Knowimagination
Mar 6, 04:21 PM
I noticed today that someone is already in line at the Knox Henderson store. They had a tent setup.
Probably the same guy that was on the news before the iPhone 4 launch.
Probably the same guy that was on the news before the iPhone 4 launch.
thatisme
Mar 29, 12:37 PM
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-is-lens-review.aspx
go down to COMPARED ..
now roll over the images.. if you tell me that that 55-250 shot is a 1.6 crop and the 70-X shots are very different you DO live on another plant (the 55-250 shot was manualy zoomed to match the 70-X shot hence the SLIGHT difference in focal length).. I am assuming same camera..as the review is about the lens and the FoV is too close to be recreated beteen full frame and crop.
you are twisting things nicely around now..
@Cliff, my bad I remember seen the high speed crop also on the D3 series but I might be wrong. The D700 however does have a crop but also allows you to shoot your DX lens on full frame (which will vignette) but has no speed increase over the full frame mode.
Thatisme:
It is kind of funny how you try to wiggle yourself out of this though...
We (a buddy and me here, pro photographer but you would dismiss this anyway as him not knowing either, are having a great time with your "knowledge" and your way of going from the 200mm debacle to IMAGE... and no, the image will still not be different between an EF-s and an EF lens at the same focal length on the same body.
End of story..if you are so sure.. why don't YOU prove ME wrong? you posted 1 picture of a modified 5d, which wasnt even yours. there is no 10mm on full frame (hence the vigneting) so you would have to shoot that 52 with the 10-22 at 22mm and then use a full frame 22 milimeter lens and compare it, because you ARE arguing, at least now, that the image will be different. It won't except for the vignetting.. re-read your own statements from before and watch how you ended up now on the "image" :)
Don't worry, by Monday I will prove it to you but why don't you prove me wrong before?.. I dare you.
EF-s lens and EF (or DX and FX for me) at the same focal length on the same camera, same f stop, same shutter speed... Exif data intact.
To the OP: I have to apologize for this and this is the last post related to Thats me from my side:
To answer your question: EF-s is cheaper as stated before the mess and is targeted specifically for the crop sensor bodies. You CAN fit both EF-s and EF on a crop sensor body and you will get the same image. EF lenses are just made for full frame as also stated before.
sorry for the mess.
With your link provided, I agree there is a slight difference there, but as you said, you ASSUME that it was with the same camera.... That would be my assumption as well, however, that example hardly makes your case, as the 70mm had to be manually dialed in... a small change has a big effect at long distances.... just saying... Show it using a prime (can't) or at the long end of the lens where there is no room for error or adjustment (200mm example). Eliminate all variables.
So, quit your arguing and prove it with a real world example with your gear. I don't own any EF-S lenses anymore, so let's get that in the great wide open, so I can't run this comparison for you. There is a fundamental reason for that, which gets more to the point of the OP... Image quality is flat out crap as compared with Canon's L glass, which just so happens to be only in the EF mount. Right, wrong or somewhere in-between, this discussion has no bearing for me, since I will never own another EF-S lens anyway. To that point, I won't ever own a 1.6 crop camera again either, for what it's worth.
I have no further interest in this discussion, so have fun. Enjoy.
go down to COMPARED ..
now roll over the images.. if you tell me that that 55-250 shot is a 1.6 crop and the 70-X shots are very different you DO live on another plant (the 55-250 shot was manualy zoomed to match the 70-X shot hence the SLIGHT difference in focal length).. I am assuming same camera..as the review is about the lens and the FoV is too close to be recreated beteen full frame and crop.
you are twisting things nicely around now..
@Cliff, my bad I remember seen the high speed crop also on the D3 series but I might be wrong. The D700 however does have a crop but also allows you to shoot your DX lens on full frame (which will vignette) but has no speed increase over the full frame mode.
Thatisme:
It is kind of funny how you try to wiggle yourself out of this though...
We (a buddy and me here, pro photographer but you would dismiss this anyway as him not knowing either, are having a great time with your "knowledge" and your way of going from the 200mm debacle to IMAGE... and no, the image will still not be different between an EF-s and an EF lens at the same focal length on the same body.
End of story..if you are so sure.. why don't YOU prove ME wrong? you posted 1 picture of a modified 5d, which wasnt even yours. there is no 10mm on full frame (hence the vigneting) so you would have to shoot that 52 with the 10-22 at 22mm and then use a full frame 22 milimeter lens and compare it, because you ARE arguing, at least now, that the image will be different. It won't except for the vignetting.. re-read your own statements from before and watch how you ended up now on the "image" :)
Don't worry, by Monday I will prove it to you but why don't you prove me wrong before?.. I dare you.
EF-s lens and EF (or DX and FX for me) at the same focal length on the same camera, same f stop, same shutter speed... Exif data intact.
To the OP: I have to apologize for this and this is the last post related to Thats me from my side:
To answer your question: EF-s is cheaper as stated before the mess and is targeted specifically for the crop sensor bodies. You CAN fit both EF-s and EF on a crop sensor body and you will get the same image. EF lenses are just made for full frame as also stated before.
sorry for the mess.
With your link provided, I agree there is a slight difference there, but as you said, you ASSUME that it was with the same camera.... That would be my assumption as well, however, that example hardly makes your case, as the 70mm had to be manually dialed in... a small change has a big effect at long distances.... just saying... Show it using a prime (can't) or at the long end of the lens where there is no room for error or adjustment (200mm example). Eliminate all variables.
So, quit your arguing and prove it with a real world example with your gear. I don't own any EF-S lenses anymore, so let's get that in the great wide open, so I can't run this comparison for you. There is a fundamental reason for that, which gets more to the point of the OP... Image quality is flat out crap as compared with Canon's L glass, which just so happens to be only in the EF mount. Right, wrong or somewhere in-between, this discussion has no bearing for me, since I will never own another EF-S lens anyway. To that point, I won't ever own a 1.6 crop camera again either, for what it's worth.
I have no further interest in this discussion, so have fun. Enjoy.
BornAgainMac
Apr 25, 05:14 PM
Amazing, and then what? Maybe use it twice in your machine's life?
Perhaps Family Pack edition only. Or maybe have it a premium option.
Perhaps Family Pack edition only. Or maybe have it a premium option.
JDDavis
Mar 6, 06:44 AM
http://www.mattsepeta.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Sepeta-Photography-4.jpg
Used some off camera flash to create contrast between the falling snow and the rest of the scene. Totally forgot to CTO gel it but oh well! Even more contrast now!
Nice. My only complaint is the really bright street lamp. It keeps sucking me in. I like the bright lights in the background though. How does this shot look in black and white? I'm a sucker for snow shots in black and white. Don't know why.
Used some off camera flash to create contrast between the falling snow and the rest of the scene. Totally forgot to CTO gel it but oh well! Even more contrast now!
Nice. My only complaint is the really bright street lamp. It keeps sucking me in. I like the bright lights in the background though. How does this shot look in black and white? I'm a sucker for snow shots in black and white. Don't know why.
more...
Perushka
Oct 10, 09:19 AM
If you ask me, it's pretty clear Apple will update all of its laptops before the holiday season. I personally can't wait to buy a new MB, because my 600 MHz G3 iMac is getting a bit sluggish. My question is this: Will it be a simple CPU upgrade, or will Apple change pricing and/or other hardware (such as HD capacity, RAM, etc.)? Oh, and how long do I have to wait?
calcvita
Apr 5, 06:43 PM
Its actually a quite clever design and means that the iProducts 30pin connector can be relevant for many more years to come.
can you please explain to me (or provide a link where it's explained) the benefits of using a 30 pin connector in comparison to a usb port? is it maybe so that apple can sell more adaptors? (i'm not sarcastic on this one, i'd really like to know)
can you please explain to me (or provide a link where it's explained) the benefits of using a 30 pin connector in comparison to a usb port? is it maybe so that apple can sell more adaptors? (i'm not sarcastic on this one, i'd really like to know)
more...
Graeme A
Oct 26, 08:44 PM
for any people having to use windows xp.
IE6 - it works
FF2 - forget it...
IE6 - it works
FF2 - forget it...
yankeedoodle
Nov 22, 02:18 AM
Sounds like cold fusion to me... :D
more...
Lord Appleseed
Apr 21, 10:16 AM
I doubt backlit keyboard will come back on MBA. Apple is trying to differentiate the MBP and MBA. Backlit keyboard is one of their lists.
^THIS
Why do people think its necessary or will eventually come back?
Also SB + BL Keyboard VS Nvidia GPU makes no sense.
^THIS
Why do people think its necessary or will eventually come back?
Also SB + BL Keyboard VS Nvidia GPU makes no sense.
berrykerry789
May 6, 10:17 PM
Anyone have a free beta key that they can give to me? i cant preorder because i live in china... :(
more...
InuNacho
Apr 5, 06:23 PM
Cool, Apple won a patent for a miniature Sonic & Knuckles cartridge that plugs directly into your Thunderbolt capable computer.
iphoneblack
Mar 23, 08:15 PM
iBomb
which only kill evil people :D
which only kill evil people :D
more...
mrgreen4242
Dec 10, 11:23 AM
what kind of ram does it use? DDR?
No, I'm guessing it's PC133. I'll pull it apart to double check when I get a minute over the weekend.
No, I'm guessing it's PC133. I'll pull it apart to double check when I get a minute over the weekend.
.jpg "Happy Independence Day India")
fun173
Mar 20, 11:51 PM
Today my friend and i recorded this song and a couple others, this was our favorite and we wanted to see if people liked it so i thought i would ask you all :)
I know the recording quality is not the best but we will re-do it soon.
What do you all think?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0tTQe8qhJU
I know the recording quality is not the best but we will re-do it soon.
What do you all think?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0tTQe8qhJU
more...
.jpg "4 u nd my all visiting frnd")
str1f3
Apr 17, 12:16 PM
The good news is that Apple's iPhone OS won't be the dominating mobile platform for much longer. The sales numbers show that Android is quickly gaining momentum, and Google's marketplace is not censored at all and developers can choose whatever development tool they want to produce software for Android.
Just because they went from 2.5% to 5.2% in the US means nothing. Apple is at 25%. It is a lot harder to get into the higher market. All that they've been showing is that they can take some of Palm and WM6 marketshare.
http://www.tipb.com/images/stories/2010/02/marketshare-comscore-400x282.png
Apple will soon fall back into that little niche where they came from. And they deserve it because of their megalomaniac behavior and arrogant attitude.
History is going to repeat itself because Apple hasn't learned from their mistakes in the past. They lost the desktop to Microsoft because Apple refused to open their platform to third parties. Now they will lose the mobile market to Google.
Do you mean history will repeat itself like the Mac/PC wars or like the iPod? Maybe I'm missing something when you say "They lost the desktop to Microsoft because Apple refused to open their platform to third parties" because what comes to my mind is ActiveX and DirectX.
The WePad is going to ship in July. Even if it might not be as sexy as the over-hyped iPad, it is an OPEN device. And in the end, the open platform will win.
You do realize that no one is really mentioning the WePad (lol) except pretty much Germany. Go look at the current success of the iPad. If you think you can just blow up Android apps and it will be just like the iPad you're fooling yourself.
As for your Android is "OPEN" comment, I don't think you know what "open" actually means.
Is Android Evil? (http://www.visionmobile.com/blog/2010/04/is-android-evil/)
1. Private branches. There are multiple, private codelines available to selected partners (typically the OEM working on an Android project) on a need-to-know basis only.
2. Closed review process. All code reviewers work for Google, meaning that Google is the only authority that can accept or reject a code submission from the community.
3. Speed of evolution. Google innovates the Android platform at a speed that�s unprecedented for the mobile industry, releasing 4 major updates (1.6 to 2.1) in 18 months. OEMs wanting to build on Android have no choice but to stay close to Google so as not to lose on new features/bug fixes released.
4. Incomplete software. The public SDK is by no means sufficient to build a handset. Key building blocks missing are radio integration, international language packs, operator packs � and of course Google�s closed source apps like Market, Gmail and GTalk.
5. Gated developer community. Android Market is the exclusive distribution and discovery channel for the 40,000+ apps created by developers; and is available to phone manufacturers on separate agreement.
6. Anti-fragmentation agreement. Little is known about the anti-fragmentation agreement signed by OHA members but we understand it�s a commitment to not release handsets which are not CTS compliant.
7. Private roadmap. The visibility offered into Android�s roadmap is pathetic. At the time of writing, the roadmap published publicly is a year out of date (Q1 2009). To get a sneak peak into the private roadmap you need Google�s blessing.
8. Android trademark. Google holds the trademark to the Android name; as a manufacturer you can only leverage on the Android branding with approval from Google.
On a more personal note: I do not need and I do not want Apple to tell me what I can read or see on my device. If I want to see naked flesh, then it's none of Apple's business and they have ZERO rights to deny me that. (I'm European - we're not prude here and we prefer sex over violence.) If I want to use software that directly competes with Apple's own offers, then obviously their competition is giving me something that I like better than Apple's software products.
As much as I like Apple's computers, I hate their entire AppStore and iPhone SDK policies with a passion.
What you want is a bigger walled garden. You are primarily to only use Google services on Android. I don't like the App Store policies but to simply put out that with Android "is all about choice" is naive. To use half the apps in the Android marketplace your phone has to be rooted (jailbroken).
Ultimately I'd like for Apple to allow third party apps to be downloaded outside of the App Store and can understand why Jobs doesn't want to offer questionable apps on iTunes.
Just because they went from 2.5% to 5.2% in the US means nothing. Apple is at 25%. It is a lot harder to get into the higher market. All that they've been showing is that they can take some of Palm and WM6 marketshare.
http://www.tipb.com/images/stories/2010/02/marketshare-comscore-400x282.png
Apple will soon fall back into that little niche where they came from. And they deserve it because of their megalomaniac behavior and arrogant attitude.
History is going to repeat itself because Apple hasn't learned from their mistakes in the past. They lost the desktop to Microsoft because Apple refused to open their platform to third parties. Now they will lose the mobile market to Google.
Do you mean history will repeat itself like the Mac/PC wars or like the iPod? Maybe I'm missing something when you say "They lost the desktop to Microsoft because Apple refused to open their platform to third parties" because what comes to my mind is ActiveX and DirectX.
The WePad is going to ship in July. Even if it might not be as sexy as the over-hyped iPad, it is an OPEN device. And in the end, the open platform will win.
You do realize that no one is really mentioning the WePad (lol) except pretty much Germany. Go look at the current success of the iPad. If you think you can just blow up Android apps and it will be just like the iPad you're fooling yourself.
As for your Android is "OPEN" comment, I don't think you know what "open" actually means.
Is Android Evil? (http://www.visionmobile.com/blog/2010/04/is-android-evil/)
1. Private branches. There are multiple, private codelines available to selected partners (typically the OEM working on an Android project) on a need-to-know basis only.
2. Closed review process. All code reviewers work for Google, meaning that Google is the only authority that can accept or reject a code submission from the community.
3. Speed of evolution. Google innovates the Android platform at a speed that�s unprecedented for the mobile industry, releasing 4 major updates (1.6 to 2.1) in 18 months. OEMs wanting to build on Android have no choice but to stay close to Google so as not to lose on new features/bug fixes released.
4. Incomplete software. The public SDK is by no means sufficient to build a handset. Key building blocks missing are radio integration, international language packs, operator packs � and of course Google�s closed source apps like Market, Gmail and GTalk.
5. Gated developer community. Android Market is the exclusive distribution and discovery channel for the 40,000+ apps created by developers; and is available to phone manufacturers on separate agreement.
6. Anti-fragmentation agreement. Little is known about the anti-fragmentation agreement signed by OHA members but we understand it�s a commitment to not release handsets which are not CTS compliant.
7. Private roadmap. The visibility offered into Android�s roadmap is pathetic. At the time of writing, the roadmap published publicly is a year out of date (Q1 2009). To get a sneak peak into the private roadmap you need Google�s blessing.
8. Android trademark. Google holds the trademark to the Android name; as a manufacturer you can only leverage on the Android branding with approval from Google.
On a more personal note: I do not need and I do not want Apple to tell me what I can read or see on my device. If I want to see naked flesh, then it's none of Apple's business and they have ZERO rights to deny me that. (I'm European - we're not prude here and we prefer sex over violence.) If I want to use software that directly competes with Apple's own offers, then obviously their competition is giving me something that I like better than Apple's software products.
As much as I like Apple's computers, I hate their entire AppStore and iPhone SDK policies with a passion.
What you want is a bigger walled garden. You are primarily to only use Google services on Android. I don't like the App Store policies but to simply put out that with Android "is all about choice" is naive. To use half the apps in the Android marketplace your phone has to be rooted (jailbroken).
Ultimately I'd like for Apple to allow third party apps to be downloaded outside of the App Store and can understand why Jobs doesn't want to offer questionable apps on iTunes.
toddybody
Apr 19, 12:27 PM
i have it but never use it, to hard to do on that tiny screen. maybe if the 5th gets a 4 inch screen
I always get crap for talking about a 4inch iPhone 5. Not sure why some are so against it.
... I think it would be amazing.
I always get crap for talking about a 4inch iPhone 5. Not sure why some are so against it.
... I think it would be amazing.
more...
KnightWRX
Apr 26, 09:05 AM
That is what the USB stick is for! No need to download from anywhere. Don't cherry pick what you want to see and leave out the other options.
And a Apple branded USB Thumb drive makes no sense cost wise! DVD makes much more sense as an installation media. And you know what, shipping .iso files or images you can write to your own USB stick outside the Mac App Store makes EVEN MORE sense! And even more sense is shipping a simple 20 MB file (either iso or USB thumb drive format) that basically boots the Mac into the installer and gets the rest of the OS from FTP/HTTP! Wow, 1996 called they want their distribution method back...
Stop cherry picking arguments to answer and look, I can abuse exclamation points too!
Saying we need DVD Drives just because all the machines out there (still) have DVD drives is a poor argument - following that we still would have floppies. I don't want a DVD drive in my next machine. I would need it only for reinstalling the OS (which on MacOS I actually never had to do, but worst case it might be needed). Actually I won't have a DVD in my next machine since it will be the MBA. The future is here.
Then that next machine can come with a USB thumb drive like the MBA! But mass duplicating Lion media for retail sale is not about future Mac machines, it's about current owners buying the OS for their current Macs, which currently have DVD drives.
And if you see the whole picture (distribution, shipping, storage, ...) I doubt that a read-only chip on a USB stick is much more expensive - and you save on all new machines the cost for the DVD drive and can use the space for better things. If it is so much more expensive, why does the cheapest Apple laptop come with a USB stick instead of DVD? Yes it might be a tiny bit more expensive.
It's at least 15$ more expensive for a 4 GB drive. More for a 8 GB drive. DVDs cost pennies. USB Flash memory doesn't. You can put your hands over your hears and refuse to listen to the truth all you want, but that's how it is.
Duplication time and costs alone make this prohibitive. Where pressing a DVD takes a few seconds is not less, the Flash memory is limited by its writing speed. 4GB is non-trivial to write out, 8 GB is twice as long. We're talking at least a few minutes per drive. Pair that to the massive parrallele storage array is that writing out these in parallele, and costs go way up over a simple DVD press.
How often to you reinstall your OS that you keep inserting and removing it and scratching it all up? It should be a cheap stick (not good for anything else) that just sits 99.99999% of its time in the shelf. It's not that this is meant as a 'free Apple branded USB Stick' that you use all the time.
Mine is still in its packaing if you want it. I can ship it to you if that is really just you want, instead of spamming the forums asking for an overpriced installation media when DVD makes much more economical sense for Apple and its users.
As for the scratching, reports on the MBA forum are that 1 use is enough to leave the thumb-drive in a less than pristine state. Not multiple. Not "reinstall the OS every week". 1 use. It's just that cheaply made and frankly, from having looked at it, I can agree it is. With no guides to insert it into the port properly, there is no question in my mind that it will get scratched up pretty bad the first time you try to use it.
And a Apple branded USB Thumb drive makes no sense cost wise! DVD makes much more sense as an installation media. And you know what, shipping .iso files or images you can write to your own USB stick outside the Mac App Store makes EVEN MORE sense! And even more sense is shipping a simple 20 MB file (either iso or USB thumb drive format) that basically boots the Mac into the installer and gets the rest of the OS from FTP/HTTP! Wow, 1996 called they want their distribution method back...
Stop cherry picking arguments to answer and look, I can abuse exclamation points too!
Saying we need DVD Drives just because all the machines out there (still) have DVD drives is a poor argument - following that we still would have floppies. I don't want a DVD drive in my next machine. I would need it only for reinstalling the OS (which on MacOS I actually never had to do, but worst case it might be needed). Actually I won't have a DVD in my next machine since it will be the MBA. The future is here.
Then that next machine can come with a USB thumb drive like the MBA! But mass duplicating Lion media for retail sale is not about future Mac machines, it's about current owners buying the OS for their current Macs, which currently have DVD drives.
And if you see the whole picture (distribution, shipping, storage, ...) I doubt that a read-only chip on a USB stick is much more expensive - and you save on all new machines the cost for the DVD drive and can use the space for better things. If it is so much more expensive, why does the cheapest Apple laptop come with a USB stick instead of DVD? Yes it might be a tiny bit more expensive.
It's at least 15$ more expensive for a 4 GB drive. More for a 8 GB drive. DVDs cost pennies. USB Flash memory doesn't. You can put your hands over your hears and refuse to listen to the truth all you want, but that's how it is.
Duplication time and costs alone make this prohibitive. Where pressing a DVD takes a few seconds is not less, the Flash memory is limited by its writing speed. 4GB is non-trivial to write out, 8 GB is twice as long. We're talking at least a few minutes per drive. Pair that to the massive parrallele storage array is that writing out these in parallele, and costs go way up over a simple DVD press.
How often to you reinstall your OS that you keep inserting and removing it and scratching it all up? It should be a cheap stick (not good for anything else) that just sits 99.99999% of its time in the shelf. It's not that this is meant as a 'free Apple branded USB Stick' that you use all the time.
Mine is still in its packaing if you want it. I can ship it to you if that is really just you want, instead of spamming the forums asking for an overpriced installation media when DVD makes much more economical sense for Apple and its users.
As for the scratching, reports on the MBA forum are that 1 use is enough to leave the thumb-drive in a less than pristine state. Not multiple. Not "reinstall the OS every week". 1 use. It's just that cheaply made and frankly, from having looked at it, I can agree it is. With no guides to insert it into the port properly, there is no question in my mind that it will get scratched up pretty bad the first time you try to use it.
Rt&Dzine
Apr 8, 10:04 PM
It appears that a deal has been made.
rdowns
Apr 14, 01:48 PM
I guess we'll now hear Ballmer **** on data centers like he did the original iPhone. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=So7qrFO_p44&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=So7qrFO_p44&feature=related
grooveattack
Feb 23, 03:41 PM
oooo high as pos please. was thinking dvd screen shot but it looks pants.
Thunderhawks
Mar 25, 09:27 AM
Disagree. It's not ridiculous. Valid patent protection is great. That's the whole point of a patent to protect your invention. Any company with a valid invention and patent should pursue any and all infringements.
However, there are many high-tech patents that are BS or weak. Plus, I think patent holders should have to make claims of infringement in a reasonable amount of time after a potential infringement. Sitting back and waiting for products to be wildly successful before pursuing a case is nothing but settlement bloat. Finally, there is patent trolling which should be illegal as it's just lawyers looking to cash in on settlements and costs consumers. Patent trolling is like ambulance chasers. Lowest form of greed.
As I posted before Kodak once was an amazing company with many discoveries and patents in the imaging field.
Anybody close to Rochester NY should go and see their museum.
(You can also see the factory buildings that are being ripped down)
What a shame for this company to lose its vision and completely miss the digital age. (With a few exceptions)
The problem with patents is that the longer they are someplace dormant and unused it will only be a matter of time until somebody has a similar idea, driven by technological advances.
I would imagine that researching any given patent is very hard, depending on how it is worded and how vague and weak it is.
So, Apple and RIM and others may have looked, but not well enough.
Doesn't make them innocent of course and they will have to pay up, if proven.
A revision of patent laws should include that if a patent filer is not using his patented technology within a certain time period it would become open to others. That forces patent trolls to do something, rather then waiting for somebody with vision to make it successful and then cash in.
Buying Kodak may be a good tactic depending on the outcome, but the place is almost dead at this time and anybody who buys it would most likely buy it with the intention to use the patents and close the company altogether.
Only a matter of time.
However, there are many high-tech patents that are BS or weak. Plus, I think patent holders should have to make claims of infringement in a reasonable amount of time after a potential infringement. Sitting back and waiting for products to be wildly successful before pursuing a case is nothing but settlement bloat. Finally, there is patent trolling which should be illegal as it's just lawyers looking to cash in on settlements and costs consumers. Patent trolling is like ambulance chasers. Lowest form of greed.
As I posted before Kodak once was an amazing company with many discoveries and patents in the imaging field.
Anybody close to Rochester NY should go and see their museum.
(You can also see the factory buildings that are being ripped down)
What a shame for this company to lose its vision and completely miss the digital age. (With a few exceptions)
The problem with patents is that the longer they are someplace dormant and unused it will only be a matter of time until somebody has a similar idea, driven by technological advances.
I would imagine that researching any given patent is very hard, depending on how it is worded and how vague and weak it is.
So, Apple and RIM and others may have looked, but not well enough.
Doesn't make them innocent of course and they will have to pay up, if proven.
A revision of patent laws should include that if a patent filer is not using his patented technology within a certain time period it would become open to others. That forces patent trolls to do something, rather then waiting for somebody with vision to make it successful and then cash in.
Buying Kodak may be a good tactic depending on the outcome, but the place is almost dead at this time and anybody who buys it would most likely buy it with the intention to use the patents and close the company altogether.
Only a matter of time.
dscuber9000
Apr 7, 11:23 PM
Yeah, I really don't understand the move to kill planned parenthood. Any way you look at it, killing it would lead to more unwanted pregnancies... which is probably a big contributor to abortions. :p
I think Republicans just have this weird vision for America where everyone is capable and responsible. We're not. So we need planned parenthood.
I think Republicans just have this weird vision for America where everyone is capable and responsible. We're not. So we need planned parenthood.
p0intblank
Oct 26, 09:16 PM
Awesome, I love it! I want to sign up for .Mac so bad, but I can't justify it being worth $99 per year. I would gladly pay $49 per year, especially since I would use iWeb, Photocasting, and all the other good stuff.
WildPalms
Oct 26, 06:40 PM
Ahhh, so then its fine if Apple makes a Photoshop competitor. Sweet.:)
No comments:
Post a Comment