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?

 
 
shiva das
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
In article <4dd28f99$0$12469$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>,
PeterN <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On 5/17/2011 9:26 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article<4dd270c1$0$12519$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>,
> > http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) says...
> >>
> >> On 5/16/2011 10:46 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> >>> 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?
> >>>
> >> Buy the parts and do the assembly.

> >
> > Uh, where do you buy the parts to build a laptop?

>
> Google is your friend
>
> <
> http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-diy...ti-edition-eol.
> html>
>


Nope:

"OCZ End of Life Products are excellent products that are not longer
made by OCZ, but may still be available for sale."
<http://www.ocztechnology.com/products/>

<http://www.ocztechnology.com/product...book-systems.h
tml>

Google is only your friend if you actually follow the links.

All OCZ notebook products including the "DIY" notebook kits are
designated "End of Life".

OCZ 15" DIY Notebook / Intel® Core 2 Duo Processor Technology /
Centrino® 2 Capable / ATI Radeon HD3650 (OCZDIY15A2-DM86*)
"*These part numbers are no longer manufactured by OCZ. Please contact
tech support for warranty information"
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
J. Clarke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
In article <4dd28f99$0$12469$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
>
> On 5/17/2011 9:26 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article<4dd270c1$0$12519$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>,
> > (E-Mail Removed) says...
> >>
> >> On 5/16/2011 10:46 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> >>> 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?
> >>>
> >> Buy the parts and do the assembly.

> >
> > Uh, where do you buy the parts to build a laptop?

>
> Google is your friend
>
> <
> http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-diy-15-gaming-notebook-intel-ati-edition-eol.html>


Yep, butt-ignorant and stupid as ever.

Now tell us where to buy one of those "EOL" machines. You do understand
the concept of "EOL" do you not? "End Of Life"? AKA "out of
production"?

And I don't see any parts there, what I see is complete machines that
have some accessories in separate boxes.

> > Desktop machines can be assembled from commodity parts--there are
> > standard connectors and standard form factors so you can buy a case from
> > one source and a motherboard from another and a power supply from a
> > third and it will all work together. That is not true of laptops.
> >
> >>>> 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.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yup! And when you need support, you go to the vendor, not MS.
> >>
> >>>> Thousands of
> >>>> companies build PCs that will run Microsoft operating systems.
> >>>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> Microsoft was always more interested in giving the mass market
> >>>> what it wanted.
> >>>
> >>> What Microsoft wanted, true.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> I wonder why most businesses use MS products, except in the graphics
> >> arts industry.

> >
> > One reason is that if you use Microsoft you're single-source from the
> > largest server down to your cell phone, so no finger-pointing. If
> > you're using *nix servers to support Windows desktops then you're going
> > to be dealing with two groups of specialist both of which see the other
> > OS as the root of all evi.
> >

>
> Many sophisticated small offices use MS products on their desktops with
> an Apache server.


If the only thing their server does is run Apache they aren't
"sophisticated small offices", they're "small offices with a web
server".

> We are at an interesting point in the computing cycle. Originally we had
> dumb terminals. We migrated to all in one desktops. Then we networked
> them. Now the cloud, square one.


For once you've said something I almost agree with.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
On 5/17/2011 1:19 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article<4dd28f99$0$12469$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>>
>> On 5/17/2011 9:26 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> In article<4dd270c1$0$12519$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>,
>>> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>>>>
>>>> On 5/16/2011 10:46 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>>>>> 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?
>>>>>
>>>> Buy the parts and do the assembly.
>>>
>>> Uh, where do you buy the parts to build a laptop?

>>
>> Google is your friend
>>
>> <
>> http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-diy-15-gaming-notebook-intel-ati-edition-eol.html>

>
> Yep, butt-ignorant and stupid as ever.
>
> Now tell us where to buy one of those "EOL" machines. You do understand
> the concept of "EOL" do you not? "End Of Life"? AKA "out of
> production"?
>
> And I don't see any parts there, what I see is complete machines that
> have some accessories in separate boxes.
>
>>> Desktop machines can be assembled from commodity parts--there are
>>> standard connectors and standard form factors so you can buy a case from
>>> one source and a motherboard from another and a power supply from a
>>> third and it will all work together. That is not true of laptops.
>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yup! And when you need support, you go to the vendor, not MS.
>>>>
>>>>>> Thousands of
>>>>>> companies build PCs that will run Microsoft operating systems.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Microsoft was always more interested in giving the mass market
>>>>>> what it wanted.
>>>>>
>>>>> What Microsoft wanted, true.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wonder why most businesses use MS products, except in the graphics
>>>> arts industry.
>>>
>>> One reason is that if you use Microsoft you're single-source from the
>>> largest server down to your cell phone, so no finger-pointing. If
>>> you're using *nix servers to support Windows desktops then you're going
>>> to be dealing with two groups of specialist both of which see the other
>>> OS as the root of all evi.
>>>

>>
>> Many sophisticated small offices use MS products on their desktops with
>> an Apache server.

>
> If the only thing their server does is run Apache they aren't
> "sophisticated small offices", they're "small offices with a web
> server".
>
>> We are at an interesting point in the computing cycle. Originally we had
>> dumb terminals. We migrated to all in one desktops. Then we networked
>> them. Now the cloud, square one.

>
> For once you've said something I almost agree with.
>


If you look you will find.
Meanwhile, I have had enough of you trying to paste your ignorance and
lack of resourcefulness on others.
Bye Asshole.
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
ASCII
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
Mxsmanic wrote:
>
>More like the difference between a Casio watch and a Rolex.


Except Casio makes digital numerical watches
and I don't think Rolex does.
Probably the best watch available anywhere;
http://bit.ly/jXQRIt beats anything from Rolex.
 
Reply With Quote
 
J. Clarke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
In article <4dd2b741$0$12469$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
>
> On 5/17/2011 1:19 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article<4dd28f99$0$12469$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>,
> > (E-Mail Removed) says...
> >>
> >> On 5/17/2011 9:26 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>> In article<4dd270c1$0$12519$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>,
> >>> (E-Mail Removed) says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On 5/16/2011 10:46 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> >>>>> 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?
> >>>>>
> >>>> Buy the parts and do the assembly.
> >>>
> >>> Uh, where do you buy the parts to build a laptop?
> >>
> >> Google is your friend
> >>
> >> <
> >> http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-diy-15-gaming-notebook-intel-ati-edition-eol.html>

> >
> > Yep, butt-ignorant and stupid as ever.
> >
> > Now tell us where to buy one of those "EOL" machines. You do understand
> > the concept of "EOL" do you not? "End Of Life"? AKA "out of
> > production"?
> >
> > And I don't see any parts there, what I see is complete machines that
> > have some accessories in separate boxes.
> >
> >>> Desktop machines can be assembled from commodity parts--there are
> >>> standard connectors and standard form factors so you can buy a case from
> >>> one source and a motherboard from another and a power supply from a
> >>> third and it will all work together. That is not true of laptops.
> >>>
> >>>>>> 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.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yup! And when you need support, you go to the vendor, not MS.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Thousands of
> >>>>>> companies build PCs that will run Microsoft operating systems.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Microsoft was always more interested in giving the mass market
> >>>>>> what it wanted.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What Microsoft wanted, true.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I wonder why most businesses use MS products, except in the graphics
> >>>> arts industry.
> >>>
> >>> One reason is that if you use Microsoft you're single-source from the
> >>> largest server down to your cell phone, so no finger-pointing. If
> >>> you're using *nix servers to support Windows desktops then you're going
> >>> to be dealing with two groups of specialist both of which see the other
> >>> OS as the root of all evi.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Many sophisticated small offices use MS products on their desktops with
> >> an Apache server.

> >
> > If the only thing their server does is run Apache they aren't
> > "sophisticated small offices", they're "small offices with a web
> > server".
> >
> >> We are at an interesting point in the computing cycle. Originally we had
> >> dumb terminals. We migrated to all in one desktops. Then we networked
> >> them. Now the cloud, square one.

> >
> > For once you've said something I almost agree with.
> >

>
> If you look you will find.


Uh huh. So you couldn't find anything.

> Meanwhile, I have had enough of you trying to paste your ignorance and
> lack of resourcefulness on others.
> Bye Asshole.


You've said that before.
> Peter



 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Mxsmanic
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > Uh, where do you buy the parts to build a laptop?
> >
> > Desktop machines can be assembled from commodity parts--there are
> > standard connectors and standard form factors so you can buy a case from
> > one source and a motherboard from another and a power supply from a
> > third and it will all work together. That is not true of laptops.

>
> One can turn this around and ask "why build a laptop instead of a desktop?"
>
> Laptops have zero advantages over desktops except for portability.


portability is a *huge* advantage, and nothing prevents anyone from
having both a laptop and a desktop, as most people do.

some people plug in a larger display to their laptop, and depending on
the laptop, use both displays at the same time.

> You really
> need to put a very, very high priority on portability in order to accept all
> the other drawbacks of having a laptop


what drawbacks are those? modern laptops outperform desktops of just a
year or two ago, which for most people is already overkill. very few
people have 8-12 core behemoths on their desk.

> (and one of these is that it's very
> difficult to build one's own laptop).


very few people build their own computers so that's not a drawback
whatsoever.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
In article
<(E-Mail Removed)>,
Whisky-dave <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > > Apple, on the other hand, controls everything. It's Apple's way or the
> > > highway. Nobody else builds compatible hardware,

>
> Well they do I've often brought products not made by Apple that work
> with my
> Macs. iomega drives, western digital drives, Espon printer and scanner
> etc.....
>
> If a company follows Apples 'rules' for hardware and software then
> that product
> will work with Apple computers. Actually intel produce chips
> specifically for Apple last
> I heard.


there is no 'apple rule' for hardware makers. apple (like a lot of
companies) support industry standards: sata, pci, usb, firewire, dvi,
displayport, 802.11a/b/g/n, bluetooth, etc.

if a product is compliant with a given standard, it will work with a
mac.
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
On 5/17/2011 4:05 PM, Mxsmanic wrote:
> George Kerby writes:
>
>> For a long time, that was the case. It isn't today: A Intel-based Mac is
>> perfectly capable of doing anything that a Pee-Cee box can do, usually
>> faster. This is due to virtualization software like Parallels or VM Fusion.

>
> Virtual machines are never as fast as real machines, and if you want to run
> Windows applications, it makes absolutely no sense to run them in virtualized
> environments under a different OS when you can simply run them as native apps
> under Windows.
>
>> So that argument is passé.

>
> No argument is needed. It makes no logical sense to run Windows apps on a Mac,
> so running Windows apps on Windows is the default.


If the user happens to own a Mac and needs to run a Windows app for
business, it makes all the sense in the world.

I know several people who work at home a few days a week. The works
needs to be compatible with the machines in the office.


--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
shiva das
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Mxsmanic <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> ASCII writes:
>
> > Except Casio makes digital numerical watches
> > and I don't think Rolex does.

>
> And Casio makes accurate watches, whereas Rolex does not.


They no longer produce quartz watches, however:

"It would be a mistake to assume that quartz watches were an
afterthought for Rolex, even despite the company's overwhelming
commitment to mechanical movements.* Rolex began their own research into
electronic timekeeping in the early 1950s, and was awarded their first
patent for an electro-mechanical watch design in 1952.* In fact,
according to James Dowling in his book The Best of Time, of the 50
patents issued to Rolex between 1960 and 1990, 21 of them were for
electronic watches. Rolex was even issued patents in the 70s for digital
(LED) watch movements.* One such movement made it all the way to the
prototype stage and was issued the reference number 7065."

"Rolex's first commercially available quartz watch was the Quartz Date
5100.* Introduced in 1970, this watch shared the Beta 21 movement used
by other Swiss companies like Omega and Enicar.* Rolex only produced
1000 of these watches before beginning development of their own quartz
movement and the watch that would eventually become the Oysterquartz.*
In 1977, after five years of design, development, and testing, Rolex
introduced their first completely in-house quartz movements (the 5035
and 5055) and the Datejust (5035) and Day-Date (5055) Oysterquartz
models that would house them."

<http://www.oysterquartz.net/>
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Mxsmanic
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > portability is a *huge* advantage, and nothing prevents anyone from
> > having both a laptop and a desktop, as most people do.

>
> It _might_ be a huge advantage; that depends on the user. If it's a huge
> advantage, then maybe the drawbacks are justified; if it's not, they aren't.


of course it depends on the user. for every drawback there's another
advantage. different tools for different jobs.

> If I need to use a computer, I prefer to sit in front of it. If I'm not in
> front of my computer, I'm not using it.


that's good for you but you aren't the only person in this world. most
people want portability, which is reflected in sales. laptops and
mobile devices are selling much more than desktops, a trend that's
increasing.

> A laptop is ergonomically difficult to
> tolerate when one has been spoiled by desktops.


nonsense. laptops can be used anywhere - on a couch, in bed, in a
reclining chair, on the porch, etc. people are no longer limited to
being stuck at a desk in a chair.

> > some people plug in a larger display to their laptop, and depending on
> > the laptop, use both displays at the same time.

>
> They'll also need to plug in a different keyboard and mouse, unless they are
> four feet tall.


nonsense again. the internal keyboard and trackpad work just fine
(regardless of how tall one is, seriously, wtf?), but they can use
external ones if they want. or both.

> > what drawbacks are those?

>
> You can't build your own.


few people build their own computers, so that's not an issue.

> You cannot get the same performance at the same
> price point.


performance is more than adequate for what most people do and you get
*other* features, like being able to take it to a photo shoot and
showing photos just taken (with adjustments), doing work on a plane,
giving presentations, etc.

good luck lugging a desktop to a photo shoot or a conference, and where
will you plug it in on that hike up the mountain (assuming you can
carry it up the mountain)?

> All components are more expensive, less performant, and more
> prone to failure.


not necessarily.

> The list is quite long, which is why I've never owned a
> laptop of my own (and I've only reluctantly carried around company laptops,
> which I try not to use).


yes, that part is clear. you're talking out your ass.

> > ... modern laptops outperform desktops of just a
> > year or two ago, which for most people is already overkill. very few
> > people have 8-12 core behemoths on their desk.

>
> Unless they are editing photos or videos.


you don't need 8-12 core to edit photos and that's also overkill for
the videos most people do (youtube type stuff). high end video
production will have high end computers *and* laptops.
 
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