Will Lightroom Become Web Only?

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 21:09:08 -0400, nospam
wrote:

--- snip ----

what's actually happening is that the user is listening to streaming
audio or watching streaming video over their internet connection,
whether it's wifi, cellular or broadband, enjoying the music or movie
or whatever it is.

nobody (but you) gives a flying **** about reconstructing data packets
or clock rates.

You would if you didn't have any.

didn't have any what?

data packets.

Also, it is still germane when you are considering downloading and
reassembling a file so that you can play it before you discard it (or
not).

nope.

if the user wants to download a file, they click the download link or
use a downloading app.

if they want to stream, they click the stream link or use a streaming
app.

And the stream link downloads a file which is processed before all the
file is down loaded and discarded after the file is processed.

if they want to listen to old school radio, they dig it out of the
closet and hope it still works.

why do you always overcomplicate things?

Because I like to know how things work.

I bet you ignore the fact that your has an engine and think the
throttle pedal is somehow magically linked to the wheels.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 21:09:10 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

| There is a hell of a lot going on in an FM radio, too. Mayayana might
| be clinically insane...

"TV and radio are
signals received over the air, or through a cable
in some cases. The device interprets the signals
in real time, converting them to audio and/or
video. The Internet doesn't work that way."

it does work that way.

in fact, that's exactly what laptops, desktops and smartphones do when
streaming the likes of netflix, spotify, etc.

data packets are received over the air (cellular or wifi) or through a
cable (broadband), which are then interpreted in real time, converted
to audio and/or video.

With FM radio signals are interpreted as they arrive. With cable,
cellular or wifi the steady arrival of data packets cannot be
guaranteed which is why they are loaded into a temporary file which is
used as a buffer.

in other words, it works the same way, except that over the internet,
momentary dropouts do not cause an interruption in the audio or video.

not only that, but with internet radio/tv, there is no distance
limitation as there is with terrestrial radio/tv.

technology once again continues to improve.

And change. You don't seem to have caught up with the difference
between FM wireless and Internet broadcasts.

the difference in underlying technology makes absolutely no difference
to the end user, other than internet radio is better in every way.

users can still listen to the very same radio stations they did with an
old school fm radio, along with new stations they could never have
received, ones from just about anywhere else on the planet, along with
am, sw, atc, police/fire and more.

And they do this because things work differently.

I bet you ignore the fact that your has an engine and think the
throttle pedal is somehow magically linked to the wheels.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 21:59:19 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , PeterN
wrote:

| I'm glad it works for you. Sorry, I will not become involved in a tool
| war. I spend enough time creating images.

A tool war? Did I misunderstand? You said
you were experimenting with options to possibly
replace PS. I was just listing some ideas from
my experience as a Windows user.

Not all of us ha the same uses for digital creations. There is still a
substantial base of purists, who believe everything should be created in
the camera.

such people are not purists. they are ignorant fools.

The ones I know are neither ignorant, nor fools. Stephen J9Johnson is
one of the best.

anyone who holds that attitude is an ignorant fool.

BTW he was one of the original beta testers for Photoshop, and used PS
before it was called PS. While i don't agree with his philosophy, I have
a great deal of respect for him, as does Canon and National Geographic.

who cares. that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic, and for
the record, i was also beta testing photoshop before it's initial
release. it came with a security dongle to prevent pirating.

what did those people do in the film days?

perfect photos every time? certainly not.


Nobody ever said that. You are misreading my statement.

other than you.

reread what you wrote. you said there are those who believe everything
should be created in camera. the problem with that is that was not
possible with film.

why impose a requirement on digital that can't apply to film?

some of the best and most famous photographers spent many hours in the
darkroom working on a single image. ansel adams, for example.

There is a difference between image creation and image correction. Come
back when you understand the difference.

come back when you aren't in asshole mode. or not at all.

Good advice. Please take it. Maybe then some will explain to you the
difference between image creation and image correction.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

what's actually happening is that the user is listening to streaming
audio or watching streaming video over their internet connection,
whether it's wifi, cellular or broadband, enjoying the music or movie
or whatever it is.

nobody (but you) gives a flying **** about reconstructing data packets
or clock rates.

You would if you didn't have any.

didn't have any what?

data packets.

don't need any.

users want to watch shows or listen to music, not analyze data packets.

Also, it is still germane when you are considering downloading and
reassembling a file so that you can play it before you discard it (or
not).

nope.

if the user wants to download a file, they click the download link or
use a downloading app.

if they want to stream, they click the stream link or use a streaming
app.

And the stream link downloads a file which is processed before all the
file is down loaded and discarded after the file is processed.

nope. no file is downloaded.

it's a continuous stream of data, just like fm or tv. the only
difference is how it gets to the user and the conversion, none of which
affects the user in any way.

not only do you overcomplicate things, but you get it fundamentally
wrong.

if they want to listen to old school radio, they dig it out of the
closet and hope it still works.

why do you always overcomplicate things?

Because I like to know how things work.

I bet you ignore the fact that your has an engine and think the
throttle pedal is somehow magically linked to the wheels.

as usual, you're wrong, but i don't worry about that when all i need to
do is go somewhere.

the nice thing about cars is that people *don't* need to be auto
mechanics to go places.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

"TV and radio are
signals received over the air, or through a cable
in some cases. The device interprets the signals
in real time, converting them to audio and/or
video. The Internet doesn't work that way."

it does work that way.

in fact, that's exactly what laptops, desktops and smartphones do when
streaming the likes of netflix, spotify, etc.

data packets are received over the air (cellular or wifi) or through a
cable (broadband), which are then interpreted in real time, converted
to audio and/or video.

With FM radio signals are interpreted as they arrive. With cable,
cellular or wifi the steady arrival of data packets cannot be
guaranteed which is why they are loaded into a temporary file which is
used as a buffer.

in other words, it works the same way, except that over the internet,
momentary dropouts do not cause an interruption in the audio or video.

not only that, but with internet radio/tv, there is no distance
limitation as there is with terrestrial radio/tv.

technology once again continues to improve.

And change. You don't seem to have caught up with the difference
between FM wireless and Internet broadcasts.

the difference in underlying technology makes absolutely no difference
to the end user, other than internet radio is better in every way.

users can still listen to the very same radio stations they did with an
old school fm radio, along with new stations they could never have
received, ones from just about anywhere else on the planet, along with
am, sw, atc, police/fire and more.

And they do this because things work differently.

nobody said it isn't different. the point is that users just want to
listen to the radio and get on with life, not overanalyze everything to
absurd extremes.

I bet you ignore the fact that your has an engine and think the
throttle pedal is somehow magically linked to the wheels.

as usual, you're wrong, but i don't worry about that when all i need to
do is go somewhere.

the nice thing about cars is that people *don't* need to be auto
mechanics to go places.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Good advice. Please take it. Maybe then some will explain to you the
difference between image creation and image correction.

whoooooooooossssssssssshhhhhhh.

On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 00:24:34 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

what's actually happening is that the user is listening to streaming
audio or watching streaming video over their internet connection,
whether it's wifi, cellular or broadband, enjoying the music or movie
or whatever it is.

nobody (but you) gives a flying **** about reconstructing data packets
or clock rates.

You would if you didn't have any.

didn't have any what?

data packets.

don't need any.

users want to watch shows or listen to music, not analyze data packets.

Also, it is still germane when you are considering downloading and
reassembling a file so that you can play it before you discard it (or
not).

nope.

if the user wants to download a file, they click the download link or
use a downloading app.

if they want to stream, they click the stream link or use a streaming
app.

And the stream link downloads a file which is processed before all the
file is down loaded and discarded after the file is processed.

nope. no file is downloaded.

it's a continuous stream of data, just like fm or tv. the only
difference is how it gets to the user and the conversion, none of which
affects the user in any way.

An unbroken stream of data with no pause for checking or error
correction or making room for other traffic on the network? Come on!
you gotta be joking.

not only do you overcomplicate things, but you get it fundamentally
wrong.

if they want to listen to old school radio, they dig it out of the
closet and hope it still works.

why do you always overcomplicate things?

Because I like to know how things work.

I bet you ignore the fact that your has an engine and think the
throttle pedal is somehow magically linked to the wheels.

as usual, you're wrong, but i don't worry about that when all i need to
do is go somewhere.

But what you are doing now is the equivalent of denying that your car
has an engine or a gearbox.

the nice thing about cars is that people *don't* need to be auto
mechanics to go places.

But they still need all the bits and pieces to make them go.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 00:24:37 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Good advice. Please take it. Maybe then some will explain to you the
difference between image creation and image correction.

whoooooooooossssssssssshhhhhhh.

For the present you have given no indication that you know there is a
difference.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

"Eric Stevens" wrote

| nope. no file is downloaded.
|
| it's a continuous stream of data, just like fm or tv.

| An unbroken stream of data with no pause for checking or error
| correction or making room for other traffic on the network? Come on!
| you gotta be joking.

There you have it. Even with several explanations
people won't be swayed from the encompassing
misconception of the corporate Web. You can argue
with him all day and he'll just answer with variations
on: "Look, when I press the button I get a food
pellet. That's all I care about. Shut up!"

It's changed so much in just a few short years.
In the late 90s it was common for people to create
their own websites. ISPs used to offer free space for
it. Many probably still do. Webpages were easy to
write and people understood that they were files
one could access and save. But people now aren't
interested. They'd rather be consumers than creators.

Today people think of the Internet as mainly corporate
services. Webpages are often mid-sized javascript-based
software programs, and here we have 3 people, who are
experienced enough to know about usenet, nevertheless
arguing vehemently that the Internet is a broadcast
medium and that anyone who thinks otherwise is
paranoid, anti-profit(?), or at best twisted. I guess
I can rest my case, but maybe there's no one left to
hear it.

On 24/10/2017 14:04, Mayayana wrote:
"Eric Stevens" wrote

| nope. no file is downloaded.
|
| it's a continuous stream of data, just like fm or tv.

| An unbroken stream of data with no pause for checking or error
| correction or making room for other traffic on the network? Come on!
| you gotta be joking.

There you have it. Even with several explanations
people won't be swayed from the encompassing
misconception of the corporate Web. You can argue
with him all day and he'll just answer with variations
on: "Look, when I press the button I get a food
pellet. That's all I care about. Shut up!"

It's changed so much in just a few short years.
In the late 90s it was common for people to create
their own websites. ISPs used to offer free space for
it. Many probably still do. Webpages were easy to
write and people understood that they were files
one could access and save. But people now aren't
interested. They'd rather be consumers than creators.

Today people think of the Internet as mainly corporate
services. Webpages are often mid-sized javascript-based
software programs, and here we have 3 people, who are
experienced enough to know about usenet, nevertheless
arguing vehemently that the Internet is a broadcast
medium and that anyone who thinks otherwise is
paranoid, anti-profit(?), or at best twisted. I guess
I can rest my case, but maybe there's no one left to
hear it.


*I* hear you, Mayayana! :-)


--
“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick
themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.� (Winston S.
Churchill)