Jason Dunn
03-24-2011, 11:31 PM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/24/technology/personaltech/24basics.html?_r=1' target='_blank'>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/24/t...asics.html?_r=1</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"The common rap against technology is that it leads to an accumulation of devices. But the nature of technology is changing. Fewer products are doing more tasks - all accomplished by countless lines of massless software code. And so we no longer need to accumulate products. If anything, we can cut down. The question is, Which can be replaced and which are fine, or even preferable, to keep?"</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/dht/auto/1301001742.usr1.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #d2d2bb;" /></p><p><em>Image Credit: Harry Campbell</em></p><p>As I read through this article, I repeatedly said "What? No way - that's stupid!", but I admit I'm not the typical New York Times reader. Some people may very well feel that the phone on the camera is good enough and don't want to buy a digital camera - I'm not one of those people. I'd sooner swallow a bag of nails than be stuck capturing memories of my life with a camera phone. I can't help but think that the author of this article has never used HD video capture on a DSLR - if he had, he'd understand the severe limitations and the fact that it's just damn hard to use.</p><p>At least he thinks we should keep our alarm clocks. Check out the article and weigh in with your comments!</p>