Be glad Apple doesn't make cameras

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Dec 7, 2009.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism
    that to some appears attractive, but from a functional aspect, sucks.
    Think about pro cameras then think about newer small cameras and what
    is the small camera's main problem? Lack of up front functionality,
    lack of buttons. Everything is buried in menus or simply lacking.
    This is why despite the constant griping by some there ARE no small,
    pro-level DSLRs.
    Apple doesn't use buttons. Everything is in multi-layed menus
    onscreen. If the could commit the keyboard to a screen, likely they
    would. This is not the kind of hamstrung functionality people who
    know better want in a camera. They want the functions available to
    them with a one-button push, ideally.
    Which is why pro cameras will stay large.
    RichA, Dec 7, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    Ray Fischer Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism


    Rich is an effete snob who doesn't realize that Apple's computers are
    designed in California. And judging by Apple's stock price they seem
    to be doing quite well.

    It's a good thing Rich isn't an engineer. Any product he designed
    would be so heavy and so muddled with useless crap as to be unusable.

    >Think about pro cameras then think about newer small cameras and what


    Oooo! "Think".

    Take your own advice.

    --
    Ray Fischer
    Ray Fischer, Dec 7, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. But you would have to send them back to the manufacturer every time the
    battery needed replacement!

    "corks" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > ahem but apple pc's are made of metal ????
    >
    >
    > "RichA" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >> replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >> design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism
    >> that to some appears attractive, but from a functional aspect, sucks.
    >> Think about pro cameras then think about newer small cameras and what
    >> is the small camera's main problem? Lack of up front functionality,
    >> lack of buttons. Everything is buried in menus or simply lacking.
    >> This is why despite the constant griping by some there ARE no small,
    >> pro-level DSLRs.
    >> Apple doesn't use buttons. Everything is in multi-layed menus
    >> onscreen. If the could commit the keyboard to a screen, likely they
    >> would. This is not the kind of hamstrung functionality people who
    >> know better want in a camera. They want the functions available to
    >> them with a one-button push, ideally.
    >> Which is why pro cameras will stay large.

    >
    >
    Roger Matthews, Dec 7, 2009
    #3
  4. RichA

    Shawn Hirn Guest

    In article
    <>,
    RichA <> wrote:

    > Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    > replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    > design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism
    > that to some appears attractive, but from a functional aspect, sucks.
    > Think about pro cameras then think about newer small cameras and what
    > is the small camera's main problem? Lack of up front functionality,
    > lack of buttons. Everything is buried in menus or simply lacking.
    > This is why despite the constant griping by some there ARE no small,
    > pro-level DSLRs.
    > Apple doesn't use buttons. Everything is in multi-layed menus
    > onscreen. If the could commit the keyboard to a screen, likely they
    > would. This is not the kind of hamstrung functionality people who
    > know better want in a camera. They want the functions available to
    > them with a one-button push, ideally.
    > Which is why pro cameras will stay large.


    Apple did make a digital camera. Apple's QuickTake was one of the first
    consumer-level digital cameras on the market. Apple has never aspired to
    replace the PC. Steve Jobs has said that in public several times. You
    need to update yourself on history before you spout off with clearly
    uninformed information.
    Shawn Hirn, Dec 7, 2009
    #4
  5. RichA

    Shawn Hirn Guest

    In article <4b1c9c09$0$1648$>,
    (Ray Fischer) wrote:

    > RichA <> wrote:
    > >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    > >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    > >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism

    >
    > Rich is an effete snob who doesn't realize that Apple's computers are
    > designed in California. And judging by Apple's stock price they seem
    > to be doing quite well.


    Let's see. As of close this past Friday ...

    APPL = 193.32
    HP = 36.80
    DELL = 13.46


    Hmmm ...

    Apple shareholders are laughing all the way to the bank.
    Shawn Hirn, Dec 7, 2009
    #5
  6. RichA

    John A. Guest

    On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 07:05:54 -0500, Shawn Hirn <>
    wrote:

    >In article <4b1c9c09$0$1648$>,
    > (Ray Fischer) wrote:
    >
    >> RichA <> wrote:
    >> >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >> >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >> >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism

    >>
    >> Rich is an effete snob who doesn't realize that Apple's computers are
    >> designed in California. And judging by Apple's stock price they seem
    >> to be doing quite well.

    >
    >Let's see. As of close this past Friday ...
    >
    >APPL = 193.32
    >HP = 36.80
    >DELL = 13.46
    >
    >
    >Hmmm ...
    >
    >Apple shareholders are laughing all the way to the bank.


    The iPod & iPhone are to thank for that.
    John A., Dec 7, 2009
    #6
  7. RichA

    John A. Guest

    On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 07:01:32 -0500, Shawn Hirn <>
    wrote:

    >In article
    ><>,
    > RichA <> wrote:
    >
    >> Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >> replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >> design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism
    >> that to some appears attractive, but from a functional aspect, sucks.
    >> Think about pro cameras then think about newer small cameras and what
    >> is the small camera's main problem? Lack of up front functionality,
    >> lack of buttons. Everything is buried in menus or simply lacking.
    >> This is why despite the constant griping by some there ARE no small,
    >> pro-level DSLRs.
    >> Apple doesn't use buttons. Everything is in multi-layed menus
    >> onscreen. If the could commit the keyboard to a screen, likely they
    >> would. This is not the kind of hamstrung functionality people who
    >> know better want in a camera. They want the functions available to
    >> them with a one-button push, ideally.
    >> Which is why pro cameras will stay large.

    >
    >Apple did make a digital camera. Apple's QuickTake was one of the first
    >consumer-level digital cameras on the market. Apple has never aspired to
    >replace the PC. Steve Jobs has said that in public several times. You
    >need to update yourself on history before you spout off with clearly
    >uninformed information.


    Current marketing campaign notwithstanding.
    John A., Dec 7, 2009
    #7
  8. Shawn Hirn wrote:
    > In article
    > <>,
    > RichA <> wrote:
    >
    >> Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >> replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >> design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism
    >> that to some appears attractive, but from a functional aspect, sucks.
    >> Think about pro cameras then think about newer small cameras and what
    >> is the small camera's main problem? Lack of up front functionality,
    >> lack of buttons. Everything is buried in menus or simply lacking.
    >> This is why despite the constant griping by some there ARE no small,
    >> pro-level DSLRs.
    >> Apple doesn't use buttons. Everything is in multi-layed menus
    >> onscreen. If the could commit the keyboard to a screen, likely they
    >> would. This is not the kind of hamstrung functionality people who
    >> know better want in a camera. They want the functions available to
    >> them with a one-button push, ideally.
    >> Which is why pro cameras will stay large.

    >
    > Apple did make a digital camera. Apple's QuickTake was one of the first
    > consumer-level digital cameras on the market. Apple has never aspired to
    > replace the PC. Steve Jobs has said that in public several times. You
    > need to update yourself on history before you spout off with clearly
    > uninformed information.


    That won't be happening, as Rich likes to post.... a lot.

    Apple still "makes" a digital camera- they're embedded in all laptops
    and iPhones.

    --
    John McWilliams
    John McWilliams, Dec 7, 2009
    #8
  9. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Ray Fischer wrote:
    > RichA <> wrote:
    > >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    > >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    > >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism

    >
    > Rich is an effete snob who doesn't realize that Apple's computers are
    > designed in California. And judging by Apple's stock price they seem
    > to be doing quite well.
    >


    Selling iphones. European means European style, not built there.
    Apple is the Ikea of computers, but not nearly as successful with
    computers as Ikea has been with cheap furnture.
    RichA, Dec 7, 2009
    #9
  10. RichA

    GMAN Guest

    In article <>, RichA <> wrote:
    >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism
    >that to some appears attractive, but from a functional aspect, sucks.
    >Think about pro cameras then think about newer small cameras and what
    >is the small camera's main problem? Lack of up front functionality,
    >lack of buttons. Everything is buried in menus or simply lacking.
    >This is why despite the constant griping by some there ARE no small,
    >pro-level DSLRs.
    >Apple doesn't use buttons. Everything is in multi-layed menus
    >onscreen. If the could commit the keyboard to a screen, likely they
    >would. This is not the kind of hamstrung functionality people who
    >know better want in a camera. They want the functions available to
    >them with a one-button push, ideally.
    >Which is why pro cameras will stay large.

    Apple "DID" make digital cameras way back in 1994
    They were a piece of shit.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_QuickTake
    GMAN, Dec 7, 2009
    #10
  11. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Shawn Hirn wrote:
    > In article <4b1c9c09$0$1648$>,
    > (Ray Fischer) wrote:
    >
    > > RichA <> wrote:
    > > >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    > > >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    > > >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism

    > >
    > > Rich is an effete snob who doesn't realize that Apple's computers are
    > > designed in California. And judging by Apple's stock price they seem
    > > to be doing quite well.

    >
    > Let's see. As of close this past Friday ...
    >
    > APPL = 193.32
    > HP = 36.80
    > DELL = 13.46
    >
    >
    > Hmmm ...
    >
    > Apple shareholders are laughing all the way to the bank.


    Clueless. Individual share prices mean nothing, unless contrasted
    against historical prices. There are plenty of huge, successful
    companies with share prices in double-digits and plenty of boutique
    companies with share prices in the high hundreds.
    RichA, Dec 7, 2009
    #11
  12. RichA

    GMAN Guest

    In article <>, John A. <> wrote:
    >On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 07:05:54 -0500, Shawn Hirn <>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>In article <4b1c9c09$0$1648$>,
    >> (Ray Fischer) wrote:
    >>
    >>> RichA <> wrote:
    >>> >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >>> >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >>> >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism
    >>>
    >>> Rich is an effete snob who doesn't realize that Apple's computers are
    >>> designed in California. And judging by Apple's stock price they seem
    >>> to be doing quite well.

    >>
    >>Let's see. As of close this past Friday ...
    >>
    >>APPL = 193.32
    >>HP = 36.80
    >>DELL = 13.46
    >>
    >>
    >>Hmmm ...
    >>
    >>Apple shareholders are laughing all the way to the bank.

    >
    >The iPod & iPhone are to thank for that.

    And the idiots who have to replace their devices every 6 months either because
    they have to be a duchebag snob and have the latest model or Apple throws
    something into the next device that can only be done on the new 6 month model.
    GMAN, Dec 7, 2009
    #12
  13. RichA

    Paul J Gans Guest

    In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Shawn Hirn <> wrote:
    >In article <4b1c9c09$0$1648$>,
    > (Ray Fischer) wrote:


    >> RichA <> wrote:
    >> >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >> >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >> >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism

    >>
    >> Rich is an effete snob who doesn't realize that Apple's computers are
    >> designed in California. And judging by Apple's stock price they seem
    >> to be doing quite well.


    >Let's see. As of close this past Friday ...


    >APPL = 193.32
    >HP = 36.80
    >DELL = 13.46



    >Hmmm ...


    >Apple shareholders are laughing all the way to the bank.


    Share price alone means nothing. The value of a share
    depends on many things in addition to the value of the
    company. One obvious one is how many shares have been
    issued?

    --
    --- Paul J. Gans
    Paul J Gans, Dec 8, 2009
    #13
  14. RichA

    Ray Fischer Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >Shawn Hirn wrote:
    >> (Ray Fischer) wrote:
    >> > RichA <> wrote:
    >> > >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >> > >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >> > >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism
    >> >
    >> > Rich is an effete snob who doesn't realize that Apple's computers are
    >> > designed in California. And judging by Apple's stock price they seem
    >> > to be doing quite well.

    >>
    >> Let's see. As of close this past Friday ...
    >>
    >> APPL = 193.32
    >> HP = 36.80
    >> DELL = 13.46
    >>
    >> Hmmm ...
    >>
    >> Apple shareholders are laughing all the way to the bank.

    >
    >Clueless. Individual share prices mean nothing, unless contrasted
    >against historical prices.


    Now go and look up the historical prices.

    --
    Ray Fischer
    Ray Fischer, Dec 8, 2009
    #14
  15. RichA

    Ray Fischer Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >Ray Fischer wrote:
    >> RichA <> wrote:
    >> >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >> >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >> >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism

    >>
    >> Rich is an effete snob who doesn't realize that Apple's computers are
    >> designed in California. And judging by Apple's stock price they seem
    >> to be doing quite well.

    >
    >Selling iphones.


    And computers and iPods and music.

    > European means European style, not built there.


    You don't even know what "European style" means. Apparently
    you're such an America-hating snob that you think that Americans
    aren't even capable of building well-designed products.

    --
    Ray Fischer
    Ray Fischer, Dec 8, 2009
    #15
  16. RichA

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Roger Matthews <> wrote:
    >But you would have to send them back to the manufacturer every time the
    >battery needed replacement!


    No, Apple's computers really do have removeable batteries.

    >"corks" <> wrote in message
    >> ahem but apple pc's are made of metal ????
    >>
    >>
    >> "RichA" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >>> replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >>> design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism
    >>> that to some appears attractive, but from a functional aspect, sucks.
    >>> Think about pro cameras then think about newer small cameras and what
    >>> is the small camera's main problem? Lack of up front functionality,
    >>> lack of buttons. Everything is buried in menus or simply lacking.
    >>> This is why despite the constant griping by some there ARE no small,
    >>> pro-level DSLRs.
    >>> Apple doesn't use buttons. Everything is in multi-layed menus
    >>> onscreen. If the could commit the keyboard to a screen, likely they
    >>> would. This is not the kind of hamstrung functionality people who
    >>> know better want in a camera. They want the functions available to
    >>> them with a one-button push, ideally.
    >>> Which is why pro cameras will stay large.

    >>
    >>



    --
    Ray Fischer
    Ray Fischer, Dec 8, 2009
    #16
  17. RichA

    -hh Guest

    (GMAN) wrote:
    >
    > Apple "DID" make digital cameras way back in 1994
    > They were a piece of shit.
    >
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_QuickTake


    I can recall using one of those at work.

    Sure, it was slow, image quality was "eh"...but to call it crap is
    missing the point: what other digital existed to compare it against?
    Particularly at the same basic price point?

    Please do feel free to suggest some of its competing products from
    circa 1994.


    My recollection is that it was pretty unique product ... and cheaper
    than a Nikon Coolscan LS-1000 film scanner. So while it arguably
    wasn't a commercial success, it was the "innovator" marketplace risk-
    taker that revealed a new market opportunity. I don't think that we
    need to debate that digital cameras have since grown into a viable &
    profitable market segment.



    -hh
    -hh, Dec 8, 2009
    #17
  18. On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 04:39:34 -0800 (PST), -hh wrote:
    > Please do feel free to suggest some of its competing products from
    > circa 1994.


    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/timeline.asp?start=1995
    The dpreview timeline does not even start before 1995, with a single
    product only: Kodak DCS460

    A perfectly different kind of camera, integrating a 6 MP sensor within
    an analog body

    Weight (inc. batteries) 1700 g (60 oz)
    Dimensions 170 x 114 x 208 mm (6.7 x 4.5 x 8.2 in)

    > My recollection is that it was pretty unique product ... and cheaper
    > than a Nikon Coolscan LS-1000 film scanner. So while it arguably
    > wasn't a commercial success, it was the "innovator" marketplace risk-
    > taker that revealed a new market opportunity. I don't think that we
    > need to debate that digital cameras have since grown into a viable &
    > profitable market segment.


    I feel it was not a real Apple product, but the best you could get from
    a cooperation product between Apple and Kodak/Fuji

    Apple startet a good idea once again, but it did not turn out well
    enough for an ongoing success.

    - Martin
    Martin Trautmann, Dec 8, 2009
    #18
  19. RichA

    John A. Guest

    On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 14:03:57 +0000 (UTC), Martin Trautmann
    <> wrote:

    >On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 04:39:34 -0800 (PST), -hh wrote:
    >> Please do feel free to suggest some of its competing products from
    >> circa 1994.

    >
    >http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/timeline.asp?start=1995
    >The dpreview timeline does not even start before 1995, with a single
    >product only: Kodak DCS460
    >
    >A perfectly different kind of camera, integrating a 6 MP sensor within
    >an analog body
    >
    >Weight (inc. batteries) 1700 g (60 oz)
    >Dimensions 170 x 114 x 208 mm (6.7 x 4.5 x 8.2 in)
    >
    >> My recollection is that it was pretty unique product ... and cheaper
    >> than a Nikon Coolscan LS-1000 film scanner. So while it arguably
    >> wasn't a commercial success, it was the "innovator" marketplace risk-
    >> taker that revealed a new market opportunity. I don't think that we
    >> need to debate that digital cameras have since grown into a viable &
    >> profitable market segment.

    >
    >I feel it was not a real Apple product, but the best you could get from
    >a cooperation product between Apple and Kodak/Fuji
    >
    >Apple startet a good idea once again, but it did not turn out well
    >enough for an ongoing success.


    Interesting article about the first digital camera...

    http://www.spicyedition.com/archive/news/240048_firstdigital09.html

    It also mentions the Sony Mavica:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Mavica
    The first of them came out in '81, but it stored a video still rather
    than a digital image.
    John A., Dec 8, 2009
    #19
  20. RichA

    Chris H Guest

    In message <
    ..com>, RichA <> writes
    >
    >
    >Ray Fischer wrote:
    >> RichA <> wrote:
    >> >Because they'd corner the market? Hardly. Their aspirations about
    >> >replacing PC's haven't and won't come to pass. It comes down to
    >> >design. Apple products are plagued by a soulless European minimalism

    >>
    >> Rich is an effete snob who doesn't realize that Apple's computers are
    >> designed in California. And judging by Apple's stock price they seem
    >> to be doing quite well.
    >>

    >
    >Selling iphones. European means European style, not built there.


    OK so you are admitting that European style is more sophisticated than
    US "style".... I am not sure anyone, globally, will disagree with you
    as a generalisation. There will be a few exceptions I am sure.

    You will note that the majority of Apple computers are used in the
    graphics and media industries where style is important. So that you can
    not understand it says more about you than the Apple computers.



    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
    Chris H, Dec 8, 2009
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. HackaX0rus

    glad to bere here

    HackaX0rus, Jun 27, 2005, in forum: The Lounge
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    1,634
    unholy
    Jul 4, 2005
  2. C.Pittman

    Try it and You Will Be Glad You DiD!

    C.Pittman, Jun 14, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    399
    Plato
    Jun 15, 2004
  3. neville

    glad to be back

    neville, Mar 24, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    631
    Roger
    Mar 26, 2005
  4. wagwheel

    Cameras--Cameras--Cameras

    wagwheel, Mar 31, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    411
    Mark B.
    Apr 1, 2007
  5. wagwheel

    Cameras--Cameras--Cameras

    wagwheel, Apr 1, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    399
    Ken Lucke
    Apr 1, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page