|
Shifty Pony posted:Funny to see a selfie stick in pretty much its modern form in a 1980s patent. I would really like to see the patent for that.
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 19:33 |
|
|
MRC48B posted:I would really like to see the patent for that. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
Thanks. I found the actual patent if anyone else is interested in some light reading.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
MRC48B posted:I would really like to see the patent for that.  drat, beaten to it
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
Yeah that's one of them. There are a number of them actually, most of them from Minolta about the Disk 5 or Disk 7 cameras. Those used another fun obsolete failed technology - disk film. Instead of a roll of film there was a flat disk which got rotated behind the lens for each exposure. The actual exposure area was really small compared to 35mm film and it relied upon good optics both in the camera and a special higher quality lens element on the print making system at the photo finisher to keep things from looking like poo poo. Of course what happened is that point and shoots naturally gravitated toward the cheapest lens possible and the photo finisher didn't want to bother swapping lens elements so they just cranked the zoom up on their normal lens. As a result the film got a reputation for bad photographs. Combined with the expense of the new patent-protected film system it was a huge flop. Oh another fun bit about that camera - the part labeled 32 is a small curved and marked mirror set up to let you frame your shot. No do-overs with film! Shifty Pony has a new favorite as of 03:17 on Dec 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:15
|
|
|
I'm sorry, but Pinkey got his patent submitted first, so you're going to owe him royalties if you want to keep using it in your post. In semi-related news to the last page regarding Amazon: http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/12/04/amazon-buys-semi-truck-fleet-to-deliver-packages/?mod=trending_now_1 quote:The company filed a patent application in 2014, and published in September of this year, envisioning mini-distribution centers run out of semi-trucks stocked with merchandise and stationed in parking lots and other urban areas to help speed deliveries. http://1.usa.gov/21ztswq
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
Creature posted:In Sweden they have supermarkets where you can pick up a handheld scanner at the door. You scan your groceries as you go, then pay at the end. Seemed like a good system, although I didn't get a chance to try as I couldn't read the instructions. So I assume that's how it works.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:06
|
|
|
From the last page someone asked why so many differences where there is a standard: A quote from my grandfather to me when I asked the same question many years ago: "You know what they say about standards, there's more of them than a lady of the night has had men" Humphreys has a new favorite as of 07:54 on Dec 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 07:49
|
|
|
JediTalentAgent posted:I'm sorry, but Pinkey got his patent submitted first, so you're going to owe him royalties if you want to keep using it in your post. The further refinement by Melaneus satisfies the patent application board that it should be granted to him instead. You know, on the proviso we see the test images.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 10:46
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:From the last page someone asked why so many differences where there is a standard: I know, xkcd, but it's relevant: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:47
|
|
|
xlevus posted:The UK still has this with Argos. With their laminated book of dreams.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:52
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:From the last page someone asked why so many differences where there is a standard:
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:56
|
|
|
I'd rather people document their poo poo well enough to call it a standard than, you know, not, even if everyone still uses their own poo poo most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
XKCD strip or not, it's weird that in this age of global trade only ski boots and military shoes are sized by the same system in the UK, US, France, Germany, China and Japan.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 14:07
|
|
|
WebDog posted:It was mentioned earlier, but it's the Panasonic R720 "Toot-A-Loop" portable AM radio. Here's the cassette recorder of the same era. My sister and I had these actually. Hers was blue, mine was red... 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
Wasabi the J posted:A 1963 advertisement stated: "The welder will fasten together up to six sheets and requires no refills." Those things are far from being obsolete; just today I processed a stack of order invoices, from which half used one or another stapleless fasteners. Including that "lip through the slip"-system talked earlier.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
Kidney Stone posted:With their laminated book of dreams. But haven't updated anything else. So you still have to go to the ipad, find what you want, then pay at another machine that's been there since the 90s, and then wait for your poo poo. Which inevitably is broken or wrong. The entire thing is janky and reeks of code smell. I think their saving grace is same day delivery with shutl. Horse Clocks has a new favorite as of 20:00 on Dec 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
Jasper Tin Neck posted:military shoes are sized by the same system in the UK, US, France, Germany, China and Japan. Since when?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
Melaneus posted:
I think yours is better, due to un-named reasons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:The local Stop & Shop has these and after 5 or 6 times in a row being flagged to have my order checked and rescanned by an attendant I gave up and went back to regular registers or self checkout if lines are really long. It seemed particularly dumb, even as a security measure, because the attendant would only rescan the top 3-4 items, so it wouldn't prevent someone deliberately not scanning stuff or something either, so it just seemed like a deliberate "gently caress you" to people using the system to save time. Also, you still had to wait in the same line for the self checkout machines, so it didn't save time on the whole.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
drgnwr1 posted:I think yours is better, due to un-named reasons. Completely missed it first time around.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
Tubesock Holocaust posted:I want this on my nightstand. I have it on my nightstand. I'd offer it to you, but something heavy got dropped on it a few years ago, the push-to-talk button broke off and the battery compartment cover broke.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 14:24
|
|
|
FruitNYogurtParfait posted:Since when? The military shoe part admittedly only applies to NATO.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
1000 Brown M and Ms posted:I know, xkcd, but it's relevant: This reminds me, do higher end printers still come with a dozen different slots for each type of memory card? For the longest time i had a HP 4400 photo printer and one of the big features you could just bring directly from a card with the printer not going through the computer. Considering most people just use the cameras on their phones, and professionals would use something more high quality than a printer for best buy, I can't see it being a feature that would be popular anymore because digital cameras are pretty dead as consumer electronics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
Not sure about different kinds of memory cards, but lots (most?) printers these days have wifi, which was a pleasant surprise for me when I bought one a year ago. It's nice being able to print directly off my phone. With wifi you don't really need to use cards in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
FruitNYogurtParfait posted:Since when? Since NATO.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Since NATO. My Norwegian army boots had a NATO replacement code, but were marked in Norwegian sizes. It's the same system as most of continental Europe, but certainly not mondopoint. I know they changed the boots a few years after I left, so it's possible the new ones are? Computer viking has a new favorite as of 11:16 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 11:13
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:This reminds me, do higher end printers still come with a dozen different slots for each type of memory card? For the longest time i had a HP 4400 photo printer and one of the big features you could just bring directly from a card with the printer not going through the computer. Considering most people just use the cameras on their phones, and professionals would use something more high quality than a printer for best buy, I can't see it being a feature that would be popular anymore because digital cameras are pretty dead as consumer electronics. It's sickening how most people these days have no sense of aesthetics neither when it comes to picture quality nor photography skill. The selfies you see people post on Facebook that get applauded as a "great picture of you!"..... gently caress. Crooked angle, no proper lighting, terrible smartphone quality... I hate you. (what's that wheelchair granpa smilie?)
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 11:34
|
|
|
Pilsner posted:(what's that wheelchair granpa smilie?)  Does this count as a single emoticon reply? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 11:46
|
|
|
Pilsner posted:How do you conclude that? Some of us can still tell that a smartphone camera is garbage. I always use a proper digital camera (not SLR, but not the bottom-tier compact either) for taking decent pictures or videos, like when I'm on holiday, pics of my son, taking pictures of my house, or heck even when putting some junk up for sale, I use a real camera. I think most people know that a proper digital camera will always be better than a smartphone camera. I think you'll find that before phone cameras were a thing most people had no sense of aesthetics nor photography skill either. The difference was that cameras weren't as common (maybe one per household if that) so not as many people actually took photos, and even they took them less often. Everyone has multiple poo poo cameras and takes photos all the time these days, but you know what? Who gives a gently caress about always taking perfect photos? Sure, they're nice, but it's the memory behind the photo that is the important bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 12:03
|
|
|
xlevus posted:they've redone their stores to use tablets running a slightly better website. From this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggOa9aSG-Ow
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 12:24
|
|
|
Pilsner posted:How do you conclude that? Some of us can still tell that a smartphone camera is garbage. I always use a proper digital camera (not SLR, but not the bottom-tier compact either) for taking decent pictures or videos, like when I'm on holiday, pics of my son, taking pictures of my house, or heck even when putting some junk up for sale, I use a real camera. Well you're just an unique snowflake, because the small camera market is dwindling and dying. There are some nice ones out there, I love my Fujifilm x100 - but that's a small camera with a big sensor that costs a lot. Inexpensive small cameras with small sensors just don't offer enough optical benefits and have the big disadvantage of not being immediately shareable. I'm kind of surprised no one's put a zoom lens on a smartphone yet since that is the one place a small point & shoot beats a smartphone. Sony had a neat system where the zoom was built lengthwise on the camera rather than sticking out. I guess it takes too much space and Windows Lumia phones have demonstrated that camera optics rank pretty far down on people's smartphone desires.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
Samsung tried that, and it was a complete failure. Although to be fair, that's more like a camera with a smartphone built in, than a smartphone with a zoom lens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Samsung tried that, and it was a complete failure. Was it really a phone? Or a mini tablet?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:Was it really a phone? Or a mini tablet? They made a version with a working phone, and one without the cellular connection. It's a weird device, the camera isn't great, and the device isn't great because there is a giant lens you have to hold on to it. Edit: I got one as a unit to review, and it's sitting right here by my desk...It's gotten pretty much no use.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
It was a phone, the display was about 5" iirc. fake edit: 4.8" - http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_camera_gc100-4961.php
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
Non-super duper cameras on mobile phones aren't the reason most peoples photographs suck. Their pictures weren't that great back when everything still used film. Mostly because people that I know of either used cheap disposable cameras or some inexpensive point-and-click camera and couldn't frame a shot if their life depended on it. High quality SLRs or just cameras with good optics were practically unheard of, and even then only brought out for special occasions. Film for them cost a mint so it took forever to get them developed because so few shots were actually taken. Have fun seeing back 3 birthdays, a wedding and 2 Christmas diners at once, that is if the developer didn't ruin them. The real change is now that people can take pictures with their phones, they can actually take one when they want to because they have their camera with them instead of it gathering dust in a drawer somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
Without film you also take ten shots instead of one, then pick out the one that looks the least like poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 17:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 19:33 |
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:Well you're just an unique snowflake, because the small camera market is dwindling and dying. There are some nice ones out there, I love my Fujifilm x100 - but that's a small camera with a big sensor that costs a lot. Inexpensive small cameras with small sensors just don't offer enough optical benefits and have the big disadvantage of not being immediately shareable. Besides, smartphone cameras these days are perfectly okay if there's enough light and infinite DOF doesn't matter for the shot. You can take perfectly good photographs with a smartphone camera. Yes, there are good photographs you *can't* take with a smartphone camera, too. But there are even more good photographs you can't take if you don't have a camera on you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 17:33
|
|
