Why DSLR still use CF card?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: A little nostalgia this morning thinking of old dad
Next: There's an app for that: NNTP news reader for Android
From: John Navas on 6 Jul 2010 11:14 On 6 Jul 2010 14:46:45 GMT, in <89gtukF852U25(a)mid.individual.net>, ray <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: >On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 23:36:12 -0700, nospam wrote: >> yes i do, and it's even less likely that a company is going to release >> something open source, particularly a camera company where keeping >> secrets from one's competitors is key. there is absolutely no way that >> these companies would ever open source the 'secret sauce.' in some >> cases, they *can't*. > >B.S. What's the value in keeping 'proprietary secrets' that everyone in >the industry already knows? It's not necessary for a company to spend R&D >time on Linux - all they need to do is release the specs and someone will >write it for them - that simple. Cost may be the reason -- formal release of specs inevitably involves cost issues, especially in terms of support. -- John "Assumption is the mother of all screw ups." [Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]
From: John Navas on 6 Jul 2010 11:20 On 6 Jul 2010 02:22:55 GMT, in <89fibvF852U23(a)mid.individual.net>, ray <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: >On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 20:05:09 -0500, George Kerby wrote: >>>>>> Who can afford A Canon eos 1Ds mk111 ? My pension won't run to it. >>>>> >>>>> Mine would, but I eschew Canon. >>>> >>>> Because? >>> >>> Because they have no support for Linux, I choose to not use their >>> products and support folks who do. >> >> So you don't use their hardware because it doesn't fit your software? > >I don't use their hardware because of philosophical differences. I was >greatly turned off a number of years ago with a Canon winprinter. Likewise, FD lenses in my case. When initially deciding carefully on a lens system, I swallowed the Canon hype on the FD lens mount only to have Canon abandon it after I had invested many thousands of dollars in lenses. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." Should have gone Nikon. Won't buy another Canon product of any kind. -- John "There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves." -Will Rogers
From: George Kerby on 6 Jul 2010 11:37 On 7/5/10 9:22 PM, in article 89fibvF852U23(a)mid.individual.net, "ray" <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: > On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 20:05:09 -0500, George Kerby wrote: > >> On 7/5/10 12:47 PM, in article 89ek5hF852U19(a)mid.individual.net, "ray" >> <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 11:48:32 -0500, George Kerby wrote: >>> >>>> On 7/5/10 9:42 AM, in article 89e9afF852U17(a)mid.individual.net, "ray" >>>> <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 06:33:42 -0500, Neil wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 14:03:10 +0000, ray wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 01:10:42 -0700, james wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> SDxx card have equaled or bettered CF card. Is there a good reason >>>>>>>> why high end DSLRs still use CF cards? This actually seems like a >>>>>>>> turn-off, not a feature. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think one significant reason is that many purchasers are repeat >>>>>>> buyers - they already HAVE CF cards. IMHO - best route is to make a >>>>>>> camera capable of using CF and SD.����O$ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Who can afford A Canon eos 1Ds mk111 ? My pension won't run to it. >>>>> >>>>> Mine would, but I eschew Canon. >>>> >>>> Because? >>> >>> Because they have no support for Linux, I choose to not use their >>> products and support folks who do. >> >> So you don't use their hardware because it doesn't fit your software? > > I don't use their hardware because of philosophical differences. I was > greatly turned off a number of years ago with a Canon winprinter. > >> >> Man, that is something I never would have guessed. >> >> BTW: I don't use the software either, but that doesn't keep me from >> using the best hardware products on the market. > > If I felt I were severely constrained, I might possibly rethink my > position - no evidence so far that I am. An interesting aside: This is the 25th anniversary of Apple's LaserWriter. The machine opened Desktop Publishing for the "little guy". Even at seven grand, (today = $14K), it was a cheap alternative to much more expensive and time consuming lithography techniques available at that time.
From: George Kerby on 6 Jul 2010 11:41 On 7/6/10 10:20 AM, in article o4i636hl30ut0h7kj9veiv67g8cvcnjukm(a)4ax.com, "John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On 6 Jul 2010 02:22:55 GMT, in <89fibvF852U23(a)mid.individual.net>, ray > <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 20:05:09 -0500, George Kerby wrote: > >>>>>>> Who can afford A Canon eos 1Ds mk111 ? My pension won't run to it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Mine would, but I eschew Canon. >>>>> >>>>> Because? >>>> >>>> Because they have no support for Linux, I choose to not use their >>>> products and support folks who do. >>> >>> So you don't use their hardware because it doesn't fit your software? >> >> I don't use their hardware because of philosophical differences. I was >> greatly turned off a number of years ago with a Canon winprinter. > > Likewise, FD lenses in my case. When initially deciding carefully on a > lens system, I swallowed the Canon hype on the FD lens mount only to > have Canon abandon it after I had invested many thousands of dollars in > lenses. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." > Should have gone Nikon. Won't buy another Canon product of any kind. You're a pig-head. It figures. We wouldn't have expected anything else.
From: Floyd L. Davidson on 6 Jul 2010 12:08
John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >On 6 Jul 2010 14:46:45 GMT, in <89gtukF852U25(a)mid.individual.net>, ray ><ray(a)zianet.com> wrote: > >>On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 23:36:12 -0700, nospam wrote: > >>> yes i do, and it's even less likely that a company is going to release >>> something open source, particularly a camera company where keeping >>> secrets from one's competitors is key. there is absolutely no way that >>> these companies would ever open source the 'secret sauce.' in some >>> cases, they *can't*. >> >>B.S. What's the value in keeping 'proprietary secrets' that everyone in >>the industry already knows? It's not necessary for a company to spend R&D >>time on Linux - all they need to do is release the specs and someone will >>write it for them - that simple. > >Cost may be the reason -- formal release of specs inevitably involves >cost issues, especially in terms of support. You meant to say "involves reducing costs"??? -- Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd(a)apaflo.com |