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

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by nospam, May 15, 2011.

  1. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mxsmanic
    <> wrote:

    > nospam writes:
    >
    > > nope. on intel macs, windows is fully supported by apple via boot camp.
    > > for older macs, apple had a port of linux for a while called mklinux.
    > > third parties ported freebsd and others.

    >
    > Can you buy a Mac with no OS, and then install the OS of your choice on the
    > machine?


    what would be the point of that? the attraction of a mac is mac os, but
    you can certainly install whatever you want on it, including windows
    (which many people do), linux and bsd natively and most anything else
    via vmware (os/2, nextstep, beos, etc.). not much point in anything
    other than mac os x and windows though.
    nospam, May 15, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mxsmanic
    <> wrote:

    > > what would be the point of that? the attraction of a mac is mac os ...

    >
    > Yup. And what would be the point of buying a PC without Windows? More than 99%
    > of the market wants Windows. Even when Microsoft was forced to allow
    > manufacturers to provide the option of another OS, people still wanted
    > Windows.


    it's actually around 90% these days and dropping. apple's sales are
    outpacing the market, big time. if you look at specific markets (i.e.,
    photography, graphic arts), mac market share is much, much higher.
    adobe sells about 50% mac, 50% windows.

    > > ... but you can certainly install whatever you want on it, including
    > > windows (which many people do), linux and bsd natively and most anything
    > > else via vmware (os/2, nextstep, beos, etc.).

    >
    > Will Apple sell you a Mac without an OS?


    will dell sell you a pc without an os?
    nospam, May 15, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    > >> Will Apple sell you a Mac without an OS?

    > >
    > >will dell sell you a pc without an os?

    >
    > They will offer you a choice of operating systems. See for example
    > http://search.dell.com/results.aspx?s=gen&c=us&l=en&cs=&k=linux desktop&cat=all&ref=ac


    clicking to the customize section from that link (i picked a dell
    t3500), they only offer 1 of several versions of windows. i don't see a
    'none' button, or even a linux button.
    nospam, May 16, 2011
    #3
  4. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    > >Will Apple sell you a Mac without an OS?

    >
    > Probably not, but they control the whole chain. MS never has.


    sure they have. they required vendors to include windows or they won't
    get as good of a deal on pricing (or no deal). that's part of what got
    them into trouble several years back.
    nospam, May 16, 2011
    #4
  5. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mxsmanic
    <> wrote:

    > The only reason Apple hasn't got into trouble is that it's such a small part
    > of the market. It turns out that many people don't want to be in Apple's
    > stranglehold, so they just buy PCs instead.


    not anymore. apple's sales are outpacing the market as whole and have
    been for many years.

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


    except that apple's market share is growing and their revenue is higher
    than other companies such as dell.

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


    actually, the opposite.
    nospam, May 16, 2011
    #5
  6. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mxsmanic
    <> wrote:

    > > it's actually around 90% these days and dropping. apple's sales are
    > > outpacing the market, big time.

    >
    > As of this morning, 95% of non-Mac systems accessing my site are running
    > Windows. Macs are 13.5% of total visitors,


    if macs are 13.5% then it's 86.5% non-mac, not 95%, which is even
    higher than my rough 90% estimate.

    > but I suppose that includes iPads
    > and iPhones (or does it?--I'm not sure how these devices report themselves to
    > Web sites).


    as ipads or iphones, using mobile safari or whatever other browser the
    user is using (yes there are alternatives).

    > Apple's revenue is not coming from the desktop computers, although they've
    > been greatly helped by other Apple gadgets that have been hugely successful.


    apple's revenue is mostly mobile devices and laptops. desktop computer
    sales as a whole (industry wide) are dropping for laptops and now
    tablets.

    > > if you look at specific markets (i.e.,
    > > photography, graphic arts), mac market share is much, much higher.
    > > adobe sells about 50% mac, 50% windows.

    >
    > 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?

    > Today, Macs and Windows are roughly equal for graphics. Heck, they use the
    > same hardware, and there's nothing about UNIX clones that makes them better
    > for graphics than NT-family operating systems.


    the hardware may be similar but the software is very different. for
    example, os x has been able to offload just about any graphics
    operation to the gpu for nearly a decade.

    > The Mac predominance today in graphics is part inertia and part emotional
    > attachment. However, I suppose that if you intended to use a computer for
    > absolutely nothing else, a Mac would still be the better choice for graphics.
    > When you decide to run your SOHO accounting on your machine, though, you
    > discover that it might not have been such a good choice.


    accounting software on macs is not great. graphics software is very
    good. linux is a good choice for servers. different tools for different
    purposes.

    > > will dell sell you a pc without an os?

    >
    > I don't know. I build my own PCs these days--something that wouldn't be
    > possible if I wanted a Mac.


    most people do not build pcs, however, it actually is possible to build
    a mac, just not cost effective. homebuilt is a tiny portion of the
    market and not very profitable either.
    nospam, May 16, 2011
    #6
  7. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mxsmanic
    <> wrote:

    > > not anymore. apple's sales are outpacing the market as whole and have
    > > been for many years.

    >
    > I don't expect any change in Windows dominance.


    it's changing.

    > Applications drive platforms,
    > and there are more applications available for Windows than for any other
    > desktop platform.


    quality versus quantity, plus a mac can run all of those natively,
    alongside all mac applications and unix apps. in other words, macs can
    run more software than a windows box can.

    > > except that apple's market share is growing and their revenue is higher
    > > than other companies such as dell.

    >
    > Most of their revenue is coming from non-desktop gadgets (iPhone, iPod, iPad,
    > etc.), although the desktops are receiving some benefit from this.


    <http://readtechnews.com/windows-is-dominant-linux-and-mac-os-fastest-gr
    owing/>

    According to Gartner reported, benefit from the Mac desktop and
    notebook sales strong growth, the revenue of Apple platform in 2010
    was 520 million U.S. dollars, up 15.8%. In contrast, MicrosoftŒs
    client business grew only 9.2%.

    from apple's earnings call last month, mac sales grew 28% compared to a
    market contraction of 3%, the 20th consecutive quarter that they
    outpaced the market. half of mac buyers are buying their first mac (aka
    'pc switchers').

    > > actually, the opposite.

    >
    > No company prospers by marketing the opposite of what consumers want.


    exactly why apple is prospering.
    nospam, May 16, 2011
    #7
  8. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mxsmanic
    <> wrote:

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

    >
    > It has been true for years. As I recall, that came directly from Adobe.


    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).

    > > most people do not build pcs, however, it actually is possible to build
    > > a mac, just not cost effective. homebuilt is a tiny portion of the
    > > market and not very profitable either.

    >
    > Apple sells OEM copies of its Mac OS? I've never seen that anywhere. What
    > about the BIOS and other Mac-specific stuff?


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

    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).

    a 5 user license of os x (family pack) is $49. how much are 5 licenses
    of windows ultimate?
    nospam, May 16, 2011
    #8
  9. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mxsmanic
    <> wrote:

    > > Apple is such a small part of the market ...

    >
    > On the desktop, yes. And one reason for that is their iron grip on both
    > hardware and software. It's a walled garden, but it's a small garden.


    wrong, and it's actually a big open garden. the os x kernel is open
    source, as is webkit and many other parts of of os x. in fact, some of
    apple's competitors use apple's own webkit engine (google, nokia and
    others).

    what parts of windows can i download and where? has microsoft released
    the internet explorer rendering engine source code? windows is about as
    proprietary as it gets, especially with microsoft doing things to keep
    people on the platform (active x, .net, c#, wmv, etc.).
    nospam, May 16, 2011
    #9
  10. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mxsmanic
    <> wrote:

    > > it's changing.

    >
    > Unless the applications market changes first, the changes will not be
    > significant.


    the industry is moving to mobile devices, namely tablets.

    > > quality versus quantity, plus a mac can run all of those natively,
    > > alongside all mac applications and unix apps. in other words, macs can
    > > run more software than a windows box can.

    >
    > There's no difference in quality between Mac apps and Windows apps,


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

    > and there's no reason to run Windows apps on a Mac.


    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.

    try to keep your story straight.

    > The application market for
    > Windows is so vast that it's very rare to be forced to get a Mac just for an
    > application.


    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.

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

    > > According to Gartner reported, benefit from the Mac desktop and
    > > notebook sales strong growth, the revenue of Apple platform in 2010
    > > was 520 million U.S. dollars, up 15.8%. In contrast, Microsoft¼s
    > > client business grew only 9.2%.

    >
    > Growth is not dominance. Five million dollars up 15.8% is an extra $790K;
    > 95 million dollars up 9.2% is an extra $8.74 million, or more than ten times
    > as much increase in absolute dollars.


    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.

    > > from apple's earnings call last month, mac sales grew 28% compared to a
    > > market contraction of 3%, the 20th consecutive quarter that they
    > > outpaced the market. half of mac buyers are buying their first mac (aka
    > > 'pc switchers').

    >
    > Wait and see.


    wait for what?

    > > exactly why apple is prospering.

    >
    > Apple is prospering because of non-desktop products.


    no, they're prospering for both mobile and desktop products.
    nospam, May 16, 2011
    #10
  11. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mxsmanic
    <> 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.
    nospam, May 16, 2011
    #11
  12. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mxsmanic
    <> 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.
    nospam, May 16, 2011
    #12
  13. nospam

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Mxsmanic
    <> 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.
    nospam, May 16, 2011
    #13
  14. Mxsmanic <> 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
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 16, 2011
    #14
  15. Mxsmanic <> 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
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 16, 2011
    #15
  16. Mxsmanic <> 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
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 16, 2011
    #16
  17. Mxsmanic <> 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
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 16, 2011
    #17
  18. Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    > On Sun, 15 May 2011 17:03:18 -0700, nospam <>
    > 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
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 16, 2011
    #18
  19. Mxsmanic <> 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
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 16, 2011
    #19
  20. nospam

    Bruce Guest

    David Dyer-Bennet <> wrote:
    >On Sunday, May 15, 2011 7:59:30 PM UTC-5, nospam wrote:
    >> In article <>, Mxsmanic
    >> <> 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.
    Bruce, May 16, 2011
    #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. bob
    Replies:
    66
    Views:
    1,665
    J. Clarke
    Jul 3, 2011
  2. David Dyer-Bennet

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

    David Dyer-Bennet, May 10, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    233
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    May 21, 2011
  3. David Dyer-Bennet

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

    David Dyer-Bennet, May 10, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    210
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    May 21, 2011
  4. David Dyer-Bennet

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

    David Dyer-Bennet, May 10, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    612
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    Jun 8, 2011
  5. Wolfgang Weisselberg

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

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 16, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    31
    Views:
    644
    John Turco
    May 27, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page