Digital BW, The Print

Bob writes:

> But I remember some guy named Moore back 30 years
> ago who came up with this idea about computers
> getting twice as fast and half the size every
> 18 months or something like that.

Moore's law does not apply to analog devices, and both scanners and
electronic ("digital") cameras are analog devices.  A digital device such as
a microprocessor or memory chip doesn't have to understand anything except
on and off, and so tolerances are generous.  In an analog device, every
electron affects the results, and so the worse the tolerances, the worse the
results.  For this reason, analog devices cannot be improved at any speed
coming even remotely close to obeying Moore's law.  And digital photography
is currently dependent on improvements in analog devices; that has been what
kept digital photography so long in coming, and that is what prevents it
from matching film even after years of development.

> When someone told me that someday computers would
> be so small they could be battery powered and we could
> carry them around in our hands, I didn't believe him
> either.

I did, but I also predicted that most people would still be using computers
with real keyboards and large displays, and I was right.

> Maybe in 2003, but 2004?

2004 will be practically identical to 2003, for digital photography and
scanners, just as these fields have been in previous years.  When you look
past the hype (not an easy task, since the hype completely obscures the view
most of the time), you see that progress really isn't as fast as it is
claimed to be.