In defense of WiFi...

[Devinhullphoto]

BUY A SENSE OF HUMOR I hear it comes in an instant version.

But, does it have wifi?

 

[table1349]

Instant is better. Who enjoys a brewed cup of coffee when you can have instant coffee???

There are some days when instant is better. Ever stood in a Starbucks line. I have to stop at Duncan Donuts to get coffee just so I can patiently wait in a Starbucks line for Coffee.

 

[table1349]

BUY A SENSE OF HUMOR I hear it comes in an instant version.

But, does it have wifi?

:lmao:

Even more important.....Does it have BACON??????

Admit it Derrel, you know we would get to Bacon in this thread eventually didn't you?

 

[table1349]

Do people have terrible memories? I can look at all thousands of photos and tell you exactly where it was taken.

Oh yeah???? Where was this photo taken???
http://vodly.to/content/avatars/917b5fc29d8bac42945b5be96ca61f06.png

 

[Devinhullphoto]

There are some days when instant is better. Ever stood in a Starbucks line. I have to stop at Duncan Donuts to get coffee just so I can patiently wait in a Starbucks line for Coffee.

I worked at Dunkin for 2 years in college. We always had a line out the door compared to the shorter line at Starbucks across the way. They were probably all like you. Haha. I prefer Starbucks over any other. That's what I brew daily.

 

[Steve5D]

It seems that in most things in this world, we want things done as fast as possible.

Why is there a double standard here? Why is instant gratifcation taboo? It makes no sense.

If you know what you're doing with your camera, it shouldn't matter how much time is in between you pressing the shutter button, and you utilizing the image in the ways you see fit.

I've lost count of the number of posts I've read here which state that every photo needs editing.

Every photographer takes pictures he doesn't want clients to see. Any photographer who says he doesn't is a liar.

Why would I want my camera to automatically upload all my photos for a client to see immediately? Why would I want to show clients images before they're edited? I don't do it now and, frankly, there's really no reason to.

I don't have it, nor do I want it. If a camera I want for other reasons has it, and it increases the cost too much, I won't buy it. If I do buy it, I won't use it.

I'm not saying that it won't hold a level of value for some people, but it's like anything else that's new. It doesn't suddenly make everything else not work anymore...

 

[table1349]

There are some days when instant is better. Ever stood in a Starbucks line. I have to stop at Duncan Donuts to get coffee just so I can patiently wait in a Starbucks line for Coffee.

I worked at Dunkin for 2 years in college. We always had a line out the door compared to the shorter line at Starbucks across the way. They were probably all like you. Haha. I prefer Starbucks over any other. That's what I brew daily.

That was probably because Dunkin just had counter help. You come in, you ask for coffee, you get coffee, you leave.

Starbucks has "Barista's." You come in, you stand in line, then you wait in line, while your "Barista" is busy trying to figure out who is on the expresso line, and who is making lattes. Barista - an Italian word for Bartender.

I will have to admit though, if it wasn't for the wifi, they would go out of business in a week. No one would just stand around in that line with out some form of entertainment. Let's be serious here, after all it's only coffee.

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

BUY A SENSE OF HUMOR
I hear it comes in an instant version.

You might want to look at the return policy on yours.

And the rest of you

I love how a thread must be titled "defense of Wi-fi", in 2013, as the majority of you respond via your Wi-Fi networks, in 2013, while I posted numerous practical applications of DSLR Wi-fi, realistic, practical applications, in 2013-- which none of you responded to.

You can twist my words all you want. Never did I imply instant coffee is superior to regular coffee, or instant wine is better than aged wine.

I feel like I'm arguing with a field of scarecrows.

 

[Devinhullphoto]

You might want to look at the return policy on yours. And the rest of you I love how a thread must be titled "defense of Wi-fi", in 2013, as the majority of you respond via your Wi-Fi networks, in 2013, while I posted numerous practical applications of DSLR Wi-fi, realistic, practical applications, in 2013-- which none of you responded to. You can twist my words all you want. Never did I imply instant coffee is superior to regular coffee, or instant wine is better than aged wine. I feel like I'm arguing with a field of scarecrows.

I don't have hate towards you or your work. Just wifi on my camera.

 

[table1349]

A bit of Cheese to go with that instant whine???


(Yes the spelling is correct):lmao:

 

[limr]

I'm convinced I need a new blender with WiFi...I can send it my preferred ice grind settings from the living room, using my Android phone OR my iOS devices, and it can grind my ice EXACTLY the way I want it, in increments as discrete as .08 seconds per setting change!

I SO would have loved that in my bartending days. I hated frozen drink orders. H.A.T.E.D.

I think DSLR wireless connectivity and transmission of data is the wave of the future. It will make many things easier for everyone.

Resistance is futile.

...

That's all well and good for you, but not everyone works that way or wants to work that way. So no, it will not make things "easier for everyone." Saying that everyone should just shut up and get on board is just as silly as saying that wi-fi is useless and just a fad. No one here seemed to be saying that wi-fi is useless, btw, but just that they didn't find it personally usefulwhen included in their camera. Those scenarios you listed are pretty specific to professional portrait or wedding photographers. If someone is not in those professions, will they still find it easier and irresistible? And if they don't, so what? Why should it matter if someone chooses a different way of doing things? Why do I have to jump off the bridge just because everyone else is doing it?

So why is instant gratification taboo? What makes instant gratification better or worse than delayed gratification?

...

It seems like a rather odd attachment to the ways of old. And not a very logical one.

"The Economics of Immediate Gratification" http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/rabin/jbdmfinal.pdf A quote from the discussion: "Perhaps our most explicit theme is that an underlying preference for immediate gratification can explain a variety of behaviors. We have outlined a simple model of preference for immediate gratification, and shown how such preferences give rise to procrastination, overindulgence in addictive activities, seemingly excessive punishments for delay in completing a task, and over-consumption of basic consumer goods."

"Escaping the impulse to immediate gratification: the prospect concept promotes a future-oriented mindset, prompting an inclination towards delayed gratification." : Escaping the impulse to immediate gratification... [Br J Psychol. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI
"People's willingness to postpone receiving an immediate reward in order to gain additional benefits in the future, that is, a tendency to shallow delay discounting, is closely related to one's health, wealth, and happiness."

"Ability to delay gratification may be linked to social trust, a new CU-Boulder study finds" Ability to delay gratification may be linked to social trust, new CU-Boulder study finds | University of Colorado Boulder "A body of research that stretches back more than a half-century has shown that the ability to delay gratification is linked to a number of better life outcomes. On average, people who were able to delay gratification as children go on to have higher SAT scores, for example. They also tend to be more socially conscious as adolescents, less obese as adults, and less likely to abuse drugs or alcohol."

So what's so great about 'faster'?

The fact is that the same sort of fanatical attachment to the new simply for its newness or its speed is also illogical. There is nothing inherently better about newer and faster, or even easier. Neither is there anything inherently good about older or slower or more difficult. People will assign value to these characteristics, however, because they have a desire to assign these characteristics to tasks they find boring or difficult. Others may not need that same task to be faster, or they have a different definition of 'easy.' You see wi-fi in a camera as easy and convenient so you can make more money or spend time doing other things. Someone else might see it as fussy and a PITA and an unnecessary complication. (I see it as totally a moot point for me since I don't even have a DSLR.)

The fact remains that people are going to have their opinions and preferences, and this takes the entire subject outside the realm of logic, so there's no point in speaking so pejoratively about 'an odd attachment to the ways of old' when the same could be said of a 'pathological need for the new, imaginary ways of the future.'

I have always loved the predictions of the way new technologies will "kill" older ways of working. Or will suddenly "revolutionize" entire industries, activities, or ways of doing things.

View attachment 57473

...

Okay, you forced me to do it.

<span style="font-family:verdana;">

 

[Steve5D]

Starbucks has "Barista's." You come in, you stand in line, then you wait in line, while your "Barista" is busy trying to figure out who is on the expresso line, and who is making lattes.

If I want coffee, I'll go to Dunkin' Donuts or McDonald's or 7-Eleven or any one of the gajillion other places in town to get "coffee"

Starbuck's doesn't sell coffee. Starbuck's sells raspberry-mocha-mint-creme-girlie-boy-foo-foo-bull****-coffee.

It's nothing more than the liquid version of the many pastries they sell...

 

[rexbobcat]

Instant Gratification: http://friendseat-images.s3.amazonaws.com/2010/09/big-mac2.jpg Damn well worth waiting for: http://assets2.pulsdcdn.com/system/images/8622/original/prime-rib.jpg You want fries with that? I know which one I am choosing and there are no arches involved.

So you're saying you want prime rib, even if takes longer?

I'm saying if you could have your prime rib, without the wait, why wait?

This isn't rocket science.

That's idealistic and not necessarily realistic.

The operative phrase in your question is "If you could."

Saying instant gratification is or isn't bad is like debating about whether credit cards are bad. It depends on the situation and the circumstances. This seems like argument for argument's sake.

 

[Dao]

I have few eyefi cards at home, but they are SD cards. So my wife use them most of the time. If the card support my camera, I will use them.

First of all, it is also a regular memory card, so it store all you photos. 2nd, the setup is quite easy. No need to do much and do not need to be a tech (although my work require technical knowledge including ISP networking equipments). And you do not need do anything different while you are shooting.

You setup to dump the photos to a tablet or computer or both. I see it is a great tool for instance backup for important photos. You do not need to wait, just shoot. It is kind of like write cache in a storage system. You can keep shooting and store the photos in the card. While there is a chance, the card will make a copy to your computer.

From your computer, you can use Lightroom to import the photos to the location you prefer later on if you choose to do. And you do not need to have a hotspot nearby, the card can act as a AP and your PC can connect to it directly automatically.


Again, speed is not an issue. So if a person take a photo then look at the top display and change the shutter speed or aperture and look at the viewfinder, the computer may already backup that photo.

Personally, I like that feature and I wish both of my camera take SD card now.

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

That's all well and good for you, but not everyone works that way or wants to work that way. So no, it will not make things "easier for everyone." Saying that everyone should just shut up and get on board is just as silly as saying that wi-fi is useless and just a fad. No one here seemed to be saying that wi-fi is useless, btw, but just that they didn't find it personally usefulwhen included in their camera. Those scenarios you listed are pretty specific to professional portrait or wedding photographers. If someone is not in those professions, will they still find it easier and irresistible? And if they don't, so what? Why should it matter if someone chooses a different way of doing things? Why do I have to jump off the bridge just because everyone else is doing it?

I attacked his logic. His logic being that because something can be done faster with new tech, then that is somehow instant gratification, and the resulting instant gratification is bad. I found fault in that logic, because it's inherently wrong. Now, what you and others have done, is made my attack on his logic somehow my philosophy about everything, which is classic straw man argument fallacy.

If his logic worked, all our cars would still go less than 20mph, our internet would still be provided through our telephone line and AOL, and our precious smartphones would not exist. No one would want the instant gratification of going faster, or having high speed internet. Tech has rapidly changed the world. Some go along for the ride, some groan and resist. I see a lot of groaning in this thread. And general negativity. Around something that can be pretty damn cool. All the while, they're probably groaning while typing from their computer which is connected to wi-fi, or their tablet, or smartphone. So it's just a steady dose of hypocrisy and irony here.

Then I come along and serve up some REAL, practical, useful ways this tech can be utilized, and all I hear is an onslaught of "aghhhhhh, instant wine, wifi sux HAR HAR HAR, instant coffee blah blah". It's completely beside the point. I can't really take the opposing argument seriously, especially if there's faulty logic.

"The Economics of Immediate Gratification" http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/rabin/jbdmfinal.pdf A quote from the discussion: "Perhaps our most explicit theme is that an underlying preference for immediate gratification can explain a variety of behaviors. We have outlined a simple model of preference for immediate gratification, and shown how such preferences give rise to procrastination, overindulgence in addictive activities, seemingly excessive punishments for delay in completing a task, and over-consumption of basic consumer goods."

"Escaping the impulse to immediate gratification: the prospect concept promotes a future-oriented mindset, prompting an inclination towards delayed gratification." : Escaping the impulse to immediate gratification... [Br J Psychol. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI
"People's willingness to postpone receiving an immediate reward in order to gain additional benefits in the future, that is, a tendency to shallow delay discounting, is closely related to one's health, wealth, and happiness."

"Ability to delay gratification may be linked to social trust, a new CU-Boulder study finds" Ability to delay gratification may be linked to social trust, new CU-Boulder study finds | University of Colorado Boulder "A body of research that stretches back more than a half-century has shown that the ability to delay gratification is linked to a number of better life outcomes. On average, people who were able to delay gratification as children go on to have higher SAT scores, for example. They also tend to be more socially conscious as adolescents, less obese as adults, and less likely to abuse drugs or alcohol."

So what's so great about 'faster'?

I appreciate a well-researched and thought out argument. Let's not make a mountain out of a molehill and forget the context of this conversation though.

The fact is that the same sort of fanatical attachment to the new simply for its newness or its speed is also illogical. There is nothing inherently better about newer and faster, or even easier. Neither is there anything inherently good about older or slower or more difficult.

I disagree. Advancements largely make all our lives easier. Without advancements, our quality of life would never improve. Human innovation wouldn't exist. Humans have the innate need to find easier way to do things, more efficient ways. It's a driving force. Newer is better, the majority of the time.

(I see it as totally a moot point for me since I don't even have a DSLR.)

So I'm not invalidating your argument, but what's your angle here? This conversation is about DSLR Wi-fi, a feature which I've actually used. You say I'm arguing for the sake of argument, but I have firsthand experience with the topic under discussion (hint: a lot of these guys don't). It does not seem you do. So who is arguing for the sake of argument here?

The fact remains that people are going to have their opinions and preferences, and this takes the entire subject outside the realm of logic, so there's no point in speaking so pejoratively about 'an odd attachment to the ways of old' when the same could be said of a 'pathological need for the new, imaginary ways of the future.'

I'm seeing a lot of negativity surrounding an exciting new feature. I'm coming from a place of actual real-world use, and application. Like it or not, this tech is going to be more and more intertwined in the DSLR's to come. I'm embracing it. Others are not. It's not a pathological need for others to see the same way. It's a need for the hundreds/thousands of others who will see this thread years down the road to understand there's a different perspective/opinion, and not everyone is here to dump on OP and the tech.