Olympus launches micro 4/3 camera

John Navas wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:33:55 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
[]
In other words, you could easily mute the sound, but you choose not
to. Whether it is inconsiderate or not is a matter of opinion. What
you choose to do only serves to hurt yourself.
No, I cannot mute the sound from that site alone, without affecting the
sound I may wish to have from other sites or from other functions on my
computer.

Damn! Now there's a problem! LOL

Those pages are an example of poor Web-site design,

In your opinion.

and one I
will not view.

Suit yourself, but that only serves to hurt yourself.


David is right John...
Force feeding sound that can't be turned off interferes with a user who
is already listening to their own music. Very unthoughtful of them to do it.

I learnt in 1998 that such poor design did more damage to your visitor
count than having no sound at all. It seems you don't care about the
personal comfort of web site visitors. That's OK. Maybe you don't have
top ranking web sites you rely on for your living.

That is no reason to get abusive at people pointing out the stupidity of
not including a button with about 1 minute's worth of script under it
and in the process, gain some extra visitors from your target audience.

You seem to have a habit of doing this sort of thing. You can cure
boredom by masturbating, you know? You don't have to be a nasty *******.

"John Navas" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:11:12 -0400, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote in
:

"John Navas" wrote in message
. ..

Usenet is unquestionably dying, and we only have ourselves to blame, for
allowing Usenet to be turned into a cesspool of illicit file sharing
(drawing the ire of Eliot Spitzer last year) and gutter noise (driving
away the majority of Internet users).

It was a different type of illicit cesspool that Elliot Spitzer was
dwelling
in.

Thanks for catching that -- actually Andrew Cuomo:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9988278-38.html
http://news.cnet.com/the-iconoclast/?keyword=usenet

I'm not a Cuomo fan, going back to the days when Mariotaxed us at every turn
in NY, but I admire Andrew's tenacity in how he does his job.

In article , John McWilliams
says...

Me three. It's not difficult to code the page with a) a control to stop
the sound, or control its volume, and b), have its default position to
Off when the page is first opened.

But would you buy this camera? If not, you are not in the target group
and the camera website might appeal to the right people.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

ray wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 09:00:44 -0700, John Navas wrote:

On 17 Jun 2009 15:31:16 GMT, ray wrote in
:

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 21:46:28 -0700, John Navas wrote:

On 17 Jun 2009 00:43:53 GMT, ray wrote in
:

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 10:42:01 -0700, John Navas wrote:

Loaded in less than 30 seconds for me over 3G cellular.

I'm seldom patient enough to wait 30 seconds for a page to load. I
must KNOW that it has some information I REALLY want. Otherwise, I
generally give about 10 seconds and I'm gone. Don't know why folks
would intentionally limit their audience like that.

I guess they assume people with normal patience will wait 30
seconds.

I expect that if you could actually check on the 'normal patience'
level, you'd find it to be under 15.

A sad commentary on those people. Regardless, this isn't a general
website like Google, and the marketing people may simply not be
interested in those who will click away after only 15 seconds,
focusing instead on those who want the full experience. It's called
"focusing on the target market" and "qualifying the prospect".

It's also called "limiting your prospective client list".

When I'm shopping for a camera I want to know about the camera, not listen
to music that someone else has selected.

John Navas wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:51:00 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote in :


I believe standing up for good and thoughtful web design by leaving
immediately and commenting to the author is an upstanding act.

Also pointless and self-destrictive.

This really could use some 'splainin'. In other words, it isn't
pointless, as there's a chance that Mon. Molon will change his dastardly
web design.

How could my not going to his web site be destructive to yours truly?
(or self-destrictive, for that matter.)

--
John McWilliams

J. Clarke wrote:
Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , John McWilliams
says...

Me three. It's not difficult to code the page with a) a control to
stop the sound, or control its volume, and b), have its default
position to Off when the page is first opened.
But would you buy this camera? If not, you are not in the target group
and the camera website might appeal to the right people.

So you're saying that there is some kind of psychological correlation
between tolerating gratuitious noise from a web site and buying a micro 4/3
camera?

Gersnorfle! Good'un, JC.

--
john mcwilliams

John Navas wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:30:45 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote in :

John Navas wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:51:00 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote in :
I believe standing up for good and thoughtful web design by leaving
immediately and commenting to the author is an upstanding act.
Also pointless and self-destrictive.
This really could use some 'splainin'. In other words, it isn't
pointless, as there's a chance that Mon. Molon will change his dastardly
web design.

0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000001 %


C;mon, Alfie, show us the money! :-)

How could my not going to his web site be destructive to yours truly?
(or self-destrictive, for that matter.)

Cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I'm well aware of clichés that describe self destructive behavior, but -
whoa!- my nose is fully in tact, and I am not spiting anyone. Just not
going to a place that is unpleasant for me.

--
john mcwilliams

John Navas wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:35:03 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote in :


But would you buy this camera? If not, you are not in the target group
and the camera website might appeal to the right people.

So you're saying that there is some kind of psychological correlation
between tolerating gratuitious noise from a web site and buying a micro 4/3
camera?


Gersnorfle! Good'un, JC.

So you're saying that a straw man fallacy is a good'un?

No. I am saying I enjoyed his turn of phrase. Did not opine as to
fallacies nor straw men, and my mentioning them in response to your
reply neither confirms nor denies that I agree his statement contains
either.

Clear? :-)
--
john mcwilliams

Alfred Molon wrote in
:

http://www.olympus-europa.com/consum...p=912222#intro

Thanks to all the responders who don't know how to control their audio for
turning this useful heads-up into yet another example of how usenet has
been ruined by idiots.

On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:58:33 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:

ray wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 09:00:44 -0700, John Navas wrote:

On 17 Jun 2009 15:31:16 GMT, ray wrote in
:

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 21:46:28 -0700, John Navas wrote:

On 17 Jun 2009 00:43:53 GMT, ray wrote in
:

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 10:42:01 -0700, John Navas wrote:

Loaded in less than 30 seconds for me over 3G cellular.

I'm seldom patient enough to wait 30 seconds for a page to load. I
must KNOW that it has some information I REALLY want. Otherwise, I
generally give about 10 seconds and I'm gone. Don't know why folks
would intentionally limit their audience like that.

I guess they assume people with normal patience will wait 30
seconds.

I expect that if you could actually check on the 'normal patience'
level, you'd find it to be under 15.

A sad commentary on those people. Regardless, this isn't a general
website like Google, and the marketing people may simply not be
interested in those who will click away after only 15 seconds,
focusing instead on those who want the full experience. It's called
"focusing on the target market" and "qualifying the prospect".

It's also called "limiting your prospective client list".

When I'm shopping for a camera I want to know about the camera, not
listen to music that someone else has selected.

Amen. Content is, or should be, king. Glitz means very little when one is
seeking information.