It's not different than developing for any other phone... and that's why so few people used non-preinstalled apps on their phone before the iPhone. Look at Symbian, it's a clusterfuck of versions, headsets and implementations. My last Symbian phone would crash if I tried to used T9 in my favorite IRC app and GMail would just quit after 2-3 emails. Screw that.
It is completely different than developing for a PC because computers are viewed by consumers as platforms while phones are viewed as tools/electronic gadgets. If an game doesn't run on somebody's PC, they'll update their drivers, reboot their machine, etc. If an app doesn't work on someone's phone, they say, "what is this shit" and complain about the app. It needs to just work.
Look, at the end of the day app developers want to make money. If they can do it by developing against 3 phones/OS configs vs 200+, that's a huge savings.
Apple stuff are available soon after they are announced. You can actually buy the stuff ! Similarly, they do not promise stuff. People that bought the first iPhone knew they wouldnt get the MMS, Copy-Paste,... You get what's on the box - no surprises or false hopes.
Yeah, I'd expand on this: everything that they promise works well. This is a pretty big deal in the world of mobile phones - if you look at a list of functions, the Nokia I had before my iphone was a superior product. In practice, apps crashed, I got the GPS to work once and using T9 would crash the phone regularly. Everything I've tried to use in my iphone 3G works.
Re:Imagine if you had to Hack Windows to run on a
on
The Hackintosh Guide
·
· Score: 1
Five years is 'relatively recently' in the world of computers?
Kodak makes a ton of sensor for other camera companies, including some of the best, high-end medium format sensors in the game. None of the film manufacturers has done as well in the digital arena: Agfa, Konica, etc. Fuji's doing pretty well, but then they make fine lenses for medium (hasselblad uses them) and large format.
I'm interested by what metric 'many of the new smartphones are better'.
I bought an HTC Android phone that was released under 12 months ago. Compared to the 3 year old iPhone 3G I got after it, it's slower, the software is buggier, most Android apps don't run on it and I can't upgrade it past Android 1.6 - even though there is an update, but the update is carrier-locked.
We're supposed to be logical and have superior reasoning abilities, and there's absolutely nothing logical or reasonable about getting ink permanently injected into your skin.
That's the most common FUD you hear about geeks and nerds. In reality, geeks characterize themselves with poor social skills, a simple single-mindedness that often misses the forest for the trees and an inability to treat viewpoints other than their own as valid.
Your post is symptomatic of that kind of thinking. There are logical reasons to get tattoos, your inability to realize is pathetic.
HTC doesn't offer a 2.1 upgrade for my HTC Tattoo. Period. It's supposed to "real soon now", it doesn't. Is Google at fault? Is Android? Is HTC? You know what, I don't care, it just doesn't work.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
I have an HTC Tattoo, the I can't use a bunch of apps I'd love to use on it, a couple others crash. Fragmentation has pretty made Symbian a platform only the nerdiest geeks code for, I'd love to see that not happen to Android too.
Linux is getting it's ass handed on the desktop by OS X, which is what a desktop unix OS should be like for most people. It's not dying on the desktop, it's been pretty much dead for a while.
I have an Android phone, to say that it's quite strong and more polished than an iPhone is a joke. There really is no comparison.
Thats 6 hours left to exercise outside, is that not an incredibly high amount?
you're kidding, right? in the summer, especially when my parents were working, i'd have 16-17 hours of free time/day. on a good day, 90% of that was spent outside or at least out of the house.
Re:File size of jQuery
on
jQuery Cookbook
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
the slashdot page i read this on is 281k. come join us here in 2010.
A noted Nikon writer, Thom Hogan has been writing about a more modular system and how it would make financial and market sense to Nikon (or whoever adopted that strategy). Probably won't ever come to fruition as the Japanese camera makers are very, very conservative and the cost to enter the market very high,.
It also makes no financial sense to create a system like this. A camera company could approach it in one of three ways: * Put a cheap sensor on a back, price it low enough that people can get it instead of a cheap DSLR and put it on their old manual SLR. Cons: the low-end dslr market is among the most lucrative in digital photography; the support for this item would be a nightmare as thousands of buyers try to mate their backs with cameras that haven't been touched in 20 years. * Put a cheap sensor on a back, price it equal to the cheaper full frame offerings. Cons: almost nobody buys it as most people prefer to get a modern camera than trying to jerry rig a back onto a manual camera. As vocal as this market might be, it's pretty small and mostly made up of budget conscious buyers, which would limit the market even more. * Put a great sensor on a back, price it around the top-end full frame offerings. Cons: 20 people buy them, anybody else who can afford it buys a modern camera.
I'm pretty sure Canon and Nikon have both done their homework on this one, and it just doesn't make any sense for them
I read the stuff you linked over at Thom's and I think he's been hanging around the forums too much. Olympus isn't popular because m4/3 is open standard and takes lens adapters, it's popular because Olympus is a camera company (unlike Samsung) and they made a decent-sized splash marketing their new digital PENs. Samsung is such a fringe brand in prosumer digital cameras that I honestly have never seen a Samsung DSLR outside of a store. The whole m43/4/3 standard was really just a way for Olympus to work its way out of obscurity after abandoning SLRs after the OM range. Cause if there's one thing about digital hitting the camera market, it gave a LOT more money to the camera manufacturers.
They've been doing this ever since the first digital backs came out in 1992. You put the back on your 'blad (or, generally speaking, any MF cam you can mount your back on to - I've seen hacks putting them onto Rollei TLRs), connect a cable to PC sync port in the lens (where the shutter is) and you're good to go. If you need to trigger strobes, most backs have their own PC sync. Ta-da.
Seriously, you can put a MF back on a shoebox with a pinhole in it and you'll get a picture, just short the PC sync cable to fire it. Soooo not news.
I own a blad, but there is no way I can afford this back (yet). Nor would it be justified for the shooting I do. That said, if Nikon would offer backs that would fit their older cameras I would be in the market, especially if they were <$1000 and FX sensor size, even if "only" 6 to 10 MP.
Dear Nikon: I want a digital back for my F3HP and my 90s please. -nB
The only way this will happen is if Canon does it first. Let's be realistic, there is no reason for Nikon to shit all over it's most profitable, sub $1k market with a support-intensive, low margin piece of gear.
Are you out of your mind? Every time I finish a shoot with medium format and Polaroids I throw out a small baggie full of trash: boxes, wrappers, polaroid crap, etc. Then I use a couple liters of distilled water (that I burn gas, to get it to my house) and a bunch of chemicals to actually get an image - oh yeah, that generates trash too (film cassettes, 120 film paper backing, spools, etc). The landfill space needed to cover 5 years of shooting is magnitudes greater than for digital.
Hell, they just stopped making Neopan 400 because a toxic chemical was used to make it.
Because to get 30 quality megapixels with a decent dmax from a film scan you need at least a dedicated film scanner, something along the lines of a Nikon 9000 ED, and even then, you can't see your work as you go.
The only effect that delimiting the number of medallions in play would have is a decimation of the livelihood of taxi drivers. Prices are fixed, so nothing would be gained from increasing competition. There would just be a lot more drivers trying to service the same number of riders.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not different than developing for any other phone... and that's why so few people used non-preinstalled apps on their phone before the iPhone. Look at Symbian, it's a clusterfuck of versions, headsets and implementations. My last Symbian phone would crash if I tried to used T9 in my favorite IRC app and GMail would just quit after 2-3 emails. Screw that.
It is completely different than developing for a PC because computers are viewed by consumers as platforms while phones are viewed as tools/electronic gadgets. If an game doesn't run on somebody's PC, they'll update their drivers, reboot their machine, etc. If an app doesn't work on someone's phone, they say, "what is this shit" and complain about the app. It needs to just work.
Look, at the end of the day app developers want to make money. If they can do it by developing against 3 phones/OS configs vs 200+, that's a huge savings.
Apple stuff are available soon after they are announced. You can actually buy the stuff ! Similarly, they do not promise stuff. People that bought the first iPhone knew they wouldnt get the MMS, Copy-Paste, ... You get what's on the box - no surprises or false hopes.
Yeah, I'd expand on this: everything that they promise works well. This is a pretty big deal in the world of mobile phones - if you look at a list of functions, the Nokia I had before my iphone was a superior product. In practice, apps crashed, I got the GPS to work once and using T9 would crash the phone regularly. Everything I've tried to use in my iphone 3G works.
Five years is 'relatively recently' in the world of computers?
Kodak makes a ton of sensor for other camera companies, including some of the best, high-end medium format sensors in the game. None of the film manufacturers has done as well in the digital arena: Agfa, Konica, etc. Fuji's doing pretty well, but then they make fine lenses for medium (hasselblad uses them) and large format.
wait, so do you like a real keyboard or are you writing this on your eeepc?
I'm interested by what metric 'many of the new smartphones are better'.
I bought an HTC Android phone that was released under 12 months ago. Compared to the 3 year old iPhone 3G I got after it, it's slower, the software is buggier, most Android apps don't run on it and I can't upgrade it past Android 1.6 - even though there is an update, but the update is carrier-locked.
So yeah, I'm curious.
We're supposed to be logical and have superior reasoning abilities, and there's absolutely nothing logical or reasonable about getting ink permanently injected into your skin.
That's the most common FUD you hear about geeks and nerds. In reality, geeks characterize themselves with poor social skills, a simple single-mindedness that often misses the forest for the trees and an inability to treat viewpoints other than their own as valid.
Your post is symptomatic of that kind of thinking. There are logical reasons to get tattoos, your inability to realize is pathetic.
I'm not a hardcore player, but I play League of Legends for about 3-4 hours a day every day.
How the hell can you do anything other than work or sleep for 21-28h/week and not think you're doing it "hardcore".
Again: I don't care. And Cyanogen doesn't run on my phone.
This is the strength of the open platform.
Having a limited audience and increased development costs is a strength? Awesome.
HTC doesn't offer a 2.1 upgrade for my HTC Tattoo. Period. It's supposed to "real soon now", it doesn't. Is Google at fault? Is Android? Is HTC? You know what, I don't care, it just doesn't work.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
I have an HTC Tattoo, the I can't use a bunch of apps I'd love to use on it, a couple others crash. Fragmentation has pretty made Symbian a platform only the nerdiest geeks code for, I'd love to see that not happen to Android too.
Linux is getting it's ass handed on the desktop by OS X, which is what a desktop unix OS should be like for most people. It's not dying on the desktop, it's been pretty much dead for a while.
I have an Android phone, to say that it's quite strong and more polished than an iPhone is a joke. There really is no comparison.
for $200/month, the only international travel you'll be doing from Texas is roadtrips to Mexcio.
Also laptop ram is pretty interchangeable, except for that nasty shit Apple pulls with the differing electronegativity.
Is this something new? I bought bog-standard SODIMMs for my Mac Mini and MBP.
Thats 6 hours left to exercise outside, is that not an incredibly high amount?
you're kidding, right? in the summer, especially when my parents were working, i'd have 16-17 hours of free time/day. on a good day, 90% of that was spent outside or at least out of the house.
the slashdot page i read this on is 281k. come join us here in 2010.
A noted Nikon writer, Thom Hogan has been writing about a more modular system and how it would make financial and market sense to Nikon (or whoever adopted that strategy). Probably won't ever come to fruition as the Japanese camera makers are very, very conservative and the cost to enter the market very high,.
It also makes no financial sense to create a system like this. A camera company could approach it in one of three ways:
* Put a cheap sensor on a back, price it low enough that people can get it instead of a cheap DSLR and put it on their old manual SLR. Cons: the low-end dslr market is among the most lucrative in digital photography; the support for this item would be a nightmare as thousands of buyers try to mate their backs with cameras that haven't been touched in 20 years.
* Put a cheap sensor on a back, price it equal to the cheaper full frame offerings. Cons: almost nobody buys it as most people prefer to get a modern camera than trying to jerry rig a back onto a manual camera. As vocal as this market might be, it's pretty small and mostly made up of budget conscious buyers, which would limit the market even more.
* Put a great sensor on a back, price it around the top-end full frame offerings. Cons: 20 people buy them, anybody else who can afford it buys a modern camera.
I'm pretty sure Canon and Nikon have both done their homework on this one, and it just doesn't make any sense for them
I read the stuff you linked over at Thom's and I think he's been hanging around the forums too much. Olympus isn't popular because m4/3 is open standard and takes lens adapters, it's popular because Olympus is a camera company (unlike Samsung) and they made a decent-sized splash marketing their new digital PENs. Samsung is such a fringe brand in prosumer digital cameras that I honestly have never seen a Samsung DSLR outside of a store. The whole m43/4/3 standard was really just a way for Olympus to work its way out of obscurity after abandoning SLRs after the OM range. Cause if there's one thing about digital hitting the camera market, it gave a LOT more money to the camera manufacturers.
They've been doing this ever since the first digital backs came out in 1992. You put the back on your 'blad (or, generally speaking, any MF cam you can mount your back on to - I've seen hacks putting them onto Rollei TLRs), connect a cable to PC sync port in the lens (where the shutter is) and you're good to go. If you need to trigger strobes, most backs have their own PC sync. Ta-da.
Seriously, you can put a MF back on a shoebox with a pinhole in it and you'll get a picture, just short the PC sync cable to fire it. Soooo not news.
I own a blad, but there is no way I can afford this back (yet). Nor would it be justified for the shooting I do. That said, if Nikon would offer backs that would fit their older cameras I would be in the market, especially if they were <$1000 and FX sensor size, even if "only" 6 to 10 MP.
Dear Nikon:
I want a digital back for my F3HP and my 90s please.
-nB
The only way this will happen is if Canon does it first. Let's be realistic, there is no reason for Nikon to shit all over it's most profitable, sub $1k market with a support-intensive, low margin piece of gear.
Considering that MF backs are a professional tool, the analogy I always use is: I don't see you bitching about the price of F1 cars.
Are you out of your mind? Every time I finish a shoot with medium format and Polaroids I throw out a small baggie full of trash: boxes, wrappers, polaroid crap, etc. Then I use a couple liters of distilled water (that I burn gas, to get it to my house) and a bunch of chemicals to actually get an image - oh yeah, that generates trash too (film cassettes, 120 film paper backing, spools, etc). The landfill space needed to cover 5 years of shooting is magnitudes greater than for digital.
Hell, they just stopped making Neopan 400 because a toxic chemical was used to make it.
Because to get 30 quality megapixels with a decent dmax from a film scan you need at least a dedicated film scanner, something along the lines of a Nikon 9000 ED, and even then, you can't see your work as you go.
http://www.anythingbutipod.com/archives/images/10-years-of-mp3/creative-nomad-jukebox.jpg
Are you serious?
The only effect that delimiting the number of medallions in play would have is a decimation of the livelihood of taxi drivers. Prices are fixed, so nothing would be gained from increasing competition. There would just be a lot more drivers trying to service the same number of riders.