More on the Mirrorless Battles

On Sep 16, 2018, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 11:14:04 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Sep 16, 2018, wrote
(in ):

Le Snip


You'll have to clarify. retina display ? I only used double as a
convenient reference, but any increase would also apply.

I don’t know about *nospam* clarifying anything, but the term “Retina
display� is an Apple thing. For example the 27� iMac 5K Retina display
that I am using right now has a resolution of 5120 x2880 with an appropriate
pixel density, and it is undoubtably a higher resolution than the 1920 x 1080 of
my old non-retina display iMac.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina_display


I expect that 'Retina Display' is trade-marked and nospam is in error
applying the term as broadly as he just has.

Yup! You will not find Dell, HP, nor any manufacturer other than Apple referring
to high resolution displays as “Retina Displays�.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

In article .com,
Savageduck wrote:

I expect that 'Retina Display' is trade-marked and nospam is in error
applying the term as broadly as he just has.

Yup! You will not find Dell, HP, nor any manufacturer other than Apple referring
to high resolution displays as ³Retina Displays².

but you *will* find the general public calling them that, even when not
made by apple.

On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 22:24:24 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

If an image is
produced by a sensor with the same resolution, then enough
information, as levels of red, green and blue, ranging from 0 to 255,
are obtained for each of the 1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixcels, and the
image can be displayed accordingly. Now, if the number of sensor
pixcels are doubled in both dirrections, then the image is produced at
a higher resolution, and fully 4 pixcels have to be mapped into each
of the full screen display pixcels. In this case, the 4 should be
resolved into one, using some kind of round off scheme.

what you're describing is a retina display, except that it's a lot more
complicated than simply rounding off and may not be double either.

You'll have to clarify. retina display ? I only used double as a
convenient reference, but any increase would also apply.

I don¹t know about *nospam* clarifying anything, but the term ³Retina
display² is an Apple thing. For example the 27² iMac 5K Retina display that
I am using right now has a resolution of 5120 x2880 with an appropriate
pixel
density, and it is undoubtably a higher resolution than the 1920 x 1080 of
my
old non-retina display iMac.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina_display

I expect that 'Retina Display' is trade-marked and nospam is in error
applying the term as broadly as he just has.

i'm not the one applying it broadly.

yes, apple trademarked the name, but because they were first to mass
market it, it has become somewhat of a generic term, which i explained
in another post.

THat's dangerous to Apple's abiliy to continue 'Retina Display' as a
Trade Mark.

people 'photoshop an image' even if they use other software to do it.

It's still dangerous.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 19:27:59 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Sep 16, 2018, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 11:14:04 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Sep 16, 2018, wrote
(in ):

Le Snip


You'll have to clarify. retina display ? I only used double as a
convenient reference, but any increase would also apply.

I don’t know about *nospam* clarifying anything, but the term “Retina
display� is an Apple thing. For example the 27� iMac 5K Retina display
that I am using right now has a resolution of 5120 x2880 with an appropriate
pixel density, and it is undoubtably a higher resolution than the 1920 x 1080 of
my old non-retina display iMac.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina_display


I expect that 'Retina Display' is trade-marked and nospam is in error
applying the term as broadly as he just has.

Yup! You will not find Dell, HP, nor any manufacturer other than Apple referring
to high resolution displays as “Retina Displays�.

But you will find nospam doing that. That was why I was pointing out
that he should not do that.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 22:24:23 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


decrease and increase of what?

Just read the first post starting this thread, dumbass.

quote it in your post for context.

THis from the guy who routinely deletes text when replying to posts
and justifies it by saying that if you want to know what was
previously there you should look up the thread.

i *always* quote the relevant context in my replies.

Your version of 'relevant'.

yep. i'm the one commenting so i get to decide what parts i respond to,
which are always quoted.

i delete what is superfluous. in other words, noise.

Once again your version of 'superfluous' or 'noise'. To make matters
worse you _never_ indicate that you have made such deletions.

that is complete bull****.

Are you claiming that you have at some time indicated your snipping or
deleting text in an article you are responding to? Can you point to an
example?



better yet, ignore it.

Refuge of someone who's lost an argument.

nope.

like that part that you didn't snip. you didn't comment on it and there
is no need to include it. it's noise.

once again, you didn't snip superfluous text.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 19:27:59 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Sep 16, 2018, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 11:14:04 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Sep 16, 2018, wrote
(in ):

Le Snip


You'll have to clarify. retina display ? I only used double as a
convenient reference, but any increase would also apply.

I don’t know about *nospam* clarifying anything, but the term “Retina
display� is an Apple thing. For example the 27� iMac 5K Retina display
that I am using right now has a resolution of 5120 x2880 with an appropriate
pixel density, and it is undoubtably a higher resolution than the 1920 x 1080 of
my old non-retina display iMac.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina_display


I expect that 'Retina Display' is trade-marked and nospam is in error
applying the term as broadly as he just has.

Yup! You will not find Dell, HP, nor any manufacturer other than Apple referring
to high resolution displays as “Retina Displays�.

But you will find nospam doing that. That was why I was pointing out
that he should not do that.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

I never heard it before.

because modern computers have higher resolution displays, some
significantly so. upscaling is going to look like ****.

Not sure what you mean by upscaling. I assume you're refering to my
method of designing software to act maximally according to the
available screen resolution, i.e. - computing a point for each
available screen pixcel and nothing else.

If a higher resolution screen comes into popular use, I'll just adjust
my software to include the new resolution as an add choice to the
existing resolutions.

No big deal and it will always look perfect and run the fastest.

Nice, and I am sure that your two Sony HX80’s serve you, and your wife quite
well. However, in today’s context “mirrorless” generally refers to those
M43, APS-C, FF, and MF MILCs which compete with DSLRs, and have replaced DSLRs
in the kit of many photographers. Few here would think of the Sony HX80 as
“mirrorless”, but would classify it as acompact rather than P&S.

Well it just seems like semantics. Call things what you want. I'll
keep that "context" in mind. For me, anything that doesn't use a
mirror, like the HX80 will be mirrorless.

PS - Windows 7 UpDates are still being provided !

not for long.

No big deal.

I had a tricky problem with updating ( since corrected ) and didn't
update for over a year and didn't have a single issue.

I think updating is way over rated.