Dirk Wright wrote:
> The progression of digital technology into areas where other technology is
> the standard, is to me at least, a solution looking for a problem. I am
> still not sure if I am better off with this computer or without it.
> Likewise, I doubt my life would be significantly enhanced by the addition
> of a digital camera. of course, it is not quality of life that drives these
> things, it's profit margins and fashion statements.
>
This is one of the most unfortunate effects of digital technologies
going to the mainstream (or any technology, really). The end goal
of "modern" technology is to somehow make life easier, improve output,
or otherwise improve "quality of life." Unfortunately, this almost
without fail ends up getting lost in the name of modern technology.
A digital solution is a waste of time if the old fashioned "analog"
approach is superior, or so you'd think...
When we were brainstorming ideas of neat things you could add to a
juggling troupe's passing routine, one suggestion was that you could
draw attention to a single club by tracking it using various "high
tech" means. The Flying Karamazov Brothers (with whom we were working)
laughed at us because they'd already done that using a single colored
club and no technolgy at all. Sometimes the no-tech approach is
better, simply because it will work no matter what fails. :-)
So I hope you'll all hold on to your Zuikos, your OMs, and your
photosensitive films. We have yet to reach the point where digital
cameras can really outperform film cameras in every situation. Until
that happens, no one has any reason to give in and accept the "wave of
the future." You are not a dinosaur because you cling to the technology
that provides the best performance.
joey
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|