Re: The MacBook Pro is the most advanced laptop in the world?


"-hh" <recscuba_google@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:8cfeaf56-2ef1-4ee4-ba92-f10ac1a33c4f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"PC Guy" <pc...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In this situation I have used five cards during the shoot.

Nice in theory, but in practice, unless you have a pile of 32MB cards
you've not spent $29 to replace, or you've never had any such need.


Four of those
cards were removed from the camera as part of the shoot. Where the
additional wear and tear on the camera, using the camera to transfer the
pictures, comes from the following:

- Download pictures from card already in the camera
- Power down camera*
- Remove current card*
- Swap in new card*
- Power on camera*

Ah, now I see; your previous description was the problem. This new
description is much better

It's the same description as before.

Everything marked with an asterisk is additional wear that would not be
incurred using a media reader. That situation would look like the following
(the shoot remains the same):

- Remove current card from camera*
- Insert into meda reader
- Download pictures

- Remove current card from media reader
- Insert new meda >>> already taken out of the camera during the shoot <<<
reader
- Download pictures
...

A lot less wear on the camera.

Great in theory, but it only applies for the duty cycle that you
specified. For example, in those instances where the total shoot fits
on a single card, you never have to take it out of the camera at all,
so "Zero" risk of breaking the card door, bending pins (which now only
exist on CF cards), etc.

Hence why I wrote:

"Real photographers (apparently of which Jim is not though he claims to be) don't
use a single memory card but swap them out while shooting."

Damn. I forgot just how low the IQ level of Mactards was.

Did I really need to spell this out for you?

Yes, you needed to be specific and unambiguous. Every post, lest you
be misunderstood, for blaming others for your communication
shortcomings is immature and unprofessional.

No surprise a Mactard attempts to pass of their inability to comprehend written words as someone else's failing. Nothing more to say to you. You're too stupid and I don't feel like dumbing down my arguments to the level of a 1st grader.


And now that I understand your concern, perhaps what you should
consider is identifying primary causes of mechanical failure on
digital cameras and determine if "wear" on card doors, on/off power
buttons, etc are significant concerns. What you'll find is that they
don't wear out - they get broken.

And here's another piece of good news for you: even if you don't
screw up and break it, assuming you're a good enough photographer to
use RAW mode on your dSLR and use a 2GB card, staistically your
camera's shutter will fail at less than 400 card cycles. Or 200 card
fills with a 4GB card.


> Get this: your new camera is either a dSLR-type or an old leftover
> Point & Shoot. Compact digital P&S's that use CF mostly went the way
> of the Dodo around two years ago, with a few holdouts introduced
> Summer 2006.

It's a dSLR. Which is really not that relevant. The important point is the
CF form factor has been around for more than six years.

Bogus hand-waving. Afterall, for how long were 5.25" floppies
around?


> And while CF is still hanging tough in dSLR types...only a matter
> of time until SD capacities allow CF to be dead.

It's only a matter of time before more any technology is replaced with
something else. Therefore we should not include it?

Overall, if it was a single form factor in transition - - such as
5.25" to 3.5" floppy, I'd be inclinded to agree with you, because it
would be a discrete instance with universal acceptance.

However, the problem with the Flash Memory marketplace has been a
failure to standardize. As such, we are confronted with a half dozen
physical form factors, even before we see that each of these physical
forms have multiple firmware/protocol permutations to cope with as
well, to try to figure out which one(s) to support and which to
ignore.


According to Wikipedia SD was developed in 1999 and became available in
2000. Let's just bump it to 2001 for arguments sake. That means it's been
around for at least six years too. How many years have to go by before
you'll accept that a technology is worth adopting?


Depends on how much the Royalties are that have to be paid to the
owner of the product that doesn't have an Open Standard...doesn't it?

Oh, you *did* know that all SD card manufacturers have to pay
Royalties, don't you?

The problem with many of the non-CF formats is that they were
individually developed and purposefully kept to be proprietary. This
lack of open standards restricts competition, and with NDA's, Member
Fees and Royalties, the price on many of these forms of flash memory
were held to be artificialy high. It has demonstrated to be
suficiently lucrative that vendors frequently said "screw the
consumers" and Stove Piped their electronics products to use the flash
memory that they owned the controlling licence for. Sony was memory
stick, Olympus was xD, etc.

So why is CF already dead in compact P&S cameras?
Hint: it was the exception: an open standard.




I didn't limit my comments to just portable computers. I can see your
argument being somewhat reasonable for laptops. But desktops? Come on.
Not a single desktop ships with a media card reader.

True, but an external reader is apparently not a great enough burden
for many customers to be all that concerned about it.

And worse: You can't add an internal one to any model.

Ah, the old "I want a cheap but expandable Mac" arguement is back :-)

Where the interface is located is predicated upon consumer
preference. My Mom's preference is for IIRC the Kodak camera where
the whole camera goes right into a cradle...no need to pull the card
from the camera. In my instance, my newer printer included a couple
of card slots built right in. Plus I'm aware that there's some newer
printer/cameras can go fully wireless and skip the whole PC.


> There's also the Griffin "5-in-one" for EC/34 which costs less than
> the Delkin, but it doesn't apparently support the new SDHD protocol,
> which merely illustrates my point about how much these flash media
> "standards" are a moving target.

The most popular ones are not moving targets nor have they been
so for quite some time.

The most popular one today is SD, and it is currently a moving target
with the fairly recent roll-out of SDHD for 4GB cards, plus it is
pushing into mini-SD and micro-SD for cellphones. More pain-in-the-
ass adaptors to carry around.


Your attempt to portray them as such is nothing more than a
pathetic attempt to apologize for a feature that most anyone working in
multimedia, you know that group of people Apple caters to, are likely to
want.

Oh, please. I'm a tad frustrated that no one makes a compact P&S
that still uses CF, of which I have over 11GB invested in high speed
memory cards and thus, because it is solid state and should have
lasted a long time. I'd prefer to not be effectively forced to have
to replace it, particularly as I'm aware of the self-serving interests
who are all trying to push me onto their format so that they get
Royalties on my replacement memory.

As long as these boys are playing this game, I'd rather hold them off
at arm's length away from my hardware and rely on a USB interface or
similar. For similar reasons, I'm holding off on Blu-Ray vs HD.


-hh

.

Loading