I think that Macs elicit a fierce loyalty in a certain subset of users,
i.e., some folks passionately love Macs. I think that the majority of
users could care less and see Windows and Macs as essentially
equivalent, but use Windows since its more common and profits from the
higher amount of money
What I heard each time instead was how shocked they were that they
got more computer at one-third the price and was completely upgradable, and
that it could do everything the Macs they coveted could do.
For the record, and with all respect to Treena, Macs are just as
upgradeable. What many
Cotty,
Therein lies the difference in the philosophies of the two (or more)
companies. Apple would have you believe they are unique and different
and not upgradeable (except by them) and Wintel just lays the whole
ugly mess on the table with no apologies. Both approaches have pros
and cons.
gfen wrote:
They're both tools. Each has its stronger points, and its weaker points.
To not see this simple fact is to be ignorant and/or blind. For each pro
of one system, there is a con for the other, and in the end neither is
better or worse.
Okay, fair enough.
Subsequent to reading the
I agree that this is generally a useless, aggravating discussion. However, I
think the fact that professional photographers, publishers, and graphic
designers have all standardized on Macs and Photoshop is something that
people should be reminded of once in a while.
I remember when we switched
PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Mac Blat
SNIP
Excel is a rip-off of Lotus
There is no doubt of that, there is very little difference between the
two. Anyone familiar with Lotus (Dos Version) can see that all Excel added
was a Windows interface
. tammikuuta 2003 2:28
Aihe: Re: OT: Mac Blat
It would be really hard to get Gates (Microsoft) to pay Apple royalties since
the MAC interface is a simplified version of the LISA interface (also Apple),
which was a complete copy of Xerox's experimental interface from their Palo
Alto
Research Center
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: T Rittenhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Päivä: 12. tammikuuta 2003 2:31
Aihe: Re: Mac Blat
Why Mike, you didn't ask my opinion, so how can it be best?
BTW, the reason Apple could not keep Gates from using
Hi Doug...
Thank you for the recommendation. I have a copy of Color It! (v.3.09)
I got with my Epson digital camera.
I use it along with it's Scan Wizard plug-in to manipulate my scanner
images, but, I have NOT yet used it to fool around with digital photo images.
It's not that I'm _looking_ for
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 11 Jan 2003 at 13:34, Keith Whaley wrote:
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 11 Jan 2003 at 13:29, Mike Johnston wrote:
Macs are superior products. They work better, they are more elegant, they
are more pleasant to work with, they're designed better.
Next time, stick to something less controversial like which flavor of
Christianity is best . . . 8^)
photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
-Alkuperäinen viesti-
Lähettäjä: T Rittenhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Päivä: 12. tammikuuta 2003 2:31
Aihe: Re: Mac Blat
Why Mike, you didn't ask my opinion, so how can it be best
On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, Mike Johnston wrote:
Considering that Windows is a blatant rip-off of the Mac interface that
Gate's lawyers somehow weaseled him out of paying for, the ease of use of
_all_ computers is directly related to the ease of use of Macs. Even though
Windows is still inferior in
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, gfen wrote:
I hearby nominate this sort of useless argument to the same field as gun
talk. Stupid. pointless, and bound to aggravate everyone involved.
This is what happens when you read messae #100 in a list of 400.. by the
time the end rolls around, its (thankfully)
Keith Whaley said: Now, if only it were made for the Mac...
Now and then someone asks about Mac support on the Picture Window support
bulletin board. Someone from Digital Light and Color usually answers that
it should run fine under Virtual PC, but they don't really advertise or
support that.
A logical extension of this argument would be that all people who use
Pentax 35mm SLRs, and have professional aspirations, should switch to
another brand, since virtually no working professionals use Pentax 35mm
gear.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree that this is generally a useless,
Bruce R posted:
A logical extension of this argument would be that all people who use
Pentax 35mm SLRs, and have professional aspirations, should switch to
another brand, since virtually no working professionals use Pentax 35mm
gear.
And you never miss an opportunity to make this
Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
A logical extension of this argument would be that all people who use
Pentax 35mm SLRs, and have professional aspirations, should switch to
another brand, since virtually no working professionals use Pentax 35mm
gear.
BR
That's not at all logical. It's merely an
On 1/12/03 3:03 PM, Bruce Rubenstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A logical extension of this argument would be that all people who use
Pentax 35mm SLRs, and have professional aspirations, should switch to
another brand, since virtually no working professionals use Pentax 35mm
gear.
I have many
Bruce:
Thanks for the link to the Rob Galbraith link. I plan to replace my PII 350
this winter and the Dell 8200 is one of the computers I'm looking at. For my
use (non-production) it looks like plenty, though I probably will cram all
the RAM in it that I can.
BUTCH
Each man had only one
Look, Johnston initially made the argument that the Mac is the preferred
platform because it is used by professionals. This implies that if you
want to work like professional you should use a Mac. Since the computer
is now a photographic tool, the same premise would apply to the most
basic
platform is more legitimate than
the other.
I've got to back Bruce up on these points, the Mac Blat thread was crammed
full of brand based fallacies..
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
I'm glad someone found it useful. I wish that he had an Athlon based
system in there.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bruce:
Thanks for the link to the Rob Galbraith link. I plan to replace my PII 350
this winter and the Dell 8200 is one of the computers I'm looking at. For my
use
Sorry Bruce, I was not responding to your particular contention under the
Mac Blat thread, hence changing the subject line.
But I thought you never failed to grab the opportunity to poison the list to
the point it became so predictable when and how you show up with equally
predictable posts.
I
A logical extension of this argument would be that all people who use
Pentax 35mm SLRs, and have professional aspirations, should switch to
another brand, since virtually no working professionals use Pentax 35mm
gear.
It happens. When I joined a group studio around 1988 I switched from
Mike,
Just interesting food for thought - I found out that the underlying OS
for the Agfa D-Labs is Windows 2000. One wonders why they made that
decision. One angle could be connectivity.
Bruce
Sunday, January 12, 2003, 11:47:25 AM, you wrote:
Whine, whine, whine, Mac mac mac.. versus
crock for camera brands, then it is
also one big crock for which computer platform is more legitimate than
the other.
RS I've got to back Bruce up on these points, the Mac Blat thread was crammed
RS full of brand based fallacies..
RS Rob Studdert
RS HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
RS Tel +61-2-9554-4110
RS
, January 12, 2003 4:18 AM
Subject: Vs: Mac Blat
What´s this? There was a law suit which Apple won and Microsoft lost.
The interface was indeed originally developed by Xerox Palo Alto Research
Center but there´s nothing to indicate that Apple got it free.
All the best!
Raimo
Personal photography
Damn right. And they ought to get rid of all that color BS too.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Mac Blat
Whine, whine, whine
Look, Johnston initially made the argument that the Mac is the preferred
platform because it is used by professionals. This implies that if you
want to work like professional you should use a Mac. Since the computer
is now a photographic tool, the same premise would apply to the most
basic
Back up to my original post. It said, virtually no professional
photographers use 35mm Pentax SLRs. I never stated that it was
impossible to use both.
You have proved nothing. Stick to being an Artiste.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How good are you at logic? Viewed from a logical
Sounds like the riddle of Schrodinger's Camera...
Mike Johnston wrote:
How good are you at logic? Viewed from a logical perspective, the argument
above is specious on its face.
I'll give you the proof: I use Macs, and I use Pentaxes. If your premises
and reasoning as presented above were
But I would not trade my
Mac for an IBM for anything. That's my choice. Others will not agree. But
then again they have probably never spent any real time on a Mac.. A Mac is
like an LX, once you GET IT you love it...
Yay, Vic.
This is all I was ever really saying. As usual it took someone
how hard it is to use a Mac
This is a classic oxymoron!
Cotty,
Considering that Windows is a blatant rip-off of the Mac interface that
Gate's lawyers somehow weaseled him out of paying for, the ease of use of
_all_ computers is directly related to the ease of use of Macs. Even though
Windows
In a message dated 1/11/2003 3:27:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
It still doesn't change the fact that the founders of Apple saw, what
was to become the Mac's interface, first at Xerox PARC.
Bill Gates has
nothing to do with it.
BR
Not disputing that.
Ryan K. Brooks wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/11/2003 2:47:31 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not quite, because Bill Gates is the ultimate rip-off artist. And M$ is re-known
for getting away with it.
IIRC the guy that invented Dos got a
It is in fact, just as bad, just as rehashed and just as irrelevant to
photography (no matter how they are used).
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike,
I fear that this could be just as bad as the gun thread.
Keith Whaley wrote:
Ryan K. Brooks wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 1/11/2003 2:47:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not quite, because Bill Gates is the ultimate rip-off artist. And M$ is re-known for getting away with it.
IIRC the guy that
On Saturday, January 11, 2003, at 03:04 PM, Bob Zwarick wrote:
I scan at the moment using a Dimage Scan Dual III for 35mm and an
Epson 2450
for the 6x6 slides. -
Bob
Hi Bob,
Would you care to share your impression on the ScanDual III? There are
quite a few owners of the SD II on the
In a message dated 1/11/2003 4:07:07 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well Access is certainly no rip off of Paradox... Paradox
is simply the
dumbest relational DB I have ever had to use.
It well might be the rip off of something else.
-
Bob
Paradox was pretty good
Dan Scott wrote:
On Saturday, January 11, 2003, at 03:04 PM, Bob Zwarick wrote:
I scan at the moment using a Dimage Scan Dual III for 35mm and an
Epson 2450
for the 6x6 slides. -
Bob
Hi Bob,
Would you care to share your impression on the ScanDual III? There are
quite a few owners of
There are also owners of other scanners that need replacing (HP S20),
and are interested.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would you care to share your impression on the ScanDual III? There are
quite a few owners of the SD II on the list and I'm sure most if not
all would be interested.
On 11 Jan 2003 at 13:34, Keith Whaley wrote:
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 11 Jan 2003 at 13:29, Mike Johnston wrote:
Macs are superior products. They work better, they are more elegant, they
are more pleasant to work with, they're designed better.
Mike, you should get out more.
-
From: Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Dan Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 1:34 PM
Subject: ScanDual III (was Re: Mac Blat)
On Saturday, January 11, 2003, at 03:04 PM, Bob Zwarick wrote:
I scan at the moment using a Dimage Scan Dual III for 35mm
For S-20 owners, no more scrathes from the drive mechanism, better color
rendition of water blues. And easier to load :)
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Rubenstein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: ScanDual III (was Re: Mac Blat
(was Re: Mac Blat)
Dan Scott wrote:
On Saturday, January 11, 2003, at 03:04 PM, Bob Zwarick wrote:
I scan at the moment using a Dimage Scan Dual III for 35mm and an
Epson 2450
for the 6x6 slides. -
Bob
Hi Bob,
Would you care to share your impression on the ScanDual
Do the scans look sharper than from the HP? I assume the Minolta is much
better than the HP for slides. Have you tried manually adjusting the
focus? Was the Minolta softer than the Nikon (which model?) with the
Minolta dust removal turned off? Do you find the much difference is the
noise when
That Apple ripped off from Xerox PARC.
Entirely true! Thanks Bruce.
Oh, swipe me! He paints with light!
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at
http://www.macads.co.uk/
Folks,
I hereby duly apologise. I should know better but I was stupid enough to
hit the send button before my brain engaged and prevented me. Please
accept my humblest sorrow for initiating what must rank as a verbotten
thread.
For the record, I read:
how hard it is to use a Mac
and for
Mike -
It's not that I don't respect your opinion, because I do. It's just, in
this case, times have changed. Photoshop on a decently sized Intel machine
under windows XP is virtually indistinguishable from that same program on a
Mac. Many of the latest Photoshop books point this out in
Cotty wrote:
Folks,
I hereby duly apologise. I should know better but I was stupid enough to
hit the send button before my brain engaged and prevented me. Please
accept my humblest sorrow for initiating what must rank as a verbotten
thread.
For the record, I read:
how hard it is
Thank you, George...
It needed to be said, and you did it.
keith whaley
George Sinos wrote:
Mike -
It's not that I don't respect your opinion, because I do. It's just, in
this case, times have changed. Photoshop on a decently sized Intel machine
under windows XP is virtually
And right you are to apologize, Cotty. I was looking at Macs in Comp USA
down in Charlotte today. Obviously they are pop sculpture, not working
tools. Any worthwhile computer has to be in an ugly black (or at least
beige) box. Good lord, those apple people don't even know what a computer is
It would be really hard to get Gates (Microsoft) to pay Apple royalties since
the MAC interface is a simplified version of the LISA interface (also Apple),
which was a complete copy of Xerox's experimental interface from their Palo
Alto
Research Center. Neither organization would want to open
]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 2:29 PM
Subject: OT: Mac Blat
how hard it is to use a Mac
This is a classic oxymoron!
Cotty,
Considering that Windows is a blatant rip-off of the Mac interface that
Gate's lawyers somehow weaseled him out of paying for, the ease
Not quite correct, the guy who actually wrote Q-dos got nothing but his
salary in the deal.
The company that he worked for got the fee. There is some justice, he did
eventually get a
cushy job at Microsoft, while his boss's went out of business.
At 03:10 PM 1/11/2003 -0500, you wrote:
In a
Not really a rip off. The founder of DR was something of an Idealist and
wasn't against the use of his structures to create a code compatible version
of CPM86. Microsoft did however reverse engineer some of CPM86 to fix a few
bugs in DOS.
At 07:30 AM 1/12/2003 +1100, you wrote:
- Original
Oh what fun. See comments inline. My opinion is Bruce is correct.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Not quite, because Bill Gates is the ultimate rip-off artist. And M$ is
re-known for getting away with it.
IIRC the
Try Microfrontier's Color It!,
http://www.microfrontier.com/products/colorit40/index.html
At 6:53 PM -08001/11/03, Keith Whaley wrote:
I'd much rather use something else...
keith whaley
--
Douglas Forrest Brewer
Ashwood Lake Photography
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.alphoto.com
In a message dated 1/11/2003 11:19:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
I noticed a
long time ago that what someone accuses others of is what
you can expect
them to do if they get the chance.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
Hehehe.
Doe aka
In a message dated 1/11/2003 7:05:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now, as far as Photoshop is concerned, I also have an opinion on
that. (Time to stir the pot.) To recommend Photoshop to a photographer
getting into image processing is a disservice. That novice
Yes, I know.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 11:26 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Mac Blat
In a message dated 1/11/2003 11:19:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Sure is.
1. open source is by definition not ripped off.
2. if you bought the rights to it it is not ripped off.
3. If you cloned (reverse engineered) it with a different look and feel it
is not ripped off.
However, most of the heroes of the early personal computer era were avowed
hackers in the
Your point is well taken...
I'll revisit their web site, and find an address for correspondence.
Good idea,
keith
Bruce Dayton wrote:
Keith,
You should at least write to them with the request. If they don't get
enough requests, they won't consider it. If it appears to be a good
market
64 matches
Mail list logo
