Joined on Dec 17, 2011


Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10
In reply to:

(unknown member): Doesn't look like anything special to me. This man gets way, way too much credit. Heck, I even read all the time how Ive supposedly created the iPod when that's simply not true. Tony Fadell is the creator of the iPod. He led the design and production of the iPods.

Ive is not the only designer at Apple. Many people at Apple have had their ideas incorporated into the design of Apple's products, such as the engineers, especially as products got thinner and lighter. Lets face it, Steve Jobs had the most influence on final design and would not have allowed some of the poor design choices Ive made for iOS 7, such as ridiculously thin and hard to read default fonts and blinding white backgrounds. I don't think he would have went for the plastic iPhone 5C either when the current iPod Touch looks far better and more higher end.

No offense to the guy, I'm sure he is competent leading a design team, but lets dispense with the misinformation and especially the hype surrounding him.

Substantially wrong. Tony Fadell took the 'idea' to Apple where he became chief 'development' officer of the iPod division. The design of the iPod was Ive's work as head of design. Yeah, Jobs would have hated plastic for a phone and never allowed it...oh wait...they did do a plastic iPhone...under Jobs.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2013 at 14:41 UTC

Finally...a digital contender to the Minolta TC1 and probably developed by the same team.
Just ordered one from WEX.

Link | Posted on Feb 22, 2013 at 17:11 UTC as 38th comment | 1 reply
On article What makes the Microsoft Surface Pro tick? (37 comments in total)

Translation: We at iFixit reserve the right to downgrade to oblivion, any device that frustrates our business model whereby we sell parts and repair services for DIY enthusiasts.
Additionally, not withstanding the gain in device reliability due to sealed components and the design restraints imposed by the need to make devices thinner, lighter and more mobile, we consider that repairs and mods should be possible using an oily rag, a hammer and the detailed guides we sell to the public.
Accordingly, we have classified iPads, MacBooks, iPhones, Surface PCs and all other devices with sealed/glued components as detrimental to our 'last milleniun' thinking and business prospects.

Link | Posted on Feb 18, 2013 at 14:46 UTC as 1st comment | 3 replies

"We, here at iFixit, lack the specialist knowledge to easily replace the battery cheaply, using parts supplied by us. We therefore give the iPad mini a low rating because it cuts into our profit producing business"
Sealed battery devices have a reliability far greater than those with user replaceable batteries and in many cases have a far better battery life because the battery can be moulded to take advantage of all the space available. Other advantages include better resistance to moisture, lighter weight even with a larger battery and a more solid feel to the device without loose battery compartment doors which in turn promotes longer device life by eradicating broken components.
Also, Apple offer a battery replacement service which ensures that the old battery is responsibly recycled ie they don't just throw it in the bin like most repairers. Just had Apple replace the battery in my old 3GS - nearly four years old, for my granddaughter. No need to junk it.

Link | Posted on Nov 4, 2012 at 15:31 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
On article Just Posted: Sony Alpha SLT-A99 samples gallery (159 comments in total)
In reply to:

forsakenbliss: Is it me or my computer?
Lately the image samples are not so good in terms of IQ, composition, object to past years.

I think QC was easier when everything ran in-house from London. It also introduces a problem for comparison between standardised shots from differing light intensity levels. West coast USA has alarmingly high contrast intensity compared to London.

Link | Posted on Oct 11, 2012 at 16:21 UTC
In reply to:

david mackenzie: I live in London and see a lot of photographers work on market stalls in Covent Garden and Greenwich and the B&W pictures of London landmarks with buses or postboxes or letter boxes coloured in red are so common that they make me cringe. Infact I remamber these in the 80's when they were handcolured in red and I may have even been guily of it myself! This can't be infringement of copyright as its not an original idea. If this guy has got away with this then I'm going to start legal proceedings against anyone who does the standard picture of their wife looking like they are holding up the Leaning Tower of Piza as I did that first 30 years ago!

Funny this is...I used a loaner Nex7 for a few hours in London and produced very similar shots using the Selective Colour menu option.
Now, do I get sued? Or does Sony?

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2012 at 12:56 UTC
In reply to:

Hulamike: So far everyone is missing the point. The bride thinks you're ripping her off because most young people today don't see anything special about photography. It's something "everyone" does with their cellphones all the time. There's a new paradigm in place and professional wedding photographers are trying to ignor the obvious. It will only get worse as the immediacy of uploading to social media continues to trump tradition thereby eroding whatever special place wedding photography once inhabited.

Good points and it's always been that way. The successful wedding photographer is the one who adopts styles/trends early, before they become commonplace. Eg. 35mm for intimate shots instead of static medium format poses; B&W when everyone else did colour, books instead of loose photo albums; DVDs; on-line albums before social network sites took over; decent movies...and so on. The wedding photographer has to stay ahead to remain relevant. This all costs money up front.
The next trend is interactive publishing. I am presently developing something along those lines with iBooks Author aimed at iPad usage. If the money is there, I might even include an subsidised iPad in the deal to provide something unique. I guess the message is, to stay relevant you have to invest(spend upfront) in the future then claim it back over the next few jobs whilst keeping an eye on the next 'thing' that might render your uniqueness redundant.

Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2012 at 12:42 UTC
In reply to:

whtchocla7e: This camera could cost $5000 for body-only and I'd still buy it.
As long as it looks better than it performs.
I admit I fall for marketing hype rather easily but who can fault me?

Absolutely....and it reminds me of my Bessa R3a too. It's certainly better looking than the new Canon.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2012 at 01:03 UTC
Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10