This newfangled technolgy doesn't have anything over the 100 year old stuff..

CNET is carrying a story that camera phones are overrated. Which might carry some weight, except that the person saying this happens to be the CEO of Kodak. Yup, Kodak, which happens to, as far as I know, not make camera phones. And some of those people taking pics with camera phones probably would be taking pics with Kodak film cameras or Kodak digital cameras otherwise. Gee, I wonder why the Kodak CEO doesn't like them.

Now, mad anthony doesn't own a camera phone. I need one about as badly as a fish needs a bicycle. Sure, if I had one, I would probably take pics with it occasionally when I saw something I wanted a pic of but didn't have a camera on me. I could imagine that I would have used it more back in the day when I was in college.

But it seems that they are popular, despite taking rather crappy pics. But I don't think Kodak's stratagy is going to play out too well:

Kodak is now working to let cell phones use the EasyShare printer for digital cameras, which eliminates the need to upload digital photos first onto a personal computer.

I don't think most camera-phone users want to print out their pics. First of all, camera pics are low-res and are going to look like poop printed out. Secondly, you don't use a camera phone to take pictures of important stuff - you use it for spontaneous kind of stuff. Sharing those pics online makes sense. Printing them out doesn't.

The other great Kodak quote:

Carp, however, called cell phone video a mistake, saying "shifting attention to video could result in lost opportunity for all of us."

Well, I see how video would suck for Kodak - nobody prints video. I'm not sure why it's bad for the phone companies, though, even though I don't know how many customers want the ability to take very-low-qualtity videos with their phones, with the possible exception of Paris Hilton.