Slashdot Mirror

I like the look of the Das Keyboard with all black and no letters on the keys to ruin the look.

https://static.bhphoto.com/ima...

Let me guess, a white 350mm sized quadcopter (4 rotors). Likely had some mini camera on it.

Note said company did put a 25km geofence around DC, problem was it create a set of flight bugs that made the copter more dangerous. S/W bugs, gotta love them. They reverted the entire s/w patch from all the users that upgraded. Great: h/w devs not knowing the s/w side of things and vice versa. The next 5 yrs are going to be FUN.

The again, with the way drones are moving... it will be likely that software bugs will create skynet.

I just buy from B&H Photo or Adorama. They've been around for years and their prices are as low as you'll usually find. I've never had any problems ordering or returning merchandise and they don't pressure you.

http://www.bhphoto.com/
http://www.adorama.com/

The markups on electronics are very slim. If someone is selling you an electronic product for hundreds below everyone else you're being ripped off.

No, the original point was that you said " guess the other thing is that Apache/PHP seems to scale better (or at least easier/cheaper [internetnews.com] than Tomcat." The article you link to doesn't mention java or tomcat at all. The presentation that is linked from the article doesn't mention tomcat but it does say good things about java/jsp/j2ee but they couldn't use it because freebsd's threading sucks. I should have known better than to start a discussion with someone that cites an article to back up his claim when it doesn't even mention what he's claiming.

"What would are some very large sites using jsp, which for all the links you posted, you haven't been able to show.More and larger sites use php than jsp. I pointed out ebay, which is still using dlls for much of it's heavy load. You brought up playboy, which seems to be mostly a static site running some cgi scripts: http://cyber.playboy.com/cgi/ab.cgi."

eBay used to use a dll. The dll is their old architecture, when they finish the migration the dll will disapear. eBay is a complicated site and the migration will take time. A lot of ebay is currently running on websphere. You can't easily tell because they don't use the .jsp extention for their files. That's a big site. They may have 1/3rd the traffic of yahoo but their profits and revenues are about the same. Playboy does use java. I think they use a mixture of JBoss and Tomcat. Just because a page says .html doesn't mean it's a static page. A lot of times, I've noticed this with JBoss especially, files look like html but they're not. You can see this at the sims online too, which also uses jboss. Look at this url from playboy http://www.playboy.com/magazine/playmate.html?sour ce=playmate_sectionfront since when can you pass query parameters to STATIC HTML? We used this technique with sites I've worked on as well where we set up our container to recognize .html files as jsps. If you look at netcraft.com for the server info you'll see playboy.com uses mod_jk whick is the connector to Tomcat. Sometimes it's hard to tell what sites use java since many times they'll use a servlet controller that calls the jsp's behind the scenes. Sometimes you'll see a .do which is the typical way to use Struts, but not always. Here's a bit of info on capital one they use java for a lot of their stuff. I think they use oracle's application server. B&H Photo uses java for their ecommerce site (Probably the most popular online photo/video retailer) but you can't easily tell from looking at the urls unless you know what to look for. bnh is the servlet context, controller is the main servlet handler and home is a page handler. Years ago they used to use Bluestones application server. Now it seems they're just using Netscape Enterprise Server. If your brouse certain sites with cookies disabled you can sometimes see a jsessionid in the url, that's a sign it's running a java web container. Verizon Online uses Java for their clients web email and a bunch of other support functions. Have a look at Bea's Client list among some other big names you'll find Amazon.com and FedEx. Ofoto.com, now Kodak Easy Share, uses jsp. Here's a story on jboss writing their own postnuke style cms in java because php didn't scale as well. These are just the few I could remember off the top of my head. And I've done my own benchmarks for m

They're a camera and AV store but have a bunch of different electronics related to that field. B&H Photo in manhattan. They have a website too here

I'm not a regular customer that goes in and spends a few hundred dollars every week but I have spent quite a bit there and I have sent friends and family there as well that have spent a lot of money there but they have no idea that I have done that.

One day I went in to get a bunch of stuff for my darkroom. A couple hundred bucks worth and I spent about the same the week before. There was one item I bought that came in two varieties. One with a floating lid the other without. I wanted the one with the floating lid and asked for it at the store when I physically went in. When I got home I relized that they gave me the one without it. There's a 39 cent different between the two but to buy the lid seperately would cost over 3 dollars plus either shipping or another 6 dollar toll to drive in and pick it up.

I called customer service to tell them. The rectified the problem by sending out the lid at no cost via ups.

They track all purchases whether you're in the store or not and maybe if I routinely pulled this kinda thing I may not have gotten that type of response.

I wanted everything for that weekend and was ticked off that I got the wrong thing but they really made up for it. When I find a place that has good customer service I like to promote it as much as I can. They're sales people are very knowledgable and helpful and not pushy. They have really good prices as well.

Even if shipping me that item at no cost wound up making my last order break even (which i highly doubt) they helped make a loyal customer even more loyal and they have easily made it up in future business from me and others I've referred.

On the same token, I can see how some customers can cause problems, but the way Best Buy sets up their business and treats their customers I'm not surprised.

As a camera geek as well as a computer geek, I can say that I rather have film over most ditigal solutions at this point. The only digial solution that I have even considered is a digital back for my Mamiya 645, which would shoot 128mb images right to a 10gig HD. This setup would / could easily cost more than my car. It's image resolution, and film as someone else put it, near 1000 LPI, which on a 35mm (3.5cm / 2.54 = 1.377 inches) offers 1377 lines of image resolution. The best 35mm solution is the Nikon N90 with Kodak's digital back which costs nearly $18,000 new. I have yet to see one of these machines listed used. Stick with either Kodak's Royal Gold 100 & 400, or Fuji's 100 & 400, play with Kodak's CM-41 for BW photography (very nice, & have the red lens filter for outdoors!) and you will rarely go wrong. Use photo.net to learn, and shop at B&H Photo for your equipment.

I am a ProAm photographer and lust after a good digital camera. The problem is one of what makes a digital camera "good"?

The criteria that are commonly used seem to be:

• Number of pictures that fit on the media
• The size of the captured images.
• The ease of transfering images from camera to computer.
• The quality of the captured Image.
• The size of the captured Image.
• Quality of the camera.
• Quality of the Lens
• Ease of control of the camera.

I have one lens for my 35mm that I payed almost 1K for. If you look at lenses for 35mm cameras you'll find the prices range from a few hundred dollars to many thousands of dollars. It is hard to look at a camera that costs less than $300.00 and even consider the lens to be reasonable.

Each person judges their needs and makes a decision based on those needs. My brother wanted "webshots." For him a Sony which compresses everything like mad and has 640x480 sizing is just fine. For me it doesn't come close.

My friend wanted a digital and used 3 before he picked his favorite. He choose the Nikon CoolPix 950. (The current Nikon is 990). For him quality was the name of the game. The size had to be 1280x1024 or larger. The compression had to allow for NO compression. I.e A raw TIFF file. And the "Hi Quality" setting is only 4:1 compression JPEG. Very usable.

The other day I took some pictures of a personal event. I ended up with about 16 pictures, all of them head shots. After the film was developped and I had scanned them for the web it turned out that we wanted some close ups of an earing. With just the original scan I was able to do a close up of the earing without upscaling or generating any data that was not already there. And my film scanner isn't the best there is. It only does 30bits of 2000+ by 3000+ pixels.

So to determine what the "best" digital camera is requires a good understanding of what the user wants to do and how they plan to use their images. If you want to be able to just move floppy disks with "Webshots" from your camera to your computer for uploading, pick a Sony digital camera. If you want higher resolution, you need something like the CoolPix 950 from Nikon. Or if you want the real thing you can pick up a Kodak DCS660 for only $20,000.00. That actually does 2k by 3K with 36 bits.

Pick what works for you, just take the list there at the top and rank those things that are important for you. "Webshots" or "Artprint" it makes a difference as to what camera features you need.

Chris

Sorry if this is a double posting, /. has no returned page.

The funnest thing is these palm-wandabes can play .mov, but what can you play on 8meg memory? Or the max 96 meg of Compact Flash? Before a handhold device can hold 1Gig of data, it's simply stupid to add the video feature on a tiny gadget. And there is only one thing can do it. No portable dvd player doesn't count, because it can't play X-file futurama and rare Humphrey Bogart movies. (of course, I can't afford it.)

And before somebody want to remind me that they can play mp3. These are the answers 1) My Rio cost 50 bucks 2) No PDA has 32meg build-in memory 3) My Rio runs 12 hours on an AA 4) Visor will play mp3, (the add-in doesn't have its own battery source thouh)

Compaq already replace its fansy 12 godzilliom color screen with a black and white, now all it need is a decent OS :)


(disclaimer, no I don't own any PDA)


CY

The funnest thing is these palm-wandabes can play .mov, but what can you play on 8meg memory? Or the max 96 meg of Compact Flash? Before a handhold device can hold 1Gig of data, it's simply stupid to add the video feature on a tiny gadget. And there is only one thing can do it. No portable dvd player doesn't count, because it can't play X-file futurama and rare Humphrey Bogart movies. (of course, I can't afford it.)

And before somebody want to remind me that they can play mp3. These are the answers 1) My Rio cost 50 bucks 2) No PDA has 32meg build-in memory 3) My Rio runs 12 hours on an AA 4) Visor will play mp3, (the add-in doesn't have its own battery source thouh)

Compaq already replace its fansy 12 godzilliom color screen with a black and white, now all it need is a decent OS :)


(disclaimer, no I don't own any PDA)


CY