Go back to sleep, Phil

because while you were not, Steve was:

posting new info on all three new Nikons, and

a complete review of the D100.
...
In fact, Phil's site was the first one where I found ...say momentary first time... full information (pictures + data facts) blown reviews of the new Nikon digicams. AFAIK Steve submitted his first reviews some hours later. Also imaging-resource posted reviews later. Related to the Nikon D100, Phil again did an outstanding job and was the first one in this reporting field (always a great job Phil, thank's for that).

Further I have to say, that Phil's reviews are IMO by far the bests around on the net, since they always include a much different and deeper degree of informations and comparisons of digicams as other sites reviews.

-- vkyr
 
because while you were not, Steve was:

posting new info on all three new Nikons, and

a complete review of the D100.

Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old fish.
Steve - hahahahaha.

This site is superior in many many ways and Phil does a great job.

dd
 
You know, maybe I'm just too optimistic, but I read the original
poster's message in exactly the opposite fashion as has been the
case for everyone else here.
I agree with you. When I read the post yesterday I felt the same as you and when I just read the rest of the thread a few minutes ago I was suprised to see everyone bashing the original poster who I thought was giving Phil praise for a job well done.
Goes to show how even the best intentions can often be totally misunderstood.
 
At first I thought "Go back to sleep, Phil" would mean that Phil
seemed to worked some days and nights without sleeping for us... So
much updates and content!
I hoped it would mean that, but apperantly, the poster did not intend it like this. :-(
Phil, you have done an awesome job! I appreciate it very much. This
is was your site makes so special to come to.
Exactly !

On other (non photographic forums), if people ask info about digital cameras, I direct them to this site, and they all consider it one of the best.

I also like reading other reviews (steve's, dcresource, ..., - I think one should read info from various sources), but overall I like this site best (type of information given, the tests performed, the explanation of various things - I have learned a lot here, ...).
If one didn't find
the information here he/she don't have to look further...
just wait for the information to become available... :-))

Thanks Phil, keep up the good work!

Jörg
 
It is sad to see the intensity of some people's need to have up-to-the-second" rumors and technical information. I don't recall ever seeing this in 45 years with "regular" photography, or even seeing it in 25 years with computers. It goes beyond valuing speed over depth and quality. I wonder what is behind this?

In any case Phil, please ignore this type of response and continue to focus on objectivity, analysis, and quality.
I for one dismiss your criticism. Go somewhere else if you don't
like the site, but please don't try and start something up here.
because while you were not, Steve was:

posting new info on all three new Nikons, and

a complete review of the D100.

Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old fish.
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
 
I think Mike succeeded in getting some attention to his thread. Who cares who gets the review first. Phil's dpreview is the mecca of digital photography buyers and lovers.

Thanks Phil for such an outstanding site.
because while you were not, Steve was:

posting new info on all three new Nikons, and

a complete review of the D100.

Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old fish.
Steve - hahahahaha.

This site is superior in many many ways and Phil does a great job.

dd
 
I was one of the first ones to post a negative response to Mike. Take a look at his statement with a few new words inserted...

"...because while you were not [sleeping], Steve was[.] [You were] posting new info on all three new Nikons, and a complete review of the D100. Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old fish."

Without further response from Mike, it appears he could have meant a compliment. I agree with the other posters who suggested Mike's english might be poor.
because while you were not, Steve was:

posting new info on all three new Nikons, and

a complete review of the D100.

Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old fish.
 
"...because while you were not [sleeping], Steve was[.] [You were]
posting new info on all three new Nikons, and a complete review of
the D100. Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old
fish."

Without further response from Mike, it appears he could have meant
a compliment. I agree with the other posters who suggested Mike's
english might be poor.
because while you were not, Steve was:

posting new info on all three new Nikons, and

a complete review of the D100.

Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old fish.
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
 
i think mike forgot to take his medicine
I was about an hour earlier than Steve posting previews of all
three Nikon's (lots more information than Steve), I posted my D100
preview ages ago and updated in the last two weeks (again, much
more detail than Steve who has only posted a first look, not a
review).

What's your major malfuction Mike?
because while you were not, Steve was:

posting new info on all three new Nikons, and

a complete review of the D100.

Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old fish.
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
--
Braaak
--
beam me up scotty

im giving it all shes got captain
 
I'd say Mike's malfunction is he has the maturity of a three year old. Please don't rush becasue of such inane remarks. You can be first or more complete. Since I can't possibly purchase, probably for another few months, my ability to wait a few more hours wont possible hurt me..or Mike. He really does remind me of a typical three year old yelling NOW NOW NOW. Its irrational but isn't he cute in his rage.
I was about an hour earlier than Steve posting previews of all
three Nikon's (lots more information than Steve), I posted my D100
preview ages ago and updated in the last two weeks (again, much
more detail than Steve who has only posted a first look, not a
review).

What's your major malfuction Mike?
because while you were not, Steve was:

posting new info on all three new Nikons, and

a complete review of the D100.

Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old fish.
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
--
Ken Eis
 
The only thing worse than the original post are the people who felt the need to defend PA. He's a grown man who can handle his own critics. Someone starts a flame and look at all the people who put gas on it.

While I'm posting, let me say. Anyone other than a moderator who averages more than a post a day........dosen't HAVE a life.
Terry Barfield
 
I'll be the judge of that thankyou.
The only thing worse than the original post are the people who felt
the need to defend PA. He's a grown man who can handle his own
critics. Someone starts a flame and look at all the people who put
gas on it.
While I'm posting, let me say. Anyone other than a moderator who
averages more than a post a day........dosen't HAVE a life.
Terry Barfield
--
John.
 
I agree, Mike's english may be poor, but I still read it like this:

"...because while you were not [reviewing], Steve was[.] [He was] posting new info on all three new Nikons, and a complete review of the D100. Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old fish."

Mike, correct me if I'm wrong!!
"...because while you were not [sleeping], Steve was[.] [You were]
posting new info on all three new Nikons, and a complete review of
the D100. Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old
fish."

Without further response from Mike, it appears he could have meant
a compliment. I agree with the other posters who suggested Mike's
english might be poor.
because while you were not, Steve was:

posting new info on all three new Nikons, and

a complete review of the D100.

Day old newspapers are good for for disposing of day old fish.
 
The only thing worse than the original post are the people who felt
the need to defend PA. He's a grown man who can handle his own
critics. Someone starts a flame and look at all the people who put
gas on it.
While I'm posting, let me say. Anyone other than a moderator who
averages more than a post a day........dosen't HAVE a life.
Terry Barfield
Maybe thats just your immature ramblings, but I'm sure most on here won't agree.

I can post this knowing you won't reply for a week at least , because you've got such an interesting and fulfilling life to lead.
 
You're wrong John, anyone who has a great life doesn't have the need to go around dumping on other people's. You have to be morose and bitter, perhaps a little bit of an underachiever to want to do that.
The only thing worse than the original post are the people who felt
the need to defend PA. He's a grown man who can handle his own
critics. Someone starts a flame and look at all the people who put
gas on it.
While I'm posting, let me say. Anyone other than a moderator who
averages more than a post a day........dosen't HAVE a life.
Terry Barfield
Maybe thats just your immature ramblings, but I'm sure most on here
won't agree.
I can post this knowing you won't reply for a week at least ,
because you've got such an interesting and fulfilling life to lead.
--
John.
 
How do you explain the coparision between papers and fish? Try to make that into a complementary statement. No way was it anything but a derogatory post.

My own .02. Personally, day old, week old, and month old news is just fine with me. Just get it right.

Tring to "scoop" other people is silly. Would having a review 2 days early change my purchase decision? I'm going to wait until all reviews are in.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top