Pet Peeves. Don't you hate it when...

[bradg]

ohhhhh...

whered you go, and where are you going

[photosbyvito]

i went to the adirondacks, and i'm going to the outerbanks...

but let's not hijack the thread...so PM if you want to know more..or watever

[bradg]

arnt i always the one that side rails all the thread, sorry

[eric s]

Just post us some good pictures from your vacation!

I have one that many, many people found silly.

When Pentax declared they made:
"The official camera of the internet".

That is so funny and sad all at the same time.

Eric

[ignavia]

At least the 20x30 print claim has some basis. It's based on the standard screen resolution of 72dpi. A 4MP at 72dpi would be about 23"x31". Granted, it wouldn't look too nice, but if you're printing that big, you're probably not looking at it real closely.

[Mikefellh]

JimC wrote:

Don't you hate it, when a manufacturer's advertising and specs are "stretching the truth" (are at best, misleading to the consumer).

"USB: Full-Speed 12 Mbps data transfer with a USB2.0 compatible computer"

Hah. USB 2.0 is 480Mbps. USB 1.1 is 12 Mbps. Sure, you'll get full USB 1.1 speed when you use a USB 2.0 compatible computer (since USB 1.1 devices are compatible with USB 2.0 hosts, but at the USB 1.1 speed).

Of course, even this is "stretching the truth" (I'm being polite), since you usually don't get the full USB 1.1 data transfer rate.

Why can't they just say USB 1.1?

If they just said USB1.1, people with USB2.0 computers would think it isn't compatible with them.

The most misunderstood term is "USB 2.0 Full Speed"..."Full Speed" means USB1.1 speed (12Mbps)...there's
Low-Speed of 1.5Mbps (USB1.0), Full-Speed of 12Mbps (USB1.1), and Hi-Speed of 480Mbps (USB2.0).

Also, not all older USB devices are USB 2.0 compatible.

[JimC]

Mikefellh wrote:

If they just said USB1.1, people with USB2.0 computers would think it isn't compatible with them.

The most misunderstood term is "USB 2.0 Full Speed"..."Full Speed" means USB1.1 speed (12Mbps)...there's
Low-Speed of 1.5Mbps (USB1.0), Full-Speed of 12Mbps (USB1.1), and Hi-Speed of 480Mbps (USB2.0).

Also, not all older USB devices are USB 2.0 compatible.

Then they should say:

USB 1.1 (compatible with USB 2.0)

Since the USB 2.0 host side specs indicate the USB 2.0host should work with USB 1.1 devices, then it could be stated as above). If the USB 2.0 host is not compatible with the USB 1.1 device, then you've got one of two problems: Either the USB 2.0 host was not designed to specs (in which case it shouldn't be able to claim it's a USB 2.0 host), or the USB 1.1 device isn't following USB 1.1 specs. Of course, the host is more likelyat fault.

Although those selling USB 2.0 Port cardslike to advertise backwards compatibility with USB 1.1 devices, this backwards compatibility is part of the USB 2.0 specs. So, to be a USB 2.0 host, you should support USB 1.1 devices.

Since the typical consumer isn't going to understand the way the advertising/press releases/specs are written for USB 1.1 cameras (only knowing that USB 2.0 is supposed to bebetter than USB 1.1), I think the way the some manufacturershave starting stating their USB specs is a bit misleading.

I suspect that most newbies comparingcameras, seeing USB 1.1 on one model, and USB 2.0 on another model (even if it's stated as "USB: Full-Speed 12 Mbps data transfer with a USB2.0 compatible computer),probably think that the model showing USB 2.0 is better.

IMO, Manufacturers are taking advantage of USB 2.0 having 3 speeds in the specs (Hi-Speed, Full-Speed and Low-Speed) - just because they don't want consumers to know that the device is USB 1.1. Heck, I think the "Full Speed" wording in itself is misleading. Full implies Maximum.

[steve]

Don't you just hate it when somebody complains about the black background that we use here and on the main site

[photosbyvito]

haha

good one steve....i'm with you..

Vito

[bradg]

dont worry about it steve, i love your site