swingerofbirch
Nov 14, 02:29 PM
Has no one else thought of the security implications of this? They are allowing people to connect complex computer devices to the electronics system of an airplane. What is to stop someone from writing a virus that would infiltrate the plane's computers and cause it to crash? With all the crazy precautions they take regarding toothpaste, it's hard to see how they could miss the obvious.
MacDawg
Jan 4, 09:55 AM
I love my Garmin Nuvi :)
Sounds promising and I may check it out
Sounds promising and I may check it out
robbieduncan
Sep 28, 07:29 AM
They'd better start shipping the portables with more roomy hard drives soon...
These software updates are getting HUUUUUUUGGGGGE!:(
Just because the update is 100Mb (or whatever) does not mean that it needs 100Mb more disk space. If Apple want to update an executable then the updater contains the whole thing. So if the updater contains a new executable that is 10Mb and the existing one is 9.5Mb then you only need 0.5Mb more space.
These software updates are getting HUUUUUUUGGGGGE!:(
Just because the update is 100Mb (or whatever) does not mean that it needs 100Mb more disk space. If Apple want to update an executable then the updater contains the whole thing. So if the updater contains a new executable that is 10Mb and the existing one is 9.5Mb then you only need 0.5Mb more space.
lmalave
Nov 2, 10:04 PM
So many of the switchers are college kids. A few
months ago they had an article about how the
market share in college is really falling more toward
mac, more than ever before. Apple is getting them
young, and that will pay off in the long run. I got
my first Mac when I started college and now that
I finished, I got a new one. The new laptops have
made a huge dent in this age group, so that is what
a lot of this whole market share increase is caused by.
Harvard and Princeton have both recently reported that 50% of sales at their campus computer stores are Macs.
months ago they had an article about how the
market share in college is really falling more toward
mac, more than ever before. Apple is getting them
young, and that will pay off in the long run. I got
my first Mac when I started college and now that
I finished, I got a new one. The new laptops have
made a huge dent in this age group, so that is what
a lot of this whole market share increase is caused by.
Harvard and Princeton have both recently reported that 50% of sales at their campus computer stores are Macs.
more...
Cougarcat
Aug 19, 10:59 AM
because it's turned on by default. it should be off by default (IMO) and then turned on as an option. many people aren't aware that Facebook's new "features" are almost always on when rolled out.
It will only update if you allow it to use your location, and then after that only if you tap the places icon. It doesn't update your location automatically.
It will only update if you allow it to use your location, and then after that only if you tap the places icon. It doesn't update your location automatically.
robbieduncan
Sep 27, 09:18 AM
I expect that 10.4.8 will be required for Aperture 1.5 (as OS updates are normally required to add RAW support for new cameras). A post on another forum (arstechnicas iirc) by someone who was at Photokina and had talked to someone from Apple said that Aperture 1.5 was scheduled to be available for download at the end of the show (October 1st)...
more...
Darkroom
Apr 16, 06:53 PM
way to stand by your principles by resubmitting :rolleyes:
netdog
Oct 27, 05:43 AM
If you buy .Mac, you pay mainly for the integration with Apple's iLife applications.
Actually, I pay for the IMAP service and automatic syncing of my contacts, datebook, bookmarks, etc. across both my Macs with an automatic online backup and a web-accessible copy. I am glad to get these services all from one integrated source...in this case from Apple.
I have a Google account too, but Google does not offer Mac users what .Mac offers. I've got nothing against people choosing not to pay for or use .Mac, but I am really tired of people miscasting .Mac as being much more limited than it actually is to get others to see things their way.
If you want the services that .Mac offers, you can get it for anywhere from $45 to $79 per year, or about $3.75 to $6.50 per month. For me, that's a bargain. For others, it may admittedly not be worth it.
Actually, I pay for the IMAP service and automatic syncing of my contacts, datebook, bookmarks, etc. across both my Macs with an automatic online backup and a web-accessible copy. I am glad to get these services all from one integrated source...in this case from Apple.
I have a Google account too, but Google does not offer Mac users what .Mac offers. I've got nothing against people choosing not to pay for or use .Mac, but I am really tired of people miscasting .Mac as being much more limited than it actually is to get others to see things their way.
If you want the services that .Mac offers, you can get it for anywhere from $45 to $79 per year, or about $3.75 to $6.50 per month. For me, that's a bargain. For others, it may admittedly not be worth it.
more...
Digidesign
Sep 19, 05:10 PM
That's really interesting! You just held "c" at boot to load up the XP CD?
I'm guessing you still needed to use a "slipstreamed" XP SP2 CD with the SATA drivers installed so it doesn't run in dog slow PIO mode
Where the hell did you find chipset drivers, graphics card drivers, sound card drivers etc? :confused:
Clarification:
I made a MacPro driver CD from Bootcamp, and a slipstreamed XP SP2 CD. The slipstreamed XP SP2 CD boots up just fine holding "c" at boot.
I'm guessing you still needed to use a "slipstreamed" XP SP2 CD with the SATA drivers installed so it doesn't run in dog slow PIO mode
Where the hell did you find chipset drivers, graphics card drivers, sound card drivers etc? :confused:
Clarification:
I made a MacPro driver CD from Bootcamp, and a slipstreamed XP SP2 CD. The slipstreamed XP SP2 CD boots up just fine holding "c" at boot.
HexMonkey
May 31, 05:04 AM
Overly-general guidelines based on the number of articles is poor structure, if it gets vastly overcrowded then new subcategories should be used very sparingly, but without subsubcategories, a user won't have to click through more than 3 times to get to the article they want from the Guides page, Top Category>Subcategory>Article, and potentially most of the time, two, Top Category>Article, or they'll just search it out which is the most likely, but that doesn't mean a decent hierarchy should be given up since it allows the user to just browse articles of interest.
I don't think the number of clicks is the best metric here. If there are hundreds of articles in a category, it takes a long time to skim through the list of them. If you can spend a few extra seconds narrowing down what you're looking for, it can be much faster to find something.
I don't think the number of clicks is the best metric here. If there are hundreds of articles in a category, it takes a long time to skim through the list of them. If you can spend a few extra seconds narrowing down what you're looking for, it can be much faster to find something.
more...
sebastianlewis
May 31, 04:32 AM
A solution is a solution no matter whether it's the Command Line or a GUI, besides that, a lot of apps also have a CLI equivalent, Property List Editor and defaults, Disk Utility and diskutil, Automator and automator, etc. So clearly articles involving Disk Utility would also need to include diskutil, and Automator would need to include it's CLI equivalent... not quite the same for the Plist editor and defaults I guess.
Then there is something like Quicksilver, which is kind of a mix between the GUI and the Terminal, well actually I'd go so far as to say it's an interface paradigm in itself. Then there are preference pane apps which aren't full GUI apps, codecs like Perian and WMV Components which also happen to have preference panes by the way, small utilities like Jumpcut which can function in either the GUI or the CLI via the same keyboard shortcut and just extend the clipboard, so it's really hard to create an artificial distinction between them, and then there are X11 apps, and what about online apps like Google Docs? No, they're not Mac specific apps, but neither is something like OpenOffice.org, they just happen to be hosted online and work in a browser, but a solution is still a solution whether or not it's locally hosted or remote, has a GUI or uses the CLI, or has its own unique interface, uses Aqua, or uses the X Window System, or uses your browsers rendering engine.
On the other hand, if we were to use subcategories as filters, then that would just have the effect of narrowing the list instead of forcing the user to click through to another category to find what they might be looking for so we wouldn't have to create a distinction between different types of Software in the main category.
So in reality, Mac OS X is a hybrid breed and so you have to look at where the real distinction is, the Operating System provides the software for a functioning computer, Apple provides their Cocoa and Carbon developers with the HIG, and also provides a full UNIX environment that anyone can take advantage of, and also provides a powerful Rendering Engine in the OS that provides an environment for both Widgets and Web-based Apps to run in. Some people are scared of the Terminal, but the Guides are here and they can be a powerful tool for getting people more used to the idea of using the Terminal and getting the most out of their computer, or if they chose too, they can completely ignore it.
Sebastian
Clearly there are both cases where there is too much categorisation and where there is not enough. I'm in favour of general guidelines based on the number of articles, ie new subcategories should have at least x articles, and categories with more than y articles may want to be broken up - of course, there will be exceptions, so they should be only very general guidelines.
I'm open to a big change in the category organisation of the Guides, as it is clearly badly structured in some places. However, any new structure needs to be carefully designed and agreed upon, as it is a lot of work to change and very difficult to undo.
Overly-general guidelines based on the number of articles is poor structure, if it gets vastly overcrowded then new subcategories should be used very sparingly, but without subsubcategories, a user won't have to click through more than 3 times to get to the article they want from the Guides page, Top Category>Subcategory>Article, and potentially most of the time, two, Top Category>Article, or they'll just search it out which is the most likely, but that doesn't mean a decent hierarchy should be given up since it allows the user to just browse articles of interest.
Sebastian
Then there is something like Quicksilver, which is kind of a mix between the GUI and the Terminal, well actually I'd go so far as to say it's an interface paradigm in itself. Then there are preference pane apps which aren't full GUI apps, codecs like Perian and WMV Components which also happen to have preference panes by the way, small utilities like Jumpcut which can function in either the GUI or the CLI via the same keyboard shortcut and just extend the clipboard, so it's really hard to create an artificial distinction between them, and then there are X11 apps, and what about online apps like Google Docs? No, they're not Mac specific apps, but neither is something like OpenOffice.org, they just happen to be hosted online and work in a browser, but a solution is still a solution whether or not it's locally hosted or remote, has a GUI or uses the CLI, or has its own unique interface, uses Aqua, or uses the X Window System, or uses your browsers rendering engine.
On the other hand, if we were to use subcategories as filters, then that would just have the effect of narrowing the list instead of forcing the user to click through to another category to find what they might be looking for so we wouldn't have to create a distinction between different types of Software in the main category.
So in reality, Mac OS X is a hybrid breed and so you have to look at where the real distinction is, the Operating System provides the software for a functioning computer, Apple provides their Cocoa and Carbon developers with the HIG, and also provides a full UNIX environment that anyone can take advantage of, and also provides a powerful Rendering Engine in the OS that provides an environment for both Widgets and Web-based Apps to run in. Some people are scared of the Terminal, but the Guides are here and they can be a powerful tool for getting people more used to the idea of using the Terminal and getting the most out of their computer, or if they chose too, they can completely ignore it.
Sebastian
Clearly there are both cases where there is too much categorisation and where there is not enough. I'm in favour of general guidelines based on the number of articles, ie new subcategories should have at least x articles, and categories with more than y articles may want to be broken up - of course, there will be exceptions, so they should be only very general guidelines.
I'm open to a big change in the category organisation of the Guides, as it is clearly badly structured in some places. However, any new structure needs to be carefully designed and agreed upon, as it is a lot of work to change and very difficult to undo.
Overly-general guidelines based on the number of articles is poor structure, if it gets vastly overcrowded then new subcategories should be used very sparingly, but without subsubcategories, a user won't have to click through more than 3 times to get to the article they want from the Guides page, Top Category>Subcategory>Article, and potentially most of the time, two, Top Category>Article, or they'll just search it out which is the most likely, but that doesn't mean a decent hierarchy should be given up since it allows the user to just browse articles of interest.
Sebastian
mlblacy
Mar 18, 07:05 AM
The one in bold is what I see the most. I've done photography for years and see new people get into the game and worry about the wrong things. Photoshop being one of them. Photoshop shouldn't even come to someones mind.
Learn the camera, learn composition, learn lighting, learn photographic techniques to get what you want such as second curtain sync, hyperfocal distancing, etc. Once you can get it done right in camera then you can take it to the next level in photoshop (skin smoothing, removing hair wisps, correcting lens distortion, etc.).
Too many people want to be a pro right out of the gate, they buy photoshop, get a NAPP membership, a fancy computer (that is 99% of the time overkill), raid storage when they've only shot 500 pictures, etc but never bother to learn the fundamentals.
I'm all for learning on Digital, I think it helps someone learn better, but focus on learning the most important and fundamental things first, then learn about the post processing. A picture can still look fantastic without running it through photoshop.
These days much of the craftsmanship that used to take place in the darkroom coaxing a master print from a negative now takes place digitally. A technically well exposed frame can still produce a crappy print at the end of a less skilled artist. Conversely, technical perfection (second curtain sync, hyperfocal distancing gobbledygook) has very little to do with art, or even creativity. Great "art" these days is even being shot on a cellphone.
Both camps (the technical-crats & the ones who are blissfully unaware of the minutiae) can produce "great" work.
Many beginners suffer from the same bad pshop skills (hey, look... I can make grass grow on his head, no make that two heads) and mistakes that beginning designers can (hey look, I can make EACH letter a different color, and a different font).
All that being said, if I was teaching beginning photographers I would remove almost everything to start (camera, lens, etc.) and go primitive and start with building pinhole cameras. Then I would progress to the end point which would be post-processing. Post-processing is huge though...
cheers,
michael
Learn the camera, learn composition, learn lighting, learn photographic techniques to get what you want such as second curtain sync, hyperfocal distancing, etc. Once you can get it done right in camera then you can take it to the next level in photoshop (skin smoothing, removing hair wisps, correcting lens distortion, etc.).
Too many people want to be a pro right out of the gate, they buy photoshop, get a NAPP membership, a fancy computer (that is 99% of the time overkill), raid storage when they've only shot 500 pictures, etc but never bother to learn the fundamentals.
I'm all for learning on Digital, I think it helps someone learn better, but focus on learning the most important and fundamental things first, then learn about the post processing. A picture can still look fantastic without running it through photoshop.
These days much of the craftsmanship that used to take place in the darkroom coaxing a master print from a negative now takes place digitally. A technically well exposed frame can still produce a crappy print at the end of a less skilled artist. Conversely, technical perfection (second curtain sync, hyperfocal distancing gobbledygook) has very little to do with art, or even creativity. Great "art" these days is even being shot on a cellphone.
Both camps (the technical-crats & the ones who are blissfully unaware of the minutiae) can produce "great" work.
Many beginners suffer from the same bad pshop skills (hey, look... I can make grass grow on his head, no make that two heads) and mistakes that beginning designers can (hey look, I can make EACH letter a different color, and a different font).
All that being said, if I was teaching beginning photographers I would remove almost everything to start (camera, lens, etc.) and go primitive and start with building pinhole cameras. Then I would progress to the end point which would be post-processing. Post-processing is huge though...
cheers,
michael
more...
Hellhammer
Apr 25, 08:15 AM
Not to mention that the internal Ethernet port could support up to Gigabit speeds while the extEthernet would only support up to 100Mbps (due to USB's limitation of 480mbps).
Thunderbolt will solve this. TB to Gigabit Ethernet adapter will definitely deliver 1Gb/s (800Mb/s due to 8/10b encoding).
Thunderbolt will solve this. TB to Gigabit Ethernet adapter will definitely deliver 1Gb/s (800Mb/s due to 8/10b encoding).
kfscoll
Apr 28, 09:33 AM
I'd actually pay a little extra to get Lion on a read-only USB drive. I've had to reinstall SL a few times (new computers, testing, new hard drive, etc) and reinstalling (heck, even booting) from optical media is painfully slow.
more...
philitup23
Jan 7, 08:47 AM
Why do only some of the profile pics from facebook transfer over to my phone and not all of them? Where's the differentiation between the ones that transfer and the ones that dont?
NAG
Mar 23, 02:55 PM
I have a tv with an iPod dock as a feature that can play video off my iPhone when plugged in (the dock doesn't fit my iPad, booo). I don't really see why Apple would prevent Airplay from being built in to TVs when they have iPod docks. Kind of a no brainer here.
PS: The dock wasn't a factor, it was on sale. Having Airplay might have been a factor.
PS: The dock wasn't a factor, it was on sale. Having Airplay might have been a factor.
more...
Tha Professor
Nov 18, 04:03 AM
I wouldn't pay 270 dollars for a white iPhone whose home button color dont match....
TehReaper
Mar 11, 07:46 AM
Surprisingly is only two of us still in northpark mall.
ejfontenot
Mar 11, 04:10 PM
If you want a coupon for 10% off one of the best iPad cases for your new iPad, PM you email address and I will send you a coupon. www.dodocase.com
Or you can find me in line and I can show you why you should buy this case!
Or you can find me in line and I can show you why you should buy this case!
tmaxxtigger
Mar 11, 10:01 PM
50th in line at Allen BB, but they did not have much left by the time they reached me, mostly white and 3G that not many wanted, bummer. Target and Walmart in the area has little to nothing either.
Zepaw
Apr 13, 09:18 AM
I'm holding off on the ipad. I really like it and I'm not waiting for some future specs. I just am not sure I have enough need for it to spend that kind of cash. I have a three year old laptop and I think I'd rather save a little more money and get a new laptop than add an ipad to my collection. And I think the needs of an ipad are not that great for me right now.
I think if I were to buy one it would be as a gift for my parents. You know these are ideal for people in the family who do not really need a full computer but you'd like to have the ability to interact with on-line. You can set it up with your own computer and occasionally update it for them. It looks to be a lot less of a headache to manage for someone who is not tech savvy than a full computer.
Ditto on all counts, especially if the 3yo laptop is a MBP.
I think if I were to buy one it would be as a gift for my parents. You know these are ideal for people in the family who do not really need a full computer but you'd like to have the ability to interact with on-line. You can set it up with your own computer and occasionally update it for them. It looks to be a lot less of a headache to manage for someone who is not tech savvy than a full computer.
Ditto on all counts, especially if the 3yo laptop is a MBP.
Rychiar
Nov 6, 01:30 AM
i had that chuck action figure once upon a time! LOL
NewGenAdam
Apr 12, 03:03 PM
What about denying somebody a job because of their, say, intelligence? Charisma? Any number of things that are largely predetermined?
Surely it would be unfair to judge somebody by their intelligence because so much of it is down to parental intelligence and wealth; how much they can teach you and how much they can pay for the best educations. (D's A)
In theory I suppose we should only judge people for things which are entirely their own doing; things which are neither a product of their genes or upbringing. But then, taking those away, what remains?
Not much really. In practice, I fear people are at least in some part judged for merits in which their efforts play a smaller part. Like natural intelligence, or sporting ability. Is this wrong? Perhaps on some abstract moral level, but I think it's probably permissible unless someone wants to call me a senseless bigot.
Surely it would be unfair to judge somebody by their intelligence because so much of it is down to parental intelligence and wealth; how much they can teach you and how much they can pay for the best educations. (D's A)
In theory I suppose we should only judge people for things which are entirely their own doing; things which are neither a product of their genes or upbringing. But then, taking those away, what remains?
Not much really. In practice, I fear people are at least in some part judged for merits in which their efforts play a smaller part. Like natural intelligence, or sporting ability. Is this wrong? Perhaps on some abstract moral level, but I think it's probably permissible unless someone wants to call me a senseless bigot.
BruiserB
May 2, 04:03 PM
Has anyone torn-down a recent black iP4? Maybe Apple just changed the camera part on both?
No comments:
Post a Comment