jah1

Joined on Feb 24, 2012

Comments

Total: 4, showing: 1 – 4
On article Apple revamps MacBook Pro lineup, adds 'Touch Bar' (866 comments in total)
In reply to:

jah1: Obviously, there is no reason to review a mac here. Notwithstanding the notion, now that you mention it, that macs have a curiously large following of creatives, countermanded by the reality of Apple throwing creative (and other professional) power users to wind with underpowered claptrap where the "creative" is applied the look, but not to the actual need of "creatives." No use traveling the well-trod path of evidencing unhappiness: the desktop trashcan; the ports that have never been widely adopted by peripherials used by "creatives;" the requirements to clutter your desk with (and spend more money on) adapters and attachments just to do simple work; the "new" generation that is slower than the last; the dumbing-down of creative software to consumer standard....this list goes on and on.

Frankly, if Apple is now simply a gadget company, spin off the computer division so as to allow for full focus on producing innovative, useful computers rather than an underpowered platform for an emoji strip (acknowledging, of course, that the emoji strip will fundamentally change all our lives....HOW DID I EVER LIVE WITHOUT IT!!!!). For the first time in my adult life, my next computer will likely not be Apple-anything.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2016 at 01:54 UTC
On article Apple revamps MacBook Pro lineup, adds 'Touch Bar' (866 comments in total)

Obviously, there is no reason to review a mac here. Notwithstanding the notion, now that you mention it, that macs have a curiously large following of creatives, countermanded by the reality of Apple throwing creative (and other professional) power users to wind with underpowered claptrap where the "creative" is applied the look, but not to the actual need of "creatives." No use traveling the well-trod path of evidencing unhappiness: the desktop trashcan; the ports that have never been widely adopted by peripherials used by "creatives;" the requirements to clutter your desk with (and spend more money on) adapters and attachments just to do simple work; the "new" generation that is slower than the last; the dumbing-down of creative software to consumer standard....this list goes on and on.

Link | Posted on Oct 28, 2016 at 01:54 UTC as 143rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

nerd2: 99.9% of kickstarter funded products = clueless junks

I though he was talking about chinese ships!!

Link | Posted on Nov 13, 2015 at 15:55 UTC
In reply to:

cwmartin: If Sigma has any real hope of selling large quantities of this camera, then they will have to offer it in a Nikon and Canon lens mount version. People have large investments in their lens systems, either Nikon or Canon. Sigma should leverage those bases by doing what they do with their lenses, make the camera available to be compatible with the two largest lens bases. Only then will the camera be given a hard look by people with other camera systems.

This was the business case from Sigma as I remember it: the SD1 is a 46mp camera (whether it is, or not, is another matter) – we will price comparatively with other 46mp cameras (i.e., med. formt digi). Ergo, the outrageous price for an APS-C camera. The result? The cameras didn't sell – neither in absolute numbers nor in comparison with competitors. The price drop could not be a clearer admission of the failure to price the camera correctly initially. If the camera were selling box-office, I CAN ASSURE YOU that the price would not be reduced. As someone earlier astutely observed, Sigma's job is to make money: if they were making money with the cameras priced at $9000 with robust demand, business logic would dictate that the price remain the same or go even higher. The price drop has nothing to do with improved economies of scale or any such nonsense, as Sigma would internalized any such savings into its profits - but there are no profits because the cameras aren't selling.

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2012 at 03:33 UTC
Total: 4, showing: 1 – 4