He knew about the first; in Chicago, nearly all broadcast is run off the Sears Tower (for obvious reasons), digital and analog both. North-facing units in northern burbs/neighborhoods, like Evanston (where he resides) are SOL. And if you'd read his statements, instead of sounding off like a know-it-all twat, you'd have known that too.
A630: you can quite easily reassign one of your two softkeys to be "phonebook", as well as being able to assign any of the 4-way pad buttons to phonebook. One keypress.
iTunes can't control an iPod; if you tell it to play music, the music is not played through the iPod but only through the computer. As such, it's hard to argue that iTunes commands the iPod; it solely loads data to and from the iPod, and if that's patentable, we're all fucked.
Looks like their Chicago office will be strictly ad sales (not surprising, given that Chicago has a relatively large advertising market) and a data center (not surprising, given that Chicago is a major network hub for the Midwest).
In other words, if you *do* have a Ph.D., don't expect to apply to their Chicago office.
You certainly need to get your patents filed first.
Actually, no. You need to file your patents within one year of going public in the US. If, during that year, someone else tries to patent it, all you need to do is provide the *dated* proof of invention (you did remember to maintain a valid dated proof of invention, right?) and you're golden.
I see some of the ghosting, but mostly only with it wide-wide open and a light source in picture. If you're stopped down, or the light source is out of frame, I don't see it as much.
Actually, the guy who used to live in my apartment (we're friends) has a $50,000 digital MF back. Creates 100MB raw files. Why? Because he creates files that are blown up to the size of a building. He's a professional product photographer, mainly for food - McDonald's billboards need to look good too. Yes, he takes 25 megapixel images, give or take a few megapixels. The market very much is there, pretty much for the same people and the same reasons as the market for film 4x5 backs now - professionals. He tells me that most of the people he works with now do their MF work digitally.
Better Light makes a 4x5 digital scan back, for that matter. Large format digital will get there, just as digital is slowly taking over the MF market.
The documentation for the file format is available and widespread; as such, while the average computer user won't be able to write something to read it, someone will be able to, and some programmer with snaps of his (or someone else's) childhood visit to Aruba he wants to look at will invariably write one in F++, or Z++, or whatever the coding language du jour is. For that matter, I'm sure there's a LISP JPEG decoder, and LISP will never die.
And after all, the average computer user now couldn't write a JPEG decoder either.
Documents based on open (meaning, documented, not meaning Open, you freakish zealots) standards are relatively safe - as long as you can get the bits, and know the standard, implementing decode is easy. Documents based on hidden standards are more of a problem.
I have a lot of respect for both the D-70 and D-Rebel as the cheapest way to get into real photography. Both are very, very good bodies; the difference, as far as I can see, is that the Nikon kit lens is (as you said) quite, quite good, and the Canon's... isn't. Canon L-glass is good, and Nikkors are generally good, but kit vs. kit, Nikon comes out clearly ahead.
I think my favorite lens for my D-70 is the Nikon 50/1.8, and it's probably my most used lens (although I've been giving the Tokina 12-24 I bought a workout lately). I picked the Nikon 50/1.8 AF-D up for $100, new in box. If you don't have one, it's a cheap investment and well worth it.
No, it really doesn't. The kit lens on the original D-Rebel is just not a good lens. It's a good camera (even though I shoot Nikon, the Rebel's a decent piece of hardware) but the kit lens they sold with the original D-Rebel (did they update it for the new one? I didn't think they did...) was kinda crappy.
Nice links, though. Color service bureaus are always the best places to get real work done.
Screen printing was never the process used to put a photo onto a t-shirt. It's incredibly hard to get tight enough registration to do process color printing with screens.
Generally speaking, the photographer could take photos of the wedding party and sell those without permission, so long as the people in the picture are not individually recognizable; i.e. so long as the person isn't really identifiable from the photo at a reasonable glance.
For weddings, this isn't so important, but for street shots, it can be vital.
No, see, they have a steely reserve of will to avoid any further changes, even at the expense of a lawsuit or being attacked by someone with a Colt.45; they thought about a logo change, putting the text into an Olde English font, but decided that they were better off making it a camo logo instead.
My Sony amp has been working great for 8 years now.
Denon's amps may be okay, but anything they make with any kind of transport is crap. When I was working radio, we went through 6 Denon CD players in as many months before we said "Screw this" and bought TASCAM. Never looked back, and the TASCAMs are still going strong. Marantz used to make good stuff; too bad Denon bought them.
(This doesn't even get into their truly atrocious service department.)
Slashdot Mirror
He knew about the first; in Chicago, nearly all broadcast is run off the Sears Tower (for obvious reasons), digital and analog both. North-facing units in northern burbs/neighborhoods, like Evanston (where he resides) are SOL. And if you'd read his statements, instead of sounding off like a know-it-all twat, you'd have known that too.
PEBL is a model; much like RAZR is the V3 (RAZR V3, technically) the PEBL is marked as the V6.
A630: you can quite easily reassign one of your two softkeys to be "phonebook", as well as being able to assign any of the 4-way pad buttons to phonebook. One keypress.
Motorola A630. Quad-band, though if you need analog, you're still out of luck. No joystick, but a full keyboard, currently available through T-Mobile.
(Technically the A630 and that Nokia are still considered to be candy bars, not flips.)
God, I loved Omega. I should track that down and play it again; its gotta be abandonware.
(answer, after a quick google: http://www.toadstool.net/games/omega/ has the DOS and Amiga versions, as well as tanks and more)
One for each of the Internets.
That is correct, quite a few (not, by any means, all) do. I've worked on an inertial measurement system for automotive applications.
Pushing didn't cease to exist all of sudden, you know?
No, it ceased to exist after it was shoved down stairs.
That is the Terrible Secret of Space.
I wouldn't.
iTunes can't control an iPod; if you tell it to play music, the music is not played through the iPod but only through the computer. As such, it's hard to argue that iTunes commands the iPod; it solely loads data to and from the iPod, and if that's patentable, we're all fucked.
For a long time, yes. Worked great for AT&T, too.
It was when they stopped that they ran into trouble.
Looks like their Chicago office will be strictly ad sales (not surprising, given that Chicago has a relatively large advertising market) and a data center (not surprising, given that Chicago is a major network hub for the Midwest).
In other words, if you *do* have a Ph.D., don't expect to apply to their Chicago office.
You certainly need to get your patents filed first.
Actually, no. You need to file your patents within one year of going public in the US. If, during that year, someone else tries to patent it, all you need to do is provide the *dated* proof of invention (you did remember to maintain a valid dated proof of invention, right?) and you're golden.
I see some of the ghosting, but mostly only with it wide-wide open and a light source in picture. If you're stopped down, or the light source is out of frame, I don't see it as much.
Still. Best value/money of any lens I own.
Actually, the guy who used to live in my apartment (we're friends) has a $50,000 digital MF back. Creates 100MB raw files. Why? Because he creates files that are blown up to the size of a building. He's a professional product photographer, mainly for food - McDonald's billboards need to look good too. Yes, he takes 25 megapixel images, give or take a few megapixels. The market very much is there, pretty much for the same people and the same reasons as the market for film 4x5 backs now - professionals. He tells me that most of the people he works with now do their MF work digitally.
Better Light makes a 4x5 digital scan back, for that matter. Large format digital will get there, just as digital is slowly taking over the MF market.
The documentation for the file format is available and widespread; as such, while the average computer user won't be able to write something to read it, someone will be able to, and some programmer with snaps of his (or someone else's) childhood visit to Aruba he wants to look at will invariably write one in F++, or Z++, or whatever the coding language du jour is. For that matter, I'm sure there's a LISP JPEG decoder, and LISP will never die.
And after all, the average computer user now couldn't write a JPEG decoder either.
Documents based on open (meaning, documented, not meaning Open, you freakish zealots) standards are relatively safe - as long as you can get the bits, and know the standard, implementing decode is easy. Documents based on hidden standards are more of a problem.
Seriously, spend the hundred bucks on the 50/1.8 You will *not* regret it, and it's a hundred bucks, barely a scratch on the cash for that 80-400.
I have a lot of respect for both the D-70 and D-Rebel as the cheapest way to get into real photography. Both are very, very good bodies; the difference, as far as I can see, is that the Nikon kit lens is (as you said) quite, quite good, and the Canon's... isn't. Canon L-glass is good, and Nikkors are generally good, but kit vs. kit, Nikon comes out clearly ahead.
I think my favorite lens for my D-70 is the Nikon 50/1.8, and it's probably my most used lens (although I've been giving the Tokina 12-24 I bought a workout lately). I picked the Nikon 50/1.8 AF-D up for $100, new in box. If you don't have one, it's a cheap investment and well worth it.
(For the record, lens. No e.)
Digital Rebel rocks with the kit lens, folks
No, it really doesn't. The kit lens on the original D-Rebel is just not a good lens. It's a good camera (even though I shoot Nikon, the Rebel's a decent piece of hardware) but the kit lens they sold with the original D-Rebel (did they update it for the new one? I didn't think they did...) was kinda crappy.
Nice links, though. Color service bureaus are always the best places to get real work done.
Screen printing was never the process used to put a photo onto a t-shirt. It's incredibly hard to get tight enough registration to do process color printing with screens.
You're thinking offset printing.
Generally speaking, the photographer could take photos of the wedding party and sell those without permission, so long as the people in the picture are not individually recognizable; i.e. so long as the person isn't really identifiable from the photo at a reasonable glance.
For weddings, this isn't so important, but for street shots, it can be vital.
No, see, they have a steely reserve of will to avoid any further changes, even at the expense of a lawsuit or being attacked by someone with a Colt .45; they thought about a logo change, putting the text into an Olde English font, but decided that they were better off making it a camo logo instead.
Midwest-*based*. They're headquartered in Ohio, which is generally considered part of the midwest.
My Sony amp has been working great for 8 years now.
Denon's amps may be okay, but anything they make with any kind of transport is crap. When I was working radio, we went through 6 Denon CD players in as many months before we said "Screw this" and bought TASCAM. Never looked back, and the TASCAMs are still going strong. Marantz used to make good stuff; too bad Denon bought them.
(This doesn't even get into their truly atrocious service department.)
You do realize that open can mean "fully publicly documented", and not mean "Free", right?
I didn't say it was a *good* idea. Not even that it was a plausible one. Just a possible one.