Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file?

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file?

 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Mxsmanic
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > it's never been true. adobe uses a cross platform framework of their
> > own design. photoshop *began* on the mac and was ported to the pc (via
> > aforementioned framework).

>
> Some years ago, primary development moved to Windows.


totally wrong.

> > snow leopard (os x 10.6) is $29 at any computer store that carries it.

>
> And the EULA allows it to run on any hardware?
>
> > meanwhile, windows ultimate (which is the 'equivalent' to os x) is
> > around $300 for retail and $200 for oem (but no support, something you
> > get with os x).

>
> Retail versions of Windows can be installed on any hardware.


so what? what matters is if it can run on the hardware the person has.

> You only need support if something goes wrong.


nothing is perfect, stuff *does* go wrong.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Mxsmanic
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > totally wrong

>
> Look at the source code.


have you seen the source code to adobe photoshop, illustrator, and
other adobe products? no. in fact, you said you were told they
switched to windows, so you definitely did not look at the source code.

seriously, you need to keep your story straight.

> > nothing is perfect, stuff *does* go wrong.

>
> I've never needed support on a Microsoft OS.


you're in the minority.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Mxsmanic
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > the industry is moving to mobile devices, namely tablets.

>
> I'm not sure who "the industry" is, but I'm still surrounded by desktops.


then you need to get out more.

> > there can be a dramatic difference, depending on the app.

>
> That is true even among apps for the same platform.
>
> > that contradicts your earlier statement that there's more software on
> > windows, which would mean there is a reason to run windows apps on a
> > mac.

>
> No. You run Windows apps on Windows. Running them on a Mac makes no sense.


actually it makes a lot of sense.

> > tell that to those who buy macs *just* for final cut pro, aperture, or
> > many other apps on the mac that are *not* available on windows.

>
> There are only a handful of end users doing this. They are a minority even
> among Mac users.


*far* more than a handful.

> > some people even buy a mac to run windows, not os x, because they like
> > the hardware better.

>
> It's the same hardware.


no it is definitely not.

> > growth leads to dominance and your numbers make no sense. apple's
> > revenue last quarter was $24.67 billion (with a b) and net profits of
> > $5.99 billion. microsoft's revenue was $16.43 billion with $5.23 net
> > income. for a company that has such a tiny market share, they're raking
> > in the cash.

>
> They aren't raking it in from sales of desktops, where they have a tiny market
> share.


they're raking it in from a variety of things, including desktops,
laptops and mobile devices. read their financial reports.

> > wait for what?

>
> The future evolution of the market.


that's vague and meaningless.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2011
Mxsmanic <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> No. Microsoft has never had control in the way Apple does. You could always
> build your own PC and install anything you wanted on it,


How would you build your own laptop?

> and Microsoft would
> happily sell you a copy of their own OS if you wanted that.


at a much higher price than the surcharge they place on
vendors.

> Thousands of
> companies build PCs that will run Microsoft operating systems.


And?

> Microsoft has
> no control over who builds PCs.


And? "Either you preload all machines with Windows or your
licenses will be much more dear (putting you out of business in
this extremely price sensitive market)". So MS has control over
who sells PCs. (Yes, this was curbed to some extend by courts.
But that's the way MS controls and loves to control.)

> Anyone can set up shop as a PC maker and can
> choose to install or not install OEM versions of Microsoft operating systems.


And how can I set up shop as a Laptop or Netbook maker?

> Microsoft may offer incentives to pre-install Windows exclusively, but nobody
> is forced to accept those incentives, and it's possible to make money without
> them.


Sure. There are a small handful of sellers that e.g.
specialize on Linux machines. However, since most people
want Windows (for all they know is Windows and all their
friends know is Windows), most shops have to sell Windows or
die.

In other words, you can survive a bullet through the head.
It just is very rare.

> Apple, on the other hand, controls everything.


Apple controls Windows?
Apple is what is sold on most machines?

> The only reason Apple hasn't got into trouble is that it's such a small part
> of the market.


Really? And I thought it had to do with owning their
intellectual property to the machines, not only to the
software. If MS built a custom MS-computer and had IP and
had the legal rights to not share the IP --- they could do
the same.

Instead there are thousands of companies building PCs.

> It turns out that many people don't want to be in Apple's
> stranglehold, so they just buy PCs instead.


I ... doubt that that's it.

> Apple apparently would rather have
> a tiny minority of followers of Steve Jobs' peculiar religion than a much
> higher revenue.


They have a high revenue of hilg-price goods. They don't want
the low revenue, cut-throat mass market.

> Microsoft was always more interested in giving the mass market
> what it wanted.


What Microsoft wanted, true.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2011
Mxsmanic <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Eric Stevens writes:


>> It's not at all like that. Its more like selling a suit and being
>> forced to sell a particular brand of shoes to go with it.


> What percentage of customers complained about having PCs with Windows
> preloaded on them?


About 95% of all Windows users complain about Windows.

>> Freely? From Bill Gates?


> Yes. Write a check, get a copy of the OS. Anyone can buy it. You can install
> it on any PC.


Sure. Any colour^WPC that's black^Wintel-compatible.

Kindly look at the list of system types Linux runs on.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2011
Mxsmanic <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Eric Stevens writes:


> That's a bit like insisting that you buy a keyboard whether you want it or
> not.


Sure, I'd *love* a keyboard with my burger and fries, thank you!

> It reminds me of that decision against Microsoft that required that
> manufacturers be allowed to sell systems without (I think) Internet Explorer.
> Nobody actually wanted one.


So how comes so many people use Firefox instead of IE?

>> It would be commercial suicide to not have the commercially dominant
>> operating system available for sale.


> It's the other way around: the operating system is commercially dominant
> because it is freely available for sale.


Apple's systems are also freely available for sale. (By your
own definition: anyone can buy it.)

Linux is also freely available, for sale and for free, so by
your reasoning it should be even more dominant than Windows.

>> The problem was in those days
>> that MS would not sell you MS-DOS unless (a) you installed it in every
>> machine you made and (b) installed no other operating system.


> I never heard users complain about it.


I never saw you. Thus you don't exist.

>> They can do what they like with the stuff that they make.


> Unless their name is Microsoft, apparently.


Unless they are a monopoly or act illegal, yes.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2011
Mxsmanic <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Eric Stevens writes:


> That's a bit like insisting that you buy a keyboard whether you want it or
> not.


Thank you, I have a *very* good keyboard that's worked 20 years
now. (And a couple more good keyboards.) I see no need to buy
a cheaply made one that'll be a pain to use in 6 months.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2011
Eric Stevens <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Sun, 15 May 2011 17:03:18 -0700, nospam <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:


>>t3500), they only offer 1 of several versions of windows. i don't see a
>>'none' button, or even a linux button.


> They are not in the kit business. They only sell complete and
> functioning computers.


That sounds as if computer with Linux or *BSD were non-functioning.

Some might even say that computers with Windows are
non-functioning.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2011
Mxsmanic <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> nospam writes:


>> totally wrong


> Look at the source code.


URL?

>> so what? what matters is if it can run on the hardware the person has.


> If it can run on any hardware, then it will always run on whatever hardware
> the person has.


I happen to have an XO. Will Windows run on it?

>> nothing is perfect, stuff *does* go wrong.


> I've never needed support on a Microsoft OS.


I've never needed seatbelts either.
Nor support for Linux.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-16-2011
David Dyer-Bennet <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Sunday, May 15, 2011 7:59:30 PM UTC-5, nospam wrote:
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Mxsmanic
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>> > Adobe long ago switched primary development to Windows, because more users
>> > have Windows than Macs. They then port to Macs.

>>
>> totally false. where in the hell did you come up with that?

>
>I don't know how to check it (the only hope is if Adobe has made some
>public statements). But I thought this has been common knowledge for
>more than 5 years. I can't pin down the year when I heard the
>switchover happened, I'm not good at pinning memories to exact
>times.
>
>(It's perfectly possible it isn't actually true. I haven't made any
>serious efforts to check up on it because, while I find it
>mildly interesting, I don't actually care a whole lot. I'm surprised
>to find somebody who hasn't heard it before.)



It's news to me.

 
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
Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file? bob Digital Photography 66 07-03-2011 10:02 PM
Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file? David Dyer-Bennet Digital Photography 24 06-08-2011 09:58 PM
Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file? Wolfgang Weisselberg Digital Photography 31 05-26-2011 11:20 PM
Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file? David Dyer-Bennet Digital Photography 3 05-20-2011 11:59 PM
Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file? David Dyer-Bennet Digital Photography 3 05-20-2011 11:54 PM



Advertisments