GregA2
Nov 11, 02:26 AM
That sucks Justin Long isn't going to be in the ads anymore. I hope they don't stop them altogether- I was looking forward to some really good ones once Zune and Vista get here... :D
crazzyeddie
Nov 1, 11:18 PM
For the specific Mac models (like the oogles of PowerMac revisions), would it be wise to just link directly to AppleSpec instead of making our own? We already have [[PowerMac]] with links to [[PowerMac_G4]] which then links to [[PowerMac_specificModel]]. Maybe the links on the PowerMac_G4 page should be to the AppleSpec PDFs for those models?
Amazing Iceman
Feb 23, 01:30 PM
FTC go do something useful, let parents learn to educate their kids and earn their respect, so they won't over spend at the AppStore.
It could be the Candy Store or the Arcade, so what's the difference???
It could be the Candy Store or the Arcade, so what's the difference???
illitrate23
May 4, 06:40 AM
I can't download it, the "Download Mac Client" is just gray. Is it becaus i live in Europe?
Only the US client went live last week
the EU one was delayed for extra testing on the servers.
official dude on the blizzard forums said they hoped to release the EU client last night - but in the end he came back and said it would probably be today (Tuesday) instead.
But, seeing as they work West Coast USA time, that might mean it's unlikely to become available to us until the middle of the night tonight
i tried the pc client under boot camp - looked great, was a real buzz to playing the old game again with such nice graphics
Only the US client went live last week
the EU one was delayed for extra testing on the servers.
official dude on the blizzard forums said they hoped to release the EU client last night - but in the end he came back and said it would probably be today (Tuesday) instead.
But, seeing as they work West Coast USA time, that might mean it's unlikely to become available to us until the middle of the night tonight
i tried the pc client under boot camp - looked great, was a real buzz to playing the old game again with such nice graphics
Sabacrow
May 2, 03:46 PM
I have been spending ours on this, searching and searching and searching to no avail. Basically, here's my problem. I use Better Touch Tool on my MBP for all of my trackpad gestures and it handles them quite well, except for one. I want to register a three-finger tap as CMD+SHIFT+CLICK or SHIFT+MIDDLE CLICK to open a link in a new tab and jump to that tab automatically in Chrome. The problem is that BTT only allows trackpad gestures to be predefined actions or keyboard shortcuts. The closest I've come so far has been setting three-finger tap to middle click and having to hold down shift, but I want the entire command to be key free. All I want to know is if there's a way to remap the Middle click to any of the F1-F12 buttons.
By the by, I've already looked at KeyRemap4MacBook
Thanks for any help
By the by, I've already looked at KeyRemap4MacBook
Thanks for any help
alent1234
Apr 15, 11:17 AM
Its very subjective to the developer whether what SQL database sucks.
Zimbra integrates into itself (Its much more than just an exchange competitor now) and starts from free.
zimbra, pop/imap
what a joke. firewall guys, we want email on our phones. we need to open the firewall on a few more ports
exchange is database based which makes it easier and cheaper to manage it
the base product is free but once you start buying add ons like archiving it's a lot more expensive than exchange. and other features that require MS outlook, contacts sync and iphone/mobile are not free. major fail and will cost just as much if not more than MS exchange once you compare apple's to apples
Zimbra integrates into itself (Its much more than just an exchange competitor now) and starts from free.
zimbra, pop/imap
what a joke. firewall guys, we want email on our phones. we need to open the firewall on a few more ports
exchange is database based which makes it easier and cheaper to manage it
the base product is free but once you start buying add ons like archiving it's a lot more expensive than exchange. and other features that require MS outlook, contacts sync and iphone/mobile are not free. major fail and will cost just as much if not more than MS exchange once you compare apple's to apples
bond2
Sep 20, 12:26 PM
As the saying goes at Apple: "If you can't beat'em, dual'em"
I say whatever it takes to keep up. Doesn't bother me that there are two CPU's under the hood. Anyways I am sure that OS X is way more optimized for dual Processors than Windows 2000 or XP. Having OS X far outways the slight difference in hardware performance. OS X is specifically designed for Macs, and optimized to take full advantage of the hardware. No one that has a Dell, Compaq, Gateway...etc... can say the same thing about Windows. The only way that would happen is if Microsoft came out with a special Intel version of Windows or AMD version. Never gonna happen. I know most of you already know this but I just thought I'd throw it out there again.
I say whatever it takes to keep up. Doesn't bother me that there are two CPU's under the hood. Anyways I am sure that OS X is way more optimized for dual Processors than Windows 2000 or XP. Having OS X far outways the slight difference in hardware performance. OS X is specifically designed for Macs, and optimized to take full advantage of the hardware. No one that has a Dell, Compaq, Gateway...etc... can say the same thing about Windows. The only way that would happen is if Microsoft came out with a special Intel version of Windows or AMD version. Never gonna happen. I know most of you already know this but I just thought I'd throw it out there again.
macusersince5
Mar 23, 04:10 PM
this is awesome!!! you know sharing of information can and usually does go both ways:apple::cool:
PodPacker
Oct 6, 09:52 PM
So the iPod Nano and Shuffle are failures in the same context?
The iPod line relied on the music library of the owner and the usage options. The iPhone is a smart phone. It's main usage is constant. The iPod had varied usage depending on model. iPos shuffle extreme portability for sports and style for women, iPod nano for the casual user who wanted more features and for those with active lifestyles and the iPod classic for the owners of large music libraries and wanted portable video as well as the power user who accessed the device as a portable hard drive.
The iPod line relied on the music library of the owner and the usage options. The iPhone is a smart phone. It's main usage is constant. The iPod had varied usage depending on model. iPos shuffle extreme portability for sports and style for women, iPod nano for the casual user who wanted more features and for those with active lifestyles and the iPod classic for the owners of large music libraries and wanted portable video as well as the power user who accessed the device as a portable hard drive.
ciaran00
Jun 10, 04:43 PM
If T-mobile gets the iPhone maybe they will have better data plans than AT&T
They already do. I've been on Tmo with my iPhone for 3 years now.
Just unlock and go over. Or sit on your hands and wait for official.
They already do. I've been on Tmo with my iPhone for 3 years now.
Just unlock and go over. Or sit on your hands and wait for official.
steelfist
Nov 14, 12:47 PM
hope it's on the A380. that would be awesome! I agree, ipod video abuse will go pretty far though, as far as pornography goes.
coder12
Apr 5, 10:22 AM
They're wrong! If you shove it in your pants while in a 2 foot thick cement building all of your reception goes away!
pubwvj
Apr 7, 05:56 PM
Never strive to be normal.
Still, although I enjoy using my PowerBook and iPodTouch I would love to have an iPad. Nice bit of engineering.
Still, although I enjoy using my PowerBook and iPodTouch I would love to have an iPad. Nice bit of engineering.
carlgo
Mar 20, 10:16 AM
Why all this discussion ? It's easy to suck at photography. It was easier to mess up with film, that's for sure. You should see some of my early attempts...no, you shouldn't...
radiohead14
Apr 5, 10:19 AM
Speaking of such things, I have seen the Barnes and Noble Nook. Ugh. Ick. Yuck. Disgustipating.
no offense.. but how old are you? the nook does a great job of being an ereader.. why would you expect it to be more than what its true purpose is? it sounds like you're over exaggerating things, as i've seen no issues like what you mention
no offense.. but how old are you? the nook does a great job of being an ereader.. why would you expect it to be more than what its true purpose is? it sounds like you're over exaggerating things, as i've seen no issues like what you mention
-hh
Mar 21, 09:24 PM
Its funny that film and film cameras were so difficult to get right, but there was almost no post-processing. Now we shoot computers with lenses attached, get great technical results, yet post-process our photos to death.
Actually, for many people there was quite a bit of post-processing, but it was hidden from them: it was the hand-inspected print from ye olde local camera store, which would dial in what they believed were the appropriate corrections.
I do still suck.
My problem is leaving my camera on Auto. I just don't know which setting to use. The more I read and the more opinions I see, the more confused I get. Plus when I see a good subject I don't want to mess it up with my ill informed selections...
I did just buy the Bryan Peterson Understanding Exposure book, so hopefully that will help set me off in the right direction!
I agree with most of what you say, except.... I don't get the "Shoot only Full Manual" advice that is heard here and in other places.
If I have spent some $$ on a camera with a computer and a light meter, I figure I'm going to make it do at some of the work. The way I see it, I have a management job, and that is to decide what DoF and/or apparent motion I want to capture (composition) - and to ensure good exposure (quality control). The camera gets to do the grunt work of doing the calculations. It's the back-office.
Thanks for saying this.
I think that there's really two different aspects to this that both require appreciation.
The first is that having the personal knowledge of the variables that go into a proper exposure is a good thing...as well as more factors such as the trade-off of DOF versus Shutter, etc...this is most easily learned by inflicting the "pain" of full manual upon the student.
(like that contradiction? "Pain is Easy" :-)
However, once one knows the ropes ... and what is important - - including when it is/isn't important - - why not let the machine do the settings for a 'nominal' exposure? Afterall, that's what it is good at, and you can concentrate on more important stuff - - such as composition.
At the same time, knowing when to be ... unafraid ... of using the various camera settings is still a very good thing. For example, I revisited this just the other night while outside to shoot some 'big moon' photos:
I did a quick setup and did some shots to find that the auto exposure was totally blown out. Did the "quick cheat" to spin the one dial to override to -2 stops ... still too bright. Figured out that this was probably because I had forgotten to set the camera over to spot metering before going out in the dark...and in the dark, couldn't find that control. So instead of stumbling in the dark blind, I just spun it over to Manual and readjusted, recalling reading somewhere that the old "Sunny 16" rule (I had forgotten the "Moony 11" derivative) also applies to bright exposures of the full Moon to get an idea of just how many stops I was still over-exposing things. I didn't remember the correct rule of thumb, but with digital that doesn't matter as much: it got me quite close in just a few shots; the shot I liked best ended up at 1/320sec for a 280mm shot at f/4.9 / ISO 100...a bit more light-gathering than the correct rule, but more importantly, it was a full 7 stops lower than where the camera default settings were, and I got the whole shebang done in <2 minutes.
...which meant that I was able to get quickly back inside, before my wife was able to yell at me for being outside in the cold without any jacket.
-hh
Actually, for many people there was quite a bit of post-processing, but it was hidden from them: it was the hand-inspected print from ye olde local camera store, which would dial in what they believed were the appropriate corrections.
I do still suck.
My problem is leaving my camera on Auto. I just don't know which setting to use. The more I read and the more opinions I see, the more confused I get. Plus when I see a good subject I don't want to mess it up with my ill informed selections...
I did just buy the Bryan Peterson Understanding Exposure book, so hopefully that will help set me off in the right direction!
I agree with most of what you say, except.... I don't get the "Shoot only Full Manual" advice that is heard here and in other places.
If I have spent some $$ on a camera with a computer and a light meter, I figure I'm going to make it do at some of the work. The way I see it, I have a management job, and that is to decide what DoF and/or apparent motion I want to capture (composition) - and to ensure good exposure (quality control). The camera gets to do the grunt work of doing the calculations. It's the back-office.
Thanks for saying this.
I think that there's really two different aspects to this that both require appreciation.
The first is that having the personal knowledge of the variables that go into a proper exposure is a good thing...as well as more factors such as the trade-off of DOF versus Shutter, etc...this is most easily learned by inflicting the "pain" of full manual upon the student.
(like that contradiction? "Pain is Easy" :-)
However, once one knows the ropes ... and what is important - - including when it is/isn't important - - why not let the machine do the settings for a 'nominal' exposure? Afterall, that's what it is good at, and you can concentrate on more important stuff - - such as composition.
At the same time, knowing when to be ... unafraid ... of using the various camera settings is still a very good thing. For example, I revisited this just the other night while outside to shoot some 'big moon' photos:
I did a quick setup and did some shots to find that the auto exposure was totally blown out. Did the "quick cheat" to spin the one dial to override to -2 stops ... still too bright. Figured out that this was probably because I had forgotten to set the camera over to spot metering before going out in the dark...and in the dark, couldn't find that control. So instead of stumbling in the dark blind, I just spun it over to Manual and readjusted, recalling reading somewhere that the old "Sunny 16" rule (I had forgotten the "Moony 11" derivative) also applies to bright exposures of the full Moon to get an idea of just how many stops I was still over-exposing things. I didn't remember the correct rule of thumb, but with digital that doesn't matter as much: it got me quite close in just a few shots; the shot I liked best ended up at 1/320sec for a 280mm shot at f/4.9 / ISO 100...a bit more light-gathering than the correct rule, but more importantly, it was a full 7 stops lower than where the camera default settings were, and I got the whole shebang done in <2 minutes.
...which meant that I was able to get quickly back inside, before my wife was able to yell at me for being outside in the cold without any jacket.
-hh
Tones2
Apr 19, 10:03 AM
So what's this, an OLD white iPhone 4 prototype with 64 GB with a different version of iOS 4, none of which will ever be released? Wow, great news. :rolleyes:
Tony
Tony
Eriden
Apr 5, 09:46 AM
You're supposed to use smilies when you're being sarcastic on the Internet.
Nonsense. A <sarcasm> tag is perfectly acceptable around here as well.
Of course, the need for such devices usually says more about the reader's comprehension abilities than it does about the writer's callousness or alleged cultural insensitivity/anglocentrism.
Nonsense. A <sarcasm> tag is perfectly acceptable around here as well.
Of course, the need for such devices usually says more about the reader's comprehension abilities than it does about the writer's callousness or alleged cultural insensitivity/anglocentrism.
GFLPraxis
Apr 5, 04:52 PM
Fantastic. Apple should have Thunderbolt across most of their Mac line by the time this comes out on the iPhone 5/iPad 3, and most new PCs will have USB 3.
Super-high-speed syncing, plus possibly external devices due to Thunderbolt's daisy chain ability?
It could make an iPad/iPhone accessories market of Thunderbolt devices that pushes adoption...
Super-high-speed syncing, plus possibly external devices due to Thunderbolt's daisy chain ability?
It could make an iPad/iPhone accessories market of Thunderbolt devices that pushes adoption...
str1f3
Dec 27, 07:57 PM
I have to say that LIVEFRMNYC's chat makes more sense than the Consumerist's. Fraud would certainly be reason for preventing only online sales. My guess is that the Consumerist got a typically uninformed call center employee.
Why would that make more sense with one city? The fraudulent claims would have to be more than the iPhones they sell online in NYC. There are more iPhone users here than any other city in the world.
Also you would have to say the Consumerist (well-respected blog) is lying and AT&T isn't. Do you really believe that? The original reason the Consumerist went after this story was that people were having this problem and they initiated their own investigation.
Why would that make more sense with one city? The fraudulent claims would have to be more than the iPhones they sell online in NYC. There are more iPhone users here than any other city in the world.
Also you would have to say the Consumerist (well-respected blog) is lying and AT&T isn't. Do you really believe that? The original reason the Consumerist went after this story was that people were having this problem and they initiated their own investigation.
Andronicus
Mar 24, 02:47 PM
That almost makes me feel bad for selling a 16GB Wi-Fi only for $375 last week. oh well...I'm over it.
Don't feel bad I bought a first gen iPad right before the iPad 2 launch. I paid $500 for a 32GB 3G, and I still love it! Worth the money and will hold me over till iPad 3 retina display!
Don't feel bad I bought a first gen iPad right before the iPad 2 launch. I paid $500 for a 32GB 3G, and I still love it! Worth the money and will hold me over till iPad 3 retina display!
tlinford
Mar 31, 02:52 AM
In the art of war, 'keep you friends close, and you enemies closer'!
JordanTracer
Apr 6, 08:02 PM
Okay, anyone with any intelligence can tell this is fake.
1. Camera positioning is wrong, the positioning of the camera would be closer to the middle of the ipod, because the image sensor would be to wide/thick to fit there, its not like the iphone which is not rounded.
-in image 4 you can also see that the camera was photoshopped in by the pixel patterns
-photo 1 you can see fake shadowing opposing the camera to make it look as if its real, but really giving away its fakeness
2. capitative button, the idea is cool, but apple already discussed this option and said it was unreliable, and would cause many to lose battery life from heat activation.
-Also in image 3 you can clearly see it was photoshopped by the blurring, repeating and the swirling on the fingerprints.
3. Capacity, the actual and physical capacities of a device are different, a 128 gb ipod would have 120gb physical. then some more reserved for apple so 118gb
-also photoshopped, if you noticed the added blur in the area of device capacity, its because there is. also the focal point is distorted by the blurring effect so it proves the photoshopping
4.DVT-1 that is the name commonly used for the development of iphone, but each test was labeled with its respective code such as N90, or its respective XXGB meaning which has come to be known as the common for test items, because the cases are manufactured the same for many levels as the internals are tweaked and tested.
-photo 1 shows a blured capacity like 64gb, not the same as the 4th pictures dvt-1
-photo 4 is filtered to much, and has photoshopped DVT-1 which would be an improper labeling
so in conclusion macrumors should remove this or label it as fake on top, its completely fake, and not even a good rumor.
1. Camera positioning is wrong, the positioning of the camera would be closer to the middle of the ipod, because the image sensor would be to wide/thick to fit there, its not like the iphone which is not rounded.
-in image 4 you can also see that the camera was photoshopped in by the pixel patterns
-photo 1 you can see fake shadowing opposing the camera to make it look as if its real, but really giving away its fakeness
2. capitative button, the idea is cool, but apple already discussed this option and said it was unreliable, and would cause many to lose battery life from heat activation.
-Also in image 3 you can clearly see it was photoshopped by the blurring, repeating and the swirling on the fingerprints.
3. Capacity, the actual and physical capacities of a device are different, a 128 gb ipod would have 120gb physical. then some more reserved for apple so 118gb
-also photoshopped, if you noticed the added blur in the area of device capacity, its because there is. also the focal point is distorted by the blurring effect so it proves the photoshopping
4.DVT-1 that is the name commonly used for the development of iphone, but each test was labeled with its respective code such as N90, or its respective XXGB meaning which has come to be known as the common for test items, because the cases are manufactured the same for many levels as the internals are tweaked and tested.
-photo 1 shows a blured capacity like 64gb, not the same as the 4th pictures dvt-1
-photo 4 is filtered to much, and has photoshopped DVT-1 which would be an improper labeling
so in conclusion macrumors should remove this or label it as fake on top, its completely fake, and not even a good rumor.
bobr1952
Mar 13, 10:41 AM
How can something like this be for "some phones?" Doesn't make much sense to me--seems more likely to be a problem with the carrier--mine did fine figuring out it was now daylight savings time. :confused:
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario