Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 1) 263

If your vision is very poor...and you view both ports from a distance...I suppose they could both look like blurry black rectangles. That's about it. They aren't even close to the same size.

I took a photo for you: I couldn't place the ruler exactly but both ports are just under 7/8ths of an inch by apprx. 1/16th high. They opening and placement is exactly the same size. You have to look closely on the SX-70 since the opening is surrounded by black plastic. The SX-70 was the iPod of its time. Steve Jobs was known to manage design details including over the transparency of the glass in the Apple store and the shade of yellow in the Google logo on the iPhone app. It's entirely plausible that he had input on the single port on this iconic device. That was my guess. If I was a betting man, I'd wager there is not another consumer electronic device between 1970 and 2003 with a port of these exact dimensions. Let alone a device of the prominence of the SX-70 or iPod. Why is it relevant? Because it shines a light on the Polaroid SX-70, which might deserve more recognition for its design achievements. Also, like the terrific 'Everything is a Remix' series, it's good for creative people and engineers to know that decisions are sometimes arrived at by looking at choices made by your predecessors. I figured the Slashdot audience might include people who build and design ports and connectors for a living. If that's not interesting to you, that's ok. I just wanted to give you a more detailed photo so you can draw your own conclusion based on the best information available. Cheers.

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 2) 263

If your vision is very poor...and you view both ports from a distance...I suppose they could both look like blurry black rectangles. That's about it. They aren't even close to the same size.

. Fail.

I'd have to disagree with that. They are exactly the same size. That was my observation. That's why you can fit the tip of the iPod cable in the SX-70 jack and it's snug. They are micrometers different. If i had a more powerful lens and a micro meter, I'd be able to better show the fit. If you look at any other device between 1970 and 2003, I am not sure you would find a device port that has these dimensions. I could be wrong, but for all of the conversation, nobody has cited a device that is the same match. It seems random if you think they are random devices. But the SX-70 was the iPod or Walkman of its day. It's legendary. I am not saying it's important to anyone else. I left that for the editors to decide. I just thought it was interesting. It's not supposed to be any more significant that potentially seeing a lineage in consumer electronics. It got me to pull my SX-70 of the shelf. It's quite amazing. If you like technology you'd likely enjoy the camera. Sorry you didn't like the greenlight. My server shares your sentiment. On that front, I agree with your 'fail' assessment. Cheers.

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 2) 263

Hi. The observation was about design. Not functionality. With the SX-70 collapsed the similarity is more striking. The iPod connector didn't fit, but the tip was snug, meaning that the measurements were the same. I have many connectors here for phones, PDAs, gaming devices, etc. and nothing was close. It didn't seem random. My guess, and it was just a guess - presented as a question, was that someone designing this new port for the iPod liked the aesthetic of the SX-70. By the time the 30pin adaptor was added, the iPod was already an iconic device. As was the SX-70. It seemed reasonable to me that there would be some thought put in to the aesthetics of the newly designed port. I am sorry the story was green lit for you. . If it's any consolation, I spent the weekend trying to get my host to re-instate my server account. So, I guess I was appropriattely 'punished'. I didn't mean to waste anyone's time. I was excited to find something that seemed connected. I did several searches and couldn't find anything on it. (perhaps because I am off base). There's been lots of interesting feedback from engineers who work on ports. I still haven't' seen anything that was as close of an aesthetic match as these two. If you still feel like I should be banned, that's certainly your prerogative. Cheers.

Comment Re:From the Newton Interconnect maybe? (Score 1) 263

Thanks. Loved seeing that. You may be right. It does however look different on first glance. I think I was struck by how indistinguishable the Polaroid port was. To the extend that you could put the tip of the iPod connector in it. It looks like the newton port, while vaguely similar, wouldn't have the same potential. I'd love to have one here to compare though. Cheers.

Comment Re:I dunno why people are pooping on you (Score 1) 263

Don't get me wrong. I love some of the snark. Someone made a crack about my server exploding because I tried to sync it with my Polaroid. I was actually just hoping to throw it up for discussion. There's been interesting feedback from people who actually engineer ports. What surprised me was people thinking I was either slamming S. Jobs or being a fanboi. It was neither. Just an observation about two pieces of iconic consumer technology. Thanks for the feedback. I've linked the photos, video and text in the comments here.... somewhere.

Comment Re:Those aren't the same. (Score 1, Insightful) 263

I specifically addressed the Samsung issue in my post. I don't have that text locally. And I can't get to it now because my server is blown. I said that I felt it was an homage in design if Apple did in fact settle on that size and design for the port. The two products were decades apart and didn't compete. Much different than Samsung having connectors on the market to confusing consumers with a product directly competing with Apple.

Comment Re:Strikes me as (Score 1) 263

Not at all. I am a huge fan of Apple. And vintage Polaroid for that matter. I thought it was an homage in design. The products were decades apart and never competed. There's nothing technically useful about the Polaroid port for the iPod. I was guessing, yes guessing, that the exact dimensions may be a result of Steve liking the design. Having been a fan of Edwin Land and Polaroid.

Comment Re:Please post the website content in your post.. (Score 2) 263

And here is an earlier draft of the text from the article:

Steve Jobs, an inspiration to artists and business leaders alike, had a hero of his own. According to this article from the New York Times, Edwin Land, the creator of Polariod was a role model for Jobs. Land was also a college dropout who developed great products, simply and elegantly designed to appeal to an enormous market. It's an interesting read, as is the linked Fastcompany book review.

Like Jobs, Edwin Land had numerous technological and commercial achievements. However, the NYTimes article calls the Polaroid SX-70 folding camera Edwin Land's 'supreme achievement'.

I happen to have a vintage Polaroid SX-70. After reading the article, I pulled it off the shelf to take another look. It's a really beautiful piece of design. It even came with this handsome leather case.

This camera was my father's, and I've handled it hundreds of times since I was a child. Today, pulling it out the case I was immediately struck with a question:

Why does a 40 year old camera have an Apple 30-pin connector port on it? (or at least one that looks nearly identical)
There is a port, just above the lens, that seems ready for any iPod accessory. It's not as obvious when the camera is open, but the port to connect the old fashioned 'flash bar' is very obvious when the camera is collapsed. In fact, the collapsed SX-70 looks like a piece of consumer electronics Steve Jobs would have created if he'd been born a generation earlier.
It's not just similar. Physically, it's almost an exact match. You can even put the tip of a 30-pin connector in the Polaroid and it's a snug fit. I know that this seems like Apple fanboi wishful thinking - that something could be this specifically thought through. Perhaps it is, and that thought occurred to me. So I tried other things that could be similar in size. An SD card. Close, but it doesn't fit. You don't get snug fit of the 30-pin connector.
Keep in mind that this is the only port on this device. And it's designed to allow the camera to interact with accessories. And this isn't just any device. It's the 'supreme achievement' of the man Steve Jobs called a 'national treasure'. Now, this port of nearly identical proportions is the common denominator three devices that could each, along with the original Macintosh, contend as Steve's 'supreme achievement.' And out of all of the sizes available for peripheral ports (micro-usb, etc), this is nearly an exact match, within micrometers (if I had the appropriate tools, I'd measure it for you). Here's a video to give you a better sense of the fit:

Perhaps there was never an explicit intention to mimic the SX-70. Of course, if this similarity is by design, I am sure someone like Jony Ive would know. The port could have been a result of teamwork, but if Steve Jobs obsessed over Edwind Land's creations the way we obsess over his, there is a reason that this could have felt like the right size for an accessory port according to Steve's aesthetic sensibilities.

I've never givien much thought to the 30-pin connector. It wasn't any more interesting to me than a USB port. But now, I'd be very curious to know the background of the only physical trait that latest iPhone shares with the early iPods and with a forty year-old camera invented by a man Steve Jobs idolized. .

Slashdot Top Deals

We can found no scientific discipline, nor a healthy profession on the technical mistakes of the Department of Defense and IBM. -- Edsger Dijkstra