Author Topic: What if Microsoft made digital cameras? (Read 1089 times)

adash · « **on:** September 25, 2010, 06:26:20 AM »

Would they have to be rebooted every 5 pictures or would they catch viruses out of nowhere?

Luke · « **Reply #1 on:** September 25, 2010, 07:03:14 AM »

I'll play along although I have no idea why a software company would start making hardware (and in a completely different field on top of that).

My guess would be that they would steal someone else's user interface and call it their own. It would also become more or less the standard that everyone but a small minority of eccentrics would use. (LOL.....just having fun)

popo · « **Reply #2 on:** September 25, 2010, 07:26:28 AM »

Microsoft are not just a software company, as they have made hardware for years too. The biggest example being the xbox but there's also plenty of smaller peripherals too.

In parallels with the Apple scenario, they would also need help, but I think their corporate behaviour is more open to working with other companies if they don't just outright buy them out. The question of what they would bring to the market remains the same though.

Security and stability are partial myths in the MS world. Their software openness (in a user sense, not an IP sense) gives it great flexibility and potential vulnerability. For example, I don't run realtime antivirus on my main PC and haven't had a single virus infection in over 10 years. I don't think any camera would run x86 Windows anyway, but more likely a Windows mobile variation. Limited ability to add user apps is a possibility (but also applies to Apple too).

adash · « **Reply #3 on:** September 25, 2010, 08:01:18 AM »

Quote

I don't run realtime antivirus on my main PC and haven't had a single virus infection in over 10 years.

Yeah, why run a real time anti-virus on a Window$ PC, it will just annoy you by detecting viruses every now and then....

Quote

Their software openness (in a user sense, not an IP sense) gives it great flexibility and potential vulnerability.

How is that Unix clones, *BSD and Linux distributions are not so notoriously vulnerable? Does it have to do with code quality, security architecture and the like?

Quote

I don't think any camera would run x86 Windows anyway, but more likely a Windows mobile

By the way, Sony NEX runs linux.

Panther · « **Reply #4 on:** September 25, 2010, 10:27:38 AM »

Microsoft does make webcams capable of taking stills...

popo · « **Reply #5 on:** September 25, 2010, 11:29:50 AM »

Quote from: adash on September 25, 2010, 08:01:18 AM

Yeah, why run a real time anti-virus on a Window$ PC, it will just annoy you by detecting viruses every now and then....

Exactly! I find real time AV scanners are over sensitive to non-issue risks ("potentially unwanted software" that I actually do want) and other false positives. The only "real" malware I've ever had comes in the form of dodgy e-mail attachments and I find my spam filter eats those anyway. I spend more time dealing with AV software funnies than they are worth. Only occasional paranoia will make me run a full scan, and they've always come up with nothing worse than a cookie.

Quote

How is that Unix clones, *BSD and Linux distributions are not so notoriously vulnerable? Does it have to do with code quality, security architecture and the like?

Different sort of openness. There's more easily accessible ways for end users to modify windows than typical linux installs.

Quote

By the way, Sony NEX runs linux.

So does my $20 router. How does that relate to MS on a DSLR?

adash · « **Reply #6 on:** September 25, 2010, 12:05:49 PM »

Quote

There's more easily accessible ways for end users to modify windows than typical linux installs.

Not exactly. The large hole in security lies in the privileges that are given to the default user and background processes. And from code quality and discovered, but unfixed bugs.

Quote

So does my $20 router. How does that relate to MS on a DSLR?

It does not. I thought it might be an interesting fact.

voyager · « **Reply #7 on:** September 26, 2010, 01:05:43 AM »

Would they get the blue screen of death too?

adash · « **Reply #8 on:** September 26, 2010, 02:05:07 AM »

Quote from: voyager on September 26, 2010, 01:05:43 AM

Would they get the blue screen of death too?

They would probably have three additional buttons on the back - Ctrl, Alt and Del....

voyager · « **Reply #9 on:** September 26, 2010, 02:22:18 AM »

They'll replace the Canon Direct Print button with it.

peterb666 · « **Reply #10 on:** September 26, 2010, 02:34:54 AM »

Quote from: voyager on September 26, 2010, 01:05:43 AM

Would they get the blue screen of death too?

I was thinking that. Up market cameras would of course have the blue vari-angle LCD of death and the blue EVF of death.

popo · « **Reply #11 on:** September 26, 2010, 02:40:12 AM »

The blue could be colour calibrated on higher models.

lisandra · « **Reply #12 on:** September 26, 2010, 07:24:27 PM »

Quote from: popo on September 26, 2010, 02:40:12 AM

The blue could be colour calibrated on higher models.

via upgrade when you buy windows camera 7 ultimate pro home bussiness super edition 3, for $299 (camera office suite professional 2011 not included...)

MrPhotographer · « **Reply #13 on:** September 27, 2010, 12:52:35 AM »

If Microsoft made a camera, they would have you beta test it first, then charge you for all your work. Also they would retain copyright on all the pictures you've shot with their camera, since they only really sold you a license to use the camera.

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #14 on:** October 31, 2010, 06:23:09 PM »

Quote from: MrPhotographer on September 27, 2010, 12:52:35 AM

If Microsoft made a camera, they would have you beta test it first, then charge you for all your work. Also they would retain copyright on all the pictures you've shot with their camera, since they only really sold you a license to use the camera.

Damn Suits

What if Microsoft made digital cameras?