OK, I stand thoroughly corrected. What was wrong with
her, that she had to invent such an annoying creature?
I have Victor and Clippy on my new computer and I
can't say I will be using them. They bug me immensely,
especially since Victor is impossible to turn off for
ages when you are first settin
> petit miam wrote:
> >
> > I don't think I like what you are trying to imply
> > there. I'm sure the other females on this list
> would
> > agree.
>
> I think you're being a little to eager to take
> offense.
OK. None taken.
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Y
You shouldn't be offended by the truth. The person who invented Bob
married Bill. (I don't remember if she had anything to do with Clippy).
This is not a slap at females this is a slap at Microsoft Bill and his
wife. (At least that's how I would interpret it).
At 04:35 AM 5/14/2001 -0700, you w
petit miam wrote:
>
> I don't think I like what you are trying to imply
> there. I'm sure the other females on this list would
> agree.
I think you're being a little to eager to take offense.
I'm not trying to imply anything - You seem to be reading
a generalization into my message. That's your
Who's that totally annoying guy in Windows Me? I can
call him up again any time I need some help - Yeah
right.
> > What/Who is "Bob" and "Clippy"?
>
> Two of the more asinine things Microsoft has tried
> to foist on us.
>
> "Bob" was an interface developed for, I think,
> Windows 95. Your scree
Unless I'm buying ProPacks that only come in 36s, I
prefer the 24s. Often I'll process rolls with only 12 - 18 frames
exposed and the wastage is a little less. Also the standard
negative file sheets for 36 are unsatisfactory -- those that
hold 36 frames won't contact print on 8x10 and the ones
t
At 09:10 AM 5/10/01 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>
>> We're
>> used to a "standard" roll being 36 exposures, a short roll at 24
>> exposures, and with few exceptions, that's the way it's been.
>
>Actually, the sales figures show us that in consumer films, 24s outsell
>36s and 12s
It's already becoming to be a nuisance..
The problem I had last time I wanted to buy film in a General Store, not
a photo store, as an emergency measure, was that they only had Kodak "Ultra"
and "Zoom" (I think) color films in *partially opaque* plastic tube-like
3-film packs. I turned the packag
>Just consider who the consumer isdubious graduates of inept schools who
>cannot read, count, or reason, but probably have an undeserved high self
>esteem. No wonder they get confused.
Um... this seems to be the case... in many US movies...
regards,
Alan Chan
__
> I think the best evidence is how many people run file attachments in email
> without knowing what they are or what they do.
Or they send emails intended to be personal to a mailing-list. Like I just
did
sending a message in Spanish intended only for Albano.
My apologies to the list.
Hernan.
Hi,
> Both based on the premise that the typical computer user is a complete
> idiot.
that seems like a reasonable assumption when you consider that one of
the best-selling series of books is called "The complete idiot's guide
to..."
---
Bob
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"In my vocabulary 'art
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>
> What/Who is "Bob" and "Clippy"?
Two of the more asinine things Microsoft has tried to foist on us.
"Bob" was an interface developed for, I think, Windows 95. Your screen
was set up as Bob's house and you went to different rooms to do
different things. Childish, dippy a
Hi,
well, if you want to be digital you can count up to 1,048,575 before
you run out of fingers and toes, assuming the normal mammalian complement.
---
Bob
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"In my vocabulary 'art' is a dirty word" - Helmut Newton
Wednesday, May 09, 2001, 3:48:26 PM, you wrote:
>>
> The packaging will no longer indicate "96 EXP",
> but rather the more arithmetically tractable "4 ROLLS"
This is a problem, as how might one know how many exposures there
are per roll? Another marketing ploy to offer less for more? We're
used to a "standard" roll being 36 exposures, a short
Just consider who the consumer isdubious graduates of inept schools who
cannot read, count, or reason, but probably have an undeserved high self
esteem. No wonder they get confused.
Jerry in Houston
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.
-- Original Message --
>addition to losing the prominent display of film speed, the new four-roll
>consumer packaging will also *not* include a picture of the four enclosed
film
>cassettes. Apparently this is too confusing or complicated for consumers
as
>well? The packaging will no longer ind
Shel wrote:
> My Gawd! Is it true that we're a nation of morons and imbeciles,
> or is it that corporate America just thinks we are?
Don't know if this is any indication of a trend, but I was in a local Target
store the other night (buying some film, in fact), and a customer asked a
store clerk
Unfortunately a little of both, or maybe a lot of both.
At 07:25 AM 5/9/2001 -0700, Shel wrote:
>My Gawd! Is it true that we're a nation of morons and imbeciles, or
>is it that corporate America just thinks we are?
>
>"Peifer, William [OCDUS]" wrote:
>
> > < > Eastman Kodak Co. today will announ
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Alling"
Subject: Re: Nasty Kodak rumor, or the sloppy truth: the dumbing
down of North America??
> Unfortunately a little of both, or maybe a lot of both.
>
> At 07:25 AM 5/9/2001 -0700, Shel wrote:
> >My Gawd! Is it true that
"Peifer, William [OCDUS]" wrote:
>
> ..."Kodak Bright Sun" for 100 speed and "Kodak Max Versatility"
> for 400 speed. "We think this will be a lot more relevant to consumers than
> it is to be talking about film speed"
Do you suppose that the Microsoft guy who developed "Bob" and then
Clippy ha
- Original Message -
From: "Peifer, William [OCDUS]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: May 9, 2001 8:14 AM
Subject: RE: Nasty Kodak rumor, or the sloppy truth: the dumbing
down of North America??
> Hi Brent and Chris,
>
> Fear-mongering an
My Gawd! Is it true that we're a nation of morons and imbeciles, or
is it that corporate America just thinks we are?
"Peifer, William [OCDUS]" wrote:
> < Eastman Kodak Co. today will announce a complete packaging makeover for its
> most recognizable and profitable products -- consumer film and
Hi Brent and Chris,
Fear-mongering and a hoax? Well, Chris, I think the photo lab owner got it
at least partly right, according to a front-page article in the Rochester
(NY) Democrat & Chronicle for Wed., 2 May 2001. According to the D & C
staff writer, it's not the film itself, but rather the
23 matches
Mail list logo
