Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Sounds logical.
I'm not using a Mac.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Yes, when all else fails, Read The *Fine* Manual. [Slightly off-topic rant follows]

RTFM! is an old saying on the Internet that dates from the early, pre-commercial days. It's an acronym for "Read The Fine Manual", although the exact reference of the 'F' word in RTFM has varied according to the (ahem!) taste of the user, and perhaps the emotional state of the user when RTFM! is invoked.

RTFM is often used in frustration by those of us who play "tech support professional" from time to time. While I'm neither a technician, nor a tech support professional, my job has required me to play that role rather well from time to time, and RTFM is a phrase I've come to cherish. And since I write a lot of those manuals, RTFM is particularly near and dear to me!

You see, at any given moment, in any given field, only about a fourth or fifth of us are reading anything that is really important to our jobs and our roles! Of course, we never know who those people are, until they screw up. But the Pareto Optimality or 80/20 rule, as it is also known, is alive and well, and lives in all user communities. (Google Pareto, the economist, for more info.)

The classic reason for "RTFM!" is that about half the personality types in the world seem to operate on the principal of "Ready, Fire!, Aim? WTF is aim?" The rest of us occasionally read procedures, manuals, instructions, etc. because we don't want to fail... It's not that we're afraid of failure or "learning the hard way"; we just think it's often an enormous waste of time and money, and it can be embarrassing. So we like to AIM before we FIRE.

I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of bloggers and blog readers are in that half of humanity that reads more often and more deeply than tweet-level (or is it twit-level?) trivia. So, for those of you who appreciate the deeper meaning, here's a bit of anonymously attributable wit regarding RTFM: (I am not the author. I do appreciate the satirical wit of the author.)

In speech, inflection is everything. In print, we use bold face, italics, underlines, and other cues to connote inflection or tone of voice and different meanings to the reader.

Take, for instance, the popular acronym, RTFM, which means, "Read The F___ Manual":

RTFM — Please read the fine manual. It will be rather helpful in directing you back onto the correct path.

RTFM — Helpful information is available. Please take advantage of it. It's in the manual.

RTFM — Important information is available, if you'll only read it!

RTFM — Read the sex manual if you think you’re not doing it right.

RTFM — As your therapist, I suggest you read the Kama Sutra, mother of all sex manuals. You seem to have the basics down, but perhaps you and your partner need more variety.

RTFM — Yeah, I know you say you read the manual, but you obviously didn't understand it. Please go read the manual again!

RTFM — Your complete, utter disregard for printed instructions has driven me into a bout of fleeting depression. Please read the instructions again, or use them as a suppository!

RTFM!! — Your incompetence has driven me to the point where the SWAT team is on standby, and the men in little white coats are coming to take me away! GAAAA! Only Dilbert would understand this!

— Anonymous

Bill Munny Loc: Aurora, Colorado

I use both. They seem to be about equal in transfer time as long as they are both using the same USB port of 2.0. When bringing them into USB 3.0 from a USB 3.0 card reader or cable, the cable seems to slightly faster. I have tested these with RAW 29 MB files bringing in from 50 to 300 files.

I don't think you gain much when comparing.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

If you use multiple cards then you use the card reader to download one card while the other is in your camera which can be very convenient. If your camera only transmits images via a USB2 interface than copying them to you computer will be very significantly slower than when downloading them from a USB3 card reader.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

Also a bit off-topic, but, I think we have pretty well beaten the OP's question to death. My apologies to him anyway. In my early days of learning computers I quickly learned that when someone in tech support says "It must be the drivers" what they really saying is: "I have no 'fine' idea what the problem is".
I also quickly lost any awe I may have had for the tech support Whiz Kidz. One evening, during a seeming endless session with Microsoft support while trying to get Windows 95 to re-load we had a lull. The kid on the other end got talking and ended up revealing how he, and a friend from Dell support decided to clean up his Mom's computer one day. Ended up deleting all her bank records. Oops! I mentioned that she must have been impressed! He didn't seem to think so!

hassighedgehog Loc: Corona, CA

Ditto. It is much faster download. In addition, it does not use the camera's battery charge.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Good help is hard to find...

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

I found using a card reader was a lot faster than downloading from the camera.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

The last time I owned a Mac was before I used SD memory. These are cards from which I deleted images on a Win7 machine, and then sometime later I read on a Linux machine.

n46130

Have 2 Nikon cameras. I find using the cable is a better idea as I am concerned that sliding cards in and out may damage the camera contacts.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

I understand your concern if you are using CF cards (Compact Flash). If you are using SD cards its not an issue.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

How do you know that Linus didn't create the folder? Which I'm guessing is what happened when you mounted the SD card on a Linux system.
".trash" is not a typical Windows file connotation.
.<name> is typically a Unix (or a variant like Linux or Ultrix) connotation. I have never had a Mac, so I have no idea about their system file connotation.

Since I'm running Windows, not running Unix, why would I have a .trash folder on any media I use?
My website is hosted on a Unix server. My area there does have a .trash folder.
Does my camera run on Unix? Or is it a proprietary operating system. Who knows. (who cares.)
I don't get into the guts of operating systems anymore. I did with DOS, but quit when Windows came out.
Unless your background is in programming or computers, and know what created the .trash folder on the SD card, I would not assume that all SD cards have one.

EDIT: I did check one of my SD cards using FTP. There was no .trash folder, but I did find a system folder called "System Volume Information", which looks like it's just data,no files.

PAR4DCR Loc: A Sunny Place

I always download from the card. Built in reader my computer and have a card reader for backup.

Don

11bravo

While my old Lenovo has a card slot, it has a tendency to want to hold on to the card; the push to release easier said than done. Easier to use a separate reader.

Like you, carry 2 Transcend usb3 card readers. No cable, plugs directly into a port on my notebook. Never had a failure; carry 2 just in case I misplace one (have it in white, easier to spot).

Another advantage for me of using a reader is that I can use TeraCopy for the copy, with a MD5 checksum of each file to verify copy. Yes, it doubles the time, but I can catch up with email or the news while waiting, and it's not that long a wait.

raymondh Loc: Walker, MI

I guess if you have a couple thousand pictures to download a card reader makes since. But it seems like an extra wasted step to unload & reinsert a card in order to gain an extra 30 sec's? to download a couple hundred shots. And I'm willing to bet more people have had issues fiddling with installing a card than they ever have had plugging in the USB cable.