For all we know they introduce a new series of HDTV camcorder, or a new brand of printers, or, well... They have 80 new products on showcase, according to that Photokina floorplan.
They currently only have 34 new product posted on the Canon USA website. I think there are quite a few announcements yet to come, but most of it will probably be other products like software, printers, camcorders, etc.
jwil wrote:
Unfortunately my original intention had been for them to be linked. On other forums pasting a the URL of an image without [ img ] tags creates a link, apparently not so on this forum.
Then a certain over-anxious moderater jumped on it while I was making an edit to just reference the HTML page. I'd PM'd him to explain, but apparently he's left his admonishment up for all to see and be confused by.
I think maybe someone had a bit too much caffiene that day. ;-)
Excuse me 'jwil', but at least reference reality, not some manipulated version of it. Had you not chosen to delete my 'Edited by' reference (placed at 12:37 GMT when I modified the links, right before I posted), I might have entertained your request to 'remove the admonishment' after you claim to have 'modified the links'. I had fixed the links a full 2 hours before you 'edited' your post by (only) deleting the 'Edited by' text.
Your claim that I 'jumped on it' "while you were making an edit" is quite simply false. There was nothing confusing about my post, it was your selective alteration of your originally-edited post that confused the situation, as evidenced by the timestamp of your 'Edited by' being two hours after my discrete post that followed your initial post (with the embedded links).
Jeff
FM.com Moderator
PS: For those unclear on our linking rules here at FM.com, from the Rules page:
"Do not violate copyright laws, or misrepresent someone else's work as your own. You may not use or publish any of the photographs displayed on these pages without express permission from the original photographer. No exceptions."
Jeff wrote:
Excuse me 'jwil', but at least reference reality, not some manipulated version of it. Had you not chosen to delete my 'Edited by' reference (placed at 12:37 GMT when I modified the links, right before I posted), I might have entertained your request to 'remove the admonishment' after you claim to have 'modified the links'. I had fixed the links a full 2 hours before you 'edited' your post by (only) deleting the 'Edited by' text.
[/OT]
In other words, a feature request for a forum update (when/if that will take place) is to have the forum software keep track of post-edits and add it automatically to the bottom end of the post, instead of putting it as text in the user-editable domain.
Sorry, also OT. Then again, this thread is so massive that it will probably not register for long
Jeff wrote:
Excuse me 'jwil', but at least reference reality, not some manipulated version of it. Had you not chosen to delete my 'Edited by' reference (placed at 12:37 GMT when I modified the links, right before I posted), I might have entertained your request to 'remove the admonishment' after you claim to have 'modified the links'. I had fixed the links a full 2 hours before you 'edited' your post by (only) deleting the 'Edited by' text.
Your claim that I 'jumped on it' "while you were making an edit" is quite simply false. There was nothing confusing about my post, it was your selective alteration of your originally-edited post that confused the situation, as evidenced by the timestamp of your 'Edited by' being two hours after my discrete post that followed your initial post (with the embedded links).
Jeff
FM.com Moderator
PS: For those unclear on our linking rules here at FM.com, from the Rules page:
Excuse me? I WAS making an edit. I'll concede that perhaps you were making one at the time also, but if you weren't so overzealous as a moderator perhaps you could have waited the 3 minutes it took me to correct my own error.
How dare you accuse me of lying. Perhaps in the future you would like to check a timestap before rapidly jumping on the authoritarian bandwagon and editing MY post for me. I am an adult and quite capable of correcting a post myself. In the future try to moderate yourself before moderating others and send me damn PM rather than do this crap again.
Who the hell do you think you are making an accusation like that.
And for clarification when I made my edit (actually I did make two) I didn't read the "modified by" lines and I just deleted them. The first edit I made was for the links and the second for spelling. You might want to reference my post count and realize that I haven't yet figured out the quirks of the custom FM forum software.
No problem, it's funny that there was never an edit stamp of yours until two hours later. I'm also not sure how you could have 'edited the links' when I already had (in my overzealous state) edited them. Please PM if you'd like to comment further.
Not sure what happens if a post is edited in the same time by a moderator and by the poster... Does the last edition erase the previous one ? If yes, it might be an issue at times: both the moderator and the poster start editing the original version of the post and in the end both are sure there changes have been commited although only the last commit is taken into account...
Be courteous, and polite. Do not use profanity, viciously bash others, be rude, hateful, threatening, abusive, invasive, or otherwise violate any laws. By participating in this forum, you agree to any possible future rules amended, implicit, or implied.
Jeff wrote:
That's very true, but the links were (still) embedded when I edited them 4 minutes after he posted. I added the "_" to externalize the links.
If you edited his post only 4 minutes after he posted, then your lastest edit to reflect the proper series of edits is way off.
jwill posted Sep 16, 2006 at 08:33 PM
jeff replied 'not to embed' at Sep 16, 2006 at 08:38 PM
jwil says he linked to information in a following post at Sep 16, 2006 at 08:48 PM
And the post it all started with has: Edited by Jeff on Sep 16, 2006 at 12:37 PM GMT (Reason: un-embedded link to copyrighted material)
Something does not compute here, the times are off. But I'll shut my yap on this topic. Sorry for going off topic.
Jeff wrote:
Excuse me 'jwil', but at least reference reality, not some manipulated version of it.
Yikes!
Having some rather extensive background moderating discussion forums, may I suggest that you resist the temptation to go after an active and positive forum participant like jwil in the future?
Whoever was right, the moderator's work of keeping a forum on track (and minimizing the personal stuff that can ruin a forum) is easier when the moderator resists the temptation to "let 'em have it" in the forum. The potential for destructive effects on forum dialog is illustrated well by what this situation has done to the last few pages of discussion here.
If necessary, a personal message to jwil would suffice. Based on jwil's posting history, a moderator should assume that he is a person of some character and serious intent.
I also vote for removing the original response to jwil's message. It is only confusing in the current context.
Respectfully, and hoping that everyone will now move on...
Dan
Edited by danmitchell on Sep 19, 2006 at 08:58 AM GMT
Edited by danmitchell on Sep 19, 2006 at 07:44 PM GMT
Jeff wrote:
No problem, it's funny that there was never an edit stamp of yours until two hours later. I'm also not sure how you could have 'edited the links' when I already had (in my overzealous state) edited them. Please PM if you'd like to comment further.
Jeff
FM.com Moderator
Edited by Jeff on Sep 19, 2006 at 09:36 AM GMT
Sorry "jeff" but since you chose to air this on the forum I won't take it to PM. I edited my post immediately after posting it, not two hours later. I just took a look at the time stamps on my last two posts. You may not realize this, but the forum software localizes timestamps based on ysome time zone settings. Perhaps this is based on the server's time zone? I've seen this occur at more than one site.
Right now my posts are showing as having occured 2 hours earlier than the time it actually is on my computer.
And, lastly, the relative times are correct, based upon your specific settings in your User Profile (the reason for the apparent 8-hour discrepancy you quoted above). i.e. when I quote text with 'my' time settings, it may appear different based upon 'your' settings, though the timestamps in each post (which can't be edited) will be (relatively) correct.
Although entertaining, none of this back-and-forth is telling me anything that may or may not be true about what Canon will do for the mid- to pro- range of DSLRs at Photokina! Let's get back to talking about BS!!
But I'll shut my yap on this topic. Sorry for going off topic.