Jim's unanswered question...
Edwin
"Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b1
Snit
--
€ Deleting from a *Save* dialog is not a sign of well done design
€ A personal computer without an OS is crippled by that lacking
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
So?
What do you suppose has changed?
--
'It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix.'
"It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix'
(Edwin on Mac OS X)
'[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' --
'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the
IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM)
'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included
on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun)
Jim Polaski
There was in fact a company marketing a laptop with a built-in pro-level digital camera.
To use it you would put the laptop on a tripod and use the whole thing as the camera.
A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who purchased one.
--
Jim
Snit
jpolaski-C528CC...@comcast.dca.giganews.com on 11/17/06 10:17
PM:
And that is, of course, completely different than what Apple has done.
--
€ Teaching is a "real job"
€ The path "~/users/username/library/widget" is not common on any OS
€ The term "all widgets" does not specify a specific subgroup of widgets
Sandman
"Snit Jr" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
His question is quite valid. No laptop today comes with a built in
camera *meant for photography* which is clearly what Jim was talking
about.
Then again, he wrote it in English, which is why you didn't understand
it.
--
Sandman[.net]
Josh McKee
Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote:
> In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b1
>
> There was in fact a company marketing a laptop with a built-in pro-level
> digital camera.
Toshiba was making a laptop with a pro-level camera? Which model was
that?
> To use it you would put the laptop on a tripod and use the whole thing as the
> camera.
Only a Maccie caught in hypocrisy would make such a stupid statement.
> A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
> purchased one.
Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
yourself.
Josh
Snit
jtmckee-C23E15...@netnews.comcast.net on 11/18/06 7:01 AM:
I am unfamiliar with the Toshiba product. If it was quite similar to the
Mac product you might have a point.
I suspect you do not.
--
€ The tilde in an OS X path does *not* mean "the hard drive only"
€ Things which are not the same are not "identical"
€ The word "ouch" is not a sure sign of agreement.
Jim Polaski
Josh McKee <jtm...@rm-bogus-ac.net> wrote:
> In article <jpolaski-C528CC...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
> Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> > >
> > > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b1
> >
> > There was in fact a company marketing a laptop with a built-in pro-level
> > digital camera.
>
> Toshiba was making a laptop with a pro-level camera? Which model was
> that?
>
> > To use it you would put the laptop on a tripod and use the whole thing as
> > the
> > camera.
>
> Only a Maccie caught in hypocrisy would make such a stupid statement.
Lets see, Photography, specifically for Advertising is where I've worked since 1972 and
having seen the first Dicomed digital scan back and later this laptop/camera hybrid in
studio demos, you're saying It doesn't exist.
>
> > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
> > purchased one.
>
> Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
> yourself.
>
> Josh
Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the business here in Chicago.
That is your implication.
--
Jim
Josh McKee
Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote:
> In article <jtmckee-C23E15...@netnews.comcast.net>,
> Josh McKee <jtm...@rm-bogus-ac.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <jpolaski-C528CC...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
> > Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > > "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > > > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > > > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> > > >
> > > > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b
> > > > 1
> > >
> > > There was in fact a company marketing a laptop with a built-in pro-level
> > > digital camera.
> >
> > Toshiba was making a laptop with a pro-level camera? Which model was
> > that?
> >
> > > To use it you would put the laptop on a tripod and use the whole thing as
> > > the
> > > camera.
> >
> > Only a Maccie caught in hypocrisy would make such a stupid statement.
>
> Lets see, Photography, specifically for Advertising is where I've worked
> since 1972 and having seen the first Dicomed digital scan back and later this laptop/camera
> hybrid in studio demos, you're saying It doesn't exist.
Your resume is irrelevant as to whether this system exists or not. With
that said I clearly asked:
"Toshiba was making a laptop with a pro-level camera? Which model was
that?"
To which you did not provide an answer.
> > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
> > > purchased one.
> >
> > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
> > yourself.
> >
> > Josh
>
> Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the business here
> in Chicago.
Working "in the business" is not necessary.
> That is your implication.
Josh
Mayor of R'lyeh
<jtm...@rm-bogus-ac.net> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
How could he know that? He doesn't even know what school he graduated
from; the year he graduated or the degree he got.
>
>> > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
>> > > purchased one.
>> >
>> > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
>> > yourself.
>> >
>> > Josh
>>
>> Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the business here
>> in Chicago.
>
>Working "in the business" is not necessary.
>
>> That is your implication.
>
>Josh
--
"A president who breaks the law is a threat to the
very structure of our government."
Al Gore
Bill Clinton became eligible for reinstatement to the
bar on January 19,2006 after losing his law license
in 2001 for comitting perjury.
Jim Polaski
Josh McKee <jtm...@rm-bogus-ac.net> wrote:
I didn't provide a name because it was such a forgettable product and a stupid idea born
of nothing less than a way to get folks money. For the moment, I just don't remember the
name it was marketed under. I have no reason to remember forgettable garbage especially
for something I wouldn't purchase. At the time, Dicomed, Phase One, Kodak, Leaf and the
Big Shot were the preferred professional choices.
>
> > > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
> > > > purchased one.
> > >
> > > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
> > > yourself.
> > >
> > > Josh
> >
> > Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the business
> > here
> > in Chicago.
>
> Working "in the business" is not necessary.
Sure it is because if you didn't, you probably wouldn't see the advertising for the
product since most, if not all of it was in publications to the trade not consumers.
>
> > That is your implication.
>
> Josh
--
Jim
Jim Polaski
You don't know anything of science and couldn't even answer a basic question relating to
the most basic of atoms.
>
> >
> >> > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
> >> > > purchased one.
> >> >
> >> > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
> >> > yourself.
> >> >
> >> > Josh
> >>
> >> Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the business
> >> here
> >> in Chicago.
> >
> >Working "in the business" is not necessary.
> >
> >> That is your implication.
> >
> >Josh
--
Jim
Josh McKee
Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote:
To answer your earlier question: I have seen no evidence of this item
therefore I have to conclude it doesn't exist.
> >
> > > > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
> > > > > purchased one.
> > > >
> > > > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
> > > > yourself.
> > > >
> > > > Josh
> > >
> > > Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the business
> > > here
> > > in Chicago.
> >
> > Working "in the business" is not necessary.
>
> Sure it is because if you didn't, you probably wouldn't see the advertising
> for the product since most, if not all of it was in publications to the trade not
> consumers.
You're egos approaching that of George.
Josh
Jim Lee Jr.
Josh McKee <jtm...@rm-bogus-ac.net> wrote:
> You're egos approaching that of George.
>
> Josh
You misspelled "Your," "egos" should be "ego is" and "George" should be
"George's."
Jim Polaski
Josh McKee <jtm...@rm-bogus-ac.net> wrote:
Just because you're in the dark, doesn't mean the product never or does exist. After some
looking in back issues of PDN, the company was Foveon, who made a customized laptop with
it's custom cradle to hold the laptop and the lens system and you used the laptop screen
to focus, compose etc. They needed their togetherness to work due to the customization,
you couldn't just plop in any laptop. A system.
http://www.photomediagroup.com/pmm/issues/Winter2000/Montiz.htm
"The Foveon system consists of a customized high-powered laptop that holds up to 500
uncompressed raw image files. It sits in an ergonomically designed cradle that houses the
imaging sensors on its front. To this front section is connected a Canon L series
autofocus zoom lens. To view the subject, you look at the right side of the LCD monitor,
which displays a 7-inch by 7-inch live video feed image of the scene to be captured. Once
you fire the camera, the captured image, also 7-inch by 7-inch, pops up on the left side
of the monitor."
It was marketed as total integrated system for the studio photographer back in 2000.
>
> > >
> > > > > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here
> > > > > > who
> > > > > > purchased one.
> > > > >
> > > > > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
> > > > > yourself.
> > > > >
> > > > > Josh
> > > >
> > > > Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the
> > > > business
> > > > here
> > > > in Chicago.
> > >
> > > Working "in the business" is not necessary.
> >
> > Sure it is because if you didn't, you probably wouldn't see the advertising
> > for the product since most, if not all of it was in publications to the
> > trade not
> > consumers.
>
> You're egos approaching that of George.
>
> Josh
Ego has/had nothing to do with it, the facts do and the product did exist.
--
Jim
Steve de Mena
It looks like it was pretty slick for its time.
Was the fact it was integrated with a laptop that
much of a hindrance for a studio? I have seen
people shoot with Hasselblads with digital backs
and it was connected to a cart with their laptop
(and supplies) and that did not look very portable
either.
Steve [amateur photog]
Steve de Mena
>> http://www.photomediagroup.com/pmm/issues/Winter2000/Montiz.htm
>>
>> "The Foveon system consists of a customized high-powered laptop that
>> holds up to 500 uncompressed raw image files. It sits in an
>> ergonomically designed cradle that houses the imaging sensors on its
>> front. To this front section is connected a Canon L series autofocus
>> zoom lens. To view the subject, you look at the right side of the LCD
>> monitor, which displays a 7-inch by 7-inch live video feed image of
>> the scene to be captured. Once you fire the camera, the captured
>> image, also 7-inch by 7-inch, pops up on the left side of the monitor."
>> It was marketed as total integrated system for the studio photographer
>> back in 2000.
>
> It looks like it was pretty slick for its time. Was the fact it was
> integrated with a laptop that much of a hindrance for a studio? I have
> seen people shoot with Hasselblads with digital backs and it was
> connected to a cart with their laptop (and supplies) and that did not
> look very portable either.
>
> Steve [amateur photog]
I found some more info here:
I wonder how much it cost?
Steve
Jim Polaski
The Foveon was unbalanced and clumsy. Not much of a big deal for a tabletop shooter I
suppose, but it represented a totally different way of working when FILM was still king.
Second, it was a PC laptop and most photographers putting their toe in the digital pond
were on Macs. Third, it was expensive. The ONLY way you could work was to use the laptop
screen.
At nearly the same time was the Dicomed "Big Shot" which used the Hasselblad body with a
capture back, not a scan back. But all that differed was how you "recorded" the image and
no different than film, you squeezed the shutter and still used the optical viewfinder,
just as you did with film, to compose the photo.
--
Jim
Edwin
Sandman wrote:
> In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "Snit Jr" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b1
>
> His question is quite valid. No laptop today comes with a built in
> camera *meant for photography* which is clearly what Jim was talking
> about.
Jim wrote what he did in response to the Toshiba laptop which had a
camera built into in in the way that MacBook has a camera built into
it. You were given a reference to the thread. The Toshiba is the
same thing as the MacBook, WRT to the camera, and both you and Jim know
it, you're both just being willfully stupid - AGAIN!
> Then again, he wrote it in English, which is why you didn't understand
> it.
I'll assume you wrote the above to underscore your own stupidity.
Josh McKee
Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote:
That's why I said:
"I have seen no evidence of this item therefore I have to conclude it
doesn't exist."
After asking you for information about it. Information which you did not
supply until after my comment.
Josh
Jim Polaski
Josh McKee <jtm...@rm-bogus-ac.net> wrote:
IOW, you're just an obstinate snob.
--
Jim
Edwin
Why would you bring that up in response to PC laptops that had cameras
built into them in the same way that the MacBook has a camera built
into it?
Edwin
Jim Polaski wrote:
> In article <jtmckee-C23E15...@netnews.comcast.net>,
> Josh McKee <jtm...@rm-bogus-ac.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <jpolaski-C528CC...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
> > Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > > "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > > > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > > > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> > > >
> > > > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b1
> > >
> > > There was in fact a company marketing a laptop with a built-in pro-level
> > > digital camera.
> >
> > Toshiba was making a laptop with a pro-level camera? Which model was
> > that?
> >
> > > To use it you would put the laptop on a tripod and use the whole thing as
> > > the
> > > camera.
> >
> > Only a Maccie caught in hypocrisy would make such a stupid statement.
>
> Lets see, Photography, specifically for Advertising is where I've worked since 1972 and
> having seen the first Dicomed digital scan back and later this laptop/camera hybrid in
> studio demos, you're saying It doesn't exist.
Who cares if it does? The camera under discussion was just like the
one in the MacBook Pro is now. I made a mistake in saying "Toshiba,"
the first PC notebook with a built in camera was the Sony Vaio laptop,
predating the MacBook.
> >
> > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
> > > purchased one.
> >
> > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
> > yourself.
> >
> > Josh
>
> Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the business here in Chicago.
> That is your implication.
He doesn't have to know any "digital photo history," other than to know
that PC laptops had built in cameras before the MacBook got one, and at
that time, you could see no reason for it, in fact, you didn't even get
the right idea of the kind of camera, or how it was mounted, in the PC
laptop.
Edwin
Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b1
>
> So?
Why do Maccies use this juvenile retort so often?
> What do you suppose has changed?
You tell me. PC laptops got cameras built into them long before Macs
did. Tell me what's changed that suddenly gives Jim a reason to
have one.
Edwin
IOW, you're projecting again.
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
Where has Jim made a big deal about having one (if he even has one)?
If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and make
a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal of
Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
Alan Baker
> Alan Baker wrote:
> > In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> > >
> > > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b1
> >
> > So?
>
> Why do Maccies use this juvenile retort so often?
Perhaps because you so rarely saying anything that requires more.
>
> > What do you suppose has changed?
>
> You tell me. PC laptops got cameras built into them long before Macs
> did. Tell me what's changed that suddenly gives Jim a reason to
> have one.
Where has Jim made a big deal about having one (if he even has one)?
If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and make
a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal of
Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Edwin
The poorly worded question you hounded the Mayor with doesn't prove he
knows nothing of science because he wouldn't answer you.
Your "basic question" was worded wrong. You asked where is the "exact
position" of the electron in a hydrogen atom. You would have to
provide figures for all of the quantum variables for that answer to be
calculated, something you would not do, something which you didn't even
conceive of as being necessary to answer your idiotic question.
Edwin
Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <1164064337.4...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > Alan Baker wrote:
> > > In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > > "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > > > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > > > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> > > >
> > > > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b1
> > >
> > > So?
> >
> > Why do Maccies use this juvenile retort so often?
Note: no response.
> > > What do you suppose has changed?
> >
> > You tell me. PC laptops got cameras built into them long before Macs
> > did. Tell me what's changed that suddenly gives Jim a reason to
> > have one.
>
> Where has Jim made a big deal about having one (if he even has one)?
Where has Jim asked why anybody needs a camera built into a MacBook?
> If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and make
> a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal of
> Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
So you support his position WRT to PC laptop cameras? You can't see
any reason why anybody would want one, unless it was a professional
photographer aiming his whole notebook as if it were one big camera?
Edwin
Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <1164064337.4...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > Alan Baker wrote:
> > > In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > > "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > > > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > > > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> > > >
> > > > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b1
> > >
> > > So?
> >
> > Why do Maccies use this juvenile retort so often?
>
> Perhaps because you so rarely saying anything that requires more.
No, it's because you have juvenile minds.
> >
> > > What do you suppose has changed?
> >
> > You tell me. PC laptops got cameras built into them long before Macs
> > did. Tell me what's changed that suddenly gives Jim a reason to
> > have one.
>
> Where has Jim made a big deal about having one (if he even has one)?
Where has Jim asked why anybody would want a camera built into a
MacBook?
> If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and make
> a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal of
> Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
You won't find him asking what value a built in camera is to a MacBook
owner either, but yet he couldn't see what value a built in camera was
to a PC laptop.
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> Alan Baker wrote:
> > In article <1164064337.4...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Alan Baker wrote:
> > > > In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > > > > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > > > > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> > > > >
> > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef0
> > > > > 1b1
> > > >
> > > > So?
> > >
> > > Why do Maccies use this juvenile retort so often?
> >
> > Perhaps because you so rarely saying anything that requires more.
>
> No, it's because you have juvenile minds.
>
> > >
> > > > What do you suppose has changed?
> > >
> > > You tell me. PC laptops got cameras built into them long before Macs
> > > did. Tell me what's changed that suddenly gives Jim a reason to
> > > have one.
> >
> > Where has Jim made a big deal about having one (if he even has one)?
>
> Where has Jim asked why anybody would want a camera built into a
> MacBook?
Where has been the need? Who has been touting the camera as something
particularly wonderful?
>
> > If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and make
> > a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal of
> > Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
>
> You won't find him asking what value a built in camera is to a MacBook
> owner either, but yet he couldn't see what value a built in camera was
> to a PC laptop.
Who's posted something saying that the camera built into the Macbook is
a big deal? IOW, who has posted something that he would need to counter?
Snit
1164062309....@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com on 11/20/06 3:38 PM:
I am not familiar with the Toshiba. Can you provide a reference?
--
€ Nuclear arms are arms
€ OS X's Command+Scroll wheel function does not exist in default XP
€ Technical competence and intelligence are not the same thing
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and make
> > a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal of
> > Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
>
> So you support his position WRT to PC laptop cameras? You can't see
> any reason why anybody would want one, unless it was a professional
> photographer aiming his whole notebook as if it were one big camera?
No, I don't support *that* position, and I don't know whether or not
that is Jim's position.
Snit
Link to a reference for the PC - otherwise what is there to compare?
--
€ Teaching is a "real job"
€ The path "~/users/username/library/widget" is not common on any OS
€ The term "all widgets" does not specify a specific subgroup of widgets
Snit
>>> Only a Maccie caught in hypocrisy would make such a stupid statement.
>>
>> Lets see, Photography, specifically for Advertising is where I've worked
>> since 1972 and
>> having seen the first Dicomed digital scan back and later this laptop/camera
>> hybrid in
>> studio demos, you're saying It doesn't exist.
>
> Who cares if it does? The camera under discussion was just like the
> one in the MacBook Pro is now. I made a mistake in saying "Toshiba,"
> the first PC notebook with a built in camera was the Sony Vaio laptop,
> predating the MacBook.
I have not seen your link - it would help with the comparison.
>>>> A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
>>>> purchased one.
>>>
>>> Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
>>> yourself.
>>>
>>> Josh
>>
>> Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the business here
>> in Chicago.
>> That is your implication.
>
> He doesn't have to know any "digital photo history," other than to know
> that PC laptops had built in cameras before the MacBook got one, and at
> that time, you could see no reason for it, in fact, you didn't even get
> the right idea of the kind of camera, or how it was mounted, in the PC
> laptop.
There was little reason for a second mouse button until contextual menus...
and even then they were not *needed*. Depends on how it is used... so, can
you link to such a product where it was done well. I know of none before
Apple, but there are many products I do not know.
--
€ Deleting from a *Save* dialog is not a sign of well done design
€ A personal computer without an OS is crippled by that lacking
Edwin
Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <1164065212.0...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > > If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and make
> > > a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal of
> > > Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
> >
> > So you support his position WRT to PC laptop cameras? You can't see
> > any reason why anybody would want one, unless it was a professional
> > photographer aiming his whole notebook as if it were one big camera?
>
> No, I don't support *that* position, and I don't know whether or not
> that is Jim's position.
Then you look even stupider than you usually do, for your efforts on
Jim's behalf in this thread.
Edwin
Snit wrote:
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> stated in post
> 1164062309....@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com on 11/20/06 3:38 PM:
>
> >
> > Sandman wrote:
> >> In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> >> "Snit Jr" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> >>> your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> >>> must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> >>>
> >>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b1
> >>
> >> His question is quite valid. No laptop today comes with a built in
> >> camera *meant for photography* which is clearly what Jim was talking
> >> about.
> >
> > Jim wrote what he did in response to the Toshiba laptop which had a
> > camera built into in in the way that MacBook has a camera built into
> > it. You were given a reference to the thread. The Toshiba is the
> > same thing as the MacBook, WRT to the camera, and both you and Jim know
> > it, you're both just being willfully stupid - AGAIN!
> >
> >> Then again, he wrote it in English, which is why you didn't understand
> >> it.
> >
> > I'll assume you wrote the above to underscore your own stupidity.
> >
> I am not familiar with the Toshiba. Can you provide a reference?
My mistake. The Sony Vaio.
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
I'm not making any efforts on anyone's behalf, Edwin.
Edwin
" I do like the iMac for the integrated video camera... that is pretty
cool." -- Snit
"The Mac product does well, though it does depend on what you value:
the Mac
has a built in camera, the Dell a larger screen... either one could be
a
deal breaker." -- Snit
"> Or you could get this (outfitted similarly to the 17" MacBook Pro)
and
> it only costs $2500.
> http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc...
> s=dhs&fb=1 "
"Sure, except, no FireWire 800, no illuminated keyboard, and no camera.
Plus, it's made of cheap plastic, weighs a pound more, and is 60%
thicker. And then there's the software bundle. " -- ZuU
> > > If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and make
> > > a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal of
> > > Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
> >
> > You won't find him asking what value a built in camera is to a MacBook
> > owner either, but yet he couldn't see what value a built in camera was
> > to a PC laptop.
>
> Who's posted something saying that the camera built into the Macbook is
> a big deal? IOW, who has posted something that he would need to counter?
You read this group very selectively... or you're just very
dishonest... I'm going with the latter...
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
You pay attention to *anything* Snit says? When did this happen?
>
> "> Or you could get this (outfitted similarly to the 17" MacBook Pro)
> and
> > it only costs $2500.
> > http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc...
> > s=dhs&fb=1 "
>
>
> "Sure, except, no FireWire 800, no illuminated keyboard, and no camera.
>
> Plus, it's made of cheap plastic, weighs a pound more, and is 60%
> thicker. And then there's the software bundle. " -- ZuU
In which the camera is mixed in with a bunch of other things. Hardly
"something particularly wonderful".
>
> > > > If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and make
> > > > a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal of
> > > > Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
> > >
> > > You won't find him asking what value a built in camera is to a MacBook
> > > owner either, but yet he couldn't see what value a built in camera was
> > > to a PC laptop.
> >
> > Who's posted something saying that the camera built into the Macbook is
> > a big deal? IOW, who has posted something that he would need to counter?
>
> You read this group very selectively... or you're just very
> dishonest... I'm going with the latter...
LOL
So far the number of posts presented where the camera in the Macbooks
has been portrayed as a big deal: 0
Jim Polaski
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
Only in your delusional dreams.
--
Jim
Mayor of R'lyeh
<mayor.o...@gmail.com> chose to bless us with the following
wisdom:
>On 20 Nov 2006 15:21:39 -0800, "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> chose to
Didn't you notice how he changed it? At first it was 'where exactly'
then it went to 'where' and in this latest round he started in with
the uncertaintity. Its like he was getting told by someone (Joe
maybe?) that his question needed rephrasing to be valid. It only
serves to underscore that his actual knowledge in this area is zero
and that his 'degree' came from a Cracker Jack Box.
>>
>>> > >
>>> > >> > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
>>> > >> > > purchased one.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
>>> > >> > yourself.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Josh
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the business
>>> > >> here
>>> > >> in Chicago.
>>> > >
>>> > >Working "in the business" is not necessary.
>>> > >
>>> > >> That is your implication.
>>> > >
>>> > >Josh
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jim
--
"A president who breaks the law is a threat to the
very structure of our government."
Al Gore
Bill Clinton became eligible for reinstatement to the
bar on January 19,2006 after losing his law license
in 2001 for comitting perjury.
Snit
>>> Jim wrote what he did in response to the Toshiba laptop which had a
>>> camera built into in in the way that MacBook has a camera built into
>>> it. You were given a reference to the thread. The Toshiba is the
>>> same thing as the MacBook, WRT to the camera, and both you and Jim know
>>> it, you're both just being willfully stupid - AGAIN!
>>>
>>>> Then again, he wrote it in English, which is why you didn't understand
>>>> it.
>>>
>>> I'll assume you wrote the above to underscore your own stupidity.
>>>
>> I am not familiar with the Toshiba. Can you provide a reference?
>
> My mistake. The Sony Vaio.
What type camera? Where was it located? What software came with it?
Apple put the whole package together well... did Sony?
Snit
>>> Where has Jim asked why anybody would want a camera built into a
>>> MacBook?
>>
>> Where has been the need? Who has been touting the camera as something
>> particularly wonderful?
>
> "I do like the iMac for the integrated video camera... that is pretty
> cool." -- Snit
And it is... with the integration into the whole system. I do not know if
the Sony did this... it may or may not have.
> "The Mac product does well, though it does depend on what you value: the Mac
> has a built in camera, the Dell a larger screen... either one could be a deal
> breaker." -- Snit
I still stand by this. No argument here... nor bias for or against Mac in
that statement.
...
>> Who's posted something saying that the camera built into the Macbook is
>> a big deal? IOW, who has posted something that he would need to counter?
>
> You read this group very selectively... or you're just very
> dishonest... I'm going with the latter...
The camera, with its integration, is pretty cool. Not sure I would call it
a "big deal", but I would not argue with that classification.
--
€ It is OK to email yourself files and store them there for a few weeks
€ No legislation supercedes the Constitution (unless it amends it)
€ Apple's video format is not far from NTSC DVD and good enough for most
Snit
alangbaker-1BDF2...@news.telus.net on 11/20/06 5:01 PM:
>>> Where has been the need? Who has been touting the camera as something
>>> particularly wonderful?
>>
>> "I do like the iMac for the integrated video camera... that is pretty cool."
>> -- Snit
>>
>> "The Mac product does well, though it does depend on what you value: the Mac
>> has a built in camera, the Dell a larger screen... either one could be a deal
>> breaker." -- Snit
>
> You pay attention to *anything* Snit says? When did this happen?
Just because he trolls me and claims to not trust what I say does not mean
he does not... and the question was not about paying attention to me, just
if such things have been stated. He pointed to comments of mine that could
be reasonably construed to show I felt it was a "big deal" (big enough to be
a deal breaker for some, anyway).
...
>> You read this group very selectively... or you're just very
>> dishonest... I'm going with the latter...
>
> LOL
>
> So far the number of posts presented where the camera in the Macbooks
> has been portrayed as a big deal: 0
His quoting of my comments... and stating they could be shown to say I was
commenting on them being a "big deal", is reasonable...
See, Edwin, when you are being honest and honorable I will back even you...
despite your clear and open dishonesty toward me in the past.
--
€ There is no known malware that attacks OS X in the wild
€ There are two general types of PCs: Macs and PCs (odd naming conventions!)
€ Mac OS X 10.x.x is a version of Mac OS
Snit
I have yet to see evidence that it was done the same way - with the same
excellent hardware and software integration. It may have been... but you
have not shown this.
Sandman
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> > >
> > > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef01b1
> >
> > His question is quite valid. No laptop today comes with a built in
> > camera *meant for photography* which is clearly what Jim was talking
> > about.
>
> Jim wrote what he did in response to the Toshiba laptop which had a
> camera built into in in the way that MacBook has a camera built into
> it.
I.e. Jim misunderstood the topic and started talking about something
entirely different - i.e. cameras in laptops for photography, evident
by his references to holding it up to your eye to a built-in
viewfinder to focus,
Why not make fun of him misunderstanding the topic instead of trying
to force his words to mean something they don't.
--
Sandman[.net]
Jim Polaski
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
No eddie, it's a basic simple question that has a simple answer, without all your
handwaving to try and make in into a hard, and nearly impossible question to answer.
If, and that's a big, IF, you understand the basic principles of QM, the answer is right
there. Think Heisenberg for one. You can't simultaneously measure the position and
momentum of that electron with absolute precision. It's a probability distribution.
>
>
> > > >
> > > >> > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here
> > > >> > > who
> > > >> > > purchased one.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
> > > >> > yourself.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Josh
> > > >>
> > > >> Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the
> > > >> business
> > > >> here
> > > >> in Chicago.
> > > >
> > > >Working "in the business" is not necessary.
> > > >
> > > >> That is your implication.
> > > >
> > > >Josh
> >
> > --
> > Jim
--
Jim
Jim Polaski
"where exactly" and "...where is the 'exact position' " are the same thing, but then you
always want to twist things to obfuscate issues. Try again klyde. You're the one who's
really uncertain.
>
> >>
> >>> > >
> >>> > >> > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone
> >>> > >> > > here who
> >>> > >> > > purchased one.
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
> >>> > >> > yourself.
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > Josh
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the
> >>> > >> business
> >>> > >> here
> >>> > >> in Chicago.
> >>> > >
> >>> > >Working "in the business" is not necessary.
> >>> > >
> >>> > >> That is your implication.
> >>> > >
> >>> > >Josh
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Jim
--
Jim
Jim Polaski
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
Oh lost one, I was referring to the professional market, where there was such a beast made
by Foveon. In your limited experience you might think it great, but it was an albatross
and the marketplace proved same. No one, save a few brave souls, were about to change the
dynamic so severely as to change the workflow of taking images on a professional level.
And before you get your panties in a bundle, the Foveon was not in the same class as the
camera that is built into todays MacBook or any PC laptops either. The Foveon was capable
of reproduction quality images, suitable for lithography, not low-rez webcam stuff.
--
Jim
Jim Polaski
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> Jim Polaski wrote:
> > In article <jtmckee-C23E15...@netnews.comcast.net>,
> > Josh McKee <jtm...@rm-bogus-ac.net> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <jpolaski-C528CC...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
> > > Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <1163803528.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "Why would I want a laptop with a built in camera? I suppose you hold
> > > > > your laptop up to your eye to aim and focus the built-in camera? You
> > > > > must be a professional photographer. " -- Jim Polaski
> > > > >
> > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/msg/3f18e42fb1ef0
> > > > > 1b1
> > > >
> > > > There was in fact a company marketing a laptop with a built-in
> > > > pro-level
> > > > digital camera.
> > >
> > > Toshiba was making a laptop with a pro-level camera? Which model was
> > > that?
> > >
> > > > To use it you would put the laptop on a tripod and use the whole thing
> > > > as
> > > > the
> > > > camera.
> > >
> > > Only a Maccie caught in hypocrisy would make such a stupid statement.
> >
> > Lets see, Photography, specifically for Advertising is where I've worked
> > since 1972 and
> > having seen the first Dicomed digital scan back and later this
> > laptop/camera hybrid in
> > studio demos, you're saying It doesn't exist.
>
> Who cares if it does? The camera under discussion was just like the
> one in the MacBook Pro is now. I made a mistake in saying "Toshiba,"
> the first PC notebook with a built in camera was the Sony Vaio laptop,
> predating the MacBook.
So what! No one is claiming firsts here. It just doesn't apply.
>
> > >
> > > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
> > > > purchased one.
> > >
> > > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
> > > yourself.
> > >
> > > Josh
> >
> > Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the business
> > here in Chicago.
> > That is your implication.
>
> He doesn't have to know any "digital photo history," other than to know
> that PC laptops had built in cameras before the MacBook got one, and at
> that time, you could see no reason for it, in fact, you didn't even get
> the right idea of the kind of camera, or how it was mounted, in the PC
> laptop.
Sure I did. The difference between a web-cam quality thing in a laptop is vastly
different than a pro quality piece of equipment like the Foveon.
Get over it.
--
Jim
Edwin
No, Jimbob, it's an idiotic question that proves the questioner doesn't
understand the subject he's asking about.
> without all your
> handwaving to try and make in into a hard, and nearly impossible question to answer.
Handwaving? I stated the facts. Your question would not have been
impossible to answer, if you had provided the necessary information, as
I told you several times.
> If, and that's a big, IF, you understand the basic principles of QM, the answer is right
> there. Think Heisenberg for one. You can't simultaneously measure the position and
> momentum of that electron with absolute precision. It's a probability distribution.
Nobody is talking about measuring. You would have had to supply the
figures as assumed values, not measure them. That's the only way your
demand to be given the "exact position" of an electron in a hydrogen
atom could be satisfied.
Did you ever decide if its a chemistry degree you're pretending to
have, or a physics degree? I ask for information only.
[snip]
Edwin
You're wrong, as usual. I pointed out that PC laptops came with a
built in camera, back when the Mac did not, and you couldn't conceive
of why a laptop computer would have a built in camera. You couldn't
even conceive of what that camera was like, and when off on a tangient
about professional cameras.
And *I* am claiming firsts here, just as *I* did in the thread that
first confused you so badly, and it certainly does *apply!*
> >
> > > >
> > > > > A more than clumsy arrangement at best and don't know anyone here who
> > > > > purchased one.
> > > >
> > > > Just admit to your error. It hurts watching you stumble all over
> > > > yourself.
> > > >
> > > > Josh
> > >
> > > Maybe you know more digital photo history since you work in the business
> > > here in Chicago.
> > > That is your implication.
> >
> > He doesn't have to know any "digital photo history," other than to know
> > that PC laptops had built in cameras before the MacBook got one, and at
> > that time, you could see no reason for it, in fact, you didn't even get
> > the right idea of the kind of camera, or how it was mounted, in the PC
> > laptop.
>
> Sure I did. The difference between a web-cam quality thing in a laptop is vastly
> different than a pro quality piece of equipment like the Foveon.
Which makes you look like a complete moron for bringing up the Foveon
when I mentioned PC laptops with web-cam cameras built into them, which
Apple didn't have until the LCD iMac or the MacBook.
Can you see why iMac and PowerBook users would want a built it camera?
If so, can you finally see why a PC notebook user would also want a
camera built in? You know, another feature that the PC had first, but
you couldn't see the value of until it got bolted into an Apple
computer?
> Get over it.
What you mean is "please let you live it down."
Snit
>> Sure I did. The difference between a web-cam quality thing in a laptop is
>> vastly
>> different than a pro quality piece of equipment like the Foveon.
>
> Which makes you look like a complete moron for bringing up the Foveon
> when I mentioned PC laptops with web-cam cameras built into them, which
> Apple didn't have until the LCD iMac or the MacBook.
>
> Can you see why iMac and PowerBook users would want a built it camera?
> If so, can you finally see why a PC notebook user would also want a
> camera built in? You know, another feature that the PC had first, but
> you couldn't see the value of until it got bolted into an Apple
> computer?
I have asked you repeatedly to link to the PC laptop with such a camera and
for you to talk about the level of integration it had with the software and
other hardware.
You have run every time.
Maybe the camera was done well on the PC laptop - I do not know ... but
clearly *you* do not think so.
--
€ The tilde in an OS X path does *not* mean "the hard drive only"
€ Things which are not the same are not "identical"
€ The word "ouch" is not a sure sign of agreement.
Edwin
Snit wrote:
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> stated in post
> 1164143566.6...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com on 11/21/06 2:12 PM:
>
> >> Sure I did. The difference between a web-cam quality thing in a laptop is
> >> vastly
> >> different than a pro quality piece of equipment like the Foveon.
> >
> > Which makes you look like a complete moron for bringing up the Foveon
> > when I mentioned PC laptops with web-cam cameras built into them, which
> > Apple didn't have until the LCD iMac or the MacBook.
> >
> > Can you see why iMac and PowerBook users would want a built it camera?
> > If so, can you finally see why a PC notebook user would also want a
> > camera built in? You know, another feature that the PC had first, but
> > you couldn't see the value of until it got bolted into an Apple
> > computer?
>
> I have asked you repeatedly to link to the PC laptop with such a camera and
> for you to talk about the level of integration it had with the software and
> other hardware.
>
> You have run every time.
I have ignored you every time. I don't bother with people who forge
quotes from me.
> Maybe the camera was done well on the PC laptop - I do not know ...
Yes, you do not know. Ignorance is one of your defining features.
> but clearly *you* do not think so.
Yet another of your moronic lies.
Edwin
IOW, you know you're wrong, but you refuse to admit you're wrong.
> >
> > "> Or you could get this (outfitted similarly to the 17" MacBook Pro)
> > and
> > > it only costs $2500.
> > > http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc...
> > > s=dhs&fb=1 "
> >
> >
> > "Sure, except, no FireWire 800, no illuminated keyboard, and no camera.
> >
> > Plus, it's made of cheap plastic, weighs a pound more, and is 60%
> > thicker. And then there's the software bundle. " -- ZuU
>
> In which the camera is mixed in with a bunch of other things. Hardly
> "something particularly wonderful".
The camera was listed as an advantage over its PC laptop competition
which didn't have it. Yet another case of you knowing you're wrong
but refusing to admit it.
> >
> > > > > If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and make
> > > > > a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal of
> > > > > Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
> > > >
> > > > You won't find him asking what value a built in camera is to a MacBook
> > > > owner either, but yet he couldn't see what value a built in camera was
> > > > to a PC laptop.
> > >
> > > Who's posted something saying that the camera built into the Macbook is
> > > a big deal? IOW, who has posted something that he would need to counter?
> >
> > You read this group very selectively... or you're just very
> > dishonest... I'm going with the latter...
>
> LOL
Why would you laugh about that, other than because you're an arsehole?
> So far the number of posts presented where the camera in the Macbooks
> has been portrayed as a big deal: 0
Yet another lie to add to your innumerable accumulation of lies you've
told in this group.
Edwin
Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <1164065956....@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > Alan Baker wrote:
> > > In article <1164065212.0...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> > > "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and make
> > > > > a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal of
> > > > > Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
> > > >
> > > > So you support his position WRT to PC laptop cameras? You can't see
> > > > any reason why anybody would want one, unless it was a professional
> > > > photographer aiming his whole notebook as if it were one big camera?
> > >
> > > No, I don't support *that* position, and I don't know whether or not
> > > that is Jim's position.
> >
> > Then you look even stupider than you usually do, for your efforts on
> > Jim's behalf in this thread.
>
> I'm not making any efforts on anyone's behalf, Edwin.
You're only fooling yourself, Alan.
Edwin
Why did you do that in response to PC laptops that had the kind of
camera the iMac or MacBook finally got later?
> In your limited experience you might think it great,
How would you know what my experience is?
> but it was an albatross
> and the marketplace proved same.
I never mentioned the thing in the first place, and I have no idea why
you mentioned it either... wait... yes I do... because you're an idiot!
> No one, save a few brave souls, were about to change the
> dynamic so severely as to change the workflow of taking images on a professional level.
Who cares? That wasn't the type of camera under discussion.
> And before you get your panties in a bundle, the Foveon was not in the same class as the
> camera that is built into todays MacBook or any PC laptops either. The Foveon was capable
> of reproduction quality images, suitable for lithography, not low-rez webcam stuff.
So why the hell did you bring it up in the first place... oh yeah, I
remember... because you're an idiot!
PCs had the type of camera the iMac or MacBook have built in now, but
they had it first for years before Apple included them, and back then
you couldn't understand why anybody would want a camera built into a
laptop... you couldn't even figure out what form that camera was in....
you were totally ignorant of what was in the PC laptops you were
denouncing... IOW, you're the typical Mac Advocate!
Edwin
You may have something there... as I read your posts, it's hard to
believe a real person is typing them out... I must be deluded...
Snit
You are still running from the simple request - and spewing dishonest
accusations as you go. Noted.
In the end, Edwin, you claim their was another notebook with a camera that
was similar to the Apple offerings, but you will not back up your claim.
The fact that not even you will back up your claim is quite telling. You
are now in your circus mode where you spew insults and attacks to hide your
ignorance and inability to support your claims. I assure you, Edwin, it is
not working. I see no signs of anyone buying your bullshit.
And in response, it is likely, you will blame your circus on me.
--
€ Nuclear arms are arms
€ OS X's Command+Scroll wheel function does not exist in default XP
€ Technical competence and intelligence are not the same thing
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
Nope. It means I have Snit in my killfile and can't figure out why
everyone doesn't.
>
> > >
> > > "> Or you could get this (outfitted similarly to the 17" MacBook Pro)
> > > and
> > > > it only costs $2500.
> > > > http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc...
> > > > s=dhs&fb=1 "
> > >
> > >
> > > "Sure, except, no FireWire 800, no illuminated keyboard, and no camera.
> > >
> > > Plus, it's made of cheap plastic, weighs a pound more, and is 60%
> > > thicker. And then there's the software bundle. " -- ZuU
> >
> > In which the camera is mixed in with a bunch of other things. Hardly
> > "something particularly wonderful".
>
> The camera was listed as an advantage over its PC laptop competition
> which didn't have it. Yet another case of you knowing you're wrong
> but refusing to admit it.
That doesn't make it "something particularly wonderful", now does it?
>
> > >
> > > > > > If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and
> > > > > > make
> > > > > > a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
> > > > >
> > > > > You won't find him asking what value a built in camera is to a
> > > > > MacBook
> > > > > owner either, but yet he couldn't see what value a built in camera
> > > > > was
> > > > > to a PC laptop.
> > > >
> > > > Who's posted something saying that the camera built into the Macbook is
> > > > a big deal? IOW, who has posted something that he would need to
> > > > counter?
> > >
> > > You read this group very selectively... or you're just very
> > > dishonest... I'm going with the latter...
> >
> > LOL
>
> Why would you laugh about that, other than because you're an arsehole?
LOL
If only you could figure it out...
Strike that. You have figured it out, but you'd desperately like to
pretend you haven't.
>
> > So far the number of posts presented where the camera in the Macbooks
> > has been portrayed as a big deal: 0
>
> Yet another lie to add to your innumerable accumulation of lies you've
> told in this group.
LOL
Alan Baker
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > Only in your delusional dreams.
>
> You may have something there... as I read your posts, it's hard to
> believe a real person is typing them out... I must be deluded...
They're much the same, no doubt, as the delusions suffered by those who
read the posts of Milo MkLinux, anton, cybernaught, ...
Snit
>>>>>>> Where has Jim made a big deal about having one (if he even has one)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where has Jim asked why anybody would want a camera built into a MacBook?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Where has been the need? Who has been touting the camera as something
>>>>> particularly wonderful?
>>>>>
>>>> " I do like the iMac for the integrated video camera... that is pretty
>>>> cool." -- Snit
>>>>
>>>> "The Mac product does well, though it does depend on what you value: the
>>>> Mac has a built in camera, the Dell a larger screen... either one could be
>>>> a deal breaker." -- Snit
>>>>
>>> You pay attention to *anything* Snit says? When did this happen?
>>>
>> IOW, you know you're wrong, but you refuse to admit you're wrong.
>>
> Nope. It means I have Snit in my killfile and can't figure out why everyone
> doesn't.
Unlike you, apparently, some people like to see honest and honorable
comments. You should ask yourself why you do not (or at least claim to
not).
--
€ Teaching is a "real job"
€ The path "~/users/username/library/widget" is not common on any OS
€ The term "all widgets" does not specify a specific subgroup of widgets
Edwin
You had another spasm.
Edwin
He's no worse than you are.
> >
> > > >
> > > > "> Or you could get this (outfitted similarly to the 17" MacBook Pro)
> > > > and
> > > > > it only costs $2500.
> > > > > http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc...
> > > > > s=dhs&fb=1 "
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Sure, except, no FireWire 800, no illuminated keyboard, and no camera.
> > > >
> > > > Plus, it's made of cheap plastic, weighs a pound more, and is 60%
> > > > thicker. And then there's the software bundle. " -- ZuU
> > >
> > > In which the camera is mixed in with a bunch of other things. Hardly
> > > "something particularly wonderful".
> >
> > The camera was listed as an advantage over its PC laptop competition
> > which didn't have it. Yet another case of you knowing you're wrong
> > but refusing to admit it.
>
> That doesn't make it "something particularly wonderful", now does it?
Yes, it does. And there's still the posts made by Snit, and others.
> >
> > > >
> > > > > > > If he bought a new Macbook (Pro, I'd assume), did he come here and
> > > > > > > make
> > > > > > > a big fuss about how useful the camera is to him? A quick perusal
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > Google Groups suggests the answer is "no".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You won't find him asking what value a built in camera is to a
> > > > > > MacBook
> > > > > > owner either, but yet he couldn't see what value a built in camera
> > > > > > was
> > > > > > to a PC laptop.
> > > > >
> > > > > Who's posted something saying that the camera built into the Macbook is
> > > > > a big deal? IOW, who has posted something that he would need to
> > > > > counter?
> > > >
> > > > You read this group very selectively... or you're just very
> > > > dishonest... I'm going with the latter...
> > >
> > > LOL
> >
> > Why would you laugh about that, other than because you're an arsehole?
>
> LOL
>
> If only you could figure it out...
>
> Strike that. You have figured it out, but you'd desperately like to
> pretend you haven't.
Sure, I figured out that you are an arsehole, that's why you respond
like an arsehole.
> >
> > > So far the number of posts presented where the camera in the Macbooks
> > > has been portrayed as a big deal: 0
> >
> > Yet another lie to add to your innumerable accumulation of lies you've
> > told in this group.
>
> LOL
Arsehole.
Edwin
Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <1164152043.3...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > > Only in your delusional dreams.
> >
> > You may have something there... as I read your posts, it's hard to
> > believe a real person is typing them out... I must be deluded...
>
> They're much the same, no doubt, as the delusions suffered by those who
> read the posts of Milo MkLinux, anton, cybernaught, ...
How many years back would they have to go to read those posts, Alan?
Josh McKee
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> Alan Baker wrote:
[ snip ]
> > Nope. It means I have Snit in my killfile and can't figure out why
> > everyone doesn't.
>
> He's no worse than you are.
That's why they're both in mine.
Josh
Snit
jtmckee-7BBE5A...@netnews.comcast.net on 11/22/06 4:55 PM:
You *claimed* to put me in your KF shortly after you humiliated yourself in
a discussion with me. Do not blame me for your lies and humiliation.
Snit
>>> The camera was listed as an advantage over its PC laptop competition
>>> which didn't have it. Yet another case of you knowing you're wrong
>>> but refusing to admit it.
>>
>> That doesn't make it "something particularly wonderful", now does it?
>
> Yes, it does. And there's still the posts made by Snit, and others.
Funny how you don't blame your circuses on me when you are using my comments
as evidence.
--
€ OS X is partially based on BSD (esp. FreeBSD)
€ OS X users are at far less risk of malware then are XP users
€ Photoshop is an image editing application
Alan Baker
> > > > > > Where has been the need? Who has been touting the camera as
> > > > > > something
> > > > > > particularly wonderful?
> > > > >
> > > > > " I do like the iMac for the integrated video camera... that is
> > > > > pretty
> > > > > cool." -- Snit
> > > > >
> > > > > "The Mac product does well, though it does depend on what you value:
> > > > > the Mac
> > > > > has a built in camera, the Dell a larger screen... either one could
> > > > > be
> > > > > a
> > > > > deal breaker." -- Snit
> > > >
> > > > You pay attention to *anything* Snit says? When did this happen?
> > >
> > > IOW, you know you're wrong, but you refuse to admit you're wrong.
> >
> > Nope. It means I have Snit in my killfile and can't figure out why
> > everyone doesn't.
>
> He's no worse than you are.
Lot's of people believe me. According to you, nobody believes Snit.
>
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "> Or you could get this (outfitted similarly to the 17" MacBook Pro)
> > > > > and
> > > > > > it only costs $2500.
> > > > > > http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&o
> > > > > > c...
> > > > > > s=dhs&fb=1 "
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Sure, except, no FireWire 800, no illuminated keyboard, and no
> > > > > camera.
> > > > >
> > > > > Plus, it's made of cheap plastic, weighs a pound more, and is 60%
> > > > > thicker. And then there's the software bundle. " -- ZuU
> > > >
> > > > In which the camera is mixed in with a bunch of other things. Hardly
> > > > "something particularly wonderful".
> > >
> > > The camera was listed as an advantage over its PC laptop competition
> > > which didn't have it. Yet another case of you knowing you're wrong
> > > but refusing to admit it.
> >
> > That doesn't make it "something particularly wonderful", now does it?
>
> Yes, it does. And there's still the posts made by Snit, and others.
According to you, nobody believes Snit.
Except when you suddenly need to believe him...
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
I don't know. Don't care.
That you made them and then denied making them, speaks volumes about you.
Snit
> In article <1164238537.5...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> Where has been the need? Who has been touting the camera as
>>>>>>> something
>>>>>>> particularly wonderful?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> " I do like the iMac for the integrated video camera... that is
>>>>>> pretty
>>>>>> cool." -- Snit
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The Mac product does well, though it does depend on what you value: the
>>>>>> Mac has a built in camera, the Dell a larger screen... either one could
>>>>>> be a deal breaker." -- Snit
>>>>>
>>>>> You pay attention to *anything* Snit says? When did this happen?
>>>>
>>>> IOW, you know you're wrong, but you refuse to admit you're wrong.
>>>
>>> Nope. It means I have Snit in my killfile and can't figure out why
>>> everyone doesn't.
>>
>> He's no worse than you are.
>
> Lot's of people believe me. According to you, nobody believes Snit.
Well, Edwin did not really mean that... he was just pushing his BS to
further his trolling circus. Which he then blames on me.
>>> That doesn't make it "something particularly wonderful", now does it?
>>
>> Yes, it does. And there's still the posts made by Snit, and others.
>
> According to you, nobody believes Snit.
>
> Except when you suddenly need to believe him...
Ok, to be fair to Edwin... he did not say he *believed* me, he merely quoted
what I said.
Snit
> In article <1164238621.0...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>> In article <1164152043.3...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
>>> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Only in your delusional dreams.
>>>>
>>>> You may have something there... as I read your posts, it's hard to
>>>> believe a real person is typing them out... I must be deluded...
>>>
>>> They're much the same, no doubt, as the delusions suffered by those who
>>> read the posts of Milo MkLinux, anton, cybernaught, ...
>>
>> How many years back would they have to go to read those posts, Alan?
>
> I don't know. Don't care.
>
> That you made them and then denied making them, speaks volumes about you.
There are many things Edwin says and then denies saying. Here are just a
few examples... in each case even when he first stated these things he was
falsely attributing them to someone other than himself:
"I am wrong...
... AGAIN." - Edwin
"why was I born with a coat hanger embedded in my skull?" - Edwin
"I am just getting hungry or looking for attention:
I eat dog shit to get attention." - Edwin
"Thank you all for giving me attention... does anybody have
some mouthwash?" - Edwin
"I can stop thinking about having sex with monkeys" - Edwin
Rather despicable of him.
Edwin
Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <1164238621.0...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > Alan Baker wrote:
> > > In article <1164152043.3...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> > > "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Only in your delusional dreams.
> > > >
> > > > You may have something there... as I read your posts, it's hard to
> > > > believe a real person is typing them out... I must be deluded...
> > >
> > > They're much the same, no doubt, as the delusions suffered by those who
> > > read the posts of Milo MkLinux, anton, cybernaught, ...
> >
> > How many years back would they have to go to read those posts, Alan?
>
> I don't know. Don't care.
That's a testament to your lack of integrity.
> That you made them and then denied making them, speaks volumes about you.
Your oversimplification of the situation, along with your need to
dredge up ancient complaints that have been long remedied speaks far
more about you than you're attempting to imply about me. One can
only wonder how you stand being you.
Edwin
You're a bald-faced liar, as always.
> In the end, Edwin, you claim their was another notebook with a camera that
> was similar to the Apple offerings, but you will not back up your claim.
> The fact that not even you will back up your claim is quite telling. You
> are now in your circus mode where you spew insults and attacks to hide your
> ignorance and inability to support your claims. I assure you, Edwin, it is
> not working. I see no signs of anyone buying your bullshit.
I'm not going to dredge up history for you that is easily accessable to
anybody with Googe.
Where the hell were you when this came out in PC laptops anyway? In a
coma?
> And in response, it is likely, you will blame your circus on me.
You're a sick man.
Snit
In the end, Edwin, nothing has chanted - you claim their was another
notebook with a camera that was similar to the Apple offerings, but you will
not back up your claim. The fact that not even you will back up your claim
is quite telling. You are now in your circus mode where you spew insults
and attacks to hide your ignorance and inability to support your claims. I
assure you, Edwin, it is not working. I see no signs of anyone buying your
bullshit.
--
€ Pros aren't beginners in their field (though there are new pros)
€ Similarly configured Macs and Win machines tend to cost roughly the same
€ Some people do use the term "screen name" in relation to IRC
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
No oversimplification.
You posted under various aliases
You were found out.
You denied it.
You admitted it.
You denied admitting it.
Edwin
That's a vast oversimplification, and are in fact are outright lies in
the form you present them, but I'm not going back to re-argue that
which was resolved years ago, just because all your recent arguments
are failures, and you're desperate to manufacture something to use
against me.
Edwin
Snit
> [Toilet Flush of Snit's Crap]
>
In the end, Edwin, nothing has chanted - you claim their was another
notebook with a camera that was similar to the Apple offerings, but you will
not back up your claim. The fact that not even you will back up your claim
is quite telling. You are now in your circus mode where you spew insults
and attacks to hide your ignorance and inability to support your claims. I
assure you, Edwin, it is not working. I see no signs of anyone buying your
bullshit.
And, of course, Edwin, you blamed your circus on me. In other words, you
are still trolling and begging for my attention.
--
€ Deleting from a *Save* dialog is not a sign of well done design
€ A personal computer without an OS is crippled by that lacking
Sandman
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
How were they remedied?
--
Sandman[.net]
Sandman
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > Your oversimplification of the situation, along with your need to
> > > dredge up ancient complaints that have been long remedied speaks far
> > > more about you than you're attempting to imply about me. One can
> > > only wonder how you stand being you.
> >
> > No oversimplification.
> >
> > You posted under various aliases
> >
> > You were found out.
> >
> > You denied it.
> >
> > You admitted it.
> >
> > You denied admitting it.
>
> That's a vast oversimplification, and are in fact are outright lies in
> the form you present them, but I'm not going back to re-argue that
> which was resolved years ago
Because you'd be as owned now as you were then. I totally understand
why you would want to avoid such embarrassment.
--
Sandman[.net]
Snit
mr-906CE5.10...@individual.net on 11/27/06 2:56 AM:
> Because you'd be as owned now as you were then. I totally understand
> why you would want to avoid such embarrassment.
At least you show you know why you run from my challenge to you:
-----
Ok, Sandman, let's cut to the chase:
* I claim your CSS on sandman.net did not validate during the time period
when you claimed it did. You claim this a lie.
* You claim I am not an instructor at a college. I claim your statement
is a lie.
We each have a claim against the other, and in each case we each deny what
the other claims is true.
Put your cards on the table. If someone - a fair third party - is willing
to step in, I would love to show my evidence that your CSS did not validate.
You can show your evidence - if you claim to even have any - that I am not a
college instructor.
If nobody is willing to step up we can still post our support into CSMA...
all cards on the table... all support for our claims against each other.
Of course, the only real question in this is how fast will you run? LOL!
You see, Sandman, even you know you are lying. In both cases. There is no
doubt to that.
-----
--
€ If A = B then B = A (known as the "symmetric property of equality")
€ Incest and sex are not identical (only a pervert would disagree)
€ One can be actually guilty of a crime but neither tried nor convicted
Edwin
OldCSMAer
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> This isn't a sight you want to see, folks!
What's he been doing? Am I going to be sorry I killfiled him?
Tim Adams
OldCSMAer <OldC...@NOSPAM.com> wrote:
> In article <1164645753....@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > This isn't a sight you want to see, folks!
>
> What's he been doing?
Same shit, different day
> Am I going to be sorry I killfiled him?
no
--
regarding Snit "You are not flamed because you speak the truth,
you are flamed because you are a hideous troll and keep disrupting
the newsgroup." Andrew J. Brehm
Edwin
You're a loopy, lying idiot.
Snit
> This isn't a sight you want to see, folks!
>
Your trolling is pathetic, Edwin.
"I am wrong...
... AGAIN." - Edwin
"why was I born with a coat hanger embedded in my skull?" - Edwin
"I am just getting hungry or looking for attention:
I eat dog shit to get attention." - Edwin
"Thank you all for giving me attention... does anybody have
some mouthwash?" - Edwin
"I can stop thinking about having sex with monkeys" - Edwin
Snit
> [Toilet Flush of Snit's Crap]
>
In the end, Edwin, nothing has chanted - you claim their was another
notebook with a camera that was similar to the Apple offerings, but you will
not back up your claim. The fact that not even you will back up your claim
is quite telling. You are now in your circus mode where you spew insults
and attacks to hide your ignorance and inability to support your claims. I
assure you, Edwin, it is not working. I see no signs of anyone buying your
bullshit.
And, of course, Edwin, you blamed your circus on me. In other words, you
Jim Polaski
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
Your powers of differentiation are lacking and this is another example.
This from eddie-lost, who earned that monicker from not being able to tell the difference
between TM and I, claiming we were the same person.
--
Jim
Edwin
Your fears of being accused of honesty or intelligence are less likely
to be realized with every post you make.
Sandman
"Edwin" <thor...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > That's a vast oversimplification, and are in fact are outright lies in
> > > the form you present them, but I'm not going back to re-argue that
> > > which was resolved years ago
> >
> > Because you'd be as owned now as you were then. I totally understand
> > why you would want to avoid such embarrassment.
>
> Your fears of being accused of honesty or intelligence are less likely
> to be realized with every post you make.
Edwin>Owned.
--
Sandman[.net]