Apple QuickTake 100: 1994 Digital Camera Experience


Greetings and welcome to an LGR thing!
And this one right here is the Apple QuickTake 100 digital camera, developed in conjunction with Kodak and sold by Apple Computer beginning in February of
1994. And it was initially sold at a price of $749 US Dollars and was the
first color fully-digital camera to hit retail at less than $1000 on launch. And
even though there were later releases that connected to both Windows and Mac
OS, this original 100 model I have here only came with software to use with
Macintosh computers. It was also specifically geared towards taking
advantage of Power Macintosh hardware as this vibrant sticker on the front so
boldly proclaims. “The freedom to bring the world directly into your computer.”
Wow, all of the world just, right in there! This was immeasurably exciting in 1994!
No need to wait a week or two to get your roll of film developed, now you can
enjoy your photos the very same day. And not only that but it did so in 24-bit
color, which was still a notable accomplishment. Its nearest-priced
competitor the Logitech Fotoman Plus shot in black and white only, and the
color Dycam Model 4 cost nearly twice as much as the QuickTake 100. Yeah
that’s right, an Apple product that was both technically impressive *and* lower in
price than the competition! My how times change. I got this particular QuickTake
100 at a local Goodwill a while back, as seen on LGR Thrifts episode 30. I considered it quite a lucky find because coming across these original model 100s
can be a bit tough, especially complete in box and as lightly-used as this one
appeared to be. Speaking of that box let’s go ahead and get this thing open!
And starting right off here with some floppy disks, two of them that are just the
normal program to work with pretty much any Mac and then a third one to use if
you have a Power Mac. You also get a bit of Apple company paper work here: the
warranty and their software license agreement. As well as a 70 page user’s
guide for the Macintosh version of the QuickTake 100 here. All sorts of useful
information on how to set it up and use this thing which, again, was kind of a new
deal at this point in time. Most people didn’t even know digital cameras were a
thing, this is all pretty uncharted territory for everything from the
software itself to how to use the functions of the camera. New problems
like “oh no my camera won’t take pictures why might that be?” Well maybe it’s cuz
the memory is full. “What, a camera has memory, you have to erase it, that’s wild.”
And then in the bottom of the box tucked away in this little formed package are a
few different things. Starting with the wall charger for the nickel cadmium
batteries, well that was nice of them to include. You can just use normal AA
batteries of course, but it came with an official QuickTake charger as well as
some rechargeable batteries right here. Which I would have attempted to use, just
out of curiosity, had they not been leaking. You also get a cable to connect
to the computer and work with the camera and get your images and such. This is a
GeoPort serial data cable. And then of course there is the QuickTake 100
camera itself. And yeah it’s kind of a charmingly ugly beast, in my opinion. It’s
about the size and shape of a pair of small binoculars. It weighs 18.5 ounces with batteries installed, so just over one pound or half
a kilogram. On the front of it here with this little sliding cover that you move
to turn it on you have an 8mm fixed focus lens, the
equivalent of a 50mm lens on a 35 mil camera. With an aperture ranging
from f/2.8 to 16 and a focus range of four feet to infinity. As
well as shutter speeds between 1/30 and 1/175 of a second and
an ISO of approximately 85. Yeah this used a cut-down version of the CCD that was
used in the earlier Kodak DCS 200 digital camera back. That thing was an
$8,000 monster so having that kind of capability in something this size and
so relatively cheap was pretty neat! And your pictures were stored on one
megabyte of internal EPROM flash memory. It’s not removable, it’s just in there
all the time, but the nice part was that your photos were saved even if you
didn’t have any batteries installed. Unlike certain contemporaries like the
Fotoman that used volatile RAM, so you’d lose your pictures if the
batteries ran out or they were taken out or whatever. With a whole megabyte you
could get 32 pictures stored at 320×240 resolution or 8 pictures at 640×480.
Yes, a whopping 0.31 megapixel is what you get with this $750 camera from 1994.
Oh but hey, they threw in a free carrying strap, that’s nice. And before we get to
start taking some pictures, let’s take a look at a couple of the other little
things that are on here. Including this little pop-open side panel which
provides the serial connection as well as a place for the optional external DC
power supply. Along the bottom you have a standard tripod screw mount and these
two spots at the bottom are for hooking up the strap. And around the back is
where we have our viewfinder as well as an LCD panel. There are four different
functions here, the first one letting you change the flash functionality —
whether you want it on, off, or auto. A button for letting you switch between
the high and low-res image capturing modes. A button for enabling the timer
shutter release so that you, you know, can do timer-y things. And a recessed
button here to let you delete all of the images that are stored on the camera. Yep
all of them at once, only press that if you’re sure that nothing you’ve taken is
good. And finally when you’re ready to take yourself a photo you slide open the
front panel and the shutter release button is on the top. Just this awkward
plastic button that you smoosh inwards and there you go! *quick and quiet shutter sound* It quietly and rather
quickly takes and saves a photo, it’s a little quicker than some other digital
cameras I’ve used from this time period. Gets a full resolution image saved in
just a couple seconds! And of course to take a look at the photos we need a
computer, and for that I have chosen this lovely Power Macintosh
7300/200. *classic Mac startup chime* First things first you’ll need that
serial cable plugged into the back of the computer, and it’s going to be
plugged into either the printer or the modem port. And then the other end just
plugs into that little opening panel on the side of the QuickTake itself. And
that’s really it, just make sure it’s turned on and you’re ready to go! Just
stick those floppy disks in there and you’ll be installed and ready to go in
no time. So the QuickTake 1.0 software is what this comes with and well, it is
the most bare-bones of image retrieval and editing tools. In fact there’s not
much here in terms of editing, it really is mostly just for getting the camera
images off of the camera itself and onto your computer in the file format that
you choose. Anyway you can view them directly or you can choose to move all
of the images to your hard disk. And it does it pretty quickly, only taking about
a minute for the full one megabyte transfer. And then it’ll ask you if you
want to erase all of the images from the camera, “yes or no.” And if you say yes
it’ll bring up this little camera control panel and delete the images
straight away. And if you stick around in that camera controls area after that
then you can do pretty much everything that you could with the camera. Like
switching around the options for flash, resolution, and timer and deletion. But
you can also take a picture. You won’t be able to see a live image but you will
immediately see it quote-unquote “developed” and show up on your desktop.
And your results may vary. But yeah at this point you can view your images
within QuickTake — and you do need QuickTake. It actually shoots in its own
version of PICT images, that’s P-I-C-T. You can save in TIFF or uncompressed
PICT formats as well if you’d like, but those are gonna take up more disk space.
And yeah just check out some of these shots! As usual I like using older
digital cameras and just older cameras in general to take pictures of things
where you really wouldn’t be able to tell when it was taken. Stuff that’s
era-appropriate, like buildings and old electronics. Especially technology I just
like taking pictures of, with old technology. There’s something poetic
about that, especially cars. Oh my goodness, cars and appropriate
surroundings just make for some really convincing new/old pictures in my
opinion. And I did not actually notice until after I had already developed my
first set of pictures that a lot of my images were shifted to the left.
Like I was trying to center up these coffee mugs and then try to get a shot
through this chain-link fence at this cool background going on. But it ended up
with other stuff being in the way of the lens, it just wasn’t centered. And that is because — I didn’t actually think about
this when shooting — so, you have the flash over here and then you have the little
hole for the viewfinder to look through and a couple sensors right there. And the
actual lens isn’t where you would naturally expect it to be in the center
or close to it: it’s off to the right, when you’re shooting that is. So you have
to keep that in mind and compensate when you’re framing your photos through that
little slightly unhelpful viewfinder, just forcing you to get into the habit
of moving everything to the left when you’re trying to center up images or
frame them in a certain way. And let’s also talk about the color reproduction
because they were so boastful about that 24-bit color. And you know, a lot of these
early CCDs like this had very washed out kind of blown out colors, and this
one is no exception. I talked about all those specs before with the ISO and the
shutter speed being very limited, and indeed it is. But also just the colors
that it picks up are really strange. Like this ridiculous scene right here, that’s
not supposed to be anything pink there. That’s like reds and oranges and blues
and tans, and it just comes across as bizarre. Anything that’s red looks a
little more pink and anything that’s pink is ridiculously pink. And also you
have to keep in mind that this is not good at doing any kind of close-up
imagery, like this right here was shot about one foot away from this camera. And
of course it’s blurry, the minimum distance that it can photograph things
sharply is four feet. Which means that unless you have arms that are over four
feet long every single selfie you take is going to be a bit blurry. Or just
completely washed out because the flash goes crazy and does not know what to do
with things that are up-close and blown out by the flash. But hey, instant beauty
filter! Also worth noting that that file format that it saves things in by default,
you cannot open that in Photoshop or pretty much any modern image editor
without a plugin like UFRaw. And this one will take that raw image that’s been
compressed and you can save it as something else in GIMP or whatever you
want to do. Still that QuickTake format does a reasonable job of compression. It
makes every image about 116 kilobytes, whereas if you were saving
it as TIFF it’d be like 900K per picture. Certainly something that would
have been handy back in the days when floppy disks were your primary way of
transferring files like this. And really that is it for the Apple QuickTake 100!
I think it’s a pretty darn neat little camera. It’s interesting, if nothing else,
because it was so early to the party and really its results aren’t that bad for
1994. But at the same time I can absolutely see why it did not become
this massive success for Apple, because it just was too far ahead of its time
and nobody really knew what to do with it. Granted it still was followed up with a factory updated Plus version, and then two
follow-up models the 150 and the 200. But it was still only on the market three
years, being discontinued in 1997 when Steve Jobs returned to Apple and
drastically simplified their product line. Still, while the QuickTake wasn’t a
bastion of market success, I don’t exactly agree with all of the hyperbole
I see online retroactively branding it “an unmitigated disaster” and “one of the
single worst Apple products ever made.” Yes, it was expensive and low on features,
but that’s what you get when you’re an early entry in a new product category.
And if you actually look it up, critics at the time when this was released were
praising the QuickTake for being as affordable and capable as it was,
compared to the few other competing digital cameras back then. I know
pointing out Apple’s failures gets clicks, but I don’t think the QuickTake is
truly the worst. It was, however, absolutely early to the party and
expensive, costing more than a good 35mm SLR at the time. It is no wonder that it didn’t exactly fly off the shelves but you know, that is
exciting and unproven technology for you! No one knew where it was going,
photographers were debating whether or not digital could ever replace film. And
yeah, cameras like the QuickTake definitely wouldn’t replace film, but it
was an important step along the way to getting to that point. And if you enjoyed this episode of LGR
perhaps you would like to see some of my others! I like talking about old tech and
digital cameras, or computers, software, and oddware, all sorts of things every
Monday and Friday. So stick around if you like this kind of stuff. And as always
thank you very much for watching!

100 Comments

  1. LGR February 19, 2018 at 4:39 pm

    If you'd like to directly check out the photos I took for this video, here's an album for ya:
    https://imgur.com/a/5zYQ2

  2. KnorpelDeluxe January 26, 2019 at 8:56 am

    Good guy Apple. Supporting 4foot-arm-people in the 90s

  3. DW media February 2, 2019 at 10:52 am

    Still better than any android camera

  4. Ethan Whateley February 3, 2019 at 2:37 am

    well done! informative and very interesting.

  5. Procs February 3, 2019 at 4:05 pm

    9:49 “Every single selfie you take is going to be a bit blurry.” Perfect. Where can I buy this camera?

  6. SuperPussyFinger February 8, 2019 at 7:23 pm

    Boy, they really splurged on that luxury carrying strap.

  7. Game Mixer February 11, 2019 at 2:58 pm

    This Fotos are still better than the ones from my Phone

  8. John Dinopoulos February 13, 2019 at 1:40 pm

    Neato 🙂

  9. Gpcas9 February 17, 2019 at 12:48 pm

    You can set the date on a mac to 1956? Why?

  10. Gandalfwiz2007 February 19, 2019 at 4:32 pm

    11:25 "It was expensive and low on features" yep, you know it's an Apple product.

  11. Elliott Rowland March 12, 2019 at 2:23 pm

    I´m the 1,000th comment

  12. Manh nguyen duc March 14, 2019 at 7:35 pm

    Beauty filter before it was cool

  13. scot shabalam March 16, 2019 at 10:45 pm

    I think Apple was trying to copy the design of those Star Wars Binoculars https://timenerdworld.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/binocs1.jpg

  14. Just Another Youtube Channel March 18, 2019 at 8:14 am

    320×240 is decent for this era. Almost all of the monitors and TV’s wouldn’t be much more than 640×480. Even on a 800×600 monitor it’d still look pretty good.

  15. Popoy Bernardino March 24, 2019 at 4:39 pm

    Was this approved by steve jobs??? I don’t think sooooooo 😂😂😂

  16. douglas steel March 25, 2019 at 5:29 pm

    Oh God, had one of these at my first job. Absolutely shit. Wed just take photos to quick print and scan them instead. I'm old…

  17. only257 March 29, 2019 at 9:41 pm

    Awesome👻

  18. Christopher Hemmerling March 30, 2019 at 7:53 pm

    We used these to make "Internet Licenses" when I was in Middle school. The teacher convinced the school to buy one (it may have been a 150, but the 100 sounds more like it.) We were given instructions to correct for the off-center camera lens, and even take pictures with the camera vertical. It was very neat at the time when all we had were Classic II's, LC40's and 4 5600's, all running on Appletalk.

  19. The Metal Butcher April 4, 2019 at 6:22 am

    Pretty easy to see why old photogs thought film would never die…

  20. jesskcanada April 6, 2019 at 11:51 pm

    our school had one just like this but it was black-and-white

  21. Nate McPheeters April 8, 2019 at 8:45 am

    As in, "Quick! Take their money!"

  22. empty windex bottle April 12, 2019 at 4:21 pm

    Make apple great again

  23. Monty ___ April 12, 2019 at 9:07 pm

    Looks more like a mini-projector to me

  24. prismstudios001 April 16, 2019 at 8:00 pm

    WHAT?!!! No stickers in the box? 🍎

  25. Chris Sebes April 18, 2019 at 1:58 am

    My former employer gave me his in 1997 as a going-away present when I was leaving for college. They'd upgraded to a much more capable Kodak, but I was thrilled to get the Quicktake. The battery life was terrible and the photos were mediocre at best, but being able to take a photo and instantly use it in a project was awesome. I used it in a few projects through college and had fun with it until I got my Sony Mavica that could save to floppy discs.

  26. Chris L April 22, 2019 at 8:23 pm

    Kodak made this for Apple. they had their own version called the DC-50

  27. zermello franck April 28, 2019 at 9:47 am

    Apple failed in everything except computers and smartphone

  28. mateos vargas April 29, 2019 at 1:51 am

    Mmm leaking cadmium

  29. Ján Flaškár May 4, 2019 at 11:00 am

    https://youtu.be/ZWqV1SUYQsk?t=491
    Similar camera from the same year but in anime.

  30. Lewis Job May 5, 2019 at 6:01 am

    I love that startup sound

  31. rhkips May 11, 2019 at 3:37 am

    What?? How did you get a photo of a 1997 Ford Taurus in 1994?? LOL

    I honestly don't even remember this thing, Mac fanboi that I was in the 90s… Cool!

  32. The Restoration of Dr Who May 11, 2019 at 11:39 pm

    Now Apple products do less than you can imagine and cost a lot more than you think. Their iPad pros start above $1000…..wtf.

  33. Henk X May 12, 2019 at 2:46 pm

    Apple already knew how to do great kerning back in 1994. That looks great!

  34. TheParkerizing May 12, 2019 at 3:41 pm

    old ccd's my a$$ had a kodak dcs420 it was spot on

  35. Brian King May 12, 2019 at 6:50 pm

    Digital photos from 1956, boom.

  36. Eray Kepenek May 13, 2019 at 8:07 pm

    İ thought it was a projector at first!!

  37. Arthur Read May 14, 2019 at 5:51 am

    Damn I bet someone would have been the coolest kid in High School for having that Apple digital camera in 1994.

  38. The jg guy May 14, 2019 at 4:45 pm

    I thought it was a projector

  39. Danny Minick May 17, 2019 at 2:49 am

    I bought the Apple QuickTake 150 for 50 cents at a yard sale not long ago. Worth it.

  40. LuigiGodzillaGirl May 18, 2019 at 10:15 am

    I would love to see you feature more vintage apple products in the future

  41. mattcintosh2 May 31, 2019 at 4:05 am

    The PowerMac stuff is really important. Using the 68k decompression software takes about a minute to open a picture, the PowerMac version takes like 5 seconds on a Powermac 6100. Not sure if it was mentioned, there is an extension that can be installed that you can open the pictures directly in any program that supports QuickTime formats. I could open the photos directly in PhotoShop with that. Also, when I got pictures off the camera, the camera just showed up like a drive icon on the desktop that you could open it and drag the pictures off it, and then drag them to the trash to delete them off the camera.

  42. Dan Beers June 2, 2019 at 2:55 pm

    For 1994 those aren’t terrible at all really ..

  43. Tuck Porter June 3, 2019 at 10:59 pm

    Snap! Great Info on this digital camera relic! Before when Fedex/Kinkos CopyCenters was simply Kinkos , I saw this same digi-camera for rent over at the Kinkos in Pasadena California. Didn't have the vaguest idea of how to work that darn thing (even though I can now prepare Blu-Ray Video in Hitflim Express today). My Granny and I simply continued to have our Kodak Film developed over at Thrifty's and "Turtled" our way over to pick up our 4 x 6 pic packet. Sure wished I had a YouTube Video like this to explain things, but The World would have to wait another 10 years or so for that..

  44. Nagalior June 3, 2019 at 11:36 pm

    SEGA: I understand you, bro…
    Apple: Check out the new iPhone!
    SEGA: O….kay, no.

  45. Typo205 June 4, 2019 at 6:04 am

    Man. Clint is so handsome. Especially in that Coca-Cola selfie

  46. Journey awaits June 8, 2019 at 6:30 pm

    Still can't figure that point of mac computers in this century, everything is so based for windows

  47. Melissa Drift June 11, 2019 at 2:55 am

    My computer teacher had one of these in elementary school. I'm not sure if it was this exact one, since it was 1995, but she used it to take our pictures to send to pen pals we were supposed to have in Hawaii, but we never did. That class was the first time I ever used a computer. The school had just bought a bunch of new Apple computers and we had the first everything. I'd come from a school district in another state that didn't have money and I remember seeing all the Apple boxes in the garbage outside the school before I started there and it was big deal. I wonder if any amateur film makers were using these cameras for stop motion animation when they first came out? Did they realize how great digital cameras were going to be for that?

  48. Orange Harrison June 11, 2019 at 12:13 pm

    Wow an Apple product from back before they designed everything to break within a year

  49. Cracker Man June 14, 2019 at 12:42 pm

    Great video, as well i like your personality. As soon as you started talking about using old cameras with certain cars or old electronics, i was like yep! I understand this guy. We had these cameras the apple quick take in high school. Man i still remember to this day, it was 1996 i was in grade 11 and the computer technology teacher asked if i wanted to play around with this and show him how it worked. I never thought 23 years later id be watching a video on a thing called youtube about how cool and nostalgic this camera was or that it was one of the first digital camera's. Awesome video.

  50. Hanif Shaquille Budiawan June 16, 2019 at 3:20 am

    1990s: Apple introduce QuickTake 100
    2018: Apple introduce iPhone XS with dual camera

    That's how Apple works! 😂👌

  51. DudeBro Chill June 22, 2019 at 7:14 am

    We had one of these in my 6th grade class room. We thought we were so cool getting to use it.

  52. Walpurgisnacht July 3, 2019 at 12:23 am

    10:30
    The info for the image says it was crated in 1993 and modified in 1956, lmao.

  53. VooDooTrois July 3, 2019 at 10:43 pm

    Tom Scott should have used this camera in his video about how he can't show you how pink this pink is.

  54. Arcturas Rann July 6, 2019 at 7:11 pm

    Apple is over priced junk.

  55. Eriamjh 1138 July 7, 2019 at 8:32 pm

    It’s has its own built-in Instagram filter.

  56. jek tv July 9, 2019 at 8:38 pm

    wow

  57. Mastergeko4 July 11, 2019 at 4:45 pm

    5:54 Something that bothers me is that the Monitor Stand is backward.

  58. Lordofgiey666_official July 15, 2019 at 6:26 pm

    "Charger and charging slot sold separately"

  59. trucker V July 17, 2019 at 12:59 pm

    Anyone know where I can find a video and more info on that Dcs200? I have been searching and can't seem to find any info on it at all. Is there not many of those around anymore or something?

  60. MOLE July 18, 2019 at 11:53 pm

    Apple bosses “how much did the product cost to make …….let’s charge 50 times more”

  61. LHB GAMING July 20, 2019 at 1:02 pm

    And today Apple charges fan boys $1000 for a f***ing monitor stand ! LooooooL

  62. DarthRevan July 21, 2019 at 4:09 am

    I actually got the chance to mess around with one of these back when I was still in school.

  63. Mike Gerrits July 21, 2019 at 9:17 pm

    I forgot about this one! It was simply amazing at the time! 👍

  64. 張飛 July 22, 2019 at 10:41 pm

    好愛你的影片 喜歡舊的事物 喜歡90年代😍

  65. J K July 26, 2019 at 2:56 am

    It was expensive, short on features AND it took terrible pictures. You forgot that last part when wondering why it gets so much hate.

  66. Mateusz Ojciec July 26, 2019 at 8:51 pm

    zajebiste

  67. Drechen Lard July 28, 2019 at 10:37 pm

    8:13 bill murray.

  68. Facundo Mogor August 1, 2019 at 4:51 pm

    Do you have a pc where you don't have duke nukem 3d Installed?

  69. Patrick D August 4, 2019 at 10:27 pm

    It freaks me out, but in a good way.

  70. Jan Hanchen Michelsen August 6, 2019 at 11:49 am

    Love these old stuff stories, I like to bring some of my own memories, if that’s OK: I worked in a local, small newspaper as a freelanve journalist back then. To save money/time, the tech-interested editor bought a QT100 for mugshots and last-minute stories before printing and so on. The camera was … well, useless, most of the time. Unless we were really, really desperate. Far too soft/blurred, unpredictable exposure and very noisy, especially compared to regular darkroom development and proper repro. Even for small pictures, and even after converting to bw and with a lot of after-work in photoshop, the results were mediocre at best. And the laser printers of the day made it even worse! So, the newspaper went back to 99% film. We later quitted paste-up (just sent pdf-files to the print house) and at the same time switched to colour slides/in house development machine/film scanners. This was more expensive, but a semi-quick process that provided very good quality. Around 2001-2002 the paper went all-digital, with the far superior and very useful cameras of the time. We bought some Olympus E-10 for all-round use (nice, but very fragile), some Nikon Coolpix 5700 (really good cameras, but slow and with confusing menus), and later added the very nice Canon EOS 10D with a 300 mm for sports stories. I, myself, as a freelancer had first an Epson digital (crappy), a couple of other compact cameras (some a bit better), a CP5700 (bought second hand from the paper) before I went back to SLR and Nikon, first a D100 (a bit disappointing), later a D300 (a brilliant, brilliant machine, still very much up to the job) and then a D600 (nice camera but not so well made). QT100? When clearing out some old stuff from the paper around 2002, I took the QT100 home to for my oldest son to have some fun with and learn some mac basics on an older OS9 machine. Also for making stop motion lego movies. But the camera was still almost useless!

  71. Ramond Ferreal August 9, 2019 at 3:57 am

    I remember being in charge of buying digital SLR cameras for a real estate magazine in 2001. A top of the line 5 megapixel camera was over 5 grand! Outrageous, but we purchased 4 of them. Ten years later we couldn’t give them away.

  72. Youxun Liu August 11, 2019 at 7:15 am

    Who thought it’s an projector after seeing thumbnail

  73. Aimless August 12, 2019 at 1:20 pm

    Missed those days when apple still be able to be creative than copy ass.

  74. da_shotgunnerr August 12, 2019 at 8:29 pm

    This looks far more innovative than the iPhone X.

  75. Shawn P August 14, 2019 at 1:02 am

    Wait a second… waiting a week or two for film in 1994?

    Hate to dispute it, but same-day and one hour processing was definitely a big thing in the mid 90s – even at your average retailer.

  76. kirby march barcena August 18, 2019 at 11:47 pm

    Apple did made innovative machines in the '90s, too bad some didn't made it in this era despite many companies used Apple's concepts.

  77. jason dodt August 21, 2019 at 7:47 am

    I had a similar camera by HP, everything looks so familiar. I would not doubt that my camera was based on the same kodak tech, There was some software that HP had, it would download then sharpen the image. I bought it for around $300AU… It was a customer return and in the markdown bin…

  78. Joshua Stagnitto August 25, 2019 at 11:49 am

    7:47 holy shit.. im literally right now this very second ( minus the time im watching this video) working on that top receiver you have sitting there.. looks like a pioneer sx-1500td.. maybe you can help me.. im at a loss.. i have a pair of Acoustron LWE1's that require the 6 pin plug to be rigged into something that doesnt have that port in order for the negative feedback to work.. they were working fine and i stupidly took apart the receiver to make the wires coming out of it more sturdy and mount the housings for the plugs directly into the receiver so the housings for the cords could just be plugged into the receiver rathger than wires just dangling from the receiver and the heavy plug housings dangling out of it potentially ruining things.. and now only one of the speaker's negative feedback is working.. and that happens when the resistors inside are disconected on the green side.. but they arent!!! so im thinking the in line capacitor is dead..

    if you have any idea wtf im talking about, please help!!

  79. mattt198654321 August 26, 2019 at 9:00 pm

    In the second grade, my elementary school principal got one of these to take photos and publish in the parent news letter. All of us 7 year olds thought we were in the FUTURE!!!

  80. Kelly Norman August 30, 2019 at 2:17 am

    what a piece of shit but what do you expect it's apple

  81. Ha Ha Haa! September 3, 2019 at 11:56 pm

    It's interesting that this was: "In conjunction with Kodak." I had a Kodak version of that camera that I used for all of my pictures from Junior and Senior year of high school (1999) and a Vegas Vacation. LOL! I never used the flash. (It made pictures yellow) It had a serial port, and stored 45 640×480 shots. The two options for images were .BMP & .JPG.

  82. EthanandBros September 5, 2019 at 9:42 pm

    Watching ing your videos made my buy a powermac G4 that weighed as much as an elephant for £5, useles but Aesthetic

  83. Maddox Gamer 2411 September 6, 2019 at 3:04 am

    Welcome to an lgr thing

  84. This is Patrick September 20, 2019 at 10:20 am

    Every picture he took with this 90s camera automatically became a 90s picture lmao.

  85. זכריה Zach Fenton פנטון September 20, 2019 at 3:37 pm

    Only 8 pictures

  86. JamesStoneYT September 21, 2019 at 1:28 pm

    Apple keeping up that camera quality

  87. GK Chase September 24, 2019 at 7:58 pm

    I had that exact pencil sharpener ~1992 seen top shelf center at 1:30

  88. Januar Arifin September 29, 2019 at 6:14 am

    "Ridiculously Pink"… Wow, never heard about that before, is that a new color?

  89. Karl Smallphones October 4, 2019 at 6:07 am

    Don't you mean when Steve jobs returned to apple and put the prices up

  90. Jonah Mills October 7, 2019 at 6:47 am

    my dad showed me the first photo he took with it the other day 🙂

  91. Kathryn Elrod October 9, 2019 at 12:59 am

    Anyone notice that the self-timer icon is the same as the one in the iOS clock app?

  92. Marc October 13, 2019 at 5:39 pm

    ..and now there doing the same for professional reference motors

  93. Kode Williams October 19, 2019 at 3:58 pm

    Is it possible to connect this to a new ipad

  94. Sabrina Mitchell November 1, 2019 at 8:14 pm

    This came out a year before my family even had a computer 😂

  95. Boris Galos November 5, 2019 at 6:26 pm

    It's worth noting that the QuickTake 100 was a Kodak designed and Kodak developed product licensed to Apple and not a product designed nor developed by Apple.

  96. FORDboy357 November 11, 2019 at 4:56 pm

    Where are you that you can take a picture of an Ingles?

  97. R Graham November 11, 2019 at 11:25 pm

    Please use the pregnant pause! You literally don’t stop talking for even one second and it’s super annoying. Like you’re just trying to get out as many words as possible without stopping.

  98. Marconius November 13, 2019 at 11:26 am

    Ooooh, a whole megabyte of memory?!

  99. Larry Langer November 14, 2019 at 7:10 pm

    "Too far ahead of its time and no one knew what to do with it"

    Always the way with technology. I get the impression that VR is currently going through that phase.

  100. James Wiseman November 15, 2019 at 8:22 pm

    Contemporary review: http://www.travelassist.com/mag/a78.html

    Review of the Kodak-Version, released a few months after the Apple Version: http://www.travelassist.com/mag/a108.html

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *