«

In article <>, Alan Browne
<> wrote:

> If Apple make a camera it will likely use exactly the same wall wart as
> the iPhone. It is very compact and pretty travel friendly. I just wish
> it had folding blades like my old Nokia charger.

older iphone adapters did, and the iphone adapter is just usb. any usb
adapter will work. it does not need to be apple's.

> And it will likely use the exact same connector as the new iPhone coming
> next month. (Fewer pins than the current connector).
>
> It may also have WiFi and/or bluetooth for offloading images, video and
> aural recordings.

probably will, for both.

> > you do realize that if this mythical camera had an internal battery, it
> > would be designed to last for a full day in typical shooting (perhaps
> > more), not an hour or two, right? the ipad gets over *ten* hours of
> > battery time.
>
> Depends on use. But the iPad has more battery volume than any camera
> would have and cameras use power when storing an image and showing it on
> the display. A little bit when focusing (depending on the lens).

an ipad also has significantly more power draw than any camera would
ever have. a tiny ipod nano lasts 24 hours playing music (the ipad can
go 140+ hours doing only that).

the point is that apple isn't stupid enough to put a dinky little
battery in it.

> >> 3. How did you determine what most people do?
> >
> > industry studies. almost nobody buys spare batteries. many companies
> > are moving to internal batteries, including samsung, dell and motorola.
> > it isn't just apple.
>
> As I've pointed out to you in the past, while people may not get spare
> batteries (I do for my camera) that the other purpose for easily
> accessed and replaceable batteries is for the day the battery is no
> longer taking on a charge to a useful level. It is an easily
> serviced-by-the owner part that can be ordered online and delivered to
> the users house.

and as i've pointed out to you in the past, the useful life of the
battery is longer than the useful life of the device. chances are very
high they'll replace the entire device before the battery fails, but
for those who keep their devices longer, they can order a replacement
kit, or just have it done somewhere. needing to do that once in 5 years
is very minor.

On 8/25/2012 12:34 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <5038f26b$0$6401$>, PeterN
> <> wrote:
>
>>>> I would worry than an actual Apple camera would be an excellent product
>>>> in terms of actually taking photographs, but with specific limitations
>>>> that would annoy people. I.e. no memory card slot, no user-replaceable
>>>> battery, etc..
>>>
>>> if the battery lasts longer than a full day of shooting, who cares?
>>> most people don't have spare batteries for their cameras. it's the same
>>> as phones.
>>
>> 1. Sometimes a charger is not taken on an overnight trip
>
> whose fault is that? don't blame the manufacturer if the user is too
> stupid to not bring a charger when they might need one.
>
> plus, it will probably charge of usb, so the chances are very high they
> already brought a charger for another device. many hotels and even some
> cars have usb ports, so they probably don't need a separate charger in
> the first place. if they brought a computer, they definitely don't.
>
>> 2. sometimes the battery does not last for a full day of shooting.
>
> rarely. most people don't shoot thousands of photos a day.
>
> you do realize that if this mythical camera had an internal battery, it
> would be designed to last for a full day in typical shooting (perhaps
> more), not an hour or two, right? the ipad gets over *ten* hours of
> battery time.
>
> will it last long enough for everyone? no. nothing is perfect. if it
> has removable batteries and you brought one spare and needed a second,
> you're in the same boat. plus you have down time to swap, which may
> happen at an inopportune time. meanwhile, the vast majority won't find
> it to be a problem.
>
>> 3. How did you determine what most people do?
>
> industry studies. almost nobody buys spare batteries. many companies
> are moving to internal batteries, including samsung, dell and motorola.
> it isn't just apple.
>

Just where did I use the term: "fault"
A second battery is always part of the equipment of any serious
photographer, as is spare memory cards.


Please provide a link to the industry studies you refer to.

--
Peter

In article <IrqdnUql->, Alan Browne
<> wrote:

> >>>> 3. How did you determine what most people do?
> >>>
> >>> industry studies. almost nobody buys spare batteries. many companies
> >>> are moving to internal batteries, including samsung, dell and motorola.
> >>> it isn't just apple.
> >>
> >> As I've pointed out to you in the past, while people may not get spare
> >> batteries (I do for my camera) that the other purpose for easily
> >> accessed and replaceable batteries is for the day the battery is no
> >> longer taking on a charge to a useful level. It is an easily
> >> serviced-by-the owner part that can be ordered online and delivered to
> >> the users house.
> >
> > and as i've pointed out to you in the past, the useful life of the
> > battery is longer than the useful life of the device. chances are very
> > high they'll replace the entire device before the battery fails, but
> > for those who keep their devices longer, they can order a replacement
> > kit, or just have it done somewhere. needing to do that once in 5 years
> > is very minor.
>
> Horsecrap (as I've replied to your horseshit in the past).

horsecrap right back.

> I had to
> replace the battery in my prior phone twice over several years. I
> expect no different from my iPhone.

*you* might have needed to replace it, but most people don't. they
replace the phone every 2-3 years, some even sooner.

as for cameras, not too many people use a 5 year old camera, or a
laptop for that matter, which is what the batteries are rated for.

this whole nonsense about internal batteries is overblown. in the event
someone needs to replace a battery, they'll replace it. so you remove a
cover with a screwdriver rather than pop off a cover with your fingers.
big deal. it's not something that would need to be done more than once,
maybe twice, in the life of the product, if at all.

> And of course there are 3rd party
> batteries available and I will replace the battery myself.

so it's not even an issue.

In article <5039178b$0$6401$>, PeterN
<> wrote:

> >>>> I would worry than an actual Apple camera would be an excellent product
> >>>> in terms of actually taking photographs, but with specific limitations
> >>>> that would annoy people. I.e. no memory card slot, no user-replaceable
> >>>> battery, etc..
> >>>
> >>> if the battery lasts longer than a full day of shooting, who cares?
> >>> most people don't have spare batteries for their cameras. it's the same
> >>> as phones.
> >>
> >> 1. Sometimes a charger is not taken on an overnight trip
> >
> > whose fault is that? don't blame the manufacturer if the user is too
> > stupid to not bring a charger when they might need one.
> >
> > plus, it will probably charge of usb, so the chances are very high they
> > already brought a charger for another device. many hotels and even some
> > cars have usb ports, so they probably don't need a separate charger in
> > the first place. if they brought a computer, they definitely don't.
> >
> >> 2. sometimes the battery does not last for a full day of shooting.
> >
> > rarely. most people don't shoot thousands of photos a day.
> >
> > you do realize that if this mythical camera had an internal battery, it
> > would be designed to last for a full day in typical shooting (perhaps
> > more), not an hour or two, right? the ipad gets over *ten* hours of
> > battery time.
> >
> > will it last long enough for everyone? no. nothing is perfect. if it
> > has removable batteries and you brought one spare and needed a second,
> > you're in the same boat. plus you have down time to swap, which may
> > happen at an inopportune time. meanwhile, the vast majority won't find
> > it to be a problem.
> >
> >> 3. How did you determine what most people do?
> >
> > industry studies. almost nobody buys spare batteries. many companies
> > are moving to internal batteries, including samsung, dell and motorola.
> > it isn't just apple.
>
> Just where did I use the term: "fault"

you didn't, but if someone doesn't bring a charger and the battery goes
dead, it's of their own doing, not that the battery is internal. what
if they didn't bring a spare? same result.

> A second battery is always part of the equipment of any serious
> photographer,

only because the included battery doesn't last very long and apple
isn't going to target serious photographers anyway.

if a photographer is really serious, they'll bring a second *camera*,
as many wedding photographers do. how many typical users do you think
will do that?

anyway, many slrs get well over 1000 photos, with some significantly
more than that. much of the time, a second battery will almost always
go unused. as i said in another post, i bought a second battery for my
slr and used it once in several years, out of well over 20,000 photos.

in this thread, one person shot nearly 1200 photos on a nikon d7000 and
the battery was still 78% full. a follow up poster shot 3000 photos per
charge. you'd need to be incredibly busy to shoot that many photos in
one day.
<http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=39541562>

apple makes products for the masses, and if they make a camera, it will
be a p&s aimed at the type of person who shoots a bunch of photos at a
party and uploads them to facebook, not the pro who shoots weddings or
magazine covers. since facebook is part of ios, it will likely be
tightly integrated so all you need to do is shoot and the photos are
online. it will also have a battery that lasts quite a while, as their
other products do (laptops w/7-10 hour runtime, ipods w/24 hr runtime,
etc.).

> as is spare memory cards.

that's different, but if it can upload on the fly then than issue is
also gone.

> Please provide a link to the industry studies you refer to.

<http://allthingsd.com/20090624/new-m...es-sealed-for-
power/>

But there¹s a dirty little secret about removable-battery laptops
owned by average consumers: Hardly anybody buys extra batteries.
Research firm NPD estimates that fewer than 5% of consumers buy a
spare. So, a small trend has begun in the industry: More electronic
products are being designed with their rechargeable batteries sealed
inside. For instance, Dell¹s (DELL) new high-end laptop, the Adamo,
has a sealed battery, as does the excellent Flip pocket video camera.

as i said, it's not just apple, nor is it just laptops, and an internal
battery offers many advantages:
<http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-19736_7...-to-kiss-that-
removable-smartphone-battery-goodbye/>

What do the iPhone, Motorola Droid Razr Maxx, and Nokia Lumia 900
have in common? The fact that their batteries can't easily be removed.
....
Embedded batteries are also harder to lose and less likely to sustain
damage, since there's usually no door to pop off when you drop the
phone. More than that, sealing the back cover means you're protecting
the internals from the elements, which could make the phone more
rugged.

nospam <> wrote:
> <> wrote:

>> I've never met anyone on a trip that didn't carry a spare camera
>> battery. It's far more common than a spare battery for a phone. It's
>> quite easy to go through one battery in a compact camera in less than a
>> day.

> that only means the batteries are too small.

It's a *compact* camera. Unlike a phone, there's a real lens
and a real sized sensor ...

> if a mythical future
> camera has a longer lasting battery, then that issue goes away.

If a mythical future camera doesn't need power and has infinite
bandwidth and physically impossible lenses and sensors, then a
lot of issues go away.

> i bought a spare for my nikon slr. i get over 1000 photos per charge
> and have needed the spare *once*. it was a waste of money. most of the
> time, i shoot 200-300 photos per day. it's not an issue.

Everyone is just like nospam. Nobody ever has any other needs.


>> Furthermore, since cameras aren't subsidized by a wireless carrier,
>> people keep them longer than a phone so it's more likely that the
>> original battery would need to be replaced during the life of the product.

> subsidy has nothing to do with it. people replace phones even if
> they're not subsidized.

Yep, once they are broken.
There are a few that need every new gadget, be it computer, phone
or camera. They're as much the average as the group marriage of
5 gay inuit (with 11 children) in the US is.

> people keep computers longer than they do
> phones

I know of at least one person that keeps their phone for much
longer than their computers, therefore everyone replaces their
computers before their phones. (That's nospam logic.)

> and those have internal batteries, and not just from apple
> either.

Yep, the computers carry lithium cells for the real time clock
that work for at least 10 years and can easily be replaced.
Or they have condensators that don't need to be replaced at all.

> the batteries in macbooks and iphones are rated for 5 years. that's a
> long time for a camera.

Actually, that's a short time for a camera. Cameras nowadays
are close to their physical borders, there's just not that much
that can be improved any more. People have been using the same
film cameras for decades, and will use the same digital cameras
for decades, now that technology has stabilized.

-Wolfgang

On 8/25/2012 4:16 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <5039178b$0$6401$>, PeterN
> <> wrote:
>
>>>>>> I would worry than an actual Apple camera would be an excellent product
>>>>>> in terms of actually taking photographs, but with specific limitations
>>>>>> that would annoy people. I.e. no memory card slot, no user-replaceable
>>>>>> battery, etc..
>>>>>
>>>>> if the battery lasts longer than a full day of shooting, who cares?
>>>>> most people don't have spare batteries for their cameras. it's the same
>>>>> as phones.
>>>>
>>>> 1. Sometimes a charger is not taken on an overnight trip
>>>
>>> whose fault is that? don't blame the manufacturer if the user is too
>>> stupid to not bring a charger when they might need one.
>>>
>>> plus, it will probably charge of usb, so the chances are very high they
>>> already brought a charger for another device. many hotels and even some
>>> cars have usb ports, so they probably don't need a separate charger in
>>> the first place. if they brought a computer, they definitely don't.
>>>
>>>> 2. sometimes the battery does not last for a full day of shooting.
>>>
>>> rarely. most people don't shoot thousands of photos a day.
>>>
>>> you do realize that if this mythical camera had an internal battery, it
>>> would be designed to last for a full day in typical shooting (perhaps
>>> more), not an hour or two, right? the ipad gets over *ten* hours of
>>> battery time.
>>>
>>> will it last long enough for everyone? no. nothing is perfect. if it
>>> has removable batteries and you brought one spare and needed a second,
>>> you're in the same boat. plus you have down time to swap, which may
>>> happen at an inopportune time. meanwhile, the vast majority won't find
>>> it to be a problem.
>>>
>>>> 3. How did you determine what most people do?
>>>
>>> industry studies. almost nobody buys spare batteries. many companies
>>> are moving to internal batteries, including samsung, dell and motorola.
>>> it isn't just apple.
>>
>> Just where did I use the term: "fault"
>
> you didn't, but if someone doesn't bring a charger and the battery goes
> dead, it's of their own doing, not that the battery is internal. what
> if they didn't bring a spare? same result.

My point exactly Glad you agree.



>> A second battery is always part of the equipment of any serious
>> photographer,
>
> only because the included battery doesn't last very long and apple
> isn't going to target serious photographers anyway.

??
What is the basis for that statement?

>
> if a photographer is really serious, they'll bring a second *camera*,
> as many wedding photographers do. how many typical users do you think
> will do that?

I don't do surveys

>
> anyway, many slrs get well over 1000 photos, with some significantly
> more than that. much of the time, a second battery will almost always
> go unused. as i said in another post, i bought a second battery for my
> slr and used it once in several years, out of well over 20,000 photos.
>
> in this thread, one person shot nearly 1200 photos on a nikon d7000 and
> the battery was still 78% full. a follow up poster shot 3000 photos per
> charge. you'd need to be incredibly busy to shoot that many photos in
> one day.
> <http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=39541562>
>
> apple makes products for the masses, and if they make a camera, it will
> be a p&s aimed at the type of person who shoots a bunch of photos at a
> party and uploads them to facebook, not the pro who shoots weddings or
> magazine covers. since facebook is part of ios, it will likely be
> tightly integrated so all you need to do is shoot and the photos are
> online. it will also have a battery that lasts quite a while, as their
> other products do (laptops w/7-10 hour runtime, ipods w/24 hr runtime,
> etc.).
>

And somewhere else you stated in effect that Apple makes high quality items.

>> as is spare memory cards.
>
> that's different, but if it can upload on the fly then than issue is
> also gone.

Exactly what would you carry in the field, that would be lighter and
cheaper than a memory card?

>
>> Please provide a link to the industry studies you refer to.
>
> <http://allthingsd.com/20090624/new-m...es-sealed-for-
> power/>
>
> But there¹s a dirty little secret about removable-battery laptops
> owned by average consumers: Hardly anybody buys extra batteries.
> Research firm NPD estimates that fewer than 5% of consumers buy a
> spare. So, a small trend has begun in the industry: More electronic
> products are being designed with their rechargeable batteries sealed
> inside. For instance, Dell¹s (DELL) new high-end laptop, the Adamo,
> has a sealed battery, as does the excellent Flip pocket video camera.
>
> as i said, it's not just apple, nor is it just laptops, and an internal
> battery offers many advantages:
> <http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-19736_7...-to-kiss-that-
> removable-smartphone-battery-goodbye/>
>
> What do the iPhone, Motorola Droid Razr Maxx, and Nokia Lumia 900
> have in common? The fact that their batteries can't easily be removed.

It's obvious that you failed to read the entire article.>


--
Peter

On 8/25/2012 6:08 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2012-08-25 16:16 , nospam wrote:
>> In article <IrqdnUql->, Alan Browne
>> <> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> 3. How did you determine what most people do?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> industry studies. almost nobody buys spare batteries. many companies
>>>>>> are moving to internal batteries, including samsung, dell and
>>>>>> motorola.
>>>>>> it isn't just apple.
>>>>>
>>>>> As I've pointed out to you in the past, while people may not get spare
>>>>> batteries (I do for my camera) that the other purpose for easily
>>>>> accessed and replaceable batteries is for the day the battery is no
>>>>> longer taking on a charge to a useful level. It is an easily
>>>>> serviced-by-the owner part that can be ordered online and delivered to
>>>>> the users house.
>>>>
>>>> and as i've pointed out to you in the past, the useful life of the
>>>> battery is longer than the useful life of the device. chances are very
>>>> high they'll replace the entire device before the battery fails, but
>>>> for those who keep their devices longer, they can order a replacement
>>>> kit, or just have it done somewhere. needing to do that once in 5 years
>>>> is very minor.
>>>
>>> Horsecrap (as I've replied to your horseshit in the past).
>>
>> horsecrap right back.
>>
>>> I had to
>>> replace the battery in my prior phone twice over several years. I
>>> expect no different from my iPhone.
>>
>> *you* might have needed to replace it, but most people don't. they
>> replace the phone every 2-3 years, some even sooner.
>
> Funny how ever little accessory store still carry batteries for a wide
> range of cell phones. Never mind internet sellers. Per you there isn't
> any market for that sort of thing.
>

Funny how he talks about "most people" when the issue is "most serious
photographers/"

--
Peter

In article <>, Alan Browne
<> wrote:

> >> I had to
> >> replace the battery in my prior phone twice over several years. I
> >> expect no different from my iPhone.
> >
> > *you* might have needed to replace it, but most people don't. they
> > replace the phone every 2-3 years, some even sooner.
>
> Funny how ever little accessory store still carry batteries for a wide
> range of cell phones. Never mind internet sellers. Per you there isn't
> any market for that sort of thing.

how many they actually sell is what matters.

there are over a billion phones. just how many batteries do you think
get sold?

I haven't owned an apple product since my old IIgs, and I don't see any
purchases from there blind-unfriendly product line, any time soon.

Take Care,
Dudley




SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.org

In article <k1bu3q$mor$>, Dudley Hanks
<> wrote:

> I haven't owned an apple product since my old IIgs, and I don't see any
> purchases from there blind-unfriendly product line, any time soon.

say what???????

apple products are *very* blind friendly, one the most blind friendly
of any computing platform.

for visually impaired, macs have voice over which can read the titles
of buttons, controls and windows, as well as the contents in a window
or whatever is under the cursor. the synthesized voice is extremely
high quality, not a robotic sounding voice that's difficult to
understand. macs also support over 40 braille displays.

the cursor size can also be increased to really huge sizes. the display
contrast can be increased and/or it can be set to reverse video. one
can zoom into any portion of the display and pan around.

for hearing impaired, a mac will flash the screen instead of make
sounds and for those with limited hand mobility, they can control the
mouse with the keyboard as well as use sticky keys so two handed
operations can be done with one hand.

ios devices have similar assistive technologies, including reading
buttons and controls as well as what is under your finger as you touch
various parts of the display. zooming is also supported, as is larger
default text sizes.

it's probably the *best* choice for visually impaired people.