Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Apple REULEZ! (Score 1) 252

by PopeRatzo (#47956571) Attached to: Why You Can't Manufacture Like Apple

. I merely pointed out that as someone who works in the field I might be qualified as a person making an informed choice and not just one of the sheep buying what they're told.

A show of hands here: How many of you know someone who "works in the field" who doesn't really know his ass from an RS 232 connector?

Or maybe the view from inside the brotherhood of computer techs is somewhat different from the view from outside. You might want to make note.

Not you, Marlin. You're probably a fine person and an excellent computer tech. But beware of making appeals to authority. They are a logical trap.

Comment: Re:Apple REULEZ! (Score 1) 252

by PopeRatzo (#47956529) Attached to: Why You Can't Manufacture Like Apple

If someone calls themselves a chef or a foodie, it may not make them right when they say how long you should boil pasta, but it means their opinion about it IS based on care, thought, and knowledge

Wow, is that ever a crock. So, a person calling themselves a foodie means they've have exercised "care, thought and knowledge"? If I call myself a world champion surfer, does that mean I've ever waxed a board? Appeals to authority are one of the most dishonest forms of fallacy:

http://www.nizkor.org/features...

An Appeal to Authority is a fallacy with the following form:

Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S.
Person A makes claim C about subject S.
Therefore, C is true.

But maybe you're just not familiar with logical fallacies. Well, that's something about which I know a thing or two to snatch a phrase from esteemed computer tech Marlin Schwanke. And you will not find an "ad hominem" anywhere in my post. If you think you also know a thing or two about fallacies, I invite you to point mine out. The purpose of my post was to point out the fallacy via sarcasm. There was no ad hominem. I didn't say Marlin Schwanke was stupid, or that all computer techs are stupid or that he's somehow a bad person or a Republican. I just pointed out the absurdity of claiming this authority as if it meant something.

I'll just bet you're a computer tech, too. And that, my friend, you can take as an ad hominem.

Comment: Re:Aero Or Go Home (Score 1) 541

by ConceptJunkie (#47955847) Attached to: What To Expect With Windows 9

Windows 8 is almost literally like going back to the 1980s. And the default wallpapers are all vomit-inducingly ugly. I agree that every UI designer at Microsoft should be fired and go spend their time making hideous public sculptures in major metropolitan cities that I don't live in like all their po-mo art school friends.

Comment: Re:Aero Or Go Home (Score 1) 541

by ConceptJunkie (#47955835) Attached to: What To Expect With Windows 9

I'm amazed that Windows 8 is so advanced it's incapable of the "classic" Windows 2000 look that every other Microsoft OS in the last 15 years could do. And from a usability point of view, I could write a book on why Flat UI sucks. As far as I'm concerned the last version of Windows that wasn't eye-gougingly ugly by default was 2000. Actually, Windows 7 wasn't all that bad, but I still strongly prefer the "classic" look. But of course, Microsoft is so hypnotized by this whole "Flat UI" nonsense that they won't let me have it any more. Or they are so incompetent their state-of-the-art software can't display a 15-year-old UI scheme. Either way, stupidity or malice, it's really pathetic.

Comment: Re:The Year of Windows on the Desktop (Score 1) 541

by ConceptJunkie (#47955817) Attached to: What To Expect With Windows 9

And the only pro feature I wanted (the Unix prompt)

What are talking about, Powershell? You can install that on any version of Windows. If you are talking about an honest-to-goodness Unix prompt then install cygwin or something that gives you bash or some other Unix-style shell.

Or is there something else I'm not aware of?

Comment: Re:"compared to consumer grade cameras" (Score 2) 28

by dgatwood (#47955691) Attached to: Video Released, Crowdfunding Underway For Axiom Open Source Cinema Camera

The biggest problem I see with this is that the lens mount system appears to be purely manual. This seriously limits the lenses you can use, because these days, 99% of lenses don't have mechanical aperture control. They really need to have some sort of adaptable lens electronics in this thing, so that people can design adapters that actually support modern lenses, similar to the Metabones adapters for NEX. The absolute minimum requirement for such things is a set of electronic contacts inside the lens mount that are controllable through software.

I think if I were designing a camera system to be extensible, I'd make the lens contacts speak USB 2.0, with appropriate short-circuit protection for when the lens is being attached to the mount. That way, the adapters could be very basic USB controllers that speak a particular lens protocol, rather than having to convert one arbitrary lens protocol to another (potentially incompatible) protocol.

There is one caveat to using USB, though. You'd need to also provide a 7.2VDC pin on the lens mount. Many camera lens systems require that much voltage to drive the focus motors, and it would suck to have to boost the voltage from a 5VDC USB supply in an adapter, particularly given that you probably already have the higher-voltage DC supply floating around inside the camera.

Debug is human, de-fix divine.

Working...