More on the Mirrorless Battles

PS - Windows 7 UpDates are still being provided !

On Sep 16, 2018, wrote
(in ):


98.4% is close enough to 100%.
Oh THAT round off. Sheesh !

Also, smartphones are mirrorless, as perhaps other things
not included in the mirrorless tally.

the categories are clear.
Not to me they aren't. Without a mirror related to photography, means
mirrorless ! Everything except SLRs and DSLRs .

These days in photography most folks, when talking about “mirrorless� they
are talking about *Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras* or MILC, not phone
cameras, or compact P&S cameras. It is MILCs which are in competition with
DSLRs. The inroads MILCs have made into the DSLR market has been a major reason
for the current Nikon, & Canon moves into the FF MILC market.

I wasn't fool enough to go to Windows 8, and really not fool enough to
go to Windows 10 . Windows 7 is the optimal OS IMHO .

maybe optimal for a decade ago but certainly not now. win10 is much
better and a lot more secure than win7 and certainly win 8 (which was a
mistake).

I've posted repeatedly on the Winows 10 NG, simply asking for a single
good reason to go to 10. None has ever been provided.

Perusing that NG I see a lot of stuff
that I definitely don't want like :

Upgrading when it feels like it and not when you want it to.

Almost surely a greater tax on system resources.

Heard some mention of pop up adverts.

The security issue is dubious. I've never had the slightest issue.

I've developed applications intended for both the recommendeds with
user selection of either.

then your apps will look like **** on modern displays, and they
shouldn't be hardcoded to specific resolutions anyway.

No, that simply not true.

Apps are designed to provide display points at the available
resolution pixcels, and will provide a seamless display of all
necessary points, without any excess computations etc.

Why bother computing any more than the available display pixcels.

If displays are developed capable of higher resolutions, then I'll
simply provide that option.

Currently my apps look great on either 1920 x 1080 or 1366 x 768, and
run as fast as possible .

In article ,
wrote:


I wasn't fool enough to go to Windows 8, and really not fool enough to
go to Windows 10 . Windows 7 is the optimal OS IMHO .

maybe optimal for a decade ago but certainly not now. win10 is much
better and a lot more secure than win7 and certainly win 8 (which was a
mistake).

I've posted repeatedly on the Winows 10 NG, simply asking for a single
good reason to go to 10. None has ever been provided.

there are numerous reasons, security being one of the key ones, but
win10 is just a lot more pleasant to use than win7.

Perusing that NG I see a lot of stuff
that I definitely don't want like :

Upgrading when it feels like it and not when you want it to.

sometimes it does it when it's inconvenient, but that can be tamed to
an extent.

however, it's *extremely* important to keep up to date, just for the
security patches and bug fixes.

Almost surely a greater tax on system resources.

who cares. computers are so fast these days that they're idle most of
the time.

just don't run win10 on a ten year old computer. that isn't pretty.

Heard some mention of pop up adverts.

i've yet to see any.

The security issue is dubious. I've never had the slightest issue.

it's not dubious.

wannacry was such a big deal that microsoft had to issue a patch for
windows xp.

In article ,
wrote:

PS - Windows 7 UpDates are still being provided !

not for long.

In article ,
wrote:


I've developed applications intended for both the recommendeds with
user selection of either.

then your apps will look like **** on modern displays, and they
shouldn't be hardcoded to specific resolutions anyway.

No, that simply not true.

it absolutely is true.

Apps are designed to provide display points at the available
resolution pixcels, and will provide a seamless display of all
necessary points, without any excess computations etc.

pixels and points are not the same.

Why bother computing any more than the available display pixcels.

because it looks better.

If displays are developed capable of higher resolutions, then I'll
simply provide that option.

welcome to a decade ago, where such displays started to appear
(actually before that but not particularly affordable).

and as i said, you shouldn't be hardcoding to any particular display
size. a well written app should adapt to whatever size the user wants,
which isn't necessarily the size of the display.

Currently my apps look great on either 1920 x 1080 or 1366 x 768, and
run as fast as possible .

if they're hardcoded to those resolutions, they'll look like **** on 4k
and 5k displays, which is now the standard.

they'll also look bad on 1920x1200, 1680x1050, 1440x900, 1280x1024 and
many others.

Not all cameras without mirrors are MILCs.

Lots of great point 'n shoots, like the Sony HX80 my wife and I both
have. 30X optical zoom, can't be beat in so many ways ! Very small and
light, will easily fit in a shirt pocket, relatively inexpensive, nice
automatic lens cover, cheap batteries, etc.

No, that simply not true.

it absolutely is true.

Apps are designed to provide display points at the available
resolution pixcels, and will provide a seamless display of all
necessary points, without any excess computations etc.

pixels and points are not the same.

If the screen resolution is 1920 x 1080, then there's only 2,073,600
posible points which can be plotted. Why compute any more !

there are numerous reasons, security being one of the key ones, but
win10 is just a lot more pleasant to use than win7.

How so ?

Well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I think Windows 7 looks just fine .