complaint web cam on PC cannot take good photos. It is not their purpose.

Camera on Palm (as well as other PDA) should mainly be used to take a snapshot to assist your memory. For example, add someone's photo to address book. In fact think it like a image 'memopad' for Palm. Then you will find that a camera on PDA is pretty useful. Memopad is not something to replace Word Processor anyway.. :-)

RE: Sorry it's gone
cp31 @ 4/8/2002 11:56:56 PM #
best combination device is the panasonic sv-av10....

http://www.panasonic.com/consumer_electronics/ewear/sd_av.asp

its a digital camera, camcorder, voice recorder, and mp3 player, runnign on a free 64 mb sd. its not out, but can sell for 379.

RE: Sorry it's gone
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 12:18:47 AM #
"This is the first death, and more will come. Look for the eyemodule to bite the dust soon, as well as the Sony MS camera. Good riddance."

what an idiot.
you must know that if you find no use of such camera attachment to the PDA, you are not the target users that will purchase it.
there will always be a lot of accessories as attachments to your PDA, you get only what you need or for the fun of it.

RE: Sorry it's gone
mrhockey @ 4/9/2002 1:26:51 AM #
"there will always be a lot of accessories as attachments to your PDA, you get only what you need or for the fun of it."

I agree whole heartedly. If you think an accessory is stupid, don't buy it. Be aware that there exist many others who have found or see a pain healed by the advent of technology such as this. I for one am sad that the product was discontinued as I saw some advantages to it, but never did get around to buying one. Maybe this heralds the arrival of better picture quality units from Kodak in the near future.

-mrhockey

RE: Sorry it's gone
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 1:43:52 AM #
I simply cannot understand why that person said that "This is the first death, and more will come. Look for the eyemodule to bite the dust soon, as well as the Sony MS camera. Good riddance.", you do not dictate what others want to buy and is it good to see that line of certain products die off?

Why are there still PDA hardware developers out there that is still constantly pushing out accessories?



RE: Sorry it's gone
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 7:39:24 AM #
I agree, "Good Riddance" is an idiot. You don't like it? Here's a tip, don't buy it. However as some of us like them and use them for what ever purpose and recognize their limitations, I would hope some sort of camera stays available. I would also hazard a guess that many of the users also have a digital camera in their households. however, since you may not carry that withyou all the time, when you need a quick snapshot, the PDA cameras will do a a pinch. I have never understood the appeal of the convertible. However not being a moron or dictatorial facist I don't want them banned from the automotive world.

RE: Sorry it's gone
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 11:55:14 AM #
Wow, touchy, touchy! Looks like some people here need to take their PDA accessories a little less personally.

I think the "Good riddance" poster was speaking more from the standpoint of the MARKETPLACE. If you like the camera, buy it, but it's a far assessment to say that Kodak has discontinued the product for ONE reason and ONE reason alone: PEOPLE DIDN'T BUY IT ENOUGH. So in spite of the fact that you might think the PalmPix saved your life or "healed your pain" (whatever THAT means), you are apparently in the minority.

The "Good Riddance" poster didn't say anything about "banning" cameras from the market, they were simply saying they're likely to die off, and I tend to agree with that assessment. Of course, "mrhockey" will likely call ME an idiot because I don't agree with him, but oh, well. The convertibles analogy doesn't really work, because convertibles actually sell. I'm not sure PDA cameras do, at least not very well.

I'm not necessarily suggesting that the PalmPix was somehow inferior--I never used it. But I think it's fair to say that the PDA camera as a product is far less successful than the PDA keyboard, case, and expansion module. It's entirely possible and even likely that the eyemodule and MS camera will fail IN THE MARKET if that trend continues. If you like your PDA camera, fine, but don't whine if others don't buy it and it's discontinued.

RE: Sorry it's gone
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 1:21:14 PM #
>> there will always be a lot of accessories as attachments to your PDA, you get only what you need or for the fun of it. <<

Correct. And apparently, Kodak hasn't had enough people buying the PalmPix to justify its continued existence.

Someone who points that out and doesn't care for the product isn't an idiot simply because they disagree with you. Get over yourself.

RE: Sorry it's gone
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 1:23:44 PM #
>> I have never understood the appeal of the convertible. However not being a moron or dictatorial facist I don't want them banned from the automotive world. <<

Oh, PLEASE. Someone's a moron or a fascist because they think the MARKET will kill off a specific product. Here's a tip: learn something about market economics.

RE: Sorry it's gone
gfunkmagic @ 4/9/2002 6:35:57 PM #
In responce to the first post on this thread, i do think in the long run that there may be a use for built in cameras on pda's. For one, with the advent of next generation cellphone-pda combos and the introduction of 2.5G and 3G technology, I don't see why not a built in cellphone PDA with audiovisual telephonly capabilities is not possible. In fact such devises already exist in 3G cellphones in Japan and the advent of such devices built on the Palm OS platform will in my opinion be the rage and standard of this nich segment.

It Doesn't Suck!

I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 12:07:29 AM #
Before you pundits claim that this was a lousy product, check out the PalmPix Gallery at the Philippine Palm User Group discussion board at Brighthand:

http://discussion.brighthand.com/palmhandhelds/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2723.

I am using the m500 PalmPix myself and it comes in very very handy,especially at conventions and exhibits, where cameras are prohibited, I can take pics without anyone stopping me.

Don't knock it until you've tried it.

E.


RE: It Doesn't Suck!
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 6:14:19 AM #
Yes, it is not that bad, but does it worth the price?

RE: It Doesn't Suck!
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 10:50:08 AM #
"Yes, it is not that bad, but does it worth the price?"

well that depends very much on the users, how it is to be used.

RE: It Doesn't Suck!
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 11:40:02 AM #
"Yes, it is not that bad, but does it worth the price?"

For this satisfied user, the answer is a resounding YES. It has proved its worth in so many occasions. I own a PalmPix m500. I'm sorry to see it go, but at least I have one and it works just as well with my m515 as it did with my old m505.

RE: It Doesn't Suck!
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 12:05:45 PM #
>> I am using the m500 PalmPix myself and it comes in very very handy,especially at conventions and exhibits, where cameras are prohibited, I can take pics without anyone stopping me. <<

Yeah, THERE'S an ad campaign: "The Kodak PalmPix helps me violate the legal rights of convention organizers. My ticket is a contract with organizers whereby I agree to comply with their policies, but screw them. Thanks, Kodak."

I'm sure Kodak Corp. is VERY proud of your story...

RE: It Doesn't Suck!
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 1:28:17 PM #
Wow I am impressed with those photos. Nice Link.

Conduits, gimme the conduits first!

I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 12:17:04 AM #
Dang! Does this mean that we won't be seeeing an Mac OS-X conduit?

RE: Conduits, gimme the conduits first!
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 10:12:37 AM #
Oh geez, don't get me started on this.

When are we ever going to see the Entourage conduit?

RE: Conduits, gimme the conduits first!
Angus @ 4/9/2002 3:49:59 PM #
There is a Linux decoder with source that someone could port to OS X.

http:\\www.geocities.com\aa_soft\PalmPix.html

PALMPIX DOES NOT SUCK.

cyruski @ 4/9/2002 11:38:36 AM #
i'am angry at kodak for not making a better one. the idea was perfect (at least for me)

cyruski!

PalmPix may not work with OS 4.1

I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 1:19:28 PM #
I have bought a Palmpix for my PalmIIIxe, it worked fine with OS 3.5.3. However, after the installation of OS 4.1 on my IIIxe with the official upgrade utility, the Palmpix would not work anymore. I contacted Kodak for technical support, but I haven't heard from them for at least 3 months. Last time they said they were simulating my problem. Well, might be it is one of the reasons they quit.

RE: PalmPix may not work with OS 4.1
Ed @ 4/9/2002 1:37:27 PM #
I tested it with the m130, which uses OS 4.1, and it worked fine. Well, it worked as good as it ever works.

---
News Editor
RE: PalmPix may not work with OS 4.1
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 2:14:16 PM #
I suspect that the PalmPix for the III series and m100 series was designed for OS 3.5, while the PalmPix for the m500 series, and which will work with the m125/m130, is designed for OS 4.

RE: PalmPix may not work with OS 4.1
cyruski @ 4/9/2002 3:17:03 PM #
use the Palmpix software for m500 series. it will work with the old one and support OS4.1

i really am curious why those dorks over kodak never ever know a thing about palmpix devices.

cyruski!

RE: PalmPix may not work with OS 4.1
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/9/2002 3:32:05 PM #
Maybe because Kodak is a gargantuan company, and the PalmPix to them is only a niche-market device that is more annoyance than viable money-maker. Their tech support is most likely focused on other products that are bigger profit generators. It's not so much that they're morons but that they really DON'T CARE that much about your problem, because there are more important issues.

This would certainly explain why Kodak has discontinued their product--what's the point in keeping it? It doesn't sell that well (25 fanatics who post to a PDA website does NOT constitute "consumer demand"), doesn't work perfectly, and isn't nearly as significant in the "big picture" as a vast number of other products.

If you want a PDA camera that will alleviate the problems of the PalmPix, you'll probably have to look to a smaller company that is willing to devote more resources (development and support) to it. Unfortunately, I doubt you'll see significant enough revenue for the company to continue it, let alone survive off of it, which is why I agree with an earlier, harsher post that stated that PDA cameras in general will die out, regardless of how good or bad any of them are.

PalmPix for M500

Solo @ 4/9/2002 10:59:17 PM #
I hesitated of buying one when they announced it back in May 2001, especially after a harsh review by Ed.

Finally the idea of not having to care about batteries won me over and I decided to buy one in December. I couldn't find one either in the stores or at any online retailers (and I tried at least 20 places), I finally bought one brand new 135$ on EBay (maybe it will worth more now that it is being discontinued).

I really like the fact that I can always have a cam ready to shoot with me (I keep it in my car) anytime I need it. Up here in Canada, batteries for a standard digital camera don't stand more than one night in our cold winters.

The only complication with the cam is to completely stop moving when pressing the datebook button (to actually shoot the picture), perfectionning this art must be something close to tai chi or another oriental thing...


Price Point was too high.

orb2069 @ 4/10/2002 2:47:52 AM #
I wanted one. Yes, I know it's not a 2.4MP camera, with flash and mechanical zoom, but it was a good 'snapshot' camera.

I was out at CompUSA a few weeks back, and saw the III-interface models on sale for $20 at a checkout, and snapped it up. (I have a TRGPro)

Heck, I WOULD have paid $50 - but $100 was WAY too much. Like others have said, you can buy a 'Real' digital camera (seen Kodak DC215 for that price) for that much.

If they haden't been so greedy, and priced it at $50 or less (I assume they were worried about it cutting into their camera business) - and maybe if Palm haden't switched connectors on them TWICE...

But the pictures are OK quality, it's REALLY easy to carry around, and it dosen't eat batteries like most digital cameras do. If you see one on clearance, why not?

I wonder if they'll finally spill on how the camera/Palm interface works now, since the Palmpix software sucks so bad?

I /am/ the eggman.

RE: Price Point was too high.
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/10/2002 11:22:09 AM #
There are already interface enhancements for the
palmpix. Try PixTransfer or PixView from Palmgear.com.

http://www.palmgear.com/software/redirector.cfm/PixTransfer.zip?prodID=15393&type=zip

RE: Price Point was too high.
I.M. Anonymous @ 4/16/2002 8:27:15 PM #
Yes I just purchased the kodak palmpix for $20.00 factory sealed in a office depot store. Went back the following day and the other 4 units were gone

JM
mmk915a@hotmail.com

PalmPix on 330 finally...

I.M. Anonymous @ 4/11/2002 11:55:23 AM #
A new program is now available that allows some standard resolution programs to work in high resolution mode. I have found that it will allow users to use their PalmPix software on the 330 The program is called heFontMapper and the beta can be found at the following website: http://www.jade.dti.ne.jp/~imazeki/palm/HEfm/index-e.html

Simply install the software, enable it, and point it to the PalmPix program using the default settings. Your PalmPix program will then display the preview and the images correctly (or at least a little better).

RE: PalmPix on 330 finally...
fleegle @ 4/11/2002 10:49:20 PM #
Yes! It works! The images aren't stretched to fill the screen, i.e. scale-to-fit mode. However, the images are no longer garbled.

One thing that is strange is that the program, HEFontMapper, isn't "seen" by Launcher III. You need to use the default launcher to see it.

RE: PalmPix on 330 finally...
peterbasch @ 5/4/2002 8:44:09 PM #
Yeah! I'm using the HEFontMapper and it works great. But now I want to put JPGs or BMPs on the 330's expansion cards. I thought of installing the PalmPix m500 software on my 330, but it won't let you if you don't have a serial number! Whacky, or what? Does anyone have a solution for this? Could someone post a valid PalmPix m500 serial number? Or will it cause my HE330 to melt into slag? (I doubt it)

If anyone has any better ideas for storing pix, either in PPX or BMP or JPG formats, on the HE330's expansion cards, I'd love to know how.

Thx.

Top

Account

Register Register | Login Log in
user:
pass: