Larry Winters

Hi Paul:

Sure it works. Its just disabled to previously banned members.

Maybe its just my XP machine and/or the much despised IE, but everytime I hit the "enter" tab to start a new paragraph, the whole IE locks ups.

I can't beieve the CEO of Kodak Antonio Perez is still there AND getting paid as he is personally responsible for much of Kodaks demise.

The news has conveniently forgot to mention that Kodak was offered a couple billion several years ago for their patents but the CEO Perez thought they were worth far more, so declined the offer. Now he thought they were still going to get a premium in Bankruptcy? The guy is flat out incompetent. Not to mention he failed to understand that film really was next to dead. He also failed to hire people to implement those patents into viable products which would have been worth MUCH more.

The Kodak demise would make a perfect book on what not to do as a CEO. And to think this moron Perez is going to someday get a golden parachute retirement when he does leave. All while the common shareholders get screwed. The American way as they say.

What is ironic is that someone like myself who has chosen NOT to make Usain Bolt their hero have instantly become some whining beer sucking mal-content. It's also ironic the ones who HAVE chosen Bolt as their hero are the ones who are thowing out the insulting language.

Geesh, people have differing opinions.

lw

Ivanmaker:

Since this site is in the United States AND you list yourself as being in/from the United States how about we go by the simple English defintion of a athlete:

somebody with athletic ability: somebody with the abilities to participate in physical exercise, especially in competitive games and races

Being a sprinter doesn't make one more of an athlete. It might make them cooler to you, but I can promise you that everyone at the Olympics considers themselves athletes. For you to say otherwise is prejudicial.

Thats it for me.

Fernandobot:

Why is it rediculous to say that someone who has won 16 Golds over 8 years is more of a Legend at the Olympics than someone who has one 5?...

Stollen:

Maybe to you, the 100 meter is the most important.

Who wins the 100 meter is supposedly the fastest human, I get that. But in reality all he did was break a record. There have already been at least 20 records broken at these Olympics and some of them doubles. You wanna buy the hype and call him a legend, thats cool. But in reality the best athlete in the Olympics is the Decathlon winner. There have been a few back to back decathalon winners but none of them have called themselves legends. The decathalon winner best athlete is a standard that most all track athletes have adopted.

But yeah the glamour and the hype is the sprints, so Bolt is a legend in his own mind and the media of course.
If he comes back in 2016 and wins both the 100 and 200 again, I'll consider calling him a legend. But by then I imagine there will be someone else hotter, faster and more appealing for the15- 25 year olds of the World.

Usain Bolt is a great sprinter, thats it!!!

Ivanmaker:

So now swimmers, boxers, basketball players, weight lifters, etc., aren't athletes? Since the first and only Olympic event was the marathon I guess the sprinters, hurdlers, field events aren't athletes either. Not sure how Bolt would qualify as a Sports Legend is he's not an athlete. Oh well...

Usain Bolt is NO LEGEND. Michael Phelps would more likely be called a Legend. He's earned I think 16 Gold and over 20+ medals in 3 Olympics from the 100m, 200m to 400m with mulitple strokes. And he has Gold 3-peated in at least 2 events. When Bolt Gold medals in the 100, 200, and at least medals in the 400, and throw in a hurdle event, in 3 Olympics, then he will have just equalled Phelps. Bolts has only doubled in 2 events and now has a paltry 6 medals. I'm really no fan of swimming or Phelps but the standard he's set will take awhile to surpass and you can't deny him that.

Bolt is a character which is good for Sports advertising, but I'm still wondering want this has to do with reviewing digital photography here on DPR.

lw

I understand that logic but its flawed.
What if all of the cameras in a certain category were terrible but by definition one of them has to be rated the best, so it gets a non deserved high score. Yet in another category where all the cameras are very good, some of them are gonna get marked down just becasue there isn't enough room at the top. Therefore they get lower scores than the crappy cameras from the other group just because of stiffer competion. Yet they are superior cameras.

Another reason this strategy is flawed is because every year the quality and competition can change dramatically. So by using this flawed system a high quality camera from year one can get a lower score because of increased competition but that SAME camera could get a higher score the next year if the competitions camera were of lower quality.

I believe the higher quality camera should always get a higher score, irregardless of the category.

The ZS30 gets a 75 and the far superior FZ150 gets a 76. DPR scoring is ludicrous at best as they literally seem to change their criteria from one review to the next.

I agree. I actually compared my current SX230 to my old ZS3 and ZS7 and the SX230 always out resolved them corner to corner. Sample variation can present false values sometimes though.

When the camera manufacturers started including a back/front focus adjustment feature in their camera's that was an admission there were indeed focus problems between many lenses and cameras..That fact is not a FALLACY!!!

This added feature has saved the camera makers from repairing literally thousands of returned lenses...They initially didn't listen or care about customer complaints about focus issues until they were swamped with returned lenses, based on what customers had learned from reliable sources...Had it not saved the camera makers money they still wouldn't care...

It's always about the money and that't not a fallacy either!!!

The ACLU has minimal legal authority and their guide has the same..Unfortunately, any cop can do whatever they want at anytime with regard to Photographers or anyone else under the Homeland Security Act and a myriad of other statutes...Suspicious activity is what they usually call it, no matter the validity...

Until the HSA is repealed or largely rewritten, the US Citizen and legal visitors are at the mercy of the cop for the day...Quoting your believed rights may feel all noble and all, but the current law of the land has taken many of those rights away by the open ended probable cause authority granted to police officers...

Bottom line, try not to make yourself noticed and you'll probably get better shots and avoid any confrontation as well..

Lastly, don't rely on this BS from the ACLU!!!

Maybe the ACLU should explain that ILLEGAL aliens are not legal immigrants or legal visitors and therefore have no guaranteed Constitutional Rights other than deportation...