Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Fake high-end Hoya filters (from where else, China)
11 views
Skip to first unread message
RichA
May 23, 2012, 8:18:03 AM5/23/12
to
Bruce
May 24, 2012, 5:36:46 AM5/24/12
to
RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-warned-as-bogus-filter-scam-escalates
This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
than one of which is 'high end'.
There are plenty of 'high end' filters for sale on eBay at prices that
seem too low to be genuine.
>http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-warned-as-bogus-filter-scam-escalates
This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
than one of which is 'high end'.
There are plenty of 'high end' filters for sale on eBay at prices that
seem too low to be genuine.
RichA
May 24, 2012, 9:45:34 AM5/24/12
to
On May 24, 5:36 am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-...
> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-...
>
> This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
> affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
> than one of which is 'high end'.
>
> There are plenty of 'high end' filters for sale on eBay at prices that
> seem too low to be genuine.
Like $15 B&W's?
> This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
> affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
> than one of which is 'high end'.
>
> There are plenty of 'high end' filters for sale on eBay at prices that
> seem too low to be genuine.
Bruce
May 24, 2012, 9:51:52 AM5/24/12
to
that because it would be too obvious that they weren't genuine.
Mort
May 25, 2012, 9:33:36 PM5/25/12
to
RichA wrote:
> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-warned-as-bogus-filter-scam-escalates
>
Hi,
Fake filters are an annoyance. However, we also have to deal with fake
medications, fake airplane parts, fake automobile parts, etc, which can
be life-threatening. Caveat emptor.
Morton Linder
> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-warned-as-bogus-filter-scam-escalates
>
Hi,
Fake filters are an annoyance. However, we also have to deal with fake
medications, fake airplane parts, fake automobile parts, etc, which can
be life-threatening. Caveat emptor.
Morton Linder
Rob
May 25, 2012, 11:40:18 PM5/25/12
to
low end fakes, so be careful what you buy :)
Martin Brown
May 26, 2012, 3:23:04 AM5/26/12
to
was "Copy Watch Mister!".
Very caveat emptor but there are also bargains to be had.
I got my first high speed Boca modem there for a very good price as well
as one or two photographic bits of reasonable quality.
--
Regards,
Martin Brown
Eric Stevens
May 26, 2012, 4:28:17 AM5/26/12
to
Rolex in Hong Kong. He was told that it would be very reliable and
would be OK as it had a Seiko movent. Two years later it failed and he
then found that the Seiko movement was a fake also. :-(
Trevor
May 26, 2012, 5:08:18 AM5/26/12
to
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message
news:cr41s7hntcjpjnbli...@4ax.com...
> Years ago my (now) ex son in law bought what he knew to be a fake
> Rolex in Hong Kong. He was told that it would be very reliable and
> would be OK as it had a Seiko movent. Two years later it failed and he
> then found that the Seiko movement was a fake also. :-(
Two years is not bad for a fake Rolex, they rarely outlast the battery. If
> Rolex in Hong Kong. He was told that it would be very reliable and
> would be OK as it had a Seiko movent. Two years later it failed and he
> then found that the Seiko movement was a fake also. :-(
he paid less than $20, he probably got his moneys worth.
And hey it still looks like a Rolex (only with rust in most cases) and is
still right twice a day :-)
Trevor.
SMS
May 26, 2012, 12:05:10 PM5/26/12
to
On 5/24/2012 2:36 AM, Bruce wrote:
> RichA<rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-warned-as-bogus-filter-scam-escalates
>
>
> This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
> affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
> than one of which is 'high end'.
Avoid Hoya at all costs.
> RichA<rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-warned-as-bogus-filter-scam-escalates
>
>
> This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
> affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
> than one of which is 'high end'.
Alan Browne
May 26, 2012, 12:11:52 PM5/26/12
to
On 2012-05-24 09:45 , RichA wrote:
> On May 24, 5:36 am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-...
>>
>> This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
>> affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
>> than one of which is 'high end'.
QUOTE
> On May 24, 5:36 am, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-...
>>
>> This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
>> affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
>> than one of which is 'high end'.
The one on the left is the phoney product. It contains a barcode which
is printed on the packaging, rather than displayed via a sticky label
ENDQUOTE
Make sure your Hoya's are "sticky barcode" packaged. Don't buy used.
--
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
-Samuel Clemens.
nospam
May 26, 2012, 3:46:38 PM5/26/12
to
In article <4fc0ff3c$0$87608$742e...@news.sonic.net>, SMS
the only thing to avoid is the cheap uncoated hoya filters. hoya hmc
and particularly shmc filters are very good. b+w is another good choice
too.
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
> > affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
> > than one of which is 'high end'.
>
> Avoid Hoya at all costs.
nonsense. hoya makes excellent filters (assuming they're not fakes).
> > This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
> > affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
> > than one of which is 'high end'.
>
> Avoid Hoya at all costs.
the only thing to avoid is the cheap uncoated hoya filters. hoya hmc
and particularly shmc filters are very good. b+w is another good choice
too.
Rob
May 26, 2012, 11:33:02 PM5/26/12
to
shops Stanley Street and Nathan Rd. Ended up with Fuji UV filters 77mm
at $22 each.
Bruce
May 27, 2012, 6:32:06 AM5/27/12
to
I strongly prefer B+W, Nikon and Heliopan filters over Hoya because
the Hoya filters are difficult to keep clean.
R. Mark Clayton
May 27, 2012, 8:58:19 AM5/27/12
to
"RichA" <rande...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9d96bb84-0fb4-4d31...@pr3g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-warned-as-bogus-filter-scam-escalates
>
Looks like they work, albeit not quite as well as the originals.
It always annoys me when big brands go out of their way to rip off
customers - non refillable toner cartridges, SIMs glued in phones, root kits
on CD's and just about anything Apple does, but probably the worst are
companies that freely sell goods in one country and then try to claim that
reselling the same goods in another country in the "grey market" is somehow
criminal. Usually such companies (HP, Yamaha etc.) are trying to protect
high prices in RoB (Rip off Britain) and dishonour warranties.
Alan Browne
May 27, 2012, 9:56:09 AM5/27/12
to
And you thing that is good because ... (?).
nospam
May 27, 2012, 1:41:37 PM5/27/12
to
In article <bpOdnTIBkttcuV_S...@bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton
cartridges, that can be reset too.
> SIMs glued in phones,
which phones have glued in sims??? i've heard of locking the sim to the
phone for a short period of time, but that's to stop people from buying
a cheap prepaid phone and using the sim in a smartphone.
> root kits
> on CD's
that's a problem, but there haven't been very many of those
> and just about anything Apple does,
oh? such as what?
> but probably the worst are
> companies that freely sell goods in one country and then try to claim that
> reselling the same goods in another country in the "grey market" is somehow
> criminal. Usually such companies (HP, Yamaha etc.) are trying to protect
> high prices in RoB (Rip off Britain) and dishonour warranties.
there are legitimate ways to import products. if you circumvent that,
then you're on your own.
<nospam...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> It always annoys me when big brands go out of their way to rip off
> customers - non refillable toner cartridges,
it's not a good idea to refill, but if you're referring to chipped
> It always annoys me when big brands go out of their way to rip off
> customers - non refillable toner cartridges,
cartridges, that can be reset too.
> SIMs glued in phones,
which phones have glued in sims??? i've heard of locking the sim to the
phone for a short period of time, but that's to stop people from buying
a cheap prepaid phone and using the sim in a smartphone.
> root kits
> on CD's
> and just about anything Apple does,
> but probably the worst are
> companies that freely sell goods in one country and then try to claim that
> reselling the same goods in another country in the "grey market" is somehow
> criminal. Usually such companies (HP, Yamaha etc.) are trying to protect
> high prices in RoB (Rip off Britain) and dishonour warranties.
then you're on your own.
Rob
May 28, 2012, 4:18:19 AM5/28/12
to
On 27/05/2012 11:56 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2012-05-26 23:33 , Rob wrote:
>> On 27/05/2012 5:46 AM, nospam wrote:
>>> In article<4fc0ff3c$0$87608$742e...@news.sonic.net>, SMS
>>> <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
>>>>> affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
>>>>> than one of which is 'high end'.
>>>>
>>>> Avoid Hoya at all costs.
>>>
>>> nonsense. hoya makes excellent filters (assuming they're not fakes).
>>> the only thing to avoid is the cheap uncoated hoya filters. hoya hmc
>>> and particularly shmc filters are very good. b+w is another good choice
>>> too.
>>
>>
>> One thing I did notice was the lack of Hoya filters in the decent camera
>> shops Stanley Street and Nathan Rd. Ended up with Fuji UV filters 77mm
>> at $22 each.
>
> 77mm @ $22?
>
> And you thing that is good because ... (?).
>
why do you ask want to buy some?
> On 2012-05-26 23:33 , Rob wrote:
>> On 27/05/2012 5:46 AM, nospam wrote:
>>> In article<4fc0ff3c$0$87608$742e...@news.sonic.net>, SMS
>>> <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> This has been going on for years, and Hoya is not the only brand
>>>>> affected. We have been offered several brands other than Hoya, more
>>>>> than one of which is 'high end'.
>>>>
>>>> Avoid Hoya at all costs.
>>>
>>> nonsense. hoya makes excellent filters (assuming they're not fakes).
>>> the only thing to avoid is the cheap uncoated hoya filters. hoya hmc
>>> and particularly shmc filters are very good. b+w is another good choice
>>> too.
>>
>>
>> One thing I did notice was the lack of Hoya filters in the decent camera
>> shops Stanley Street and Nathan Rd. Ended up with Fuji UV filters 77mm
>> at $22 each.
>
> 77mm @ $22?
>
> And you thing that is good because ... (?).
>
R. Mark Clayton
May 28, 2012, 5:57:56 AM5/28/12
to
"nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:270520121041370897%nos...@nospam.invalid...
> In article <bpOdnTIBkttcuV_S...@bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton
> <nospam...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> It always annoys me when big brands go out of their way to rip off
>> customers - non refillable toner cartridges,
>
> it's not a good idea to refill, but if you're referring to chipped
> cartridges, that can be reset too.
It is a good idea to re-use virgin cartridges (same for ink-jets).
> <nospam...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> It always annoys me when big brands go out of their way to rip off
>> customers - non refillable toner cartridges,
>
> it's not a good idea to refill, but if you're referring to chipped
> cartridges, that can be reset too.
>
>> SIMs glued in phones,
>
> which phones have glued in sims??? i've heard of locking the sim to the
> phone for a short period of time, but that's to stop people from buying
> a cheap prepaid phone and using the sim in a smartphone.
go SIM's into phones (as well as "locking" them).
Google "weclome to 3's standards of customer service" for more details.
>
>> root kits
>> on CD's
>
> that's a problem, but there haven't been very many of those
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal
>
>> and just about anything Apple does,
>
> oh? such as what?
(whenever they can), incompatible logical interfaces (ibid), no flash etc.
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple_Inc.#Accusations_of_anti-competitive_behavior
for a very long list.
>
>> but probably the worst are
>> companies that freely sell goods in one country and then try to claim
>> that
>> reselling the same goods in another country in the "grey market" is
>> somehow
>> criminal. Usually such companies (HP, Yamaha etc.) are trying to protect
>> high prices in RoB (Rip off Britain) and dishonour warranties.
>
> there are legitimate ways to import products. if you circumvent that,
> then you're on your own.
worldwide and international warranties.
Wolfgang Weisselberg
May 27, 2012, 4:24:17 PM5/27/12
to
>> SIMs glued in phones,
> which phones have glued in sims??? i've heard of locking the sim to the
> phone for a short period of time, but that's to stop people from buying
> a cheap prepaid phone and using the sim in a smartphone.
You can buy SIMs freely, with no phone or strings attached.
> which phones have glued in sims??? i've heard of locking the sim to the
> phone for a short period of time, but that's to stop people from buying
> a cheap prepaid phone and using the sim in a smartphone.
You can buy smartphones with no SIMs and no strings attached.
If you're buying a phone that's (partially) paid for by the
network and they use inflated call and SMS prices to finance
that, the phone may be simlocked (locking the PHONE to the
paying network).
> there are legitimate ways to import products. if you circumvent that,
> then you're on your own.
the governments where you ex- and import. What the companies
want is irrelevant, and quite possible illegal.
-Wolfgang
nospam
May 28, 2012, 12:31:40 PM5/28/12
to
In article <h4fa99-...@ID-52418.user.berlin.de>, Wolfgang
phone and sometimes the sim is locked due to subsidies. i've never
heard of gluing sims until now.
Weisselberg <ozcv...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> >> SIMs glued in phones,
>
> > which phones have glued in sims??? i've heard of locking the sim to the
> > phone for a short period of time, but that's to stop people from buying
> > a cheap prepaid phone and using the sim in a smartphone.
>
> You can buy SIMs freely, with no phone or strings attached.
> You can buy smartphones with no SIMs and no strings attached.
>
> If you're buying a phone that's (partially) paid for by the
> network and they use inflated call and SMS prices to finance
> that, the phone may be simlocked (locking the PHONE to the
> paying network).
all true, but the issue is *gluing* sims into a phone. usually the
> >> SIMs glued in phones,
>
> > which phones have glued in sims??? i've heard of locking the sim to the
> > phone for a short period of time, but that's to stop people from buying
> > a cheap prepaid phone and using the sim in a smartphone.
>
> You can buy SIMs freely, with no phone or strings attached.
> You can buy smartphones with no SIMs and no strings attached.
>
> If you're buying a phone that's (partially) paid for by the
> network and they use inflated call and SMS prices to finance
> that, the phone may be simlocked (locking the PHONE to the
> paying network).
phone and sometimes the sim is locked due to subsidies. i've never
heard of gluing sims until now.
nospam
May 28, 2012, 12:31:45 PM5/28/12
to
In article <R46dndQAJftl1l7S...@bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton
cartridges. refilling can also be messy and most people don't bother
doing it. non-oem ink cartridges are available for those who don't want
to buy the more expensive oem inks, which are often better but not
everyone cares. it's a non-issue.
> >> SIMs glued in phones,
> >
> > which phones have glued in sims??? i've heard of locking the sim to the
> > phone for a short period of time, but that's to stop people from buying
> > a cheap prepaid phone and using the sim in a smartphone.
>
> It was widely alleged that one UK service provider used to super glue pay &
> go SIM's into phones (as well as "locking" them).
>
> Google "weclome to 3's standards of customer service" for more details.
apparently that's for prepaid phones to prevent people from buying
subsidized phones cheaply and reselling them, without ever signing up
for service. since the phones are subsidized, the carriers lose money
when this happens. it's a more drastic form of the sim locking at&t
does here with prepaid gophones, which ties the sim to the phone for
six months, after which you can swap it to a new phone.
> >> root kits
> >> on CD's
> >
> > that's a problem, but there haven't been very many of those
>
> Sony did it twice IIRC see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal
not that i'm excusing what they did, but twice is not very many.
> >> and just about anything Apple does,
> >
> > oh? such as what?
>
> iTunes,
how does itunes rip off customers? it's just an app. where do people
come up with this shit?
> non user changable batteries,
internal batteries lets the manufacturer put in a bigger battery in the
same space, plus it can take any form, which means longer run time as
well as a smaller device. that is a *benefit* to the customer. most
users never replace the battery anyway.
the batteries they use are also rated to last 5 years which is longer
than the lifetime of the device. apple isn't the only company who has
internal batteries either. others include dell and motorola. every
bluetooth headset has an internal battery and some bluetooth keyboards
have internal batteries. the flip video camera had an internal battery.
the list goes on and you'll be seeing more and more of this in the
future.
> incompatible physical interfaces
> (whenever they can),
wtf are you talking about? apple uses standard physical interfaces.
> incompatible logical interfaces (ibid),
what does that mean?
> no flash etc.
flash is proprietary. it's very hypocritical for you to want apple to
support a proprietary standard rather than the open html5 that they
chose.
furthermore, flash didn't work that well on mobile devices and apps
written in it are designed for mouse/keyboard, not touch, so they'd
need to be rewritten anyway. microsoft didn't include flash on windows
phone 7 and flash didn't really work that well on the android devices
that supported it (not all did). adobe couldn't properly fix the
problems so they cancelled mobile flash.
> See
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple_Inc.#Accusations_of_anti-compe
wrong. ios devices are not locked to itunes. you don't even need to use
itunes. the issue about which languages to be used for ios apps is also
wrong and some ios apps are even written in flash and converted to ios
native code (although they don't tend to be as good as ones written
natively from the beginning). foxconn makes products for dozens of
companies and apple is one of the only companies working to improve
conditions there.
<nospam...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> >> It always annoys me when big brands go out of their way to rip off
> >> customers - non refillable toner cartridges,
> >
> > it's not a good idea to refill, but if you're referring to chipped
> > cartridges, that can be reset too.
>
> It is a good idea to re-use virgin cartridges (same for ink-jets).
no it isn't. just ask people who have had clogs with refilled
> >> It always annoys me when big brands go out of their way to rip off
> >> customers - non refillable toner cartridges,
> >
> > it's not a good idea to refill, but if you're referring to chipped
> > cartridges, that can be reset too.
>
> It is a good idea to re-use virgin cartridges (same for ink-jets).
cartridges. refilling can also be messy and most people don't bother
doing it. non-oem ink cartridges are available for those who don't want
to buy the more expensive oem inks, which are often better but not
everyone cares. it's a non-issue.
> >> SIMs glued in phones,
> >
> > which phones have glued in sims??? i've heard of locking the sim to the
> > phone for a short period of time, but that's to stop people from buying
> > a cheap prepaid phone and using the sim in a smartphone.
>
> It was widely alleged that one UK service provider used to super glue pay &
> go SIM's into phones (as well as "locking" them).
>
> Google "weclome to 3's standards of customer service" for more details.
subsidized phones cheaply and reselling them, without ever signing up
for service. since the phones are subsidized, the carriers lose money
when this happens. it's a more drastic form of the sim locking at&t
does here with prepaid gophones, which ties the sim to the phone for
six months, after which you can swap it to a new phone.
> >> root kits
> >> on CD's
> >
> > that's a problem, but there haven't been very many of those
>
> Sony did it twice IIRC see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal
> >> and just about anything Apple does,
> >
> > oh? such as what?
>
> iTunes,
come up with this shit?
> non user changable batteries,
internal batteries lets the manufacturer put in a bigger battery in the
same space, plus it can take any form, which means longer run time as
well as a smaller device. that is a *benefit* to the customer. most
users never replace the battery anyway.
the batteries they use are also rated to last 5 years which is longer
than the lifetime of the device. apple isn't the only company who has
internal batteries either. others include dell and motorola. every
bluetooth headset has an internal battery and some bluetooth keyboards
have internal batteries. the flip video camera had an internal battery.
the list goes on and you'll be seeing more and more of this in the
future.
> incompatible physical interfaces
> (whenever they can),
> incompatible logical interfaces (ibid),
what does that mean?
> no flash etc.
flash is proprietary. it's very hypocritical for you to want apple to
support a proprietary standard rather than the open html5 that they
chose.
furthermore, flash didn't work that well on mobile devices and apps
written in it are designed for mouse/keyboard, not touch, so they'd
need to be rewritten anyway. microsoft didn't include flash on windows
phone 7 and flash didn't really work that well on the android devices
that supported it (not all did). adobe couldn't properly fix the
problems so they cancelled mobile flash.
> See
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple_Inc.#Accusations_of_anti-compe
> titive_behavior
>
> for a very long list.
wikipedia is not an authoritative source and most of those are flat out
>
> for a very long list.
wrong. ios devices are not locked to itunes. you don't even need to use
itunes. the issue about which languages to be used for ios apps is also
wrong and some ios apps are even written in flash and converted to ios
native code (although they don't tend to be as good as ones written
natively from the beginning). foxconn makes products for dozens of
companies and apple is one of the only companies working to improve
conditions there.
Savageduck
May 28, 2012, 12:58:29 PM5/28/12
to
On 2012-05-28 02:57:56 -0700, "R. Mark Clayton"
>>
>>> and just about anything Apple does,
>>
>> oh? such as what?
>
> iTunes,
iTunes is nothing more than a media player integrated with an online
store. The Android store and Amazon are similar sales showcases. I can
see why non-Mac users who own iPods, iPads, & iPhones might be
bothered, because it disturbs their comfort zone, but for the most part
it is just a piece of working software.
> non user changable batteries,
Myth; While batteries are not a simple user replacement, those who have
some skills can get battery replacement kits, with tools, from OWC.
> incompatible physical interfaces
> (whenever they can),
Like USB, Firewire 400/800, and the new "Thunderbolt"
> incompatible logical interfaces (ibid),
???
> no flash etc.
Only on iOS devices, which is forward thinking, but frustrating for
those depending on Flash for whatever reason. I certainly have Flash on
this Mac I am typing my response on.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
<nospam...@btinternet.com> said:
>
> "nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:270520121041370897%nos...@nospam.invalid...
>> In article <bpOdnTIBkttcuV_S...@bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton
>> <nospam...@btinternet.com> wrote:
<<< Le Snip >>>
>
> "nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:270520121041370897%nos...@nospam.invalid...
>> In article <bpOdnTIBkttcuV_S...@bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton
>> <nospam...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> and just about anything Apple does,
>>
>> oh? such as what?
>
> iTunes,
store. The Android store and Amazon are similar sales showcases. I can
see why non-Mac users who own iPods, iPads, & iPhones might be
bothered, because it disturbs their comfort zone, but for the most part
it is just a piece of working software.
> non user changable batteries,
Myth; While batteries are not a simple user replacement, those who have
some skills can get battery replacement kits, with tools, from OWC.
> incompatible physical interfaces
> (whenever they can),
> incompatible logical interfaces (ibid),
???
> no flash etc.
Only on iOS devices, which is forward thinking, but frustrating for
those depending on Flash for whatever reason. I certainly have Flash on
this Mac I am typing my response on.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
nospam
May 28, 2012, 1:11:13 PM5/28/12
to
In article <2012052809582911272-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
802.11b/g/n.
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> > incompatible physical interfaces
> > (whenever they can),
>
> Like USB, Firewire 400/800, and the new "Thunderbolt"
and ethernet, vga, dvi, displayport, expresscard34, cardbus, and
> > incompatible physical interfaces
> > (whenever they can),
>
> Like USB, Firewire 400/800, and the new "Thunderbolt"
802.11b/g/n.
R. Mark Clayton
May 28, 2012, 7:52:19 PM5/28/12
to
"nospam" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
SNIP
>
>> >> root kits
>> >> on CD's
>> >
>> > that's a problem, but there haven't been very many of those
>>
>> Sony did it twice IIRC see
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal
>
> not that i'm excusing what they did, but twice is not very many.
>
>> >> and just about anything Apple does,
>> >
>> > oh? such as what?
>>
>> iTunes,
>
> how does itunes rip off customers? it's just an app. where do people
> come up with this shit?
So you can put music you already own on an iPhone then?
>> >> root kits
>> >> on CD's
>> >
>> > that's a problem, but there haven't been very many of those
>>
>> Sony did it twice IIRC see
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal
>
> not that i'm excusing what they did, but twice is not very many.
>
>> >> and just about anything Apple does,
>> >
>> > oh? such as what?
>>
>> iTunes,
>
> how does itunes rip off customers? it's just an app. where do people
> come up with this shit?
>
>> non user changable batteries,
>
> internal batteries lets the manufacturer put in a bigger battery in the
> same space, plus it can take any form, which means longer run time as
> well as a smaller device. that is a *benefit* to the customer. most
> users never replace the battery anyway.
>
> the batteries they use are also rated to last 5 years which is longer
> than the lifetime of the device. apple isn't the only company who has
> internal batteries either. others include dell and motorola. every
> bluetooth headset has an internal battery and some bluetooth keyboards
> have internal batteries. the flip video camera had an internal battery.
> the list goes on and you'll be seeing more and more of this in the
> future.
>
>> incompatible physical interfaces
>> (whenever they can),
>
> wtf are you talking about? apple uses standard physical interfaces.
>
>> incompatible logical interfaces (ibid),
>
> what does that mean?
organisation etc. to ensure that their stuff is [logically] incompatible
with PC's and / or public standards. They are not as bad as they used to be
on this, but still a reason to avoid their products.
>
>> no flash etc.
>
> flash is proprietary. it's very hypocritical for you to want apple to
> support a proprietary standard rather than the open html5 that they
> chose.
>
> furthermore, flash didn't work that well on mobile devices and apps
> written in it are designed for mouse/keyboard, not touch, so they'd
> need to be rewritten anyway. microsoft didn't include flash on windows
> phone 7 and flash didn't really work that well on the android devices
> that supported it (not all did). adobe couldn't properly fix the
> problems so they cancelled mobile flash
for a full winge about this.
The really shame is that you have to down load a device specific app' for
everything rather than just running Flash.
>
>> See
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple_Inc.#Accusations_of_anti-compe
>> titive_behavior
>>
>> for a very long list.
>
> wikipedia is not an authoritative source and most of those are flat out
> wrong. ios devices are not locked to itunes. you don't even need to use
> itunes. the issue about which languages to be used for ios apps is also
> wrong and some ios apps are even written in flash and converted to ios
> native code (although they don't tend to be as good as ones written
> natively from the beginning). foxconn makes products for dozens of
> companies and apple is one of the only companies working to improve
> conditions there.
thief who pleads not guilty to stealing a thousand pounds because he only
stole �999.
nospam
May 28, 2012, 10:41:03 PM5/28/12
to
In article <sJ-dnaEdGpIYklnS...@bt.com>, R. Mark Clayton
you couldn't?
of course you can put music you already own on an iphone or ipod!! it
supports standard mp3 and aac and several other formats. do you think
it would sell as well as it has if you couldn't??
in fact, the first ipod came out *before* there was an itunes music
store, so you could *only* use music you already had.
seriously, where do people come up with this shit?
not only that, but music you buy via itunes has no copy protection so
you can use it not just on an ipod/iphone, but on an android device, a
sansia or whatever else you might want to use. even a zune.
> >> non user changable batteries,
> >
> > internal batteries lets the manufacturer put in a bigger battery in the
> > same space, plus it can take any form, which means longer run time as
> > well as a smaller device. that is a *benefit* to the customer. most
> > users never replace the battery anyway.
>
> Not convinced by that
that's ok, but it's the reason.
> > the batteries they use are also rated to last 5 years which is longer
> > than the lifetime of the device. apple isn't the only company who has
> > internal batteries either. others include dell and motorola. every
> > bluetooth headset has an internal battery and some bluetooth keyboards
> > have internal batteries. the flip video camera had an internal battery.
> > the list goes on and you'll be seeing more and more of this in the
> > future.
>
> Fine for small cheap devices - rubbbish for a portable phone on 24/7.
it's not rubbish at all. an iphone lasts a day or two in typical use,
which is longer than people are away from a place to plug it in and
since it charges off usb, it can be charged pretty much anywhere.
the reality is that most people never replace their cellphone
batteries, iphone or otherwise. they get a replacement phone when their
contract expires, usually around 2 years.
in other words, why have a replaceable battery when few people actually
will replace it?
> >> incompatible physical interfaces
> >> (whenever they can),
> >
> > wtf are you talking about? apple uses standard physical interfaces.
>
> So what is that connector on the bottom?
the connector on the iphone? it's a 30 pin dock connector that is
ubiquitous.
you can get cables and accessories anywhere and made by zillions of
different companies. it's not an official standard like usb but it
might as well be one since it's so common. many cars and even some
airplanes have ipod dock connectors.
by the way, non-apple cellphones, tablets and other devices have custom
connectors that are more proprietary. go look at the bottom of a
samsung galaxy tab and you'll see a similar dock connector to what's on
an iphone, but you won't see many accessories for it. also, the first
android phone, the htc g1, didn't even have a standard headphone jack.
you had to use an adapter to use standard headphones.
worse, every device is different. for instance, the car adapter you get
for one android device probably won't work with the one you get to
replace it. that makes it hard for third parties to come up with
accessories.
at least with apple, the dock connector is standard on all iphones,
ipads and ipods, which makes it very easy for third parties to make
stuff to plug into it.
> >> incompatible logical interfaces (ibid),
> >
> > what does that mean?
>
> Historically this has meant that Apple has used proprietary protocols,
absolute bullshit.
apple has long used industry standard protocols (ftp, vnc, ssh, etc.)
and standard formats (mp3, aac, zip, mpeg, pdf, etc.). they are also
big proponents of html5 versus the *proprietary* flash. quite a bit of
os x is open source, and some of it is even used in competitors
products!
microsoft, on the other hand, alters the standards just enough to force
users into using microsoft products. they had custom extensions to html
to lock users into internet explorer and they also push their own
proprietary windows media format rather than use industry standard mp3,
aac or mpeg.
in other words, you have it all backwards.
> media
> organisation etc. to ensure that their stuff is [logically] incompatible
> with PC's and / or public standards.
that doesn't make any sense. how is organizing media incompatible with
a pc, and what is this public standard of media organizing anyway?
> They are not as bad as they used to be
> on this, but still a reason to avoid their products.
considering it's false, it's not a reason at all.
what's funny is it looks like all your hatred is directed at the wrong
company. i assume you'll be getting rid of your windows system since
you hate proprietary products.
> >> no flash etc.
> >
> > flash is proprietary. it's very hypocritical for you to want apple to
> > support a proprietary standard rather than the open html5 that they
> > chose.
>
> Whilst it is proprietary, like PDF's it is an open standard.
it can't be both. flash is *not* an open standard, it's proprietary to
adobe. html5 *is* an open standard. apple picked the *non* proprietary
one.
by the way, pdf is a native format on a mac. you don't need to install
anything to read or write it.
> > furthermore, flash didn't work that well on mobile devices and apps
> > written in it are designed for mouse/keyboard, not touch, so they'd
> > need to be rewritten anyway. microsoft didn't include flash on windows
> > phone 7 and flash didn't really work that well on the android devices
> > that supported it (not all did). adobe couldn't properly fix the
> > problems so they cancelled mobile flash
>
> Shame realy - although some of the critique is valid. See current PC Pro
> for a full winge about this.
why is it a shame? flash sucks on mobile devices. it's slow, it's a cpu
hog (i.e., drains battery), buggy and is a security hole.
have you ever *used* flash on a mobile device? there are better
alternatives, so why do you want to stick with the crappy one?
> The really shame is that you have to down load a device specific app' for
> everything rather than just running Flash.
why? most sites have non-flash versions so you don't need flash in the
first place and native apps provide a *much* better user experience
than a browser ever could, with or without flash.
it's the same reason why desktop/laptop computers have many different
apps designed for specific tasks, rather than have everything running
in a browser with flash. why should a phone be any different?
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple_Inc.#Accusations_of_anti-co
> OTOH it is a bit like the
> thief who pleads not guilty to stealing a thousand pounds because he only
> stole £999.
not at all. in this case it's pretty much entirely bogus.
<nospam...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> >> >> and just about anything Apple does,
> >> >
> >> > oh? such as what?
> >>
> >> iTunes,
> >
> > how does itunes rip off customers? it's just an app. where do people
> > come up with this shit?
>
> So you can put music you already own on an iPhone then?
you've got to be kidding me! where in the world did you get the idea
> >> >> and just about anything Apple does,
> >> >
> >> > oh? such as what?
> >>
> >> iTunes,
> >
> > how does itunes rip off customers? it's just an app. where do people
> > come up with this shit?
>
> So you can put music you already own on an iPhone then?
you couldn't?
of course you can put music you already own on an iphone or ipod!! it
supports standard mp3 and aac and several other formats. do you think
it would sell as well as it has if you couldn't??
in fact, the first ipod came out *before* there was an itunes music
store, so you could *only* use music you already had.
seriously, where do people come up with this shit?
not only that, but music you buy via itunes has no copy protection so
you can use it not just on an ipod/iphone, but on an android device, a
sansia or whatever else you might want to use. even a zune.
> >> non user changable batteries,
> >
> > internal batteries lets the manufacturer put in a bigger battery in the
> > same space, plus it can take any form, which means longer run time as
> > well as a smaller device. that is a *benefit* to the customer. most
> > users never replace the battery anyway.
>
> Not convinced by that
> > the batteries they use are also rated to last 5 years which is longer
> > than the lifetime of the device. apple isn't the only company who has
> > internal batteries either. others include dell and motorola. every
> > bluetooth headset has an internal battery and some bluetooth keyboards
> > have internal batteries. the flip video camera had an internal battery.
> > the list goes on and you'll be seeing more and more of this in the
> > future.
>
> Fine for small cheap devices - rubbbish for a portable phone on 24/7.
which is longer than people are away from a place to plug it in and
since it charges off usb, it can be charged pretty much anywhere.
the reality is that most people never replace their cellphone
batteries, iphone or otherwise. they get a replacement phone when their
contract expires, usually around 2 years.
in other words, why have a replaceable battery when few people actually
will replace it?
> >> incompatible physical interfaces
> >> (whenever they can),
> >
> > wtf are you talking about? apple uses standard physical interfaces.
>
> So what is that connector on the bottom?
ubiquitous.
you can get cables and accessories anywhere and made by zillions of
different companies. it's not an official standard like usb but it
might as well be one since it's so common. many cars and even some
airplanes have ipod dock connectors.
by the way, non-apple cellphones, tablets and other devices have custom
connectors that are more proprietary. go look at the bottom of a
samsung galaxy tab and you'll see a similar dock connector to what's on
an iphone, but you won't see many accessories for it. also, the first
android phone, the htc g1, didn't even have a standard headphone jack.
you had to use an adapter to use standard headphones.
worse, every device is different. for instance, the car adapter you get
for one android device probably won't work with the one you get to
replace it. that makes it hard for third parties to come up with
accessories.
at least with apple, the dock connector is standard on all iphones,
ipads and ipods, which makes it very easy for third parties to make
stuff to plug into it.
> >> incompatible logical interfaces (ibid),
> >
> > what does that mean?
>
> Historically this has meant that Apple has used proprietary protocols,
apple has long used industry standard protocols (ftp, vnc, ssh, etc.)
and standard formats (mp3, aac, zip, mpeg, pdf, etc.). they are also
big proponents of html5 versus the *proprietary* flash. quite a bit of
os x is open source, and some of it is even used in competitors
products!
microsoft, on the other hand, alters the standards just enough to force
users into using microsoft products. they had custom extensions to html
to lock users into internet explorer and they also push their own
proprietary windows media format rather than use industry standard mp3,
aac or mpeg.
in other words, you have it all backwards.
> media
> organisation etc. to ensure that their stuff is [logically] incompatible
> with PC's and / or public standards.
a pc, and what is this public standard of media organizing anyway?
> They are not as bad as they used to be
> on this, but still a reason to avoid their products.
what's funny is it looks like all your hatred is directed at the wrong
company. i assume you'll be getting rid of your windows system since
you hate proprietary products.
> >> no flash etc.
> >
> > flash is proprietary. it's very hypocritical for you to want apple to
> > support a proprietary standard rather than the open html5 that they
> > chose.
>
> Whilst it is proprietary, like PDF's it is an open standard.
adobe. html5 *is* an open standard. apple picked the *non* proprietary
one.
by the way, pdf is a native format on a mac. you don't need to install
anything to read or write it.
> > furthermore, flash didn't work that well on mobile devices and apps
> > written in it are designed for mouse/keyboard, not touch, so they'd
> > need to be rewritten anyway. microsoft didn't include flash on windows
> > phone 7 and flash didn't really work that well on the android devices
> > that supported it (not all did). adobe couldn't properly fix the
> > problems so they cancelled mobile flash
>
> Shame realy - although some of the critique is valid. See current PC Pro
> for a full winge about this.
hog (i.e., drains battery), buggy and is a security hole.
have you ever *used* flash on a mobile device? there are better
alternatives, so why do you want to stick with the crappy one?
> The really shame is that you have to down load a device specific app' for
> everything rather than just running Flash.
first place and native apps provide a *much* better user experience
than a browser ever could, with or without flash.
it's the same reason why desktop/laptop computers have many different
apps designed for specific tasks, rather than have everything running
in a browser with flash. why should a phone be any different?
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple_Inc.#Accusations_of_anti-co
> >> mpe
> >> titive_behavior
> >>
> >> for a very long list.
> >
> > wikipedia is not an authoritative source and most of those are flat out
> > wrong. ios devices are not locked to itunes. you don't even need to use
> > itunes. the issue about which languages to be used for ios apps is also
> > wrong and some ios apps are even written in flash and converted to ios
> > native code (although they don't tend to be as good as ones written
> > natively from the beginning). foxconn makes products for dozens of
> > companies and apple is one of the only companies working to improve
> > conditions there.
>
> I would not expect Wiki to be 100% accurate.
so why cite it?
> >> titive_behavior
> >>
> >> for a very long list.
> >
> > wikipedia is not an authoritative source and most of those are flat out
> > wrong. ios devices are not locked to itunes. you don't even need to use
> > itunes. the issue about which languages to be used for ios apps is also
> > wrong and some ios apps are even written in flash and converted to ios
> > native code (although they don't tend to be as good as ones written
> > natively from the beginning). foxconn makes products for dozens of
> > companies and apple is one of the only companies working to improve
> > conditions there.
>
> I would not expect Wiki to be 100% accurate.
> OTOH it is a bit like the
> thief who pleads not guilty to stealing a thousand pounds because he only
> stole £999.
RichA
May 29, 2012, 9:41:00 AM5/29/12
to
On May 27, 8:58 am, "R. Mark Clayton" <nospamclay...@btinternet.com>
wrote:
> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9d96bb84-0fb4-4d31...@pr3g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-...
-Image magnification or distortion from non-flat or partially convex/
concave filter.
-Loss of contrast due to poor coatings or glass polish.
-Increased reflections due to poor coatings.
-Worst case, loss of resolution due to glass polish being poor, but
that is not likely, you'd see it with your eye if it was that bad.
A quick test for a filter is to hold it up to your eye and tilt it
back and forth. If the image moves, the filter is probably not flat
and plane-parallel as it should be.
Reflect a light source in it and look at it. If a lot of the light is
reflected, the coatings are poor, or non-existent.
wrote:
> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9d96bb84-0fb4-4d31...@pr3g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538761/photographers-...
>
> Looks like they work, albeit not quite as well as the originals.
The problems that could arise are:
> Looks like they work, albeit not quite as well as the originals.
-Image magnification or distortion from non-flat or partially convex/
concave filter.
-Loss of contrast due to poor coatings or glass polish.
-Increased reflections due to poor coatings.
-Worst case, loss of resolution due to glass polish being poor, but
that is not likely, you'd see it with your eye if it was that bad.
A quick test for a filter is to hold it up to your eye and tilt it
back and forth. If the image moves, the filter is probably not flat
and plane-parallel as it should be.
Reflect a light source in it and look at it. If a lot of the light is
reflected, the coatings are poor, or non-existent.
Wolfgang Weisselberg
May 29, 2012, 10:34:14 AM5/29/12
to
nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>> > incompatible physical interfaces
>> > (whenever they can),
>> Like USB, Firewire 400/800, and the new "Thunderbolt"
> and ethernet, vga, dvi, displayport, expresscard34, cardbus, and
> 802.11b/g/n.
It's not how many compatible interfaces you have, it's how
> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>> > incompatible physical interfaces
>> > (whenever they can),
>> Like USB, Firewire 400/800, and the new "Thunderbolt"
> and ethernet, vga, dvi, displayport, expresscard34, cardbus, and
> 802.11b/g/n.
much even a single incompatible one can hamper you.
That iPhone/iPad connector --- what other units outside Apple
is it used on?
-Wolfgang
0 new messages