Discussion of all digital SLR cameras under the Minolta and Konica Minolta brands
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
Bakubo wrote in reply to my observation that the new small netbooks were not fast enough:
Why would they not be fast enough? Not so long ago a 1.6ghz cpu and 1gb of memory would have been quite good even for a desktop and people were processing raw image files with them. Actually, in 1998 I was using a 266mhz Pentium II and 96mb of memory to process 8mp tiff images (images scanned from film). In 1999 I upgraded to 256mb of memory and a 466mhz Celeron cpu and also got a new film scanner and was working with 10mp tiff images.
I used a second hand Sony Vaio with an Intel Centrino and found the download rather slow when coming back to a hotel needing to download and also recharge camera batteries but it would do the job OK. Patience is not always my strong side. The new netbooks have smaller processors than my old Vaio so it would take me even longer with one of those. Maybe I am just impatient or I took too long to enjoy my dinners. My new Philips with dual processor, 250 Mb graphics, 2Gb of RAM and large HDD is much quicker and so is the Vosonic for downloading.
David Kilpatrick complained about his 320 Gb Freecom external HDD. I used a Freecom 160 Gb for backup and now I have the new Freecom 250 Gb mobile drive. I have found both perform without any problems. Perhaps the power supply from first the Sony and now the Philips laptop are both adequate for proper working of the external HDDs.
alphaomega wrote:Bakubo wrote in reply to my observation that the new small netbooks were not fast enough:
I used a second hand Sony Vaio with an Intel Centrino and found the download rather slow when coming back to a hotel needing to download and also recharge camera batteries but it would do the job OK. Patience is not always my strong side. The new netbooks have smaller processors than my old Vaio so it would take me even longer with one of those. Maybe I am just impatient or I took too long to enjoy my dinners. My new Philips with dual processor, 250 Mb graphics, 2Gb of RAM and large HDD is much quicker and so is the Vosonic for downloading.
Neither downloading to the computer nor downloads on a network should be compromised by processor speed. The first depends upon bus speed- USB, usually, if using a card reader, the second upon network hardware. IF for some reason the USB is only using ver 1.1, not ver 2, you will have slow writes to the computer.
Dusty
An a700, an a550 and couple of a580s, plus even more lenses (Zeiss included!).
Neither downloading to the computer nor downloads on a network should be compromised by processor speed. The first depends upon bus speed- USB, usually, if using a card reader, the second upon network hardware. IF for some reason the USB is only using ver 1.1, not ver 2, you will have slow writes to the computer.
I am not too familiar with the technical aspects of computers but I do know that my dual processor Philips with 2 Gb of RAM is much quicker at downloading image files than my older Vaio with a single Centrino and 500 Mb of RAM. Clearly neither laptop processor was able to exceedd the download speed of the USB 2.0 card reader used or there would not be a difference in download speed. The processor does matter and the new netbooks with their limited spec. predicated on size and price cannot match my Philips for download speed. It is all a question of what you pay is what you get. I will not deny that you can download images on a netbook. I have just stated I do not have the patience or time to wait patiently for the multitude of 0s & 1s to pass through these small things.
alphaomega wrote:I am not too familiar with the technical aspects of computers but I do know that my dual processor Philips with 2 Gb of RAM is much quicker at downloading image files than my older Vaio with a single Centrino and 500 Mb of RAM. Clearly neither laptop processor was able to exceedd the download speed of the USB 2.0 card reader used or there would not be a difference in download speed. The processor does matter and the new netbooks with their limited spec. predicated on size and price cannot match my Philips for download speed. It is all a question of what you pay is what you get. I will not deny that you can download images on a netbook. I have just stated I do not have the patience or time to wait patiently for the multitude of 0s & 1s to pass through these small things.
Well, the solution is simple for you then. Take your Philips computer when you travel. Problem solved.
alphaomega wrote:
I am not too familiar with the technical aspects of computers but I do know that my dual processor Philips with 2 Gb of RAM is much quicker at downloading image files than my older Vaio with a single Centrino and 500 Mb of RAM. Clearly neither laptop processor was able to exceedd the download speed of the USB 2.0 card reader used or there would not be a difference in download speed.
Hi Alphaomega
I'm not sure which model Vaio you have , but if you use a USB2.0 card reader in a USB 1.0 port the speed gets limited to USB 1.0.
