Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Digital

Submission + - The iPhone As Camera... Where To Now? (utah.edu)

BWJones writes: "Many non-photographers and even photographers, particularly the working professional photographers are accustomed to looking down their nose at cell phones as cameras, but if you look at the market, all of the innovation in photography has been happening with smart phones in the last couple of years. Sure, camera sensors have gotten better and less noisy, but convergent technologies are primarily happening in the smart phone market, not the camera market. On top of that, statistics show that the most common cameras are now cell phone cameras, the iPhone in particular. Flickr reports that as of this posting, the Apple iPhone 4s is the most popular camera in the Flickr Community. If you add in the iPhone 4 and then the large upswing in the newly available iPhone 5 and the now waning iPhone 3GS, you have in the iPhone platform a huge lead in the number of cameras people are using to post to Flickr."

Comment Re:Limitations (Score 4, Informative) 85

The plastics you'd use in a 3D printer aren't going to work all that well compared to the plastics they use for example in Glocks. Not to mention you'd still need to machine the trigger assembly, magazine well, safety assembly, fire select, etc.

Would be nice to be able to make custom grips and stocks but that plastic crap (relatively speaking) the 3D printers use isn't worth it. We tried making a test Glock grip (solid even, no magazine well) and a 4 lb weight. Snapped the grip in half easily. Perhaps with some heat treatment or additional additives in the plastic (baking it perhaps) might make the plastic work better but right now, it's too ... brittle... I guess is the best term. The problem is the way the printer prints, the bond isn't very good between layers base when force is applied perpendicular to the printing plane. Our test grips all break along the plane of the printing. We did another test where we printed out a grip with an approximate magazine well and fitted in a hollow metal slip in there to see if that would shore it up. It just cracks around the metal slip. I think baking it might help with the layers bonding together better but for those of us hoping to get custom grips, stocks, ammo and magazine containers etc are going to have to wait a bit longer. We even tried rotating the print so the plane was rotate 90 degrees and out test pendulum just kept snapping the grip either to the left or right depending on where it hit.

Once someone figures out how to do a fluro polymer type plastic in a 3D printer then we can get some real utility printing done.

Comment Re:Mr. Betteridge says... (Score 1) 767

Well said. You made your point well. I'm going to be more long winded. LOL

My counter would be, but almost anyone can cook.

To the extent that programming correlates to following well known recipes like cooking then anyone can do it.

Programming is such a nebulous word. Is a graphic artist who knows enough web technology to express graphics via CSS, Javascript, Photoshop, etc. a programmer?

Lots of accounts who use Excel can write some fairly sophisticated macros. Are they programming?

Personally I think the article asks the wrong question. The more germane question would be, 'Has the word "programming" become so muddled that it is time to expand the vernacular and come up with canonical classifications of programming?" To that I would answer yes.

In the field of genomics there are "bioinformatic programmers", usually part biologist and part programmer. They don't write application programs per se as much as they write custom analysis of data using scientific algorithms. they are scientists who write code. And, oh, btw, they also have to package that analysis in a program. The application takes a back seat to the analysis.

What is programming? The lack of clarity in definition is very similar situation to the words "software engineer" and "software developer".

Comment Hey Perspective People (Score 2) 680

Hey lets put this in perspective, remember all the people that were murdered by Christian extremists when Mel Gibson made that Passion of the Christ film? And lets not forget all those that died when the Last Temptation of Christ was released. Don't forget those murdered in the name of Christ when Andrew Loyd Webber released Jesus Christ Superstars and certainly have a moment of peace for those murdered every time South Park, Family Guy, The Simpsons, and Comic Artists featured Jesus. I mean don't you remember the "Dogma" massacres as a result of of that film? When Penny Arcade featured Jesus as Metal don't you remember the number of attempts on their lives?

It's a religion of peace people, lets keep this in perspective. Don't let a small, vocal, organized, group of extremists pain a picture of a religion is evil. I am certain those responsible will be arrested by their fellow Muslims and prosecuted for murder by their fellow Muslims.

Now the question you have to ask, "am I being sarcastic, or playing this comment straight?"

Comment Re:flight model (Score 1) 121

No real space battles would happen at long distances. It would be too easy for counter-measures to be deployed at those ranges. At 1000 miles firing two missiles at opposing ships the counter-measures (either opposing missiles, flack, etc) would have several minutes to intercept and make adjustments. At a million, they'd have hours of making minor ( 1 degree) adjustments to intercept. The exception to this rule would be if laser weapons are involved. With conventional ballistics, not really an option for long range engagement. There is a funny but oddly realistic lecture in Mass Effect about shooting a projectile in space that also explains why long range engagements are not a real option. We're not even getting into gravity, plotting an accurate shot over a milion miles would have to account for every object of significant mass between the origin and target. Impractical at best.

Comment What objective? (Score 1) 1154

What is the objective of wider adoption?

"You have to be careful if you are not sure where you are going because you might not get there."
-Yogi Berra

Every since I could dual-boot I have always used both Windows and Linux. Now using both Windows and Linux is much easier with VMs.

Tools are tools and I use Linux and Windows where they most benefit me. To that end I've never used Apple because there is nothing compelling for me on Apple. There have been only two applications I'm aware of on Apple that might convince me to run the Apple OS:
1. Pro Tools
2. Final Cut

Adoption of Linux desktop is lacking a clear objective. I use Linux when it benefits me and Windows the same. Running both is trivial for those who are tech savvy. If you are not tech savvy you probably don't need Linux. Given the advent of smart phones and touch pads then the real question is not the future adoption of Linux Desktop but the future of the desktop in general.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Working...