[oclug]Digicam connection for upload--help please
bb at L8R.net
Thu Nov 28 22:04:18 EST 2002
Part of it too, of course, is buying the product for the task. When you
buy a printer, you look at how fast it prints. You check to see how
expensive the ink cartridges are. You usually at least read up on it a
bit. Even if reading up on it, is looking at the outside of the box.
Why on earth would searching for Linux compatibility not be part of this
same process? You don't buy a printer without reading a single thing
about it, do you? The same goes for anything you buy.
When you buy a digital camera, you check up on how many megapixels it has,
what type of compression it uses for images, how long the battery life
lasts, and so on. Again, why isn't searching for Linux compatibility part
of this process for many people?
Now, I do realise that sometimes people are given products, or that their
spouse may own something, and they want this product to work with Linux.
Fine and dandy. However, if someone is given a digital camera that only
takes pictures at 640x480 resolution, or only has 2 megs of ram in it (and
no method to expand it), this device is very useless. It's a toy. Most
people would throw this toy away, or sell it, and buy something useful.
It doesn't matter if it was given to them. If it isn't up to the task,
for whatever shortcoming it has, it is time to sell it and move on.
This little rant above isn't really meant to be a rant. It is just meant
to demonstrate that our thinking needs to change with relation to Linux
compatibility. Today, virtually every range of product out there has
full, perfect Linux support, with choice thrown in to boot.
That is, you can buy a digital camera, keeping Linux Compatibility as a
criterion, just like long battery life, and have a large, competitive
selection of cameras to choose from. You can do the same for virtually
every other piece of hardware out there. We've reached that point.
Therefore, the problem today isn't with Linux Compatibility, but with all
of the obsolete hardware on the market. The problem is with people using
obsolete methods to write drivers for their products.
An example being this. Why would _anyone_, _ever_ design a camera where
the disk isn't mounted as a mass storage device. If companies can't get
this simple, easy, logical thought process right, you really have to
wonder what other problems you are going to have with their hardware.
After all, if their head isn't screwed on straight, what else isn't
screwed on straight, hardware wise?
The thought is chilling.
On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 21:38:37 -0500 (EST)
Bill Strosberg <bill at strosberg.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, Raymond Wood wrote:
> > The 2.4.20 kernel just hit the streets...
> I know this is going to seem a little annoying to GR & the folks who
> have had nothing but problems making things work, but I bought a Nikon
> Coolpix 3500 3.2 MPixel camera today for the holiday season at home,
> took some pictures, set the camera USB interface to mass storage device,
> held my breath, plugged in the USB cable to my Linux laptop, and the
> thing mounted/dev/sda1 as mass storage device nikon with no action on my
> All the files were readable and available to the GIMP, Mozilla etc.,
> without any problems.
> I'm using RedHat 7.3, current with patches & kernel upgrades on a
> Eurocomm laptop. Hotplug support is there by default, as is USB
> support. I've yet to connect a IEEE 1394 device to the laptop, but I'll
> find something soon.
> I did have to look through /var/log/messages to see where the hotplug
> stuff mounted the mass storage device, but this was easier than
> installing software on a Windows box, rebooting six times and having to
> use licenced code that allows anyone to put their own binary code on my
> I've never had any single piece of hardware install, work and behave as
> nice as this camera did.
> Sometimes you get the bear, sometimes the bear gets you.
> Bill Strosberg
> bill -at- strosberg -dot- com
> oclug mailing list
> oclug at lists.oclug.on.ca
More information about the OCLUG