By Max Howroute
These days it is hard to find a camera that doesn't use the CMOS sensor technology. Many think there's no doubt that CMOS is far superior and the discussion has ended. In fact, the debate goes on. CCD and CMOS sensors do the same job of capturing light and converting it to electrical signals resulting in a digital photograph. However there are fundamental differences in design and operation. The CCD technology is more mature and advanced, CMOS is more cost effective and trying to catch up with CCD. Don't get me wrong, both architectures are fine, what really equally matters for any sensor is the size. As of today, larger sensors capture more light, thus producing better results under many light conditions. As I've mentioned in my previous posts, this might change with the advancement of nano technology in the future. But right now the sensor size is all that really makes a difference in output quality when in comes to the sensor comparison. The fight between CMOS and CCD is purely emotional at this stage. Both technologies are useful and got their ups and downs. In CMOS for every pixel there are three MOSFET's (metal-oxide semiconductor field-effect transistors). So you share them between four pixels. CCD relies on charged coupling. CMOS is more suitable for high speed future applications. The CCD however currently used in more commercial applications, where cost is usually not a huge factor. So if you are thinking of purchasing a digital camera and thinking which sensor to pick, don't even worry about it. The major part of your camera buying decision should be the sensors size and lens selection. Both are equally important in digital cameras land.
By Max Howroute
The recent advancements in mobile photography made a huge leap over the past several years. Most photographers I talked to occasionally use their smartphone devices primarily iPhones as the main camera, simply because it's always with them. And you don't want to miss the one in lifetime shot at the right time and right place, especially if you don't want to carry a heavy and bulky camera with you at the moment. The good news for photographers everywhere, the smartphone cameras are improving with each generation. And the sensor size and image stabilization are a few of the most important aspects of needed improvements. Imagine having a aps-c size sensor in your smartphone or professional camera quality image stabilization on your portable device. With new advances in nanotechnology, this soon will become a reality, possibly within a few years from now. Today, there's a high demand for high quality cameras and optics in the smartphones and the market will respond if manufacturers come up with new designs utilizing the nanotechnology.
By Max Howroute
When was the last time you've used a personal computer, aka PC. Do you even remember? Personal computer shipments worldwide plummeted again 13.9% in the first quarter, the latest evidence of the collapsing old school computing market. As tablet computers are becoming more powerful and most importantly more useful at the accelerating speeds, the need and demand for PCs in commercial and consumer applications is plummeting even faster. According to the latest research (conducted by several tech publications), for consumers, businesses and yes even some content creators, the tablet and smartphone computers meet their everyday computing needs. Based on certain calculations, I predict that you'll be unable to find any PCs (anything that resembles a desktop or laptop computer) available for sale at least at the big box stores like Best Buy (of course if they make it through this decade) by the year 2020. Just imagine what tablet computers will be able to pull off by the end of this decade. And to be fair it is not the PC manufacturers fault, it's simply the end of era. To all the skeptics out there, just face it, embrace it and replace it. Aren't we suppose to have flying cars by now anyway? Moving on…
By Max Howroute
The self-driving vehicles technology has got to the point today when it's 100% safer than a human driver operating vehicles. Google's self-driving cars are able to sense their surroundings, pedestrians and even stoplights and unlike a person they can see continuously 360 degrees around. These vehicles have completed more than 400,000 miles of autonomous driving to date. The cars are also able to better utilize road space. In the near future with a road full of driverless vehicles, cars can safely drive within close distance to each other, using less space, reducing traffic and travel times. The technology has been perfected and safe proof over recent years, but unfortunately the lawmakers are behind on the issue. So far only three states, Nevada, Florida and California have passed laws permitting completely driverless cars operation. Today, the biggest hurdle on the way to mass produce the self-driving vehicles is a price tag. As of 2013, the average cost to make a driverless car is $150,000. As with anything in brand new technology the cost is expected to go down as more time passes by. Based on my calculations, I can safely assume in about 5 years from now, the average base self-driving vehicles will be mass produced and sold for around $22,000, within a reach of most middle class families.
It's a little ironic for one of the cable companies — which many say use their market clout to squeeze customers — to complain about being treated unfairly. But that's exactly what Time Warner Cable did on Wednesday, whining about Netflix's business decisions.
In a statement given to Multichannel News on Wednesday, Time Warner Cable said that “Netflix is actually closing off access to some of its content while seeking unprecedented preferential treatment from ISPs.”
The statement comes in response to Netflix's announcement last week that it would be providing limited 3D and “Super HD” video offerings, but only to subscribers whose Internet service providers work with Netflix's new Open Connect content delivery system.
Netflix's push for Open Connect isn't arbitrary; Internet providers can currently charge Netflix (as well as other video-streaming companies like YouTube) high prices for delivering video. Netflix decided to cut costs last summer by building its own system to deliver high-bandwidth content to consumers.
But Time Warner Cable and several other U.S. cable companies decided they'd rather keep charging Netflix for content delivery and refused to support Open Connect. Netflix upped the ante with its 3D and Super HD announcement last week, and now Time Warner is complaining about the arrangement, saying it's unfair that Netflix is taking steps to prevent getting charged for high-bandwidth content delivery.
Many see the irony in Time Warner Cable's complaint. Ryan Lawler of TechCrunch detailed the ridiculousness of the charge, noting that if Time Warner began streaming Netflix's 3D and Super HD video without Open Connect, it would almost certainly slow the cable company's connection speeds for everyone.
Luckily for consumers, Multichannel News reports that Time Warner Cable (despite its tantrum) is already in discussions with Netflix about how the companies can work together to deliver Netflix content. The likely outcome, Multichannel says, will be delivery via Open Connect.
Source: HuffPost – by Betsy Issacson