4 ms·
Any manufacturer that’s even remotely serious wouldn’t need to test their own product to find out how it works. Each component in the chain, from trigger button
by strogonoff 6y ago
Any manufacturer that’s even remotely serious wouldn’t need to test their own product to find out how it works. Each component in the chain, from trigger button to storage I/O, had presumably been tested and its tolerances documented. Responding to such a query could (should?) be as easy as checking the specs. “In theory this camera can support up to N triggers per second, which is the limit for part X, but you will need your storage to sustain writes at speed S or the buffer will fill up, and by the way this wasn’t tested end-to-end and will void your warranty.”
It’s more likely they just wouldn’t tell for whatever reason. A mass manufacturer probably doesn’t want to give an impression that they encourage a way of using the units not explicitly mentioned in the manual to avoid any complaints/lawsuits. Also, some companies require tech support staff to respond to a certain minimum number of tickets per hour (effectively penalizing personnel for doing anything beyond provided checklists, which consulting part specs definitely would be).
- sidpatil 6y ago> A mass manufacturer probably doesn’t want to give an impression that they encourage a way of using the units not explicitly mentioned in the manual to avoid any complaints/lawsuits. That, or they may have a product line which is designed for that usage case, and they don't want to hurt its sales.
- SulfurHexaFluri 6y agoI suspect its 1000x easier to just wire an arduino to the trigger and have it pulse rapidly than it is to pour over spec sheets and only end up with a "It looks like it should work"
- strogonoff 6y agoAre you saying that testing is a huge amount of work, and looking at specs is further 1000x harder? Tech support staff might not have a test bench at hand at all times (and an Arduino unit out of the blue might’ve required a month to approve and purchase), but they don’t need any equipment to pull specs for a part from internal documentation, which support staff must be very adept at scanning by the nature of their job. I believe this is what tech support more or less for, in a better world. They probably had an answer at their fingertips without any need for testing, but communicating it was against their/company’s interests.
- SulfurHexaFluri 6y agoI doubt a support person from a camera company even has the skills to understand the datasheets. 99.9% of their job is explaining things in the public manual and handling product returns. The only people with the skills to understand it would be the engineers and it would be a waste of time assigning them to investigate this unsupported hack.
- strogonoff 6y agoI know some tech support folks and consulting docs and specs is more than comfortably within their reach. In fact, it’s what they do at better companies where management does not preclude them from doing their job properly and provides access to relevant data.
- luma 6y agoIt's more likely still that the person answering emails didn't know the answer, and either was unmotivated or unable to put the question in front of someone who did know the answer and then follow up with them to respond. This is when having contacts inside a company helps. Either be a big enough customer to warrant their attention by default, or make friends with the company rep when she calls or stops by. If you aren't a large enough customer to have either of those options available to you, then you get the attention they feel you are worth as an end user.