This event was quickly followed by the most awkward Macworld keynote ever.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhhFQ-3w5tE
That's ... wow. It's like watching Larry Flynt do William Shatner.
This event was quickly followed by the most awkward Macworld keynote ever.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhhFQ-3w5tE
Sell it on ebay or something... some fanboy collector (I don't mean that in a bad way) would buy it I'm sure.
I have a QuickTake camera, new in the box. I have no way to use it. Now I don't care if I can.
Or make the jackets black.
Amateur astrophotographers (people who take pictures of stars,) sometimes remove the iR filter from their new/fancy digital camera because it increases the sensitivity - and stars emit IR quite well, too. I've never tried it (my IR-filter-removed camera died last year,) but I would wager that a camera so-modified would take similar pictures.
Wow, yeah.
Although mine still works, and it has never done that. Maybe an early firmware version?
----------
If you look at "black" clothing under *VERY* bright light, it will often have a tint to it - blue and brown are the most common.
Likewise, they have tint in infrared. That tint is generally much greater than the visible-spectrum tint.
Early digital cameras generally did not have good IR filters. With no IR filter, you see into the infrared, so the IR tint shows up *WAY* more prominently than you would possibly see in real life. In real life, these probably had a very slight brown tint. The sensor doesn't quite know what to make of the extra (infrared) light coming in, so it overloads one or more of the subpixels. In this case, the blue and red ones - causing a purple tint.
Amateur astrophotographers (people who take pictures of stars,) sometimes remove the iR filter from their new/fancy digital camera because it increases the sensitivity - and stars emit IR quite well, too. I've never tried it (my IR-filter-removed camera died last year,) but I would wager that a camera so-modified would take similar pictures.
Joining Jobs' in the image above was Satjiv Chahil, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide marketing at the time.
This event was quickly followed by the most awkward Macworld keynote ever.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhhFQ-3w5tE
What about make the one man wearing purple and Steve wearing black. Somehow it doesn't look right.
So true, if he had remained, i would have got to see a fellow Punjabi Indian presenting iPhones and Macs at the Keynoites . How cool would be that !"..From September 1988 to February 1997, Mr. Chahil served in various capacities, including Senior Vice President of Worldwide Marketing and the Founding General Manager of the New Media, Internet and Entertainment division.."
Interesting Mr. Chahil who is seen with Jobs in that picture left Apple at the low point and missed out on all the upside and all the fun. Just an observation!!
From Tim Holmes' Flickr page:
Makes you wonder why Steve Jobs would kill off a digital camera that rendered black as a vivid shade of purple.
I have a Quicktake 150 and a QuickTake 200. Both of which take lousy pictures, but at the time were amazing.
I often forget that most of you here joined the Apple world post Job's return. Heck I'm sure some of you were born post Job's return.
Apple was frankly more interesting when they were fighting for mere survival.
I met Gil Amelio in Toronto when he was doing a tour for Apple dealers shortly before they bought NeXT. He was a bit of a bozo, he didn't know what he was really doing.
The good thing that came out of the luncheon though was his quote that I still use today: "Software is not like wine. It doesn't get better sitting on a shelf".