Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > DPReview relocates - from London, England, to Seattle, WA, USA!

Reply
Thread Tools

DPReview relocates - from London, England, to Seattle, WA, USA!

 
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2010
Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
the production of new articles on dpreview.com:

"Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
love."

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp

I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John A.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2010
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 20:27:32 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>"Bruce" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
>> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:
>>
>> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
>> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
>> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
>> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
>> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
>> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
>> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
>> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
>> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
>> love."
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp
>>
>> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews.

>
>Bought out by Microsoft? (That's what happened to many of my friends from my
>generation (Comp. Sci. degree in '76) who had more energy than I and started
>companies.)


Amazon.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Pete Stavrakoglou
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2010
"John A." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 20:27:32 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Bruce" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
>>> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
>>> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:
>>>
>>> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
>>> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
>>> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
>>> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
>>> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
>>> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
>>> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
>>> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
>>> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
>>> love."
>>>
>>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp
>>>
>>> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews.

>>
>>Bought out by Microsoft? (That's what happened to many of my friends from
>>my
>>generation (Comp. Sci. degree in '76) who had more energy than I and
>>started
>>companies.)

>
> Amazon.


Yep, Amazon acquired dpreveiw in May of 2007.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2010
On Oct 21, 7:12*am, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:
>
> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
> love."
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp
>
> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews. *


Watch the reviews shift from reasonable (despite some language issues)
to sleazy, like American print magazines.
 
Reply With Quote
 
John A.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2010
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:35:43 -0700 (PDT), Rich <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>On Oct 21, 7:12*am, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
>> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:
>>
>> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
>> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
>> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
>> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
>> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
>> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
>> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
>> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
>> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
>> love."
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp
>>
>> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews. *

>
>Watch the reviews shift from reasonable (despite some language issues)
>to sleazy, like American print magazines.


And no more girls on page 3.html.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mr. Strat
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2010
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Bruce
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews.


But you'll get lots of images of our gray skies and rain...
 
Reply With Quote
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2010
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:14:53 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On 21 Oct, 12:12, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
>> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:
>>
>> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
>> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
>> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
>> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
>> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
>> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
>> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
>> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
>> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
>> love."

>
>You won;t be measuring camera weights in pounds and/or ounces will
>you.....
>I mean the states seems to be one of the very few places in the world
>that still uses
>ye olde imperial units, I do hope focal lengths won;t be expressed in
>inches
>
>But I've often wondered whether exposure times would be better
>expressed in ms
>rather than fractions of a second.......
>
>
>
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp
>>
>> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews. *


Units should be expressed in the terms the readership is most familiar
with and not determined by where the magazine is published.

The best way to express measurements is: 6"/152mm.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2010
On 10/21/10 PDT 8:14 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:

>
> But I've often wondered whether exposure times would be better
> expressed in ms
> rather than fractions of a second.......


Wonder no more: the answer is no; fractions more readily convey the
relationship of doubling/halving the light.

--
john mcwilliams
 
Reply With Quote
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2010
On Oct 21, 9:12*am, John A. <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:35:43 -0700 (PDT), Rich <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Oct 21, 7:12*am, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> Well, that came as a surprise, but it does explain the recent lull in
> >> the production of new articles on dpreview.com:

>
> >> "Last, and by no means least, we've also moved out of our London
> >> office and relocated to our new office and studio in Seattle,
> >> Washington, which has obviously caused a little disruption. But have
> >> no fear, we've worked very hard to ensure the delay in publishing
> >> reviews is kept to a bare minimum (some of the team is still working
> >> in the UK during this staggered relocation). This is an exciting move
> >> for dpreview.com, and will give us access to considerably better
> >> resources and allow us to expand our content and add features, tools
> >> and improvements to sections of the site that we know our users will
> >> love."

>
> >>http://www.dpreview.com/news/1010/10102021sitenews.asp

>
> >> I shall miss the images of London in the equipment reviews. *

>
> >Watch the reviews shift from reasonable (despite some language issues)
> >to sleazy, like American print magazines.

>
> And no more girls on page 3.html.


Because Jesus wouldn't like it.
 
Reply With Quote
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2010
On Oct 21, 1:23*pm, "David J. Littleboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> "John McWilliams" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> news:i9psg4$r7f$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>
> > On 10/21/10 * PDT 8:14 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:

>
> >> But I've often wondered whether exposure times would be better
> >> expressed in ms
> >> rather than fractions of a second.......

>
> > Wonder no more: the answer is no; fractions more readily convey the
> > relationship of doubling/halving the light.

>
> So don't use decimal. 1 ms, 10 ms, 100 ms. It's perfectly obvious they're a
> stop apart.
>
> --
> David J. Littleboy
> Tokyo, Japan


Lets go back to measuring lenses in inches. If you want to take
American measurement Luddism to its (il)logical conclusion.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ISO 17799 News Relocates Sue Thomas Computer Security 0 06-15-2005 04:18 PM
Sigma SD-10 preview at dpreview David J. Littleboy Digital Photography 12 10-28-2003 10:33 PM
Dpreview james Digital Photography 6 09-22-2003 06:02 PM
dpreview problems Rudy Marcelletti, K8SWD Digital Photography 0 09-04-2003 08:02 PM
DPREVIEW down? ScorpionKing@attNOSPAM.net Digital Photography 2 08-04-2003 06:38 PM



Advertisments