Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?

Thread Tools

Re: Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?

Wolfgang Weisselberg
Posts: n/a
Doug Bashford <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Re: Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?;
> On Sun, 5 Jun 2011 18:08:52 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
> wrote:
>> SMS <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> > It takes time to maintain documentation, and few people will do it for free.

> Hogwash. Wikipedia proves that.

Wikipedia is documentation, CHDK is a camera and the Earth is a disk.

> A thousand popular freewares prove that.

Name 100 which run on at least half as many different platforms
as CHDK and offer at least half the features CHDK offers.

> The exceptions are one-man
> operations such as Irfanview, yet even there one
> can zap in and get it within minutes.

Irfanview isn't complicated, CHDK is.

>> Doug B. just volunteered.

> Ha. As noted, I can't even register to log on to
> setepontos.

The wiki is at
and needs no registering.

> By now they owe me ~6 verify reg emails.

Look into your spam folder. Or try entering your real email

> Normally I *NEVER* register, **** that intrusive ****.

Verifying emails aren't intrusive.

Reply With Quote
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Posts: n/a
Doug Bashford <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Jun, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>> SMS <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> > It takes time to maintain documentation, and few people will do it for free.

>> Doug B. just volunteered. > -Wolfgang

> As I said above;
> I can't help


> but think that the pages of obsolete
> material are there for more than apathetic
> neglect, but for a feeling, or tradition, or
> some such that I can't put my finger on.

More doing, less talking.

> Fix that feeling, install the Wikipedia attitude there,
> problem solved.

Sure, reverse gravity and we can walk to the moon.

> What's odd here is that nobody here has denied the
> mess, yet everybody acts like (ironically) that's not a
> problem, or that's inevitable, or that's normal.

Well, maybe it is, and you are just creating problems where
none are.

> if it has no cause, or the problem is intractable.
> ...or that since I dare to notice, *I*, me a newbie,
> should fix it!

I am not bothered by it, so why should *I* fix it, or even care?

> With THAT kind of attitude how could there *NOT* be that
> problem? Yes, the problem is failure to take
> responsibility, duh, it's time to stop the fingerpointing
> and for YOU the experts to do some entropy repair.

You, Doug, are an idiot. How come *we* are to be CHDK experts and
how come *we* have to pre-chew and pre-digest everything for you?

You're shirking all your responsibilities, but you dare telling us
ours? Isn't that a case of the pot calling the polar bear black?

> Let's talk fixing.

Let's see you *do* fixing. Talking is cheap.

> Page after page I'm told

At the top of the Wiki you are told your camera isn't supported.
It's in Beta. If you cannot deal with that, get the **** out of
the steam.

[Doug being too stupid to deal with a forum]

> So the solution is a surgical bulldozer!!?? Mass,
> pinpoint deletion?

> Or is it reorganization?

No, it's you starting to learn how to deal with a forum.

> Here's one idea. How about a new section
> for DIGIC 4? least that defines an era.

> There's a zillion possibilities. But that's
> what we called in the military: a command
> decision. Who's in charge?

Again, you don't understand, grasshopper.
Even though you have been told.

I think you are trolling.

Reply With Quote
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Posts: n/a
Doug Bashford <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

>> The observed behaviour of camera manufacturers is that they are
>> not in the least positive towards CHDK (though not hostile enough
>> to make CHDK completely impossible), nor do they seem inclined to
>> add features like motion detection, scripting et al to their new
>> cameras.

> Yup. It's the microsoft definition of KISS:
> Keep It comicbook Simple for Stupid. That's us.

That may be you, but it's certainly not me.

> While the market has proven that MS KISS works,
> CHDK fills a void, a nich market. But in my opinion,
> that market can be widely expanded at little cost,
> I think it must be shrinking now due to sloppy,
> undisciplined, aimlessly wandering haphazard documentation.

You are not talking about
but about a forum for a certain beta software.

>> [2] Our analog-signal TV harddisk recorder has the tendency to stop
>> receiving when you switch channels and with a recording time
>> (advertized) of up to 400 hours, has only *8* slots for timer
>> recordings. Yes, you can do weekly repeats and Mo-Fr repeats
>> --- but you cannot give a name to the recordings before they
>> are recorded and naming recordings is a major PITA due to the
>> interface (switch through the whole alphabet letter by letter,
>> digit by digit, special char by special char (you can switch
>> between upper and lower case though) --- and don't press the
>> buttons on the remote control too fast. Never heard of an
>> on-screen keyboard, have they?) No chance for me to fix that
>> issue, even if I had all the time in the world.

> Manf' HATE buttons, yup?

It's not a case of buttons, it's a case of stupid use cases and
usability. Immediately an onscreen keyboard with cursors and/or
T9 comes to mind.

Reply With Quote
John Turco
Posts: n/a
Walter Banks wrote:
> > Bruce wrote:
> >
> > If you cannot see the significant difference between (1) a collaborative
> > non-profit venture that delivers great benefits but no disbenefits to
> > anyone

> Except Canon.
> > and (2) a commercial organisation that blatantly flouts intellectual
> > property laws to make a fast buck (or millions of them) then you are
> > beyond help. There are none so blind as those that will not see.

> The assumption in your argument is the only harm is financial then
> judge on that basis and then ignore the fiscal harm to Canon when
> it inconveniently gets in the way.
> Many parts of the CHDK that is downloaded is a copyright violation
> of Canon's IP rights. You are missing the ethics issues.
> w..

The word "ethics" has never been part of "Bruce's" extremely limited
vocabulary. He's just a conniving camera-hawker, with no respect for
"intellectual property" rights.

John Turco <(E-Mail Removed)>

Marie's Musings <>
Reply With Quote

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
Re: Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site? The Henchman Digital Photography 6 06-16-2011 06:50 PM
Re: CHDK NEWS: Year 2010 Powershots Just May Get CHDK After All RichA Digital Photography 5 08-18-2010 06:39 PM
CHDK NEWS: A Discussion Forum Dedicated to CHDK D. Larson Digital Photography 0 11-28-2007 02:45 AM
NEW CHDK Features for Canon Powershot Cameras, CHDK Build #144 and Later HokusPokus Digital Photography 23 07-16-2007 09:20 PM
Canon PowerShot A710 IS Concise Review rishil Digital Photography 2 12-16-2006 07:51 PM