So it looks like the Betacam body records sound and functions as a microphone holder.

Other than of course what I suspect is its primary purpose: to impress the people in front of the camera.

"Other than of course what I suspect is its primary purpose: to impress the people in front of the camera."

Must you make condescending remarks about everything? It's getting tedious.

"Must you make condescending remarks about everything? It's getting tedious. "

Please, John..... ;-) you know that if its not by Apple, it not worthy of consideration or praise! ;-) But isn't snow leopard deleting some user files? Isn't Apple being sued for not paying royalties for cellphone patents that everyone else has been paying for 15yrs.... etc.. which helps Apple profit line; sue anyone that approaches your products, but steal tech from others to increase profit......... fall apples starting to smell not so fresh.......

How is that condescending???

I was seeing it as a reality check, somewhat like in "The Emperor's New Clothes."

It appears to be a matter of fact that the Betacam is not used to record video, and that the only functions explicitly ascribed to it are "holding the microphone" and "recording 2-channel audio," which if it is done to Betacam tape would be analog audio (unless they used one of the super-rare Betacam cameras with digital audio), with the usual caveats that entails.

An SD LCD is mentioned also, I presume mounted on top of the Betacam body.

What am I missing in my analysis of this product that makes it different (better or more useful) than I suggested?

And where have I been condescending in the past?

I hold myself to high standards in my work, and that often means using tools beyond the most basic ones. Still, I have never hesitated to use or recommend a product that is "really good for the price" vs. "best but at an outrageous price," or "best for the same price but with an immense learning curve."

Apparently I need to polish my language to avoid offending anyone...

No condescension was intended, but I will try to choose my words more carefully in the future.

if it's not by Apple, it not worthy of consideration or praise

Less than 1% of the hardware and software products I use were made by Apple. I generally like them, but I'm not stupid enough to jump on installing the latest new OS version immediately on my must-work machines.

Snow Leopard had a goofy problem with Guest accounts that could screw up the permissions of the main user's files when doing a live user switch. Unacceptable, and fortunately it was fixed very quickly.

Windows 7 had its SMB problem that allowed anyone to bluscreen your computer or possibly access it with full privileges, but I trust this has been fixed already.

But anyone who installs new complex software early has to live with the consequences when major flaws jump up and bite them in the hamstrings.

Regarding the patents, I can't find the article I saw in the paper recently, but the gist was "cell phone makers have a long history of suing each other, not for money, but for exchange of patents."

The only relevant thing I could find now was:
Nokia has cited ten particular essential patents that Apple needs to license, but since these are controlled under the 3GPP standard, they have to be licensed at reasonable prices. We imagine that they are licensed to the people who have supplied components, but perhaps not directly to Apple.

i believe the development is being funded by our own Rupert Murdock. The thought of doing another mash up of The Downfall showing his reaction to the BBC refusing to accept footage from his 5D did come to mind :)

All joking aside, never underestimate what an Australian can do with a Dremel tool and something found on a roadside cleanup day.
For anyone interested in something real the first Ikonoskop A-cam dII in the wild is down under:

http://www.vimeo.com/7126893

More info here:

http://www.ikonoskop.com/blog/a-cam-dii-prototype-21-delivered-to-nick-paton-acs/

Bob.

Bob, thanks for bringing up the A-cam, it is just brilliant. Weighing 3 lbs. including the battery, shoots 1-60 fps uncompressed RAW (DNG), and costs about the same as an EX3 (until you start piling on additional PL lenses).

I tested the film version of this and quite liked the way it handled.

The Vimeo clip you linked shows how organic the footage looks, mmm....

"Regarding the patents, I can't find the article I saw in the paper recently, but the gist was "cell phone makers have a long history of suing each other, not for money, but for exchange of patents."" ------- Gee, that is usually only when the is no ability to paid in cash. Apple clearly knew that they infringing on Nokia communications patents since the entire cell phone industry, excluding Apple, has agreements with Nokia. It appears that Apple was trying a Xerox deal on Nokia. Apple seems to think that its political muscle could force Nokia into an Apple's "deal" on Apple terms. But now that Apple in aggressively going after the world cell market, Nokia must make Apple comply to the same deal that the rest of the cell manufacturers have. The quote above is more Apple spin.......... Apple has no hardware PATENTS of interest, its software patents is of questionable value to another manufacturer because of its association to Apple.

"goofy problem with Guest accounts that could screw up the permissions of the main user's files when doing a live user switch. Unacceptable, and fortunately it was fixed very quickly." Not quite, but nice spin ;-)

"We imagine that they are licensed to the people who have supplied components, but perhaps not directly to Apple." Gee, we, Apple who sue anyone for screwing with Apple products or market.............. can't read or understanding communications licenses because we are too cool and important, but we can squeeze every penny out of ATT and iPhone users and iTune users...... or we,Apple, don't understand non-Apple licenses or acknowledge them?

Al Gore created the Internet, so it must be that Steve and Al create cell phones too. I guess Wall Street would not like Apple as much if Apple did not created new technology they are using if they been paying royalties for the last three years...........and this is the second big set of tech patents that Apple has "borrowed" concerning the iPhone and iTouch.


But enough about Apple and Coursedesign love affair... ;-) But who's the female..... :-) Just peelling the old Apple, Coursedesign, Fall humor you know or lack of in most cases. ;-)

Al Gore created the Internet

Here's what Snopes has to say about that urban myth, with sources to back it up definitively:

Claim: Vice-President Al Gore claimed that he "invented"the Internet.

More at the link above.

Patent law is incredibly complicated, and for some reason Nokia is making their claim after 10 years of acceptance.

Perhaps Nokia will become the next SCO?

Note that these patents were under the 3GPP worldwide standard, that changes the situation considerably also. Not to mention that it isn't clear whether the royalties are due from Apple's suppliers or from Apple. But I'll let Nokia and Apple fight over that, it is not my battle.

...this is the second big set of tech patents that Apple has "borrowed" concerning the iPhone and iTouch.

Really? What's the first set?

Note that these patents were under the 3GPP worldwide standard, that changes the situation considerably also" ---?---- worldwide standard-----?----- what twisted logic are you using here? [-( Never has "worldwide standard" pre emptied patent rights in the USA. Only National Security needs can override patent owners rights for royalities, excluding any legal claims. ;-)

So the logic goes like this; we buy subcomponents, design a new product(claiming its evolutionary in cellphone technology), file patents for touch screen, anything Apple can think of but fails to note that previous patents exist and are currently being paid by everyone else? ;-) What's in that apple juice...... must be good! ;-)

Al Gore has stated that claim many times, sometimes at random. Check video of 1995 - 2000 primaries video and campaign stops, ;-) But since Al on Apple side, any question about his missteps is evil, of course, backing dating stock options is ok if you're cool or dying, leasing land for strip mining is evil too, except for Al and steve. ------------------ Al getting carried away in the heat of the moment, a politicians tool usually except when too many people remember between events. ;-)

"Really? What's the first set?" Wifi interface for email, data transmission, sms,etc for handheld devices. ;-)

"Perhaps Nokia will become the next SCO?" not likely since they actually help create the cellphone market long before Apple's entry. ;-)

I love this -> "Not to mention that it isn't clear whether the royalties are due from Apple's suppliers or from Apple" from Apple who's sues anyone that may infringe on their products! ;-) Smell the rotting cores----- ;) ...... apples ;-)

How many years was it before Apple paid Xerox a totem fee? ;-)

Burn baby Burn! ;-) We're freezing in the Midwest, so that has a double meaning! ;-)

Outside that, I like the new Apple's 27 screen, my daughter pushing for it, or that's by stated excuse.... ;-)

And I have hijack this thread with Apple nonsense instead of canon news ;-(

"until you start piling on additional PL lenses"

I believe that footage was shot with a C mount zoom. There's some bargains around in PL mount S16 lenses, still way out of my league of course but everyone I reckon should have a play with a purely mechanical lens once in their life.

Bob.

I suspect is its primary purpose: to impress the people in front of the camera.... and to impress the client, and it probably makes a lot of shooters feel more at home,, hope that doesn't offend the self appointed forum cop.

International datacommunications standards used to be decided by mostly representatives of government-owned national "PTTs" (Post Telephone Telegraph) in CCITT meetings every four years...

Today standards are formed through continuous pushing and shoveling by vendors to get their patented technology included in the next standard, so that users don't have a choice but to pay them royalties.

The vendors' only involuntary sacrifice was a binding commitment to license the patents to anyone on a non-discriminatory basis, with low royalties. That may sound waffly, but the actual wording has some bite in it, and court cases have affirmed it.

Al Gore fought hard to get the Internet funded. According to Snopes, that is all he has ever said. If you want to be the first to disprove what Snopes found from their investigation, you should let them know the specifics so that they can update the Urban Myth page to say "True" instead of "False."

Are you saying that Apple stole the patent to use Wi-Fi on a handheld device?

I didn't even know there was a separate patent for "Use of common Wi-Fi on a handheld device," but I wouldn't rule it out with our ridiculously weak patent office that tends to approve anything that is put under their noses.

OTOH, didn't someone in Australia successfully patent what turned out to be "the wheel" recently? Done as a gag of course, but it was approved. Totally great!


The cellphone market? Apple doesn't make cellphones.

They make portable Unix computers that come with a built-in cellphone program and a 3G radio :O).

Amazingly, the iPhone runs a reduced version of OS X, on a 600 MHz CPU with a very powerful mobile GPU and MMU.

If you're freezing in the Midwest, you should consider California. We had 90F on the beach recently, and much more inland of course!

We don't have heating bills here, but we do have A/C electrical bills that are probably not too far from whatyou pay for heating (electricity is more expensive here).

(Come to think of it, I haven't used the heating at home since 2002. True. Oh well. :O)

Not to over beat the dog...or ...Apple.. ;-)

Yes, there are patents for a "handheld device to "handshake" thru wireless communications... bah...bah.... "

"but I wouldn't rule it out with our ridiculously weak patent office that tends to approve anything that is put under their noses" I'm in totally agreement about the abuse, especially in the software, common hardware area! It drives me crazy hearding "one click or double click" patents when they're using about a dozen patents or more to perform their function!

"They make portable Unix computers that come with a built-in cellphone program and a 3G radio :O)." -------- OOPs----- Unix license fees......... millions of iPhones, SCO had a dream......... but the fees goto ........... lawyers and their yacht payments....... and whats left to Novell. ;-)

The sad fact every manufacturer of mobile cellular devices has a boat load of royalties they paid. Apple has been sliding by for too long in fairness to all the other device manufacturers...... especially since many of these create the mobile tech and hardware that Apple has repackaged( nice design). If Apple crushes MS mobile, no loss to the customer but others that actually design and build the technology should be paid for patents....... Apple still can sell as many devices as they can, just be balance.

California dreaming..... but right now, I'm freezing or about, pre-game stuff, UM vs PennState, our new UM coach is killing us slowly, one cut at time, I think.... ;-)

Unix license fees

I wish the government could just collect royalties for Unix instead of collecting taxes from us poor sods.

UC Berkeley's Unix ("BSD") was a big contributor, with a lot of code probably developed by socialists at government expense,,,

There are fights over royalties every day, and I have learned enough about those laws to know that a lay person cannot pass judgment on what the patent rights actually are. Even the specialized judiciary is having a hard time, and that's why so many patent infringement cases are filed in the federal court of a village in Texas that has a long history of siding with whoever is making the first claim.

Innocent until proven guilty... Works for everybody, works for society, even works for the eager accusers (by preventing foot-in-mouth disease).

Even if it was about, say, Steve Ballmer :O).

"UC Berkeley's Unix ("BSD") was a big contributor"----- are you referring to the iPhone OS? "BSD" is more like linux in that statement. Its well known that Bell labs created Unix in 1969, there is a massive legal trail of documents supporting this. Software in the late 60's was just about impossible to patent, like instruction sets. But Novell, with/thru bell labs does "own" Unix and it's derivatives( if you believe the latest arguments from the defunct SCO). But I doubt Novell would restrict Apple use of Unix as long as Apple was professional about it.

Patents are interesting, limited life vs music/performance royalties. ;-) I'm from the tech/eng/design field, so you can read between the lines. And when your are investing...... you're everyone friend..... from music producers to fast food franchises to NY building projects to golf course developments, etc........ every politician has a seat for you at their dining room table........

"Innocent until proven guilty" only by a court...... or congress or the media or Al Gore and friend(s) or the Left ......etc.... ;-)

You should check out the Texas court! Everyone loves this court because of its short time to trial. And it will spent the time hearing complex tech issues which most courts pass on because of overloaded civil dockets that are 3 to 6 yrs out. Remember, criminal cases are a higher priority that civil, so big cities are busting with fed criminal, tax cases appeals, managing grand juries, fed regulation enforcements(non-criminal) and state court challenges(appeals) ------------------- civil cases are last on the food chain( of course there are exceptions, like the outcome may change regulations, class actions).


PennState kick UM's butt without using much effort ;-(

I still have a copy of the Bell Technical Journal issue where the Unix project was first presented...

After the phone company did their initial work, AT&T became a successor (remember System V?).

I even got a call from a very old lady (somebody's aunt) who asked breathlessly, "Should I buy AT&T stock now that they own Unix?"

I looked at my laser engraved "AT&T UNIX Microsystem" wooden Post-It note holder (that I just discovered is what I still use everyday for this purpose...amazing how we tune out the constant!!!), and said, "Look, they are getting less than 0.01% of their income from Unix. Even if that increased a hundredfold, it would still be less than 1%..."

The SCO vs. Novell case is still open. SCO's CEO was just fired, but the case continues after a judge issued a ruling that was potentially adverse to Novell.

OS X uses the Carnegie Mellon University Mach kernel, with BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) goodies on top, plus tons of Apple code on top.

AT&T fought a legal war against the BSD distributions that were gradually replacing AT&T's code with their own. This led a young Finnish-Swedish guy to write an independent Unix that he intended to call Freax (Free, freaks, uniX...), but his FTP server administrator put his code in a directory he named /linux (probably thinking it was a good abbreviation for "Linus's Unix").

"Where can I find this open source Unix clone?"
"It's in the /linux directory."

The rest is history, as they say.

"The SCO vs. Novell case is still open" actually Novell has won the ownership issue of Unix, forcing SCO into bankruptcy ch11, which ended up in a liquidation by the trustee.........but SCO people have tried many other funding means or begging for buyers..... with promises of gold for unix fees......... but the court has already ruled novell owns unix, not sco, so any licensing deals are novell property not sco. Of course, MS funded ACO for a while to stop linux, IBM,Sun,etc..... I've posted here a lot about this battle in the past because of its short and long range impact of mobile devices and servers. Its more drama and $$$ for lawyers now, its impact on development is finally stopping and everyone is moving forward it seems ;-)

...the court has already ruled novell owns unix, not sco, so any licensing deals are novell property not sco.

True, but that was 2007.

This is now:

Both SCO and Novell are anticipating their next day in court to settle who owns Unix copyrights after a judge Monday overturned a 2007 decision that favored Novell.

(And yes, Microsoft's role in propping up SCO is mentioned in the news article linked above.)

The problem here is that the Bankruptcy trustee has put SCO into liquidation, which basically is a one way street. This judge ruling can not be used to undo the trustee action directly, but it may bring a large sum of money for the assets or SCO, maybe a Xlarge infusion of cash for operations and past Legal fees, a minimum of 40 million for one year operation to prove they can exist is some the current projects could convince the trustee to change directions---- many think this will be hard. ;-]

IBM now wants the US Supreme court to handle this case because they & Novell believe that they can win in most regional judicial districts 86%, but not in all now that MS is spreading money around.

This ruling may face a full 10th Circuit Court of Appeals review request from Justice, a little fed birdie leaked....

EU wants in the this fight and wants SCO dead but have limited legal positions in the US courts,( a waste of time and money really vs. slamming in the EU halls).

A side of this debate, is anyone funding SCO and SCO gets slam for business extortion, could be on the wrong side of the legal table with the new PC legal atitude about pay and business relationships. ;-)

Of course, this helps shine light on why Google developed OS's, to escape MS reach, especially their server farms and databases.

Good points and interesting info.

Perhaps the Feds could offer SCO's creditors a charitable deduction for dissolving the company?

:O)

(If that doesn't happen, the next CEO of SCO may find a horse's head in his bed very soon after accepting the job...)