Does anyone else think that the rise in Apache #'s might have a little bit to do with the rise of osX usage?
I mean since osX uses Apache straight out of the box, and more old/New mac users are converting their servers and individual machines to osX don't those machines show up in the survey as Apache Servers if they are online?
Maybe it's just me but; isn't this product all wrong.
Problem #1 PC only. At a time when Mac OSX and Linux have some of the lowest audio Latencies in the industry; and when there is so much more exitement on those platforms what is this company thinking making standard based hardware not platform independent?
Problem #2 Why USB and No Firewire (ieee1394). Newsflasch Hercules, the industry trend for MP3 music is.... iPod and iTunes, mac or pc. You can't make a new DJ product that can't control an iPod. That is just suicide. All it would take for this product to be forgotten, is someone else to intro a firewire based controler that can connect to one or 2 iPods. This would be the true killer application. You have to ride on market successes. Nothing like this works in a Vacuum. I saw this on slashdot and I was so excited until I realized what it was. so so oh hum.
Problem #3. DJ software What *%@#$!!! Why does it need to connect to DJ software. It should manage on it's own. This needs to be able to access and control MP3s and manipulate them the way that a mixer controls sound out of turntables. Have 2 or more sound sources (MP3s) cue them, play/pause them, pitch shift them, beat match, etc, From the console. use a simple interface to load all MP3s from whatever platform or external drive, and allow the console to do it's work internally. not in the host cpu. (this would enable it to control iPods and a bunch of other sound sources.)
hugh....
More poor planing and design. Typical of Vacuum designed products. Get with it.
you should rereadthe previous poster because saying something like "I've never had a client need anything more resolution than what I've been able to deliver digitally." Is silly.
As a "Professional" Graphic designer I can tell you that unless you are talking about material coming from a sinar digital studio camera or a leaf medium format camera back; a slick glossy Magazine Printing at 8.5X11 using even the lower line screen of 150 would still need 300DPI image, which very few Digital cam's can provide.
Which is why you don't see very many Digital originated images at full size in one of these magazines. You do see some at sizes of 3X5 > which can be acceptable, when coming from a good Professional camera such as a Nikon D1 or a Fuji S1, or a Pro Canon or Minolta Camera. But images form Prosumer or high end consumer models from sony, Olympus, Canon and nikon, just don't cut it. No matter how nice their CCD's we are talking about, the dinamic range necessary for true photographic output is not there. No matter what your eyes tells you from a casual look. The differences that we are talking about are not in the traditional visual range, but most people can feel the difference. a trained eye can show you the difference, but most people just feel it. Have you ever picked up a $35 design magazine and compared it to Linux Journal? Usually you can feel the richness and dept of the expensive mag as opposed to the trade mag. (not dept of content) The trade mag uses 35mm film scanned in with High end Flatbed scanner, or even flat art scanned in with The Flatbed. A high end flat bed scanner usually has shadow densities of between 3.0 and 4.0. A drum scanner on the other hand has shadow densities between 4.0 and 6.0, which really allows you to feel the richness of an image. This is what is used to get information of a 4X5 or 2&1/4 transparency. These scanners scan at 1200dpi, at 48bit; and this is what is then downsampled by photoshop. The difference between this process and a flatbed scanning at 600dpi at 36bits is HUGE. A digital camera's CCD even the nicest fanciest Prosumer model is a cripled Flatbed scanner chip. Crippled both because of the camera's usage (fast results, a lot of shaking moving objects.) and because of using less of the ccd's imaging area because of the economics behind the Optics systems.
The end result is that a digital camera, sure can win awards for nicest pretiest snapshots, but they certainly are not treatning Kodak and Fuji's cash cow; because no matter how many images are shot by casual users, the professional still shoots upwards of 1000feet of film in a two week period, as opposed to the 10 feet a year that most casual users shoot.
PS: Yes I know you shoot more with your digital camera. (it still doesn't compares to what a person who does this for a living shoots)
Slashdot Mirror
Does anyone else think that the rise in Apache #'s might have a little bit to do with the rise of osX usage?
I mean since osX uses Apache straight out of the box, and more old/New mac users are converting their servers and individual machines to osX don't those machines show up in the survey as Apache Servers if they are online?
Maybe it's just me but; isn't this product all wrong.
Problem #1 PC only.
At a time when Mac OSX and Linux have some of the lowest audio Latencies in the industry; and when there is so much more exitement on those platforms what is this company thinking making standard based hardware not platform independent?
Problem #2
Why USB and No Firewire (ieee1394).
Newsflasch Hercules, the industry trend for MP3 music is.... iPod and iTunes, mac or pc.
You can't make a new DJ product that can't control an iPod.
That is just suicide.
All it would take for this product to be forgotten, is someone else to intro a firewire based controler that can connect to one or 2 iPods.
This would be the true killer application.
You have to ride on market successes.
Nothing like this works in a Vacuum.
I saw this on slashdot and I was so excited until I realized what it was. so so oh hum.
Problem #3.
DJ software What *%@#$!!!
Why does it need to connect to DJ software.
It should manage on it's own.
This needs to be able to access and control MP3s and manipulate them the way that a mixer controls sound out of turntables.
Have 2 or more sound sources (MP3s) cue them, play/pause them, pitch shift them, beat match, etc, From the console.
use a simple interface to load all MP3s from whatever platform or external drive, and allow the console to do it's work internally. not in the host cpu.
(this would enable it to control iPods and a bunch of other sound sources.)
hugh....
More poor planing and design.
Typical of Vacuum designed products.
Get with it.
you should rereadthe previous poster because saying something like "I've never had a client need anything more resolution than what I've been able to deliver digitally." Is silly.
As a "Professional" Graphic designer I can tell you that unless you are talking about material coming from a sinar digital studio camera or a leaf medium format camera back; a slick glossy Magazine Printing at 8.5X11 using even the lower line screen of 150 would still need 300DPI image, which very few Digital cam's can provide.
Which is why you don't see very many Digital originated images at full size in one of these magazines.
You do see some at sizes of 3X5 > which can be acceptable, when coming from a good Professional camera such as a Nikon D1 or a Fuji S1, or a Pro Canon or Minolta Camera.
But images form Prosumer or high end consumer models from sony, Olympus, Canon and nikon, just don't cut it.
No matter how nice their CCD's we are talking about, the dinamic range necessary for true photographic output is not there.
No matter what your eyes tells you from a casual look.
The differences that we are talking about are not in the traditional visual range, but most people can feel the difference.
a trained eye can show you the difference, but most people just feel it. Have you ever picked up a $35 design magazine and compared it to Linux Journal? Usually you can feel the richness and dept of the expensive mag as opposed to the trade mag.
(not dept of content)
The trade mag uses 35mm film scanned in with High end Flatbed scanner, or even flat art scanned in with The Flatbed. A high end flat bed scanner usually has shadow densities of between 3.0 and 4.0. A drum scanner on the other hand has shadow densities between 4.0 and 6.0, which really allows you to feel the richness of an image.
This is what is used to get information of a 4X5 or 2&1/4 transparency. These scanners scan at 1200dpi, at 48bit; and this is what is then downsampled by photoshop.
The difference between this process and a flatbed scanning at 600dpi at 36bits is HUGE.
A digital camera's CCD even the nicest fanciest Prosumer model is a cripled Flatbed scanner chip.
Crippled both because of the camera's usage (fast results, a lot of shaking moving objects.) and because of using less of the ccd's imaging area because of the economics behind the Optics systems.
The end result is that a digital camera, sure can win awards for nicest pretiest snapshots, but they certainly are not treatning Kodak and Fuji's cash cow; because no matter how many images are shot by casual users, the professional still shoots upwards of 1000feet of film in a two week period, as opposed to the 10 feet a year that most casual users shoot.
PS: Yes I know you shoot more with your digital camera. (it still doesn't compares to what a person who does this for a living shoots)