-SD-
Jun 16, 07:27 PM
Finally we have official confirmation of the dimensions: 270mm(W) x 75mm(H) x 264mm(D). Which is apparently 17% smaller than the original.
:apple:
:apple:
twoodcc
Oct 10, 09:04 AM
ehh.. you know wikipedia isn't always right, right?
no one is
no one is
migsev
May 2, 12:03 PM
Where is everyone getting a key for this?:confused:
citizenzen
Apr 9, 02:40 PM
If people are the greatest asset then paying people to diminish that asset is a very dumb idea.
That's a little simplistic don't you think?
One would assume that you'd also be pro gun control, pro universal healthcare and anti military if not "diminish[ing] that asset" was truly so important to you.
Somehow, I doubt that you're consistent in your stance.
That's a little simplistic don't you think?
One would assume that you'd also be pro gun control, pro universal healthcare and anti military if not "diminish[ing] that asset" was truly so important to you.
Somehow, I doubt that you're consistent in your stance.
more...
Dreadnought
Nov 15, 02:49 PM
If you are interested, look at post #94. Also read this whole thread, there are a lot of good ideas for the widget mentioned.
gauchogolfer
Sep 26, 12:35 PM
Personally, I can't see how Apple could be seen to be the good guys in this case, given they're sending cease-and-desist letters to people using 'pod' (not "iPod") in their product names.
I'm actually reversing myself here, now that I've gotten a chance to read it. This isn't a true C&D letter, in fact, they're only opening up a dialog. Also, the pod reference is specific to content loaded onto portable media players, not 'pod' in general. Seems reasonable to me.
I'm actually reversing myself here, now that I've gotten a chance to read it. This isn't a true C&D letter, in fact, they're only opening up a dialog. Also, the pod reference is specific to content loaded onto portable media players, not 'pod' in general. Seems reasonable to me.
more...
*LTD*
Apr 30, 03:24 PM
If you need any kind of savvy to effectively and productively use an operating system, the operating system is poorly designed.
Sorry, guys. New rules for the post-PC era. Complexity is OUT. Get with the game. Forget conventional IT logic. It no longer applies.
Anyone who chooses the simplest operating system (like OS X and iOS, obviously) to accomplish the same tasks *is* savvy.
Sorry, guys. New rules for the post-PC era. Complexity is OUT. Get with the game. Forget conventional IT logic. It no longer applies.
Anyone who chooses the simplest operating system (like OS X and iOS, obviously) to accomplish the same tasks *is* savvy.
YoGramMamma
Apr 13, 01:35 AM
One thing that i hadnt considered until i got to use it first hand was the whole issue of latency. I got a 64GB VZW model (and while i was origianlly going to get the ATT version, i figured i'd just jailbreak and go the miWi route.. so I am gonna keep the vzw one)..
Anyway, ive used an att one and a vzw one side by side both with abotu 3 bars of signal and the vzw one smoked the att one on response time alone. the VZW was almost done loading the whole page before the att one even begun. They ultimately ended up finishing close to one another, and i am sure on larger uploads and downloads teh faster bandwidth would be a plus, but for most browsing, having a faster response time is better.... and the VZW definitely wins in this area.
Anyway, ive used an att one and a vzw one side by side both with abotu 3 bars of signal and the vzw one smoked the att one on response time alone. the VZW was almost done loading the whole page before the att one even begun. They ultimately ended up finishing close to one another, and i am sure on larger uploads and downloads teh faster bandwidth would be a plus, but for most browsing, having a faster response time is better.... and the VZW definitely wins in this area.
more...
Benjy91
Apr 19, 11:38 AM
Already got Expose multi-tasking on my iPhone :)
Phil A.
Dec 1, 09:18 AM
Looks like the train has come to the end of the line: the website now just goes to a holding page
more...
MarkyMark
Oct 24, 01:41 PM
i really wonder: why not "made in america" or "made in europe"? :confused:
They do (or at least certainly did three years ago, and I think still) make a lot of macs in Ireland. Macs made there have serial numbers which start CK. Apple were one of the top two employers there last time I heard (can't remember if they or Guinness were the biggest).
They do (or at least certainly did three years ago, and I think still) make a lot of macs in Ireland. Macs made there have serial numbers which start CK. Apple were one of the top two employers there last time I heard (can't remember if they or Guinness were the biggest).
Slip Jigs
Dec 28, 10:05 AM
This may just be the beginning. The article in Wired talks about "Data Hogs" and how ATT has been trying to get them to throttle back their usage. How, I don't know. I've been noticing more and more dropped calls on 3G as of late, so much that I have to disable it just to be able to make and complete a call.
Think about it for a second: if this were really an effort to reduce network traffic, it would be a piss-poor way of going about it. For one thing, denying the iPhone to new customers would be far less dependable than throttling data speed. For another, they're closing down only one of many distribution channels, meaning that people in NYC will still be able to get all the iPhones they want. Finally, this would be a public admission that their network is insufficient...and more fodder for the Verizon commercials. You can't tell me that that's not first in every AT&T Wireless executive's mind right now.
I don't know what's going on -- everything is just speculation based on what some low-level AT&T employees (probably new ones who couldn't get out of the holiday shift) said. And I'm not going to jump to any conclusions. I'm just saying that the Consumerist's interpretation doesn't make much sense.
But, if it was really about fraud in certain areas - wouldn't that mean that you can't purchase ANY phone from ATT online? Why would it only apply to the iPhone?
Think about it for a second: if this were really an effort to reduce network traffic, it would be a piss-poor way of going about it. For one thing, denying the iPhone to new customers would be far less dependable than throttling data speed. For another, they're closing down only one of many distribution channels, meaning that people in NYC will still be able to get all the iPhones they want. Finally, this would be a public admission that their network is insufficient...and more fodder for the Verizon commercials. You can't tell me that that's not first in every AT&T Wireless executive's mind right now.
I don't know what's going on -- everything is just speculation based on what some low-level AT&T employees (probably new ones who couldn't get out of the holiday shift) said. And I'm not going to jump to any conclusions. I'm just saying that the Consumerist's interpretation doesn't make much sense.
But, if it was really about fraud in certain areas - wouldn't that mean that you can't purchase ANY phone from ATT online? Why would it only apply to the iPhone?
more...
Hattig
Oct 10, 11:39 AM
Is this an extra MacBook model in addition to the other MacBooks?
If so, then maybe it is a MacBook with discrete graphics, but still 13.3". I.e., something between the MacBook and the MacBook Pro. It might be replacing the current Black MacBook which isn't a great deal for what you get.
Otherwise it's a redesign to address all the current MacBook issues, and will be used across the range.
Merom may come to the original MacBook sooner, but it's pretty much guaranteed that this MacBook will utilise it.
If so, then maybe it is a MacBook with discrete graphics, but still 13.3". I.e., something between the MacBook and the MacBook Pro. It might be replacing the current Black MacBook which isn't a great deal for what you get.
Otherwise it's a redesign to address all the current MacBook issues, and will be used across the range.
Merom may come to the original MacBook sooner, but it's pretty much guaranteed that this MacBook will utilise it.
iJohnHenry
Apr 3, 07:19 PM
I have no idea what you're talking about. I was responding to Ugg. :confused:
My senility, of course.
Just relax, and it will flow over you. ;)
My senility, of course.
Just relax, and it will flow over you. ;)
more...
ChrisA
Apr 25, 12:23 AM
I just bought a Presonus FireBox, but I'm having some problems with it..
Does the Firebox work on another computer?
Do other Firewire devices work on your computer?
Until you can say "Yes" to both, there is the chance that something is broken.
Does the Firebox work on another computer?
Do other Firewire devices work on your computer?
Until you can say "Yes" to both, there is the chance that something is broken.
iMikeT
Oct 9, 03:31 PM
"Change" is always a hard thing for people to accept...:rolleyes:
more...
HiVolt
Apr 1, 08:36 AM
Gotta love the old dinosaurs, they never want to adapt to new technologies...
Who cares if its being shown on a TV or an iPad? Obviously the iPad app owner must be a cable subscriber to view the content, so its paid for.
Who cares if its being shown on a TV or an iPad? Obviously the iPad app owner must be a cable subscriber to view the content, so its paid for.
Diatribe
Oct 27, 07:15 AM
Although it looks pretty nice, it is a half-assed approach to improvement.
- No spam management
- No full feature set (missing bounce, etc.)
- No full data set for the Address Book (still can't note bdays, etc.)
- No iCal integration with a fully editable calendar
Seriously would these things be too hard to do? Google does them so why doesn't Apple?
Sometimes I get the feeling that there are only interns working on .mac
- No spam management
- No full feature set (missing bounce, etc.)
- No full data set for the Address Book (still can't note bdays, etc.)
- No iCal integration with a fully editable calendar
Seriously would these things be too hard to do? Google does them so why doesn't Apple?
Sometimes I get the feeling that there are only interns working on .mac
spillproof
Aug 19, 09:56 AM
I give it a week until some little teenybopper gets stalked or kidnapped.
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
OCOTILLO
Apr 12, 10:45 AM
Is is just me, or is Pages one of the worst apps that Apple has put forth recently?
Designing a newsletter has proven to be one of the worst computing catastophes that I have had in recent years. Pages erased my work multiple times, even after I had saved it. Also, the way the program formats is terrible; Apple has caught the Word syndrome of trying to help you so much with Word processing - guessing what you want to do and doing it for you - that it makes you want to pull your hair out. I also find the interface very counter-intuitive (highly surprising for an Apple app)
Sorry for the rant, but I just lost a lot of money and time because of this half-baked program, and I have to let it out. I had high hopes for Pages and am sorely disappointed. And I thought that only Microsoft could push my buttons like this... :mad:
I purchased iWork to produce newsletters and instruction sheets. I too found it to be an unwieldy program. A new user can make a decent project if they pick a template and not deviate from it. Changing fonts, layout, etc. is painful. I assume (hopefully) that Apple wiil continue to upgrade the program.
I hate to say it, but I have an old copy of Microsoft Publisher for Windows (1 CD) that I have used for the last 6 years. It is much more intuitive than Pages. I got rid of most of my Windows software when I switched to MAC, but I kept Publisher and my old Celeron laptop for emergencies.
Designing a newsletter has proven to be one of the worst computing catastophes that I have had in recent years. Pages erased my work multiple times, even after I had saved it. Also, the way the program formats is terrible; Apple has caught the Word syndrome of trying to help you so much with Word processing - guessing what you want to do and doing it for you - that it makes you want to pull your hair out. I also find the interface very counter-intuitive (highly surprising for an Apple app)
Sorry for the rant, but I just lost a lot of money and time because of this half-baked program, and I have to let it out. I had high hopes for Pages and am sorely disappointed. And I thought that only Microsoft could push my buttons like this... :mad:
I purchased iWork to produce newsletters and instruction sheets. I too found it to be an unwieldy program. A new user can make a decent project if they pick a template and not deviate from it. Changing fonts, layout, etc. is painful. I assume (hopefully) that Apple wiil continue to upgrade the program.
I hate to say it, but I have an old copy of Microsoft Publisher for Windows (1 CD) that I have used for the last 6 years. It is much more intuitive than Pages. I got rid of most of my Windows software when I switched to MAC, but I kept Publisher and my old Celeron laptop for emergencies.
Interstella5555
Dec 2, 09:29 AM
I'll take Apples definition of what is and isn't good looking over yours thanks
I'll take my own definition over Apple's or yours. Seriously, the phone is damn good looking, but you'll take Apple's opinion over your on?
I'll take my own definition over Apple's or yours. Seriously, the phone is damn good looking, but you'll take Apple's opinion over your on?
mac1984user
Apr 12, 03:43 PM
Does anyone know if this update fixes the issue of Office depositing some 'recovered files' in the trash upon every boot? That was sooo annoying. Every time I booted, I'd have to empty the trash. Other people had the same issue, but there wasn't a proper solution. One Microsoft employee just said, 'it's safe to empty your trash.' That's not the solution we're looking for! Why are random files being generated in the trash in the first place?! Sorry. =)
thatisme
Mar 29, 07:24 AM
robbieduncan is right-on with his explanation, you're making incorrect claims: focal lengths are independent of the size of the sensor, a 50 mm lens will be a 50 mm lens on a medium format body, a full frame analog body or an APS-C-sized dslr. What changes is the field of view, which is an angle. It is this angle which is different on the above-mentioned cameras. The reason why people write something to the effect `a 50 mm lens on a crop body is equivalent to 75~80 mm lens on a full frame body' is that we've gotten used to associating focal lengths on 35 mm bodies to FOVs. Sort of like Americans got used to measuring distances in miles rather than kilometers.
which is why I have not made the claim that 200mm on one lens is not equal to 200mm on the other (by actual measurements). What I have claimed is that the EFFECTIVE (perceived) focal length is different, when angle is taken into effect (the size of the sensor in relation to the size of the rear element).
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. on the EF lens, the 200mm assumes you are using the ENTIRE image circle of the lens, which you are not. You ARE using the ENTIRE image circle on the EF-S lens, which is a True 200mm for that camera. You have to use the ENTIRE image circle to get a true measure of the focal length. when you use only a portion of that image circle, you have to apply the FOVCF to get the EFFECTIVE focal length.
Your last 2 sentences actually prove my point for me. Everything in today's photography arsenal (at least in DSLR) is based on the old film standard of 35mm image recording space (or sensor size). It is you standard of measure. It has not changed with Digital. This is why we have conversion factors and have to talk of EFFECTIVE focal lengths.
which is why I have not made the claim that 200mm on one lens is not equal to 200mm on the other (by actual measurements). What I have claimed is that the EFFECTIVE (perceived) focal length is different, when angle is taken into effect (the size of the sensor in relation to the size of the rear element).
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. on the EF lens, the 200mm assumes you are using the ENTIRE image circle of the lens, which you are not. You ARE using the ENTIRE image circle on the EF-S lens, which is a True 200mm for that camera. You have to use the ENTIRE image circle to get a true measure of the focal length. when you use only a portion of that image circle, you have to apply the FOVCF to get the EFFECTIVE focal length.
Your last 2 sentences actually prove my point for me. Everything in today's photography arsenal (at least in DSLR) is based on the old film standard of 35mm image recording space (or sensor size). It is you standard of measure. It has not changed with Digital. This is why we have conversion factors and have to talk of EFFECTIVE focal lengths.
No comments:
Post a Comment