Not sure what your point is..no one knows what size the image sensor it has,
let alone as you say the quality...but you are still dismissing it? Maybe
wait till we actually know the quality? I would also rather have a great
quality 2mp cam then a so so 5mp cam, but as yet, it is all speculation.
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 10:52 PM, b_s-wilk b1sun...@yahoo.es wrote:
Hey young fella!
Old people invented the cloud many years ago. Do you remember
ARPANET? I
do. I used it. I used punch cards for Fortran programs that I fed into
a
Burroughs mainframe that was the 3400 block of Market
Amen
--- On Sun, 10/18/09, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
From: phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] android takes on iphone
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Date: Sunday, October 18, 2009, 11:46 PM
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 3:02 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 2:33 AM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote:
Not sure what your point is..no one knows what size the image sensor it has,
let alone as you say the quality...but you are still dismissing it?
Not dismissing it. I do, however, dismiss the megapixel wars as if
that is the sole
Of course, megapixel count is only one measure and in my opinion not a very
important one.
On Oct 19, 2009 6:41 AM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 2:33 AM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote: Not sure
what your point is..no o...
Not dismissing it. I do,
On Oct 19, 2009, at 9:38 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
Not dismissing it. I do, however, dismiss the megapixel wars as if
that is the sole criteria by which to judge the capability of cameras.
The optics and CCD in a phone are going to be terrible. To make it not
terrible would require a
Are you talking about Apple or Verizon? I seem to recall Apple touting a
camera in their phone...as well as one in the new ipod nanos. It's called
marketing, all companies do it, some better then others, but I don't recall
you blasting Apple when they touted their camera.
You mentioned all the
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:40 AM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote:
The optics and CCD in a phone are going to be terrible. To make it not
terrible would require a much larger phone and nobody is going to do that.
Totally true.
The purpose of having a camera in a phone is not to take good
Well..we carry around little devices that carry our music that can't compete
at all with larger more cumbersome devices. I don't think all ipod users
are rubes just because they bought one. We carry around laptops that can't
compete with desktop units, are all laptop buyers rubes? Or are they
On Oct 19, 2009, at 12:13 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
Ignorant rubes?
Probably. However, ignorant rubes are the meat that makers of
consumer gear tend to crave the most.
Just look at the stats for the number of people who buy stuff from
spammers.
Here is a post from a totally hopeless
On Oct 19, 2009, at 12:13 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote:
Could be. But, never underestimate the propensity for the masses to
make poor decisions.
As I'm constantly reminded on this List.
*
** List info, subscription
Actually, I was thinking more in line of a webcam that would attach to
the monitor. Also looking for a decent mic for recording podcasts.
Richard P.
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 7:55 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Oct 18, 2009, at 6:30 PM, Richard P. wrote:
Can anyone make some recommendations
You can check out podcasts you like and find out what they use. I'm pretty
sure guys like Adam Curry keep lists of what they use online. If you not
I'm sure you could email the podcasters and find out.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Richard P. richs...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, I was
On Oct 19, 2009, at 12:49 PM, Richard P. wrote:
Actually, I was thinking more in line of a webcam that would attach to
the monitor. Also looking for a decent mic for recording podcasts.
Go to Radio Shack with a $20 bill.
Still nothing, Tom? People on the list might be buying android phones and
might want to know what you do about them.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:01 AM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote:
You mentioned all the things that are missing from android, like what?
On Oct 19, 2009, at 2:19 PM, mike wrote:
Still nothing, Tom? People on the list might be buying android
phones and
might want to know what you do about them.
Good luck fan boi. Buying one would be a neat trick as even the date
they will go on sale has not been announced.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 12:31 PM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote:
Well..we carry around little devices that carry our music that can't compete
at all with larger more cumbersome devices. I don't think all ipod users
are rubes just because they bought one.
I think that you either misunderstood
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 1:55 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote:
Go to Radio Shack with a $20 bill.
This is about right. What passes for generally acceptable video or
audio quality in the computer world can likely be obtained with $20
components. Being a bit facetious here, but not by much.
Figured as much, more from Tom the judge of stuff he hasn't seen. BTW, what
is your point in saying stuff you clearly can't back up?
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:59 AM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote:
On Oct 19, 2009, at 2:19 PM, mike wrote:
Still nothing, Tom? People on the list might be buying
Steve, you are entirely right, and it is quite depressing to me how very many
cameras have been sold on the basis of augmented megapixels. The sensor is
key, and its size truly determines quality of image. Those of us who formerly
were dedicated to excellence in the film era have wandered in
Perhaps I did misunderstand. Point of fact I've never met anyone who
thought a phone cam was just as good as a regular camera. The people I have
met just believe that at the time, a phone cam is just fine. Same as those
with laptops, just fine.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:56 AM,
Good recommendation on the website!
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 12:03 PM, chad evans wyatt
cewyattph...@yahoo.comwrote:
Steve, you are entirely right, and it is quite depressing to me how very
many cameras have been sold on the basis of augmented megapixels. The
sensor is key, and its size truly
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 3:13 PM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps I did misunderstand. Point of fact I've never met anyone who
thought a phone cam was just as good as a regular camera. The people I
have
met just believe that at the time, a phone cam is just fine. Same as those
with
This message seemed to have been eaten by Thunderbird on my MBP so I'll try
again.
Thanks for the info. on another distro to try. My hacker machines are an
eMachines M6805 and a Powerbook G4.
I downloaded and installed Linux Mint 'Gloria' Main (32-bit) and my first
impression is it's like the
My hacker machine is a Powerbook G3. I currently am running Fedora 10 on
it. Let me know if you have any other recommendations of Linux to run on it.
Steve
Mark A. Metz wrote:
This message seemed to have been eaten by Thunderbird on my MBP so I'll try
again.
Thanks for the info. on
Agreed.
However, if you have a DV camcorder to use as a web cam, you'll look
more fabulous than with the cheapo web cam. Don't run out and buy one
just for the web. The cheaper camera might be better because it has
terrible resolution, thus will use less bandwidth. You have to RTFM for
the
26 matches
Mail list logo
