mrstep

About

Username
mrstep
Joined
Visits
49
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
308
Badges
0
Posts
542

Reactions

216Like18Dislike22Informative

  • Security flaws in Microsoft Mac apps could let attackers spy on users

    mrstepmrstep
    Microsoft - Number One InSecurity
    lotonesrob53williamlondonwatto_cobradanox

  • New Macs in 2025 rumored to get at least one major design refresh

    mrstepmrstep
    AniMill said:
    Please Apple, please, while you’re at it, redesign the god-awful Magic Mouse so that most of the users don’t have to throw it in the drawer at the day of purchase, replacing it with an actual usable mouse.
    Never used any of mine. Drawer filler for sure.
    An actual height to fit hands, modern optics for better DPI, higher Hz rates, and updated wireless AND wired modes would make it actual Magic.  As it is, the only trick it has performed is making itself disappear from my desk as well.

    (It's the only mouse with good vertical *and* horizontal scrolling, lets you gesture for other common trackpad functions as well - but was the only mouse ever to make me feel like I was getting carpal tunnel issues, and the Bluetooth connectivity is so janky compared to mice from more recent decades that it's just unusable.  I'm convinced they don't have anyone working on the mouse team at all anymore.)
    CheeseFreezed_2AniMillAlex1Nwilliamlondonwatto_cobra

  • iPhone 16 Pro rumored to get hugely better ultra-wide sensor & optical zoom

    mrstepmrstep
    charlesn said:
    kmarei said:
    StrangeDays said:
    kmarei said:
    ...
    The part I don't get is, for the users that really need 48 megapixels and above.
    and need the highest quality possible 
    why not get a real camera with real optical  lenses ?
    a tiny sensor on an iPhone will NEVER give you the same quality as a full size sensor 
    no matter how many cameras they add to the back of the iPhone

    just like if audio is your greatest feature, you don't use an iphone
    You get a high end high res audio player


    Truer words about a camera were never spoken than the ones coined by photographer Chase Jarvis: "The best camera is the one you have with you." Those words were the ethos of his book, "Best Camera," which may have been the first published collection of exclusively iPhone photographs (the iPhone 4, I believe) by a major photographer to showcase the creative possibilities. With Chase's guiding thought in mind, I decided to sell off all of my pro, full-frame equipment and switch to iPhone photography full time about 8-9 years ago. I had a Nikon D3s, a full set of Nikon's best "gold circle" ED zoom lenses, an 85mm 1.2 prime and a 300mm 2.8 prime. But after two trips aboard when I left this equipment home because I didn't want to lug "the camera trunk" with me, I decided that the quality advantage of pro full frame equipment meant nothing if I didn't have it with me. After selling it off and switching to iPhone photography full-time, I never looked back and have never regretted it. 

    Is full-frame quality better? Of course it is. But better is meaningless if you don't have your camera with you when the opportunity for a great shot appears. Even more importantly, in my opinion: the quality of which current iPhone Pro cameras are capable exceeds what most people who aren't shooting photos for a living will ever need. I currently have a 24" x 36" color print hanging in my living room from an uncropped, no filters image taken with a 13 Pro that sparked a call from the lab which printed it for me, inquiring about the equipment I used to get the shot. No "equipment" -- just my phone. I routinely print 13x19 photos of flower close-ups shot with my iPhone and they are stunning. Would pixel-peeping reveal better quality if I had shot them with my Nikon full-frame equipment? Sure. Providing I had lugged my Nikon equipment along for a walk in the park that day. 
    I agree that most people taking pics don't need higher res to capture duck-face and a throwing a peace sign ( :wink: ), also that the phones are amazing for what they are, but there are enormous quality differences - particularly with low-light and macro shots, where the heavy processing is just terribly visible.  Even for 'normal' shots, a new full-frame + nice glass will handily outperform the phones if you ever pixel-peep or crop.

    There was a point quite a few years back where phones + computational photography had achieved 'close enough' - or in some cases better than what 'real' cameras were doing (e.g. computational low-light performance was better due to image stacking than what cameras were doing) - and hell, even today I'd rather let the phone deal with a backlit person for a media post vs. try to deal with that in some post-processing myself - but between large sensor improvements, lens improvements, and phones increasingly over-processing (mangling) the data even before the 'raw' stage...

    Don't look at a newer mirrorless Nikon/Sony/etc. if you want to save money and be happy with the phone, but the current cameras are *not* what a D3 was.   For telephoto (moon/wildlife) - and macro in particular - there's *no* comparison between the two, for control (real aperture options), quality optics, and for much more natural colors and detail, hands-down.  (I say all of this as a hobbyist.). So like someone mentioned above, it's like audio equipment. :smile: 
    watto_cobra

  • FCC votes to restore net neutrality protections in the United States

    mrstepmrstep
    neillwd said:
    More government more censorship less freedom.
    I suspect that the majority of "net neutrality" advocates are quite comfortable with government directly - and working hand-in-hand with these same tech companies and carriers - to remove non-government-approved information.
    williamlondonh2ptimpetusOctoMonkey

  • Senator Warren doesn't have a plan to break up Apple, but still wants to pretty badly

    mrstepmrstep
    ssfe11 said:
    There is something seriously wrong with this woman. 
    What do you have against Native Americans? 😂
    watto_cobra9secondkox2Suicidy