8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important call and could
he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that if I caught him using the
phone for anyother reason he would lose a days pay.

Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

--
Adam

On 24/12/2012 16:14, ARWadsworth wrote:
8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important call and could
he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that if I caught him using the
phone for anyother reason he would lose a days pay.

Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?


8.00am and one second..... :-)

Stephen

10 30 ish?

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important call and
could he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that if I caught him
using the phone for anyother reason he would lose a days pay.

Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

--
Adam

I do feel that smartphones particularly are addictive, and maybe there needs
to be some form of counselling for this.

Personally I have not ventured down this alley, as I do like to be out of
touch at times just like we all used to be.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important call and
could he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that if I caught him
using the phone for anyother reason he would lose a days pay.

Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

--
Adam

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:38:08 -0000, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

Personally I have not ventured down this alley, as I do like to be out of
touch at times just like we all used to be.

That's simple; you just ignore it or switch it off.
I regard most phone calls as intrusions and uninvited, so the caller
can take their chances whether I'm available or not.

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 21:30:29 +0000, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

Personally I have not ventured down this alley, as I do like to be out
of touch at times just like we all used to be.

That's simple; you just ignore it or switch it off.
I regard most phone calls as intrusions and uninvited, so the caller
can take their chances whether I'm available or not.

Yep and with caller ID you can decide if you want to speak to them before
answering as well. If I'm busy well tough that's what voice mail or
answering machines are for...

I find it very rude of people who must answer every call they get
instantly without an apology to me for the interuption to our
conversation. All it takes is a glance at the phone, and "Sorry, must
answer this" if they *really* do need to answer it, which TBH isn't
likely to be every call they get.

--
Cheers
Dave.

I have not bought one of the talking caller thingies, as the voice is an
intrusion in itself and they seem to have screwed up the mobile version of
this. It cannot say simple words.Cyril for example comes out as sigh rill

Brian

--
From the Bed of Brian Gaff.
The email is valid as
Blind user.
"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.co.uk...
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 21:30:29 +0000, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

Personally I have not ventured down this alley, as I do like to be out
of touch at times just like we all used to be.

That's simple; you just ignore it or switch it off.
I regard most phone calls as intrusions and uninvited, so the caller
can take their chances whether I'm available or not.

Yep and with caller ID you can decide if you want to speak to them before
answering as well. If I'm busy well tough that's what voice mail or
answering machines are for...

I find it very rude of people who must answer every call they get
instantly without an apology to me for the interuption to our
conversation. All it takes is a glance at the phone, and "Sorry, must
answer this" if they *really* do need to answer it, which TBH isn't
likely to be every call they get.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Dec 25, 1:58*am, "Brian Gaff" wrote:
I have not bought one of the talking caller thingies, as the voice is an
intrusion in itself and they *seem to have screwed up the mobile version of
this. It cannot say simple words.Cyril for example comes out as sigh rill

Brian
American pronunciation.
Like Colin Powell.
Pronounced Coe-lin.

Ah yes, but why have one if you are not going to use it much. I have a basic
phone and often only take it with me because I might be let down by
transport.

Brian

--
From the Bed of Brian Gaff.
The email is valid as
Blind user.
"Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:38:08 -0000, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

Personally I have not ventured down this alley, as I do like to be out of
touch at times just like we all used to be.

That's simple; you just ignore it or switch it off.
I regard most phone calls as intrusions and uninvited, so the caller
can take their chances whether I'm available or not.

On 24/12/2012 16:38, Brian Gaff wrote:


Personally I have not ventured down this alley, as I do like to be out of
touch at times just like we all used to be.


You don't have you answer it. Conveniently there are many dead spots
for mobile reception or the battery has gone flat.

--
mailto:news{at}admac(dot}myzen{dot}co{dot}uk

ARWadsworth wrote:

8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important call and could
he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that if I caught him using the
phone for anyother reason he would lose a days pay.

Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

8:05 AM

On 24/12/12 16:14, ARWadsworth wrote:
8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important call and could
he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that if I caught him using the
phone for anyother reason he would lose a days pay.

Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

8:12?



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/12/12 16:14, ARWadsworth wrote:
8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important call
and could he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that if I
caught him using the phone for anyother reason he would lose a days
pay. Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

8:12?


It was 8:29am.

Working on a new build with no toilet and I told him I was going for a ****.
I just walked around the building and watched him through the window using
his phone.

I did not need a ****, I just wanted to catch him using the mobile phone.

--
Adam

On Dec 25, 4:18*am, "ARW" wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/12/12 16:14, ARWadsworth wrote:
8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important call
and could he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that if I
caught him using the phone for anyother reason he would lose a days
pay. Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

8:12?

It was 8:29am.

Working on a new build with no toilet and I told him I was going for a ****.
I just walked around the building and watched him through the window using
his phone.

I did not need a ****, I just wanted to catch him using the mobile phone.

--
Adam

So who gets the prize?

harry wrote:
On Dec 25, 4:18 am, "ARW" wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/12/12 16:14, ARWadsworth wrote:
8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important
call and could he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that
if I caught him using the phone for anyother reason he would
lose a days pay. Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

8:12?

It was 8:29am.

Working on a new build with no toilet and I told him I was going
for a ****. I just walked around the building and watched him
through the window using his phone.

I did not need a ****, I just wanted to catch him using the mobile
phone.

--
Adam

So who gets the prize?

It's not worth winnng - it was his days wage.

--
Adam

On 25/12/12 09:26, ARW wrote:
harry wrote:
On Dec 25, 4:18 am, "ARW" wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/12/12 16:14, ARWadsworth wrote:
8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important
call and could he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that
if I caught him using the phone for anyother reason he would
lose a days pay. Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

8:12?

It was 8:29am.

Working on a new build with no toilet and I told him I was going
for a ****. I just walked around the building and watched him
through the window using his phone.

I did not need a ****, I just wanted to catch him using the mobile
phone.

--
Adam

So who gets the prize?

It's not worth winnng - it was his days wage.

Work is a terrible intrusion into ones social life.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On 25/12/2012 09:26, ARW wrote:

It's not worth winnng - it was his days wage.


Why would anyone even begin to want to work for you?

Presumably, as you weren't paying him for the day, he went home at 8.30?
Or did you expect him to keep working for nothing just because you are
such a truly lovely person?

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, ARWadsworth wrote:

8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important call and
could he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that if I caught him
using the phone for anyother reason he would lose a days pay.

Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

Now if the Subject: was worded a little differently I'd say this is one
of the brighter spark apprentices and he refrained from using his phone,
took the important call and then handed his phone over, keeping days pay
and earninga brownie point or three.

But as the Subject: is worded as it is 0803.

--
Cheers
Dave.

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, ARWadsworth wrote:

8am this morning he said that he was waiting for an important call
and could he keep his phone with him. I said yes and that if I
caught him using the phone for anyother reason he would lose a days
pay.

Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

Now if the Subject: was worded a little differently I'd say this is
one of the brighter spark apprentices and he refrained from using his
phone, took the important call and then handed his phone over,
keeping days pay and earninga brownie point or three.

The smarter apprentices are required to keep their mobiles with them. They
are required to take works calls.

--
Adam

On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

I think smartphones warrent their own entry in the survival "rule of
threes": 3 weeks without food, 3 days without water, 3 hours without
shelter, 3 minutes without air, 3 seconds without facebook.

On 24/12/2012 20:34, Caecilius wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

I think smartphones warrent their own entry in the survival "rule of
threes": 3 weeks without food, 3 days without water, 3 hours without
shelter, 3 minutes without air, 3 seconds without facebook.

I have a mobile phone, that is what it is, a phone. If I want a camera I
buy one. I also have an e reader, now my daughter wants one, but she
wants it combined with...., so is having awful trouble deciding which
"tablet" to buy. She claims that she does not want to carry different
gadgets with her, so want a combi. Mind you perhaps I should buy one
with a decent memory, as mine is failing!

--
Remember the early bird may catch the worm but the second mouse gets the
cheese.

Broadback wrote:
On 24/12/2012 20:34, Caecilius wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

I think smartphones warrent their own entry in the survival "rule of
threes": 3 weeks without food, 3 days without water, 3 hours without
shelter, 3 minutes without air, 3 seconds without facebook.

I have a mobile phone, that is what it is, a phone. If I want a camera I
buy one. I also have an e reader, now my daughter wants one, but she
wants it combined with...., so is having awful trouble deciding which
"tablet" to buy. She claims that she does not want to carry different
gadgets with her, so want a combi. Mind you perhaps I should buy one with
a decent memory, as mine is failing!

But having a decent camera built into a smartphone means I always have a
decent camera with me, and am able to send the pictures taken immediately
to other people in high quality. Much better than having to say "hang on
half an hour while I go and get my camera, find it the batteries have lost
charge since I last used it, charge them up and get ready to take a photo".
I find I have many more pictures that I like and keep just because it takes
me a few seconds to get the camera ready and take the photo.

In message

, Simon Finnigan writes
Broadback wrote:
On 24/12/2012 20:34, Caecilius wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

I think smartphones warrent their own entry in the survival "rule of
threes": 3 weeks without food, 3 days without water, 3 hours without
shelter, 3 minutes without air, 3 seconds without facebook.

I have a mobile phone, that is what it is, a phone. If I want a camera I
buy one. I also have an e reader, now my daughter wants one, but she
wants it combined with...., so is having awful trouble deciding which
"tablet" to buy. She claims that she does not want to carry different
gadgets with her, so want a combi. Mind you perhaps I should buy one with
a decent memory, as mine is failing!

But having a decent camera built into a smartphone means I always have a
decent camera with me, and am able to send the pictures taken immediately
to other people in high quality. Much better than having to say "hang on
half an hour while I go and get my camera, find it the batteries have lost
charge since I last used it, charge them up and get ready to take a photo".
I find I have many more pictures that I like and keep just because it takes
me a few seconds to get the camera ready and take the photo.
There's more to a decent camera than megapixels
--
bert

"bert" ] wrote in message
...
In message

, Simon Finnigan writes
Broadback wrote:
On 24/12/2012 20:34, Caecilius wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

I think smartphones warrent their own entry in the survival "rule of
threes": 3 weeks without food, 3 days without water, 3 hours without
shelter, 3 minutes without air, 3 seconds without facebook.

I have a mobile phone, that is what it is, a phone. If I want a camera I
buy one. I also have an e reader, now my daughter wants one, but she
wants it combined with...., so is having awful trouble deciding which
"tablet" to buy. She claims that she does not want to carry different
gadgets with her, so want a combi. Mind you perhaps I should buy one
with
a decent memory, as mine is failing!

But having a decent camera built into a smartphone means I always have a
decent camera with me, and am able to send the pictures taken immediately
to other people in high quality. Much better than having to say "hang on
half an hour while I go and get my camera, find it the batteries have lost
charge since I last used it, charge them up and get ready to take a
photo".
I find I have many more pictures that I like and keep just because it
takes
me a few seconds to get the camera ready and take the photo.

There's more to a decent camera than megapixels

But that may be all you need when someone has just
driven into your car and you want to take a picture of
their face so they can't claim it wasn't them driving at
the time etc.

On 26/12/2012 14:58, bert wrote:
There's more to a decent camera than megapixels

That's true ... but... the best camera in the world is the one you have
with you.

My 'phone will take 2MP pictures that are good enough to stick on a
screen. Provided the light is good and I don't want to zoom that is.

I used it yesterday to take a video of a rather wet road.

Andy

bert ] wrote:
In message
, Simon Finnigan writes
Broadback wrote:
On 24/12/2012 20:34, Caecilius wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

I think smartphones warrent their own entry in the survival "rule of
threes": 3 weeks without food, 3 days without water, 3 hours without
shelter, 3 minutes without air, 3 seconds without facebook.

I have a mobile phone, that is what it is, a phone. If I want a camera I
buy one. I also have an e reader, now my daughter wants one, but she
wants it combined with...., so is having awful trouble deciding which
"tablet" to buy. She claims that she does not want to carry different
gadgets with her, so want a combi. Mind you perhaps I should buy one with
a decent memory, as mine is failing!

But having a decent camera built into a smartphone means I always have a
decent camera with me, and am able to send the pictures taken immediately
to other people in high quality. Much better than having to say "hang on
half an hour while I go and get my camera, find it the batteries have lost
charge since I last used it, charge them up and get ready to take a photo".
I find I have many more pictures that I like and keep just because it takes
me a few seconds to get the camera ready and take the photo.
There's more to a decent camera than megapixels

Like flash, reasonable optics, ability to take a fair photo in low light
conditions, ability to automatically backup my photos the moment I get in
range of a wifi network I've connected the camera to in the past, large
memory to take many photos, ability to take panorama photographs, ability
to record HD video that is good envy to watch on a large TV? My iPhone 5
ticks all those boxes.

On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 15:45:22 +0000, Simon Finnigan wrote:
But having a decent camera built into a smartphone means I always have a
decent camera with me, and am able to send the pictures taken
immediately to other people in high quality. Much better than having to
say "hang on half an hour while I go and get my camera, find it the
batteries have lost charge since I last used it, charge them up and get
ready to take a photo". I find I have many more pictures that I like and
keep just because it takes me a few seconds to get the camera ready and
take the photo.

Well, I like having a decent camera with a decent lens, the batteries
last for ages between charges, and if anyone I know is so impatient that
they can't wait for half an hour for something I'd probably just tell
them to feck off anyway.

Jules Richardson wrote:
On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 15:45:22 +0000, Simon Finnigan wrote:
But having a decent camera built into a smartphone means I always have a
decent camera with me, and am able to send the pictures taken
immediately to other people in high quality. Much better than having to
say "hang on half an hour while I go and get my camera, find it the
batteries have lost charge since I last used it, charge them up and get
ready to take a photo". I find I have many more pictures that I like and
keep just because it takes me a few seconds to get the camera ready and
take the photo.

Well, I like having a decent camera with a decent lens, the batteries
last for ages between charges, and if anyone I know is so impatient that
they can't wait for half an hour for something I'd probably just tell
them to feck off anyway.

Which works for you, personally I prefer being able to take a good quality
photo at any time without needing notice to bring my camera with me. Not to
mention having to carry a bulky camera, spare batteries, something to back
the photos up onto............

"Jules Richardson" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 15:45:22 +0000, Simon Finnigan wrote:
But having a decent camera built into a smartphone means I always have a
decent camera with me, and am able to send the pictures taken
immediately to other people in high quality. Much better than having to
say "hang on half an hour while I go and get my camera, find it the
batteries have lost charge since I last used it, charge them up and get
ready to take a photo". I find I have many more pictures that I like and
keep just because it takes me a few seconds to get the camera ready and
take the photo.

Well, I like having a decent camera with a decent lens, the batteries
last for ages between charges, and if anyone I know is so impatient that
they can't wait for half an hour for something I'd probably just tell
them to feck off anyway.

Doesnt work that way with an accident etc.

Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,
Simon Finnigan wrote:

Broadback wrote:
On 24/12/2012 20:34, Caecilius wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?
I think smartphones warrent their own entry in the survival "rule of
threes": 3 weeks without food, 3 days without water, 3 hours without
shelter, 3 minutes without air, 3 seconds without facebook.
I have a mobile phone, that is what it is, a phone. If I want a camera I
buy one. I also have an e reader, now my daughter wants one, but she
wants it combined with...., so is having awful trouble deciding which
"tablet" to buy. She claims that she does not want to carry different
gadgets with her, so want a combi. Mind you perhaps I should buy one with
a decent memory, as mine is failing!
But having a decent camera built into a smartphone means I always have a
decent camera with me, and am able to send the pictures taken immediately
to other people in high quality.

Poor quality, you mean. The optics is unavoidably going to be crap.

Might be worth looking at. Modern camera phone. Not everyone needs a
£15,000 level camera, and for those of us that only need good quality
photographs, a smart phone is more than enough.

Much better than having to say "hang on
half an hour while I go and get my camera, find it the batteries have lost
charge since I last used it, charge them up and get ready to take a photo".

Eneloop batteries of similar.

Ok, so her limiting herself to a camera that takes AA or similar batteries,
taking a lot of cameras on the market out of the question.

I find I have many more pictures that I like and keep just because it takes
me a few seconds to get the camera ready and take the photo.

Yes, I really regret not having a camera in my pocket at all times, for
those bank robberies, car crashes, flying saucers, and other similar
things that happen to me on a daily basis.

For those of us with friends and family that we enjoy time with, and want
photos to remember that (say my four year old niece opening her Christmas
presents), the ability to take photographs is quite useful.

Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,
Simon Finnigan wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,
Simon Finnigan wrote:
Broadback wrote:
On 24/12/2012 20:34, Caecilius wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?
I think smartphones warrent their own entry in the survival "rule of
threes": 3 weeks without food, 3 days without water, 3 hours without
shelter, 3 minutes without air, 3 seconds without facebook.
I have a mobile phone, that is what it is, a phone. If I want a camera I
buy one. I also have an e reader, now my daughter wants one, but she
wants it combined with...., so is having awful trouble deciding which
"tablet" to buy. She claims that she does not want to carry different
gadgets with her, so want a combi. Mind you perhaps I should buy one with
a decent memory, as mine is failing!
But having a decent camera built into a smartphone means I always have a
decent camera with me, and am able to send the pictures taken immediately
to other people in high quality.
Poor quality, you mean. The optics is unavoidably going to be crap.
Might be worth looking at. Modern camera phone. Not everyone needs a
£15,000 level camera, and for those of us that only need good quality
photographs, a smart phone is more than enough.

Who's talking about fifteen grand? You can get an excellent DSLR or
mirrorless for 400-500 or so. With a proper lens, not a pinhole.

Much better than having to say "hang on
half an hour while I go and get my camera, find it the batteries have lost
charge since I last used it, charge them up and get ready to take a photo".
Eneloop batteries of similar.
Ok, so her limiting herself to a camera that takes AA or similar batteries,
taking a lot of cameras on the market out of the question. I find
I have many more pictures that I like and keep just because it takes
me a few seconds to get the camera ready and take the photo.
Yes, I really regret not having a camera in my pocket at all times, for
those bank robberies, car crashes, flying saucers, and other similar
things that happen to me on a daily basis.
For those of us with friends and family that we enjoy time with, and want
photos to remember that (say my four year old niece opening her Christmas
presents), the ability to take photographs is quite useful.

If you know that's what she's gonna do, you can be ready.

Much easier to always have a good camera with me, rather than having to
plan everything and carry a bag with me for the camera, laptop, tablet,
diary etc my smartphone replaces :-)

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Who's talking about fifteen grand? You can get an excellent DSLR or
mirrorless for 400-500 or so. With a proper lens, not a pinhole.

Which will fit neatly in your pocket, like a phone?

--
*I never drink water because of the disgusting things that fish do in it..

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 26/12/2012 20:55, Tim Streater wrote:

8


Might be worth looking at. Modern camera phone. Not everyone needs a
£15,000 level camera, and for those of us that only need good quality
photographs, a smart phone is more than enough.

Who's talking about fifteen grand? You can get an excellent DSLR or
mirrorless for 400-500 or so. With a proper lens, not a pinhole.

I don't think you know what a decent phone camera can do these days.
They have similar performance to compact cameras but tend to have weak
flashes and no zoom.
The lack of zoom actually makes them better optically than many compact
zoom cameras.

While I prefer to carry around my waterproof compact most of the time I
wouldn't be worried if I had to use the phones camera as it easily
matches the Nikon compact.


Of course if you know you want to take some snaps the DSLR is the better
choice for quality, its just not very portable and mine doesn't do 1080p
video like the phone does..

Huge wrote:
On 2012-12-26, Tim Streater wrote:
In article


and for those of us that only need good quality
photographs, a smart phone is ...

... totally inadequate.

Hardly - not even the camera snobs I know are making the claim that a good
smart phone camera is inadequate. Maybe if you want to print photographs at
A0 and bigger, but for most people in most situations, there's so little
difference between a smart phone and a consumer level camera you'd be hard
pushed to tell the difference when printed out at normal size, or viewed on
a normal monitor.

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article

,
Simon Finnigan wrote:

Broadback wrote:
On 24/12/2012 20:34, Caecilius wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

I think smartphones warrent their own entry in the survival "rule of
threes": 3 weeks without food, 3 days without water, 3 hours without
shelter, 3 minutes without air, 3 seconds without facebook.

I have a mobile phone, that is what it is, a phone. If I want a camera
I
buy one. I also have an e reader, now my daughter wants one, but she
wants it combined with...., so is having awful trouble deciding which
"tablet" to buy. She claims that she does not want to carry different
gadgets with her, so want a combi. Mind you perhaps I should buy one
with
a decent memory, as mine is failing!

But having a decent camera built into a smartphone means I always have a
decent camera with me, and am able to send the pictures taken immediately
to other people in high quality.

Poor quality, you mean. The optics is unavoidably going to be crap.

Much better than having to say "hang on
half an hour while I go and get my camera, find it the batteries have
lost
charge since I last used it, charge them up and get ready to take a
photo".

Eneloop batteries of similar.

I find I have many more pictures that I like and keep just because it
takes
me a few seconds to get the camera ready and take the photo.

Yes, I really regret not having a camera in my pocket at all times, for
those bank robberies, car crashes, flying saucers, and other similar
things that happen to me on a daily basis.

You've got that the wrong way round.

If these things did happen on a daily basis then you would carry your proper
camera with you at all times.

It's because they don't that you need an occasional use camera immediately
available as a backup

tim

tim..... wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
Yes, I really regret not having a camera in my pocket at all times,
for those bank robberies, car crashes, flying saucers, and other
similar things that happen to me on a daily basis.

You've got that the wrong way round.

If these things did happen on a daily basis then you would carry your
proper camera with you at all times.

It's because they don't that you need an occasional use camera
immediately available as a backup

One of these, perhaps? :-

http://www.nokia.com/global/products/phone/808pureview/


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

"tim....." wrote:
"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article
,
Simon Finnigan wrote:

Broadback wrote:
On 24/12/2012 20:34, Caecilius wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 16:14:15 -0000, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
Any guesses at what time he lost the days pay?

I think smartphones warrent their own entry in the survival "rule of
threes": 3 weeks without food, 3 days without water, 3 hours without
shelter, 3 minutes without air, 3 seconds without facebook.

I have a mobile phone, that is what it is, a phone. If I want a camera I
buy one. I also have an e reader, now my daughter wants one, but she
wants it combined with...., so is having awful trouble deciding which
"tablet" to buy. She claims that she does not want to carry different
gadgets with her, so want a combi. Mind you perhaps I should buy one with
a decent memory, as mine is failing!

But having a decent camera built into a smartphone means I always have a
decent camera with me, and am able to send the pictures taken immediately
to other people in high quality.

Poor quality, you mean. The optics is unavoidably going to be crap.

Much better than having to say "hang on
half an hour while I go and get my camera, find it the batteries have lost
charge since I last used it, charge them up and get ready to take a photo".

Eneloop batteries of similar.

I find I have many more pictures that I like and keep just because it takes
me a few seconds to get the camera ready and take the photo.

Yes, I really regret not having a camera in my pocket at all times, for
those bank robberies, car crashes, flying saucers, and other similar
things that happen to me on a daily basis.

You've got that the wrong way round.

If these things did happen on a daily basis then you would carry your
proper camera with you at all times.

It's because they don't that you need an occasional use camera
immediately available as a backup

tim

I do carry my proper camera round with me - in my smartphone. I've not used
my proper camera is over three years now since its just not worth it. It's
too bulky and annoying to have with me, so never gets taken out unless its
a special occasion, and I kept forgetting it then.

In message , Tim
Streater writes
In article ,
"tim....." wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...

Yes, I really regret not having a camera in my pocket at all times,
for those bank robberies, car crashes, flying saucers, and other
similar things that happen to me on a daily basis.
You've got that the wrong way round.
If these things did happen on a daily basis then you would carry
your proper camera with you at all times.
It's because they don't that you need an occasional use camera
immediately available as a backup

It's because they don't that I don't need a ****ing camera in my
pocket. My mobile is turned off 99% of the time and I was able - albeit
I had to search a bit - to get one without a camera and with the
minimum of other ****.

And probably cost you about a tenner
--
bert