invalidname
Oct 10, 06:21 AM
I also understand these new "auto mobiles" are going to cut into buggy whip sales. That's just wrong.
iliketyla
Apr 14, 02:30 PM
Thank (insert deity here) you close minded people don't make the hiring decisions for Apple.
Your beloved company makes a hire that they obviously deem to be beneficial and the peanut gallery thinks they know better.
:rolleyes:
Your beloved company makes a hire that they obviously deem to be beneficial and the peanut gallery thinks they know better.
:rolleyes:
DPinTX
Mar 10, 11:16 PM
What are the odds one of you Friscoans will post an update around 3:30-4:00ish and let me know what the line (or lack thereof) at Stonebriar is looking like?? Now I'm debating between Willow Bend and Stonebriar...
I will post updates through out the day. I will be there early
DP
I will post updates through out the day. I will be there early
DP
TEG
Apr 5, 05:32 PM
I believe he's referring to headsets that don't have the audio in and out jack combined into one (http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2036282). The line-in port on Macs does not have any power to support a microphone. This is why the Griffin iMic exists.
Since the Mic port turned into Line-In, there hasn't been any power on the port, requiring a powered input or amp. However, on the Headset jacks that support the iPhone mic on them, do have a built-in mic, even on the MacBook, but only when using the 3rd sleeve that the iPhone mic cable has.
TEG
Since the Mic port turned into Line-In, there hasn't been any power on the port, requiring a powered input or amp. However, on the Headset jacks that support the iPhone mic on them, do have a built-in mic, even on the MacBook, but only when using the 3rd sleeve that the iPhone mic cable has.
TEG
more...
snberk103
Jun 22, 04:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by snberk103
I'm just wondering *why* Apple is choosing this time to introduce built in SD card readers.
"This time" being last summer, when they started including them in MacBooks?
They don't really need a reason besides pretty much every consumer camera using SD media these days.
Was it really that long ago? Time flies, eh? Anyway.... They could have added it to the Mini back then quietly and without redesigning the whole case, similar to the way that the 5th USB port was added, if it was to satisfy photographers.
And they didn't need to immediately go to the top end SDXC.... most consumer cameras aren't using those cards yet. Once the low or middle speed SD card reader was added, it would have been easy to upgrade it to the top end SD card reader in a few years when those cards were more widely used. This would have been more in line of Apple's philosophy of increasing specs and features and keeping prices down. i.e. Today's new Mini has plain SD card reader, and in a year they "add" the faster reader to make a "new" new Mini.
I think there is something more to this... we'll just have to stay tuned, eh?
Originally Posted by snberk103
I'm just wondering *why* Apple is choosing this time to introduce built in SD card readers.
"This time" being last summer, when they started including them in MacBooks?
They don't really need a reason besides pretty much every consumer camera using SD media these days.
Was it really that long ago? Time flies, eh? Anyway.... They could have added it to the Mini back then quietly and without redesigning the whole case, similar to the way that the 5th USB port was added, if it was to satisfy photographers.
And they didn't need to immediately go to the top end SDXC.... most consumer cameras aren't using those cards yet. Once the low or middle speed SD card reader was added, it would have been easy to upgrade it to the top end SD card reader in a few years when those cards were more widely used. This would have been more in line of Apple's philosophy of increasing specs and features and keeping prices down. i.e. Today's new Mini has plain SD card reader, and in a year they "add" the faster reader to make a "new" new Mini.
I think there is something more to this... we'll just have to stay tuned, eh?
joepunk
May 3, 10:16 AM
Let me just say, that as complacent as Canadian's appear, **** with our Universal Health Care, and there will be rioting (Edit: tasteful demonstrations) in the streets.
The Provincial government has made quite enough cut-backs, TYVM.
Fueled by Poutine, right? :p
The Provincial government has made quite enough cut-backs, TYVM.
Fueled by Poutine, right? :p
more...
THX1139
Sep 20, 02:32 AM
I can confirm that SATA drives run at full speed now in WindowsXP.
You got this from the update? Does this mean we no longer need to slipstream the drivers to get XP to recognize the drives at normal speed?
Having to deal with the slow drives is keeping me from installing Windows. If the update makes that easier, I might go for it. I'll probably put Windows on it's own drive and then boot off it.
You got this from the update? Does this mean we no longer need to slipstream the drivers to get XP to recognize the drives at normal speed?
Having to deal with the slow drives is keeping me from installing Windows. If the update makes that easier, I might go for it. I'll probably put Windows on it's own drive and then boot off it.
MacRumorUser
Mar 25, 01:39 AM
The fact NO site has seemingly reviewed any of UBI's release is very suspicious about their quality.
Is there a review Embargo in place I wonder?
Is there a review Embargo in place I wonder?
more...
snberk103
Mar 17, 10:47 PM
In response to all the "Recommend Me a Camera/Lens/Editor etc" threads, I offer this. Comments or additions?
...
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
...
Dale
This can be expanded to include buying gear in general, like strobes and backdrops, etc...
... I have noticed I feel a bit intimidated by portrait type photography. I don't have the right equipment for it (flashes, strobes, backdrops, studio...), and I'm not sure I want to go that route. ...
I think you need to read that bit above again.
You don't need much gear at all to get started doing great photography - you just need to be good with people and have reasonable photo skills. If you are have that, then all you need is a reasonably sharp and long-ish lense and a window. See Lloyd Erlick (http://www.heylloyd.com/) for example. I don't think he is still active, but he was shooting 4x5 BW portraits by window light. I think some of his portraits are the best I have seen. I've learned from him to try and keep my portraits simple. I tell my students that doing portraiture is both the easiest and the most difficult kind of photography there is. Easy because you can make great portraits with window light, and one good lense on a camera. If you want to get fancy you can add a reflector :) . Difficult, because you need to work with people.
... I also don't care for sports in general, so that's not a likely path for me, either....
Good decision. If you don't love the stuff you shoot, it shows.
One of the best rock-n-roll photographers you will not have heard of in North America (if not the world), is Dee Lippingwell (http://www.deelippingwell.com/). She had a daytime job, but loved music. So she approached an entertainment weekly and offered to take photos, in order to get the press passes into the events. She then quit the daytime job to do the photography full time. Still loves the music and the music biz.
I've sat through a couple of seminars she has done (short on technical advice, but huge on rock-n-roll stories!
Don't let the website fool you. She doesn't actually need to advertize much. She was one of less than a dozen photographers that Mick Jagger personally invited to shoot the big SARS concert in Toronto a few years ago. I have the honour of calling her a friend, and in one of her band shots on the website you can see my former studio reflected in the subject's sunglasses.
She loves what she does, it shows, and her clients know that.
So keep banging away. It gets easier, then more difficult, then it plateaus into sort of easy again. Well, not really - but you love what you do so much you don't notice that it's difficult.
... of the above are imho, of course....
PS: Thanks Dale for the OP!
...
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
...
Dale
This can be expanded to include buying gear in general, like strobes and backdrops, etc...
... I have noticed I feel a bit intimidated by portrait type photography. I don't have the right equipment for it (flashes, strobes, backdrops, studio...), and I'm not sure I want to go that route. ...
I think you need to read that bit above again.
You don't need much gear at all to get started doing great photography - you just need to be good with people and have reasonable photo skills. If you are have that, then all you need is a reasonably sharp and long-ish lense and a window. See Lloyd Erlick (http://www.heylloyd.com/) for example. I don't think he is still active, but he was shooting 4x5 BW portraits by window light. I think some of his portraits are the best I have seen. I've learned from him to try and keep my portraits simple. I tell my students that doing portraiture is both the easiest and the most difficult kind of photography there is. Easy because you can make great portraits with window light, and one good lense on a camera. If you want to get fancy you can add a reflector :) . Difficult, because you need to work with people.
... I also don't care for sports in general, so that's not a likely path for me, either....
Good decision. If you don't love the stuff you shoot, it shows.
One of the best rock-n-roll photographers you will not have heard of in North America (if not the world), is Dee Lippingwell (http://www.deelippingwell.com/). She had a daytime job, but loved music. So she approached an entertainment weekly and offered to take photos, in order to get the press passes into the events. She then quit the daytime job to do the photography full time. Still loves the music and the music biz.
I've sat through a couple of seminars she has done (short on technical advice, but huge on rock-n-roll stories!
Don't let the website fool you. She doesn't actually need to advertize much. She was one of less than a dozen photographers that Mick Jagger personally invited to shoot the big SARS concert in Toronto a few years ago. I have the honour of calling her a friend, and in one of her band shots on the website you can see my former studio reflected in the subject's sunglasses.
She loves what she does, it shows, and her clients know that.
So keep banging away. It gets easier, then more difficult, then it plateaus into sort of easy again. Well, not really - but you love what you do so much you don't notice that it's difficult.
... of the above are imho, of course....
PS: Thanks Dale for the OP!
teerexx52
Mar 24, 07:48 PM
Is everyone keeping these, selling them, a spare one for their mother-in-law?
more...
justflie
Oct 27, 07:41 AM
- No iCal integration with a fully editable calendar
Agreed! That calendar thing really bothers me. Also, whenever you do publish calendars, it doesn't show the location of the event! That's REALLY annoying. I have to put it in the notes box in order to view it online. I actually recently emailed .mac feedback about that. Pain in the butt!
Agreed! That calendar thing really bothers me. Also, whenever you do publish calendars, it doesn't show the location of the event! That's REALLY annoying. I have to put it in the notes box in order to view it online. I actually recently emailed .mac feedback about that. Pain in the butt!
michaelcyee
Apr 19, 02:51 PM
I don't think anyone doubts the machine can do the expose effect (the iPad 1 does it in Safari just fine).
There are plenty of reasons it might have been turned down for their final switcher implementation. One, the final iOS allows a variable number of programs to remain open depending on their memory requirements. The expose implementation implies that 9 can be open. That's inconsistent UI. Two, as others have mentioned, you can't always tell the difference between apps at a glance from little screenshots. So they went with icons in the end.
I have mutilfl0w, one of the problems is that it doesn't show some apps that are running in the background, such as Mail or FaceTime, that I can see in the regular multitasking pane. That may be because it never got a picture of the app as it was open. In fact, FaceTime is an app that keeps coming back no matter how many times I've killed it, even though I have it disabled on the Settings menu. I have no idea why Apple insists that FT keeps itself open.
Rarely have I had problems with showing more than nine open apps; I'd run out of memory before I got to that stage.
There are plenty of reasons it might have been turned down for their final switcher implementation. One, the final iOS allows a variable number of programs to remain open depending on their memory requirements. The expose implementation implies that 9 can be open. That's inconsistent UI. Two, as others have mentioned, you can't always tell the difference between apps at a glance from little screenshots. So they went with icons in the end.
I have mutilfl0w, one of the problems is that it doesn't show some apps that are running in the background, such as Mail or FaceTime, that I can see in the regular multitasking pane. That may be because it never got a picture of the app as it was open. In fact, FaceTime is an app that keeps coming back no matter how many times I've killed it, even though I have it disabled on the Settings menu. I have no idea why Apple insists that FT keeps itself open.
Rarely have I had problems with showing more than nine open apps; I'd run out of memory before I got to that stage.
more...
ArchaicRevival
Apr 21, 02:04 PM
Regardless, some people are still gonna complain of some unimportant missing feature.
sandylp
Oct 26, 05:10 PM
Instead of coming out with new applications, I would prefer that Adobe put more of an effort into developing an Intel-Mac version of PhotoShop just a bit sooner than Spring of 2007. I've been delaying buying a new Mac until the new CS3 is available. :confused: Doesn't make much sense to buy a new computer, when the application that you use the most runs better on the old one!
more...
Fraaaa
Apr 21, 02:16 PM
Not enough to justify the non-inclusion of LTE/4G.
Two years from now, you'll be wishing you had faster access to streaming content (the mythical "cloud") than a bit more processing power to play a game that was designed to be playable on the iPhone 4 anyway.
I justified in my post why LTE/4G is not good for the next revision. Make an argument against that statement.
Beside, two years from now I'll be wishing nothing. 3G is good enough for browsing and I get WiFi in my house, at work and university. Two years from now, is two iPhone revisions. Most people don't even use SmartPhones, nor they care and the iPhone has the highest reselling value in hardware. So what should I be wishing for?
Two years from now, you'll be wishing you had faster access to streaming content (the mythical "cloud") than a bit more processing power to play a game that was designed to be playable on the iPhone 4 anyway.
I justified in my post why LTE/4G is not good for the next revision. Make an argument against that statement.
Beside, two years from now I'll be wishing nothing. 3G is good enough for browsing and I get WiFi in my house, at work and university. Two years from now, is two iPhone revisions. Most people don't even use SmartPhones, nor they care and the iPhone has the highest reselling value in hardware. So what should I be wishing for?
Zaty
Apr 3, 12:09 PM
In my opinion, Pages is not all that bad. It needs some tweaking and Apple has to fix some bugs. I'm sure Pages 2 will be a great app for everyone who wants to do basic wordprocessing and publishing without the limitations of TextEdit. I guess most people are disappointed with Pages because of the following two reasons:
a) Pages wasn't finished when it was released
b) Pre-MWSF rumours were talking about an MS Office replacement or killer so many people think of Pages as being a replacement for Word. But I think Pages was never intended to replace Word, it's more like iMovie vs. FCP/FCE.
a) Pages wasn't finished when it was released
b) Pre-MWSF rumours were talking about an MS Office replacement or killer so many people think of Pages as being a replacement for Word. But I think Pages was never intended to replace Word, it's more like iMovie vs. FCP/FCE.
more...
el-John-o
Nov 30, 07:55 AM
No spy chips, thank you.
http://spychips.com
I saw that website, and laughed.
"Wal-Mart is embedding RFID's In clothing ZOMG1984"
Those RFIDs are not secret government alien probes, they are made by sensormatic, are destroyed at point of sale (those demagnatizers, the bzzh sound is the RFID being scrambled), and only used if you walk out the door with something unpaid. Even then, it's not a GPS mega sensor that's tracking your every move, it just reacts with the sensors at the door to set off an alarm.
http://spychips.com
I saw that website, and laughed.
"Wal-Mart is embedding RFID's In clothing ZOMG1984"
Those RFIDs are not secret government alien probes, they are made by sensormatic, are destroyed at point of sale (those demagnatizers, the bzzh sound is the RFID being scrambled), and only used if you walk out the door with something unpaid. Even then, it's not a GPS mega sensor that's tracking your every move, it just reacts with the sensors at the door to set off an alarm.
roadbloc
May 5, 01:15 PM
It's a tax on system resources, not financial.
Seriously? A few MB's of RAM saved is worth over double the price? I'm not bashing Apple here, I love my Mac and I love OS X, but Windows 7 with an antivirus runs a hell of a lot smoother on my iMac than Snow Leopard does. When you take that into account, it pales into insignificance does running an antivirus.
Not to mention that plenty of OS X users now use an antivirus, despite there being no real need to.
Seriously? A few MB's of RAM saved is worth over double the price? I'm not bashing Apple here, I love my Mac and I love OS X, but Windows 7 with an antivirus runs a hell of a lot smoother on my iMac than Snow Leopard does. When you take that into account, it pales into insignificance does running an antivirus.
Not to mention that plenty of OS X users now use an antivirus, despite there being no real need to.
johng2222
Mar 20, 11:49 AM
So much whining, so little time.
About the only reason I'd care about anyone getting a discount is if I couldn't get the same discount myself.
Apple can charge what makes sense to them. As long as it's a decent business decision on their side, I have no gripe. If demand is high enough, they can get what they ask. If their institutional customers want to be "tossed a bone" to buy, then throw them a bone and make it up on volume.
Make some money Apple - and don't go broke in the process.
I like what Apple does enough to want Apple to stay healthy.
Nobody has to buy anything Apple sells if they don't want to. Nor can Apple make them.
Move on, people.
About the only reason I'd care about anyone getting a discount is if I couldn't get the same discount myself.
Apple can charge what makes sense to them. As long as it's a decent business decision on their side, I have no gripe. If demand is high enough, they can get what they ask. If their institutional customers want to be "tossed a bone" to buy, then throw them a bone and make it up on volume.
Make some money Apple - and don't go broke in the process.
I like what Apple does enough to want Apple to stay healthy.
Nobody has to buy anything Apple sells if they don't want to. Nor can Apple make them.
Move on, people.
PlaceofDis
Apr 2, 07:22 PM
for any complex formatting Word is definitly the way to sad to say, its not that bad of an app, although it is filled with bloat....
Pages is stong because of its templates, but its not good for making documents from scratch, if it improved in this area i would stick to it, but the UI definitly needs some work, toolbars and palettes need to be used more effectively and perhaps a bit more customization of the two would help a bit
for now i guess ill be typing up my poetry in Word
Pages is stong because of its templates, but its not good for making documents from scratch, if it improved in this area i would stick to it, but the UI definitly needs some work, toolbars and palettes need to be used more effectively and perhaps a bit more customization of the two would help a bit
for now i guess ill be typing up my poetry in Word
Henri Gaudier
Jan 28, 03:43 AM
Interesting to hear you say that -- I use the Oyster RFID card for public transport here in London, and it's incredibly efficient. Compared to paper tickets, it's faster to use, faster to pay for, and much more durable.
Would be great to have this built into my iPhone...
EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oyster_card#Usage_statistics to see just how massively popular RFID technology is here. Only 4% of Tube users use cash, the rest use RFID for their journeys!
If there's one nation running towards a surveillance state it's the UK. Even the Information Commissioner agrees. What's worse is the UK Home Office has successfully proselytised this to the Dwarf Commander In Chief Sarko who has promised to spend literally billions to emulate the UK here in France.
Would be great to have this built into my iPhone...
EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oyster_card#Usage_statistics to see just how massively popular RFID technology is here. Only 4% of Tube users use cash, the rest use RFID for their journeys!
If there's one nation running towards a surveillance state it's the UK. Even the Information Commissioner agrees. What's worse is the UK Home Office has successfully proselytised this to the Dwarf Commander In Chief Sarko who has promised to spend literally billions to emulate the UK here in France.
acfusion29
Mar 13, 02:00 PM
Actually... my Samsung Focus (Windows Phone 7) updated itself at 1:59 to 3:00... I watched. I believe this is an Apple level problem, not Microsoft ;)
Phones keep time while they're off. Phone's also don't check to see what time it is, every hour, they check when they're turned on. The network provides a fallback, but the phone should know what time it is, too. There's no excuse for Apple's spotty coding. None.
i understand what you're saying, as soon as the phone is booted up, the time is pushed to the phone by the carrier.
the time was updating by the carrier right at 2AM to reflect the proper time changes. this has nothing to do with Apple's code. the only way i can see this being a problem is if the setting "set time automatically" wasn't enabled.
Phones keep time while they're off. Phone's also don't check to see what time it is, every hour, they check when they're turned on. The network provides a fallback, but the phone should know what time it is, too. There's no excuse for Apple's spotty coding. None.
i understand what you're saying, as soon as the phone is booted up, the time is pushed to the phone by the carrier.
the time was updating by the carrier right at 2AM to reflect the proper time changes. this has nothing to do with Apple's code. the only way i can see this being a problem is if the setting "set time automatically" wasn't enabled.
theBB
Sep 25, 10:52 PM
According to US law, a trademark holder MUST defend their trademarks, or they risk losing them. Google is struggling with this, as they're trying to encourage people not to use it as a generic verb.
Wikipedia Linky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain#Trademark)
I was going to point out that Bayer already lost Aspirin and Xerox came very close, but thanks for the link. Still, podcast is different enough compared to iPod that Apple is probably not at risk. However, "probably" is not the same as "definitely".
Wikipedia Linky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain#Trademark)
I was going to point out that Bayer already lost Aspirin and Xerox came very close, but thanks for the link. Still, podcast is different enough compared to iPod that Apple is probably not at risk. However, "probably" is not the same as "definitely".
Bennieboy�
Apr 24, 01:36 PM
here are your stats Dukebound Click (http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_summary.php?s=&u=511029)
No comments:
Post a Comment