edesignuk
Dec 18, 08:51 AM
I bought it, all fingers crossed for a raging victory on Sunday :D
DanielK
Oct 16, 04:37 PM
Hmm... I've held off on buying both a new phone and a new iPod for a while now, assuming that I'd want whatever phone Apple eventually comes out with, but the mention of battery life issues concerns me. If the battery goes dead on my iPod, no big deal, I don't listen to music until I charge it again. But if the battery goes dead on my phone, I could miss an important call. And if I have to monitor how much music I listen to to ensure that I can still receive calls, that might be a problem. Ideally, they could address this concern by having some software that told you well in advance that if you stop listening to music now, you still have so much time left on your phone.
akatsuki
Mar 23, 09:16 PM
I'd just like to be able to stream audio to my car using AirPlay instead of plugging my iPhone in every time.
Jasonbot
May 3, 04:13 PM
Sigh, My download option is still greyed out.
Jett0516
Mar 19, 04:51 PM
what kind of school would need the ipad over a mac or pc?
Thunderhawks
Mar 25, 09:27 AM
Disagree. It's not ridiculous. Valid patent protection is great. That's the whole point of a patent to protect your invention. Any company with a valid invention and patent should pursue any and all infringements.
However, there are many high-tech patents that are BS or weak. Plus, I think patent holders should have to make claims of infringement in a reasonable amount of time after a potential infringement. Sitting back and waiting for products to be wildly successful before pursuing a case is nothing but settlement bloat. Finally, there is patent trolling which should be illegal as it's just lawyers looking to cash in on settlements and costs consumers. Patent trolling is like ambulance chasers. Lowest form of greed.
As I posted before Kodak once was an amazing company with many discoveries and patents in the imaging field.
Anybody close to Rochester NY should go and see their museum.
(You can also see the factory buildings that are being ripped down)
What a shame for this company to lose its vision and completely miss the digital age. (With a few exceptions)
The problem with patents is that the longer they are someplace dormant and unused it will only be a matter of time until somebody has a similar idea, driven by technological advances.
I would imagine that researching any given patent is very hard, depending on how it is worded and how vague and weak it is.
So, Apple and RIM and others may have looked, but not well enough.
Doesn't make them innocent of course and they will have to pay up, if proven.
A revision of patent laws should include that if a patent filer is not using his patented technology within a certain time period it would become open to others. That forces patent trolls to do something, rather then waiting for somebody with vision to make it successful and then cash in.
Buying Kodak may be a good tactic depending on the outcome, but the place is almost dead at this time and anybody who buys it would most likely buy it with the intention to use the patents and close the company altogether.
Only a matter of time.
However, there are many high-tech patents that are BS or weak. Plus, I think patent holders should have to make claims of infringement in a reasonable amount of time after a potential infringement. Sitting back and waiting for products to be wildly successful before pursuing a case is nothing but settlement bloat. Finally, there is patent trolling which should be illegal as it's just lawyers looking to cash in on settlements and costs consumers. Patent trolling is like ambulance chasers. Lowest form of greed.
As I posted before Kodak once was an amazing company with many discoveries and patents in the imaging field.
Anybody close to Rochester NY should go and see their museum.
(You can also see the factory buildings that are being ripped down)
What a shame for this company to lose its vision and completely miss the digital age. (With a few exceptions)
The problem with patents is that the longer they are someplace dormant and unused it will only be a matter of time until somebody has a similar idea, driven by technological advances.
I would imagine that researching any given patent is very hard, depending on how it is worded and how vague and weak it is.
So, Apple and RIM and others may have looked, but not well enough.
Doesn't make them innocent of course and they will have to pay up, if proven.
A revision of patent laws should include that if a patent filer is not using his patented technology within a certain time period it would become open to others. That forces patent trolls to do something, rather then waiting for somebody with vision to make it successful and then cash in.
Buying Kodak may be a good tactic depending on the outcome, but the place is almost dead at this time and anybody who buys it would most likely buy it with the intention to use the patents and close the company altogether.
Only a matter of time.
netdog
Oct 27, 03:04 AM
It's still a ripoff.
SL
So don't get it. Obviously many agree with you, and many don't, myself included.
SL
So don't get it. Obviously many agree with you, and many don't, myself included.
Half Glass
Sep 20, 11:27 AM
Just to clarify...do I need to reinstall XP now after the EFI update or should the speed be correct now?
I have a feeling a reinstall is necessary and that is fine, I'm just at work now and was wondering what to expect when I get home tonight.
Thanks!
--HG
I have a feeling a reinstall is necessary and that is fine, I'm just at work now and was wondering what to expect when I get home tonight.
Thanks!
--HG
RogueLdr
Sep 19, 04:15 PM
It's a shame, however, that Apple will probably never link to this page due to the fact that they are not #1 on the list. The similiarity in performance of the G4 system and the Pentium system speaks highly of the efficiency of the G4 processor.
RL
RL
appleguy123
Apr 4, 11:21 PM
Can we please make a sticky about this? It seems like this question is asked at least 3 times a month.
Project
Nov 5, 06:33 AM
I think we can see it all around us that people are switching. Im a recent switcher myself and have had 2 Macs now in 12 months.
What im interested in though, is what effect Vista will have on the rate of switchers. Its fairly easy to get a casual PC user to switch on eye candy alone. Will this work when Vista out eye candys OSX?
What im interested in though, is what effect Vista will have on the rate of switchers. Its fairly easy to get a casual PC user to switch on eye candy alone. Will this work when Vista out eye candys OSX?
jsw
Sep 13, 09:22 AM
I know -- just a few minutes with them and they'll have you in stitches.
And surgeons are less boring in bed - anesthesiologists always want to put you under, er, be on top.
And surgeons are less boring in bed - anesthesiologists always want to put you under, er, be on top.
blackstarliner
Oct 13, 03:43 AM
my bet is they have several different manufacturers. with macbook split up between 2-3 builders.
I thought it was common knowledge that due to the great demand* for MBs, Apple had to find a second manufacturer to meet orders. Hence all the delays a month or two ago. Is it just me or why haven't folk put 2 and 2 together?
* despite being 'overpriced', 'obsolete' POS that no-one in their right mind would consider when you can have a dell with magical c2d for 300 bucks less? :confused:
I thought it was common knowledge that due to the great demand* for MBs, Apple had to find a second manufacturer to meet orders. Hence all the delays a month or two ago. Is it just me or why haven't folk put 2 and 2 together?
* despite being 'overpriced', 'obsolete' POS that no-one in their right mind would consider when you can have a dell with magical c2d for 300 bucks less? :confused:
Rigsby
Oct 26, 07:35 PM
it was a bit embarrassing to say i was queuing for an operating system!
Cah! It is the people who asked who should be embarrassed.
I got there about 5 and about half-way around the block which was good enough to snag a shirt, keyboard and Leopard by about 6.15.
My main purpose in commenting though is to say congrats to Apple on the management of the event, especially the policing of the queue. It was good to see they dealt with pushing in because, let's face it, they get the same money whether you push or not.
(one machine Leoparded, two to go!)
Cah! It is the people who asked who should be embarrassed.
I got there about 5 and about half-way around the block which was good enough to snag a shirt, keyboard and Leopard by about 6.15.
My main purpose in commenting though is to say congrats to Apple on the management of the event, especially the policing of the queue. It was good to see they dealt with pushing in because, let's face it, they get the same money whether you push or not.
(one machine Leoparded, two to go!)
{1984}
Sep 23, 08:37 PM
i guess everyone knows about the whole "MHz myth" thing...
Reason for G4 processors killing the Pentium 4 is cuz of the pipeline and i'm not gonna bother cuz everyone probably knows...
Reason for G4 processors killing the Pentium 4 is cuz of the pipeline and i'm not gonna bother cuz everyone probably knows...
blinkie
Dec 21, 05:49 AM
- just don't have any time for this.
Time enough to post about it though ;) Merryxmas
Time enough to post about it though ;) Merryxmas
flosseR
Mar 29, 09:31 AM
thatisme....give up.. you are trying in vain to recover from a grave mistake..
effectively you HAVE argued wrong:
Originally Posted by thatisme
YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF
This WILL in fact create the eEXACT same image... It does not matter what focal length it is, the SENSOR will create the image.. the only difference is that the EFs lens has a smaller image circle.. NOTHING ELSE changes!!! absolutely NOTHING. I don't get what your problem is.. the mm amount on the lens is what matters... if you only get a 1.6x crop out of the resulting image in comparison to a full 35mm frame has no relevance to the lens.
THE MILLIMETER OF THE ACTUAL FOCAL LENGTH ARE ALWAYS THE SAME!
end of story.
A canon 55-200 EF-s and a 70-200L lens at 200mm on a canon 7D will produce the exact same image...the same as if you would mount both lenses on a full frame body and crop the image by 1.6.
end of this meaningless discussion now.. geez
effectively you HAVE argued wrong:
Originally Posted by thatisme
YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF
This WILL in fact create the eEXACT same image... It does not matter what focal length it is, the SENSOR will create the image.. the only difference is that the EFs lens has a smaller image circle.. NOTHING ELSE changes!!! absolutely NOTHING. I don't get what your problem is.. the mm amount on the lens is what matters... if you only get a 1.6x crop out of the resulting image in comparison to a full 35mm frame has no relevance to the lens.
THE MILLIMETER OF THE ACTUAL FOCAL LENGTH ARE ALWAYS THE SAME!
end of story.
A canon 55-200 EF-s and a 70-200L lens at 200mm on a canon 7D will produce the exact same image...the same as if you would mount both lenses on a full frame body and crop the image by 1.6.
end of this meaningless discussion now.. geez
iJohnHenry
Apr 3, 06:53 PM
You don't have to be mad, but it sure helps.
Is this a chink in the armour??
Am I winning you over?
:D
Is this a chink in the armour??
Am I winning you over?
:D
Orion09
Apr 4, 11:50 AM
Im tryin to print some episodes to tape and runnin into some issues. I have been doing this with no problem for a couple years now but no more...My setup to give you an idea is Firewire out of my mac into my tapedeck and a/v out of my tapedeck into a monitor just to make sure everything is ok. When i play my video it usually has a straight stream to my monitor through the tapedeck but what its doing now is just playing the audio and showing the first frame of the video and nothing else till i stop the video, then it changes the first frame to the last frame i stopped the video on. When I try to print to tape it will record the audio and just the frame that the playhead was on when I hit record. Not sure if anyone else has had this problem before, its kinda strange. I have restarted FCP, refresed the A/V devices checked my settings and not sure whats goin on. There is a connection because it brings the picture and audio in, it just wont stream the video to my tape deck. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.
Ommid
Apr 25, 08:10 AM
Surely if they do 1680 15inch, then a 1680 13 won't be unfeasible.
NebulaClash
Apr 20, 06:48 PM
We're...not...normal?
Image (http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/8018/airplane2shatner.jpg)
WHY THE HELL AREN'T I NOTIFIED ABOUT THESE THINGS?!? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHKd80asXy4)
No, we are not normal. The average person does not read message boards about electronic devices and the companies that build them. So, no, we are not normal. We are gadget geeks.
And I like being not normal in this way. Remember, it is never the normal people who change the world ;)
Image (http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/8018/airplane2shatner.jpg)
WHY THE HELL AREN'T I NOTIFIED ABOUT THESE THINGS?!? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHKd80asXy4)
No, we are not normal. The average person does not read message boards about electronic devices and the companies that build them. So, no, we are not normal. We are gadget geeks.
And I like being not normal in this way. Remember, it is never the normal people who change the world ;)
Hrududu
May 2, 01:47 PM
I had opted in on Blizzard's website, but I haven't seen anything about downloading it. I really just want to know if my MBP is going to be capable of playing it. Anyone have an original Core 2 Duo MBP with the 128MB Radeon X1600 thats tried it out?
twoodcc
Apr 16, 09:53 PM
I do now, for some reason it takes me a while to understand when I look at it.
i think those stats are pretty good. nothing is perfect, but they seem to work for me.
Ha ha, yes we could use some more folders.
yeah the more the better right now. and i finally got my other system up!
i think those stats are pretty good. nothing is perfect, but they seem to work for me.
Ha ha, yes we could use some more folders.
yeah the more the better right now. and i finally got my other system up!
NewGenAdam
Apr 12, 06:08 PM
All mah customers is scared of you ... you bein' black and all ... so they'all stand in the other line and make my other checker do all the work.
So's I gots to fire you and hire me more white checkers.
Yeah. Let's bring back those days ... when America was great. :rolleyes:
Haha your golden age?
Really though.
We can choose not to employ someone born stupid because they'd do a worse job so why can we not also choose not to employ somebody born of a particular ethnicity if they'd do a worse job because of it?
To clarify, I don't think we should practise racism. Please never quote me out of context. I'm just amused by the logical inconsistency if we accept that ethnicity may play a part in ability (which it probably doesn't, but it's an interesting thought path to follow): then can we choose against someone for it in the same way we choose against somebody born stupid?
I propose that we should be able to choose who to employ (and everything else) by how well they'd do the job, with one qualification: we cannot choose against them if our reason for doing so would be because discrimination against them would compromise their ability to do a job. Because ethnicity is not an absolute disadvantage; at most it can be argued as a social disadvantage in intolerant, racist countries.
Not having the 'disadvantage by social discrimination' clause would be implicitly condoning society's discrimination in allowing others to act by its harmful consequences.
Sorry if my words fell onto the thread all jumbled. I think this makes some sense.
So's I gots to fire you and hire me more white checkers.
Yeah. Let's bring back those days ... when America was great. :rolleyes:
Haha your golden age?
Really though.
We can choose not to employ someone born stupid because they'd do a worse job so why can we not also choose not to employ somebody born of a particular ethnicity if they'd do a worse job because of it?
To clarify, I don't think we should practise racism. Please never quote me out of context. I'm just amused by the logical inconsistency if we accept that ethnicity may play a part in ability (which it probably doesn't, but it's an interesting thought path to follow): then can we choose against someone for it in the same way we choose against somebody born stupid?
I propose that we should be able to choose who to employ (and everything else) by how well they'd do the job, with one qualification: we cannot choose against them if our reason for doing so would be because discrimination against them would compromise their ability to do a job. Because ethnicity is not an absolute disadvantage; at most it can be argued as a social disadvantage in intolerant, racist countries.
Not having the 'disadvantage by social discrimination' clause would be implicitly condoning society's discrimination in allowing others to act by its harmful consequences.
Sorry if my words fell onto the thread all jumbled. I think this makes some sense.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق