On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 02:17:15PM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote: > William Robb wrote: > > > >From: "Larry Colen" Subject: Re: point and shoot > > > >>>This really sucks. I just want something simple that I can pull up to > >>>my eye and then throw the photos out on the web when I get home. But > >>>all I see is chimp-approved plastic junk with smile recognition. WTF > >>>happened to cameras? Am I the only person in the whole wide world > >>>that doesn't want a zillion worthless features at the expense of > >>>something functional? > >> > >>Most of those features are purely software, so don't add anything to > >>production cost. > > > >Software writers work for free? > >No wonder I hammer nails for a living. > > Well, they can re-use basically the same code on lots of different > cameras, and when you work out the cost per camera it almost *is* free.
My point was that once you write the code it doesn't cost any more to put it in 1,000,000 cameras as it does to put it into 1. Likewise a lot of the code, as mentioned, can be reused across model lines. Only the hardware dependent firmware needs to be rewritten for new hardware. > > What also wouldn't cost a lot more would be to have a feature which > disabled all the other "features" so that we purists could also enjoy > the camera. Perhaps some manufacturer will implement this someday... There is a freeware package for hacking canon point and shoot firmware so that you can have exactly the feature set you want. http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK I'll spare you all my open source rant about how a struggling second tier (in sales) company could leverage an amazing amount of talent by opening up the firmware for their cameras. -- The fastest way to get your question answered on the net is to post the wrong answer. Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
