Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Except (Score 3, Insightful) 81

What they have there are some old 600 cameras that work with film made by the Impossible Project, and a rebadged Fuji Instax camera that works with Fuji Instax film. Polaroid apparently has a rebadged version of that, too. The stuff they're talking apart in the article is what's generally referred to as peel-apart film or packfilm, for 100-series Polaroid cameras like the Polaroid Automatic 100, 250, 360 etc etc... They were a lot of them. Also, you can use the stuff on old press cameras, like a Graflex or Linhof 4x5. The pictures generally are of better quality than what you'd get from the Instax or 600-series integral-film. Obviously, I'm a fan, but this was a long time coming. They discontinued the 4x5 stuff years ago, leaving only the smaller FP-3000b (a great black & white instant film) and FP-100c (the color stuff in the article). Then last year, they stopped making FP-3000b. I was hoping that we'd get a few more years of FP-100c because of some sort of imagined manufacturing synergy with Fuji's Instax film (which remains very popular, it would seem), but alas! It wasn't to be. It's the end of an era, I guess; but film shooters like myself should be used to this sort of thing by now.

Comment But... (Score 5, Insightful) 196

... it's still terrible. They could have made it with construction paper cut-outs and hired some decent writers instead of spending 70 million on fancy CGI and celebrity voices, and then making the same cliched shitpile we see every two or three months. Also, as is traditional on Slashdot, I am basing my vociferous opinion exclusively on the obnoxious 30-second trailers I've seen, and have not actually seen the movie.

Comment Wall-E? (Score 1) 1015

"I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet." Sounds like Stephen has seen Wall-E too many times. Does he have a five-year-old? Anyway, I doubt we'll be conquered by a race of vacuous, immobile, milkshake-slurping space balloons who aren't interested in anything past their viewscreens.

Comment Apple is a media co now (Score 1) 965

I've been using Apple machines since I was about 6, and much of my geekiness today is due to the software and hardware tinkering I did with them over the years. I'm pretty disturbed by the direction I see Apple going. iTunes was, I think, the beginning of the end, and the iPad is an unsettling glimpse into the future. Since the iTunes store opened, Apple has gone from being a "computer" company to being a "media" company. The iPad is locked down because of Apple's need to keep the content providers at bay. Now, I know Apple makes a boatload of cash serving all this DRMed content, but really they should have just stuck to geekier pursuits like making nice computers with a slick OS, and left all the intellectual property bullshit to somebody else. I don't have an iPhone, but I wasn't too miffed to learn that it was locked down, because most phones are (I know, I know, the N900). But when I heard they were making a tablet, I pictured a MacBook crammed into tablet form with a cool multitouch version of OS X. So I was disappointed to find that it was this giant iPhone that I'll never be able to run X11 or MacPorts or even Firefox on. I'm hoping that people will realize that they don't need an iPad (despite the reality distortion field that undoubtedly surrounds it) and it will fail miserably, and Apple will go back to the way it was when I was doing Logo on my Apple ][c. Something about Apple's stock prices (like the fact that one share costs about as much as an iPod) tells me that this is unlikely to ever occur.

Slashdot Top Deals

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.

Working...