Brando offers up 2.4-inch digital photo frame, isn't joking

Generally speaking, we've seen digital photo frames get additional features, boosts in screen size and increases in resolution, but Brando is taking innovation in the opposite direction with its "portable" iteration. After triple checking to make sure this wasn't some sort of sick holiday prank, it looks as if the firm actually is offering up a 2.4-inch frame that touts a 320 x 240 resolution panel, comes with your choice of transparent or heart-shaped frames and gets its juice from a built-in Li-ion / USB port. Heck, you'll even get 16MB of internal storage space -- enough for 32 photos! If you're absolutely sure the novelty won't wear off after 7.3 minutes of use, feel free to cough up $45 and bring one home.

[Shadowfox952 @ Dec 24th 2007 9:37PM]

What's up with all the extraneous space AROUND the screen? Isn't the whole thing contradicting itself?

[Wwhat @ Dec 26th 2007 9:22AM]

The frame is detachable, and is transparant I might mention since that is not visible on the picture.

[Fank @ Dec 24th 2007 9:44PM]

Good to see we can still make more products that waste energy and resource every day. Keep it up!

[Wwhat @ Dec 26th 2007 9:04AM]

oh piffle.

[Tachikomatic @ Dec 24th 2007 9:46PM]

Things I would rather spend $45 on instead of this:
Reducing the national debt
spray painting my car
40 gallons of soda
building a chair out of 45000 pennies
a tank and a half of gas
2 weeks worth of burritos

[Fernando @ Dec 24th 2007 10:24PM]

Hmmm, Burritos, I like the way you think.

[roole @ Dec 24th 2007 10:52PM]

Tachikomatic: 45,000 pennies? I'd like to do business with you.....
;-)

[roflercopterer @ Dec 24th 2007 11:02PM]

Hey if you want to reduce the national debt donate the $45 to Ron Paul's campaign.

[gamecrazychris @ Dec 24th 2007 9:52PM]

What the hell am I doing(this goes to all the people reading this too) go spend time with your family! Nobody gives a shit about a stupid digital picture frame. Everyone should get off their computers and go do something with someone at least on Christmas eve. Peace out and Merry Christmas!

[Fernando @ Dec 24th 2007 10:25PM]

no u

[The_Steven @ Dec 24th 2007 9:50PM]

Hackable? I sure wouldn't mind a "HTC Tilt DS"

[arkady @ Dec 24th 2007 9:59PM]

you think thats small/pointless have a look at this

http://www.pcworld.co.uk:80/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1774518623.1198551047@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccccaddmldggffdcflgceggdhhmdgml.0&page=Product&fm=null&sm=null&tm=null&sku=817555&category_oid=-30329

[Paul @ Dec 24th 2007 10:30PM]

Nope, the engadget one still wins. The one you linked to can be attached to a keychain at least and is portable. Not only that its also only around $15-20 US, whereas while the engadget one does have a larger screen it also has a fricken 2 inch border. So you it would essentially mean you are carrying around a 6 inch rectangular device that only has a 2.4 in screen.

[Hannes @ Jan 2nd 2008 12:36PM]

That's great. Are there really people out there who are buying this? I mean, the 2.4" even is ridiculous, but this one ... But maybe it is just too cheap, for that money people are even buying sh..


http://www.digital-photo-frame-market.info

[kyle @ Dec 24th 2007 10:54PM]

Post about about a 150 inch screen then a 2.5 inch screen, covering the extremes I see

[kyle @ Dec 24th 2007 10:54PM]

2.4 even better

[Tiptup300 @ Dec 25th 2007 2:39AM]

But will it play pong!?

Erm, Think I did that wrong.

[James @ Jan 6th 2008 11:41AM]

Each one of my photos is at least 6MB so that means I would have...about 2.5 photos on that thing unless I spend even more money to get a memory card.

Oh...I forgot, the screen is too crap in size to need to worry about resolution so that means I can have 100KB JPEG's so theoretically I could have about 160.

Why don't they just give up and get a proper name.

[Kane @ Dec 25th 2007 1:18PM]

The only place I see this being is on the vanity of a teenage girl. I'd buy the heart shaped one for my baby sister. She like digital frames but thinks the ones out aren't "cute enough".

[Magallanes @ Dec 26th 2007 7:01AM]

Palm fonts?

[thehumanyawn @ Feb 29th 2008 11:47PM]

You think that's ridiculous? I dropped into a Fred Meyer the other day and saw a 1.8" digiphoto frame with a 2" border for $35. Wish I took a picture of it. What a waste of plastic.

[snebbit @ Dec 29th 2007 4:49PM]

Someone linked to an even smaller frame from PCWorld, but it doesn't count. As someone said, it is a keychain. I've seen 1.5" freestanding photo frames at work though, with a huge 4 megabytes of internal memory, I'll get a photo and post it if you like.