Talk:Digital photo frame

Spam links

I just reverted [1] for the second time a spam link. The website, while at first sight a legitimate source of information, is actually a stepping stone to commercial/spam website. Tony 16:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I think we should discuss which external links we include in this article, as it has been changed so often now. I think the how stuff works (a good introduction to the topic) and digital-photo-frame-market.info (site is quoted in the wikipedia article) should be mentioned.

--221.232.146.56 01:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I wasn't logged in. That's my account info:

--Misterboom 01:42, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, digital-photo-frame-market.info looks like a spam site. The most prominent link on the main page is to a "buyer's guide" for consumers, but if you look at the "buyer's guide" all it does is try to direct you to one of three Amazon.com stores to buy a digital camera. PubliusFL 02:00, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

That's right (, but I would not call a web shop spam). On the other hand there is a lot of info about digital photo frames, which can not be find somewhere else. Furthermore, the wikipedia article uses information from that site.

--Misterboom 12:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Misterboom, what is your relationship to this website? Are you the owner, an author? Tony 15:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the best solution is not to use that site as a source for in--Misterboom 08:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)formation in the article, then. Because the site does not qualify as a reliable source, and its propriety is questionable under the external link guidelines. PubliusFL 22:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Since there was no answer after a week, I removed the link. Tony 20:14, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I was on a trip the last week. Anyway, I try to give you a few answers.

First, I am the owner of the site and I am aware that you mistrust the owner of a site, who wants that his site is mentioned. On the other hand, I also have other sites and never tried to add it on Wikipedia. Why I have chose to add this site? I think it gives additional information to the article, which exceeds the amount which can be mentioned in the Wikipedia article.

There are also concerns about the quality of the information. Frankly speaking, you would know that the information is correct, if you have some knowledge about digital photo frames, which go further than maybe possessing one. So my question is, what qualifies you to judge on the information on my site? I worked for a digital photo frame producer, I made a market research on that topic. If you think the information is not correct, then just write to some digital photo frame producers, they will all assure you that the info is correct. Besides there is also an article from another employee of a dpf producer.

Are there also opinions of other people, not just Tony and PubliusFL?

--Misterboom 08:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps someone should add information on the do-it-yourself trend of converting laptops and old computers into DPFs. 74.192.137.200 13:36, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Since you are the owner of the site, you cannot include it as a link. This is against Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#Examples. "Conflict of interest often presents itself in the form of self-promotion, including advertising links, personal website links, personal or semi-personal photos, or other material that appears to promote the private or commercial interests of the editor, or their associates." Tony 15:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I concure. This site is an advertisement for yourself (I actually clicked around on it and you encourage people to "do business" with you). Whether or not the information on there is true or false doesn't matter. I don't doubt that everything you put on there is what you know. Yet for you to choose to include it, no matter how innocent those intentions might have been is, to put it bluntly, is unethical. I have no doubt that other sources that share this data can be found elsewhere. If you want to help improve the qualaty of this page then search for those sources.

I wrote this page, because I have not found any other information on this topic somewhere else. You can try it, but I am pretty sure that the information on my page is unique and it is absolutely relevant for this article. I got many responses from people who wrote me that the information on the site was a big help for them. If the only doubt of my site is that I offer my services, I regret this. This site is absolutely not my primary source of income, it is my hobby. I think the information is very good and very useful and I indeed believe that persons who consider buying a dpf should have a look on this site first. If the only doubt is the commercial background, I can offer to delete the "My services" section and the links to the Amazon shops. Misterboom 14:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Source does not meet requirements of editorial oversight etc to be a reliable source. The link would probably not survive in an external link section either, especially since the editor who wrote the article also keeps adding links to his/her related commercial website rather than expanding the article itself. You might want to check WP:EL for info on adding links and/or ask for a third opinion at WP:30 to get several other editor opinions/recommendations. Flowanda | Talk 21:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Please look in the history. I really helpped to improve the article. I added quite a lot of info (some of it deleted now), but part of the article is written by me. In the end I got fed up with adding a link to my site (which I still think is very relevant as it contains much more info than in the Wikipedia article and also contains views of professionals), but I think one could cite the info which comes from my site. 21:35, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Misterboom (talk)

General Question regarding Digital Photo Frames and images loaded on them

The answer to this question could help the article: How does a digital photo frame display an image? Not all images will be to the exact dimensions of the frame, so does the digital photo frame 1) center the image? 2) stretch the image to fit? or 3) somehow crop the image for best display? --Mjrmtg (talk) 00:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Mjrmtg, the aswer is that all the ways you listed are possible, it depends on the digital photo frame you have and its fuctionalities. I think that the standard is to display the picture in its original size and center it (if its a small picture it will be in the center in its original size, if its a large pic then the frame will usually fit it so that it suits the frame size). i have also seen the functionality of a "fit" function, so that via zooming the largest pic possible will be displayed. i think to crop the image is quite unusual.

--Misterboom (talk) 16:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Transcend T.photo

The Transcend T.photo was released somewhere in May 2007. Was there one before that? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 09:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

hmm...

two things really here 1) I am pretty sure the first digital photo frames were hacked together DIY jobs from old laptops etc, surely this should be mentioned? 2) on the security issues, shouldn't it mention that the trojan only effects computers running the Microsoft windows operating system? —Preceding unsigned comment added by UltraMagnus (talk • contribs) 19:54, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Timeline

I honestly never knew of the things til today. There ought to be some more technical details regarding their development. JamesEG (talk) 21:37, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Outdated Information

Hello,

I work closely with Nixplay, a digital picture frame provider. This page is missing a lot of information, plus the info. on here is pretty outdated. I wanted to work on updating the info. on this page and was wondering who exactly I would need to run this by? Especially since there would need to be major editing done.

Thank you!Laurajodonnell (talk) 16:11, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Removed Broken spam link

I just removed [2]. This goes to the blog of a digital photo frame company which is now a broken link.

Calipediabrown (talk) 18:49, 15 July 2018 (UTC)