Hopefully, the Lexmark vs. Static Control Components decision will help curb this kind of crap (at least in the U.S.) if Sony ever decides to sue an aftermarket battery maker. (But that won't happen since nobody will ever be able to beat Sony's encryption. <g> My money's on some 12 year old getting his Sony digicam to work properly with a potato and some chewing gum.) Here's a brief, rather one-sided, article that covers the basics: http://www.counterthink.org/000433.html
Sony's problem is that they think they can behave like a monopolist without actually being one. I've stated this before, but I'll mention it here again - I don't buy Sony products. I try my damnedest not to buy products that use Sony components. From this date forward if I ever knowingly purchase a Sony product, I will hand deliver all my Pentax glass to Cotty's Custom Chop Shop. On 12/5/05, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >At least this time, they may have a point. > >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=16139935 > > The point being that they're too cheap to put in overvoltage protection. > Seriously, these days with chip-size switching regulators it's trivially > easy to make devices that accept huge input voltage ranges. > > > -- -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
