Far, far different sized battery packs, however. The Prius battery pack is around a hundred pounds, I believe the EV1 pack was close to ten times that size.
But Platt's playlist application also has a rejection history.
Moot.
The rejection of Platt's patent would in no way invalidate it's use as prior art for invalidating a different patent. One of the great things about patent applications, even rejected ones, is that they form a trail of prior art that can be used to invalidate future attempts to patent ideas.
For the prices I gave above, I did not as carefully match these factors. You're welcome to do your own comparison, however the figures were in line with my purchase of the laptop I'm using now about 18 months ago. At that point I did do a very careful analysis of "what I needed", and picked the cheapest way to meet my requirements while maximizing screen resolution. Battery life was comparable enough for the machines I picked then, as were ports and optical drives. Included software was less a factor since I tend towards either very stock applications (browser, IM) or professonal products (Photoship, Capture One Pro) that are available on both platforms but cost significant money. Still, just having Unix under the hood I probably would have thrown a few hundred for, just not $1500. (I think originally
I found a more carefully crafted comparison "for what I want" to be about $1200 different.)
For this comparison,
I did choose the "better" Dell screen, which was more expensive but is comparable in quality (and higher resolution) than the Apple. The size of the large-display laptops tends to be display driven and is therefore comparable in width and height, wouldn't suprise me if the Apple were thinner, though.
It's worth noting, though, that this is "for what I want." I made no attempt to pick machines that would make sense for other people or work through a variety of machines, I aimed directly for a high-resolution, big display, high-RAM, high-disk-space but not top-clock speed laptop, which is a very specific niche.
I'm writing this on an Inspiron 8600 that I use constantly on photographic travel trips. I do have some complaints, but the machine has taken quite a bit of abuse with no damage, except a broken -off PCMCIA eject lever. Since I'd paid another couple hundred when I bought this for accidental damage protecton (does Apple offer that yet?), that lever and the motherboard it's attached to were replaced quickly and efficiently, at no charge, they even provided the box to pack the unit in.
IBM doesn't make a laptop with that size display, the closest comparable I could find is $2737, near the price of the Dell, and it's stuck with a stupid pointing stick.
My statement, and I quote, was it is in fact quote possible that most American Christians are evolution-deniers.
I think the polls are sufficient to support the contention of possiblity. Thus, I stick by my assertion that the misdirected, evidence-free response of the grandparent post contributes nothing, since the use of "possible" is clearly distingushable from "likely" or "certain", and
is therefore ironic in it's unlikely parallels
with the evolution-deniers themselves.
I think the people giving Christianity a bad name are in the minority among Christians but they are, unfortunately, a very vocal minority.
Actually, about 45% of Americans believe in creation as-described-by-Biblical literalism, since Christians are only about 77% of Americans, while I am playing a bit fast and loose, it is in fact quote possible that most American Christians are evolution-deniers. If you have facts to support your contention that evolution-denial is a minority of US Christians, I would greatly appreciate a cite.
Hey, it's just a theory, right? After all, only thirty-some percent of US citizens believe there's any scientific evidence for evolution at all, whereas 25 percent believe in the validity of astrology, and 41 percent (may have this last number wrong by a couple) believe in Creationism. (Sources are various Gallup polls.) Clearly equal time is justified, don't you think?
From reading the various articles, Voyager's "three-axis stabilization system" apparently introduces "noise" in the spacecraft trajectory which overwhelm the very tiny effect seen in Pioneer.
While archival paper is interesting to artists, without color management, there's little point to using Zazzle for high-quality reproductions. I have used them for some marketing posters, and they were excellent, and great to work with, but no good color management means they'll miss out on a lot of business from professional artists.
<geeksize>He should try it, then, I'll look forward to seeing one of his immages in the Smithsonian. </geeksize>
What's tragic about what Tom is suggesting is that you CAN'T reshoot a wedding.
Yeah, there's a smaller but real extent to which thats true in my work as well. Many of my best images are quite dependent on particular whether conditions. As an extreme example, This
image gets its effectiveness from light sneaking through a hole in a blanket of clouds in the direction of sunrise, at sunrise, a condition which lasted around 30 seconds and which I haven't seen again there--and clear skies don't produce anything nearly as nice.
Not that it's nearly the same situation in general, I don't have to deal with clients emotionally invested in a single moment, (they never see the inevitable images that don't make the cut in my biz), it's just quite a different
thing.
I'm with you on digital. But it's still true, in my experience, that a fast frame capture rate is no substitute for having the composition, exposure, focus, and moment right the first time. The way I read the parent of my post above seemed to suggest that if you had a machine gun you didn't need to be able to aim, or to know the precise moment to fire. In my experience with wildlife, this is hardly the case, a fast capture rate helps, but doesn't preclude the need for someone who can make stuff happen right the first time.
(geeksizing)1 Gig is tiny, I tend to usually carry 10G in CF cards around when I work. I'd expect that a wedding photographer would need at least as much. But yeah, memory is cheap, and that's far from my point.(/geeksizing)
Just to chime in on this, Costco does do great prints for cheap, and Dry Creeks profiles for those printers are "pretty good," I have seen issues in the near-neutrals with the DC profiles, but otherwise my results have been fabulous.
I still use a high-end service bureau (Calypso Imaging in Santa Clara) for my large fine art prints (the LightJet profiles they provide are far more than "pretty good", they're dead-on on-target, and Costco doesn't do 96x72 prints), but I still use Costco prints for press, for pages of thumbnails I use in marketing my image, and for "mini prints" of some images that don't feature greys. (For large prints, it's not worth saving the few bucks Costco would save me for other sort of "workflow" reasons.)
A real pro will shoot several shots for each one they keep, with slight variations in lighting, etc.
That's true in my line of professional photography, but not for wedding photographers. Really good wedding photographers, like street or documentary photographers, do their best work by capturing a particular moment or emotion, those expressions are fleeting, and can't be replicated.
Slashdot Mirror
Nods. Certainly Microsoft/Hotmail, or Yahoo!, or my ISP, would never, ever look at the email that flows through and onto their servers. Oh no.
To the contrary, one can read Weinberg's express reasons for coining the word in interviews such as this one.
Far, far different sized battery packs, however. The Prius battery pack is around a hundred pounds, I believe the EV1 pack was close to ten times that size.
Moot.
The rejection of Platt's patent would in no way invalidate it's use as prior art for invalidating a different patent. One of the great things about patent applications, even rejected ones, is that they form a trail of prior art that can be used to invalidate future attempts to patent ideas.
Yeah, my sense is that the iBooks are more competetive, but they're not what I needed, so I haven't done that research.
For this comparison, I did choose the "better" Dell screen, which was more expensive but is comparable in quality (and higher resolution) than the Apple. The size of the large-display laptops tends to be display driven and is therefore comparable in width and height, wouldn't suprise me if the Apple were thinner, though.
It's worth noting, though, that this is "for what I want." I made no attempt to pick machines that would make sense for other people or work through a variety of machines, I aimed directly for a high-resolution, big display, high-RAM, high-disk-space but not top-clock speed laptop, which is a very specific niche.
I'm writing this on an Inspiron 8600 that I use constantly on photographic travel trips. I do have some complaints, but the machine has taken quite a bit of abuse with no damage, except a broken -off PCMCIA eject lever. Since I'd paid another couple hundred when I bought this for accidental damage protecton (does Apple offer that yet?), that lever and the motherboard it's attached to were replaced quickly and efficiently, at no charge, they even provided the box to pack the unit in.
IBM doesn't make a laptop with that size display, the closest comparable I could find is $2737, near the price of the Dell, and it's stuck with a stupid pointing stick.
Getting to spend an extra $1,522 (plus tax) for little benefit, apparently.
17" Powerbook 1440x900, 2GB, 100GB disk, 3 years warranty: $3898+tax.
17" Dell Inspiron 1920x900, 2GB RAM, 100 GB disk, 3 years warranty: $2376+tax.
The irony, it burns.
I think the polls are sufficient to support the contention of possiblity. Thus, I stick by my assertion that the misdirected, evidence-free response of the grandparent post contributes nothing, since the use of "possible" is clearly distingushable from "likely" or "certain", and is therefore ironic in it's unlikely parallels with the evolution-deniers themselves.
You provided none in rebuttal. It is ironic that you should use this as a refutation in this discussion.
One?
Actually, about 45% of Americans believe in creation as-described-by-Biblical literalism, since Christians are only about 77% of Americans, while I am playing a bit fast and loose, it is in fact quote possible that most American Christians are evolution-deniers. If you have facts to support your contention that evolution-denial is a minority of US Christians, I would greatly appreciate a cite.
Hey, it's just a theory, right? After all, only thirty-some percent of US citizens believe there's any scientific evidence for evolution at all, whereas 25 percent believe in the validity of astrology, and 41 percent (may have this last number wrong by a couple) believe in Creationism. (Sources are various Gallup polls.) Clearly equal time is justified, don't you think?
Give it time, give it time.
From reading the various articles, Voyager's "three-axis stabilization system" apparently introduces "noise" in the spacecraft trajectory which overwhelm the very tiny effect seen in Pioneer.
While archival paper is interesting to artists, without color management, there's little point to using Zazzle for high-quality reproductions. I have used them for some marketing posters, and they were excellent, and great to work with, but no good color management means they'll miss out on a lot of business from professional artists.
<geeksize>He should try it, then, I'll look forward to seeing one of his immages in the Smithsonian. </geeksize>
What's tragic about what Tom is suggesting is that you CAN'T reshoot a wedding.
Yeah, there's a smaller but real extent to which thats true in my work as well. Many of my best images are quite dependent on particular whether conditions. As an extreme example, This image gets its effectiveness from light sneaking through a hole in a blanket of clouds in the direction of sunrise, at sunrise, a condition which lasted around 30 seconds and which I haven't seen again there--and clear skies don't produce anything nearly as nice.
Not that it's nearly the same situation in general, I don't have to deal with clients emotionally invested in a single moment, (they never see the inevitable images that don't make the cut in my biz), it's just quite a different thing.
And yes, it is tragic.
(geeksizing)1 Gig is tiny, I tend to usually carry 10G in CF cards around when I work. I'd expect that a wedding photographer would need at least as much. But yeah, memory is cheap, and that's far from my point.(/geeksizing)
I still use a high-end service bureau (Calypso Imaging in Santa Clara) for my large fine art prints (the LightJet profiles they provide are far more than "pretty good", they're dead-on on-target, and Costco doesn't do 96x72 prints), but I still use Costco prints for press, for pages of thumbnails I use in marketing my image, and for "mini prints" of some images that don't feature greys. (For large prints, it's not worth saving the few bucks Costco would save me for other sort of "workflow" reasons.)
That's true in my line of professional photography, but not for wedding photographers. Really good wedding photographers, like street or documentary photographers, do their best work by capturing a particular moment or emotion, those expressions are fleeting, and can't be replicated.
Yup, I did. :/
Read the rest of my thread, I appreciate deeply your colorful demonstration of my actual point.