[digiKam-users] How to interpret DigiKam error message when connecting to camera

[a squared]

I do not know who Dilbert, or his boss, are and knowing now that I sound
like them hasn't informed me more about the cause of the problem I am
having. Please explain the significance of your assessment.

I have now examined the SD Card Association's Simplified Specification for
these cards. The insertion/ejection life cycle data has been removed from
the specification. Other analyst's assessments, discoverable by a
Google search, suggest a life-time of thousands of cycles. This implies
that these devices are physically robust beyond average consumer
requirements. Electrical read/write cycle life time appears, from similar
sources, to be in the many 10's of thousands of cycles. My comment about SD
cards not being meant to be repeatedly inserted/removed was an opinion that
is/was wrong. Mea culpa.

However, I believe there is more work involved in using a card reader than
in directly connecting a camera. I think it is not necessary to detail the
individual steps of the two techniques in order to support my view. On my
Fuji camera, if I don't exploit the technique of allowing the spring to
forcibly eject the card, then it takes quite a bit of messing about,  in a
very confined space, to get one's fingers around the card to pull it out.
If I use the spring, the card is fired more than a meter or two away from
the camera and has been known to land in my cup of tea. Directly connecting
the camera is easier.

My point about the function of reading the card while it is in the camera
being implemented within DK is that DK should therefore provide a more
meaningful error message than that which I receive. You have elaborated
and provided a more complete analysis, confirming that DK is involved in
this process. My point stands, does it not ?

About your numbered comments:
1. The number of people successfully using DK, or the size of their data
transfers, has no bearing on the fact that it doesn't work in my
environment. I have few skills, but I do clearly remember, almost 40 years
ago when I had global responsibility for technical support  - hardware and
software  - for a range of computer systems , that one of my biggest
challenges was to teach my staff that because we didn't have a
problem didn't mean that our customers didn't have problems. The operating
environments are different. the factors that can invoke an error situation
are different. Don't castigate the victim.

2. If you have a mind set that looks for insulting assertions, you are
possibly bound to find them. That is no proof that they exist or were
intended.

3. I thought that my original post was a request for help.

4. I'm not sure what level of detail you are suggesting should have been
included in my original post; cables, for instance: what are  the
salient and relevant properties and how could I assess and enumerate them?
How would I know what else is running that is relevant? The list of active
processes in Cinnamon is pretty daunting; how do I know which are relevant?
In fact this is a back-to-front approach to PSI: a technical support person
should be telling me precisely what information is required and how I
should acquire it. It is my contention that DK knows precisely why it is
unable to communicate with my camera and that this should point me to the
necessary solution, instead of providing me with a generic 'computer says
no' style of error. That is just lazy programming. if somebody feels
insulted by that they need some counselling on self assurance.

In conclusion, I have decided that my installation of DK is functionally
unable to read from a directly connected camera and I have reverted to
using a card reader. Life is too short -for me.

On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 18:29, <digikam at 911networks.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 17:20:55 +0100
> a squared <amfev44 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have to ask: was this function fully tested?
>
> You sound like Dilbert's pointy-hair boss :(
>
> > The scenario suggests there is some difference of opinion between
> > Linux and DK.  I'm not capable of figuring this out. Yes, I could
> > remove the SD card and use a card reader, but this is a hassle
>
> Yes I understand but to me it's not anymore hassle than plugging and
> unplugging the camera into the computer
>
> > and the card is not really meant to be repeatedly removed from and
> > re-inserted into the camera.
>
> Uh? Why? What qualification do you have to make such a statement?
>
> > The function to read from the card while still in the camera is,
> > apparently, a function of DK.
>
> Actually it's a function of the OS, the camera, the transport
> protocol and the software (DK)
>
> >
> > When will it be offered in a working form or when will effective
> > problem source identification procedures be provided (that's a
> > question to the developers)?
>
> 1. There are tenS of thousandS of users that are using DK everyday,
> including me, getting their images into DK with some very large
> libraries.
> 2. I find your assertions very insulting to the people that have
> worked and have contributed very hard to DK.
> 3. Instead, you could state that you have a problem with... and some
> people would try to help.
> 4. You have not provided any useful information like computer,
> camera, cables, what else is running... what are the exact steps?...
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20200628/a12918cc/attachment.htm>