MisterMe
Sep 14, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by bullrat
I'm a potential "switcher" that wants to buy an iMac now but I keep reading all the posts on the various Mac boards about how even the latest 17 inch iMac looks "choppy" or "jerky" when resizing or moving windows and how much slower browsing the Web is than bad old MS on Wintel.
I have not seen those posts, but then I have seen a lot of other bitching and moaning about one thing or another. Point No. 1: Although I don't have access to a 17" iMac, I do have Jaguar installed on my 2000 Firewire PowerBook G3. I don't see any of that choppiness and jerkiness that you mentioned. I would be astonished to find it on a faster machine like the 17" iMac. Point No. 2: Don't take anybody's word for it. Drive down to your nearest Apple retailer. Look at the machines yourself. That should end all arguments.
I'm so bored reading all the MHz doesn't matter blather. It does matter. When a brand new $2000 computer looks choppy using a brand new OS, then something is not right. It should be blazing on all basic functions. Flame away if you like, I see a lot of that on the Mac boards whenever someone happens to disagree with the party line but I'd wager I speak for a lot of potential switchers.
Again, have your actually seen this "choppiness" on that $2000 machine with the brand new OS? Now for the issue of MHz, browse the web sites of the expensive UNIX workstations and servers. Look at the clock speeds of the offerings from IBM, HP, SGI, and Sun. For the most part, you will see that their machines have clock speeds in the sub-GHz range. Yet these are the machines of choice when price is no object and the job must get done. Just think about this: these boards are filled with laments that effectively tell you that you need substaintially higher clock speeds to run a computer game than you need to simulate the gas flow in a jet engine. Don't you think that something is just a bit warped here?
I guess what really blows me away is that Apple appears to be *purposely* cripppling their systems. From what I understand it's possible for Apple to upgrade the processor, bus, memory and other components without any technical difficulties.
Think. Think. Think. Apple does not "appear" to be purposesly crippling its systems. The entirity of the corporation orbits about the Macintosh. No company would purposely cripple its central product. The fact that Apple is only one of two profitable personal computer manufacturers serve as loud testimony to the contrary. Just because a bunch of idle college students post things on the Internet does not make them so.
Okay, you can flame away now -- but all I'm saying is there are a lot of potential switchers waiting to plunk down their hard earned cash if Apple would get it together. I see more and more Apple folks waking up, no longer satisfied to let Apple off the hook for getting further and further behind the rest of the computer world.
If you are serious, then nobody wants to see you flamed. But again, think. Exactly how is Apple behind? If you are talking about the race toward bankruptcy, then I would agree with you. Apple is second to last in that race among personal computer makers.
The best OS deserves the best hardware or at least a lot better hardware than being currently used. You want premium prices? Then give us premium hardware. Geez, drop Motorola if they can't deliver the goods and go with IBM (don't go with Intel or AMD to keep that Apple distinction). But pul-leeze do it soon. I want to buy!
-bullrat
I cannot agree more that the best OS deserves the best currently available hardware. However, the machine has to be affordable. For many years, Apple has ranked among the highest quality hardware manufactures. I am not just talking about microprocessors. I've endured conditions that put Dells out to pasture while my Mac chugged along like a champ.
As for all this business about Motorola this, IBM that, and AMD the other thing, I will leave it to Apple to make the best decision. It knows the players and its own business better than any nitwit posting on an Internet bulletin board.
I'm a potential "switcher" that wants to buy an iMac now but I keep reading all the posts on the various Mac boards about how even the latest 17 inch iMac looks "choppy" or "jerky" when resizing or moving windows and how much slower browsing the Web is than bad old MS on Wintel.
I have not seen those posts, but then I have seen a lot of other bitching and moaning about one thing or another. Point No. 1: Although I don't have access to a 17" iMac, I do have Jaguar installed on my 2000 Firewire PowerBook G3. I don't see any of that choppiness and jerkiness that you mentioned. I would be astonished to find it on a faster machine like the 17" iMac. Point No. 2: Don't take anybody's word for it. Drive down to your nearest Apple retailer. Look at the machines yourself. That should end all arguments.
I'm so bored reading all the MHz doesn't matter blather. It does matter. When a brand new $2000 computer looks choppy using a brand new OS, then something is not right. It should be blazing on all basic functions. Flame away if you like, I see a lot of that on the Mac boards whenever someone happens to disagree with the party line but I'd wager I speak for a lot of potential switchers.
Again, have your actually seen this "choppiness" on that $2000 machine with the brand new OS? Now for the issue of MHz, browse the web sites of the expensive UNIX workstations and servers. Look at the clock speeds of the offerings from IBM, HP, SGI, and Sun. For the most part, you will see that their machines have clock speeds in the sub-GHz range. Yet these are the machines of choice when price is no object and the job must get done. Just think about this: these boards are filled with laments that effectively tell you that you need substaintially higher clock speeds to run a computer game than you need to simulate the gas flow in a jet engine. Don't you think that something is just a bit warped here?
I guess what really blows me away is that Apple appears to be *purposely* cripppling their systems. From what I understand it's possible for Apple to upgrade the processor, bus, memory and other components without any technical difficulties.
Think. Think. Think. Apple does not "appear" to be purposesly crippling its systems. The entirity of the corporation orbits about the Macintosh. No company would purposely cripple its central product. The fact that Apple is only one of two profitable personal computer manufacturers serve as loud testimony to the contrary. Just because a bunch of idle college students post things on the Internet does not make them so.
Okay, you can flame away now -- but all I'm saying is there are a lot of potential switchers waiting to plunk down their hard earned cash if Apple would get it together. I see more and more Apple folks waking up, no longer satisfied to let Apple off the hook for getting further and further behind the rest of the computer world.
If you are serious, then nobody wants to see you flamed. But again, think. Exactly how is Apple behind? If you are talking about the race toward bankruptcy, then I would agree with you. Apple is second to last in that race among personal computer makers.
The best OS deserves the best hardware or at least a lot better hardware than being currently used. You want premium prices? Then give us premium hardware. Geez, drop Motorola if they can't deliver the goods and go with IBM (don't go with Intel or AMD to keep that Apple distinction). But pul-leeze do it soon. I want to buy!
-bullrat
I cannot agree more that the best OS deserves the best currently available hardware. However, the machine has to be affordable. For many years, Apple has ranked among the highest quality hardware manufactures. I am not just talking about microprocessors. I've endured conditions that put Dells out to pasture while my Mac chugged along like a champ.
As for all this business about Motorola this, IBM that, and AMD the other thing, I will leave it to Apple to make the best decision. It knows the players and its own business better than any nitwit posting on an Internet bulletin board.
thatisme
Mar 29, 12:37 PM
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-is-lens-review.aspx
go down to COMPARED ..
now roll over the images.. if you tell me that that 55-250 shot is a 1.6 crop and the 70-X shots are very different you DO live on another plant (the 55-250 shot was manualy zoomed to match the 70-X shot hence the SLIGHT difference in focal length).. I am assuming same camera..as the review is about the lens and the FoV is too close to be recreated beteen full frame and crop.
you are twisting things nicely around now..
@Cliff, my bad I remember seen the high speed crop also on the D3 series but I might be wrong. The D700 however does have a crop but also allows you to shoot your DX lens on full frame (which will vignette) but has no speed increase over the full frame mode.
Thatisme:
It is kind of funny how you try to wiggle yourself out of this though...
We (a buddy and me here, pro photographer but you would dismiss this anyway as him not knowing either, are having a great time with your "knowledge" and your way of going from the 200mm debacle to IMAGE... and no, the image will still not be different between an EF-s and an EF lens at the same focal length on the same body.
End of story..if you are so sure.. why don't YOU prove ME wrong? you posted 1 picture of a modified 5d, which wasnt even yours. there is no 10mm on full frame (hence the vigneting) so you would have to shoot that 52 with the 10-22 at 22mm and then use a full frame 22 milimeter lens and compare it, because you ARE arguing, at least now, that the image will be different. It won't except for the vignetting.. re-read your own statements from before and watch how you ended up now on the "image" :)
Don't worry, by Monday I will prove it to you but why don't you prove me wrong before?.. I dare you.
EF-s lens and EF (or DX and FX for me) at the same focal length on the same camera, same f stop, same shutter speed... Exif data intact.
To the OP: I have to apologize for this and this is the last post related to Thats me from my side:
To answer your question: EF-s is cheaper as stated before the mess and is targeted specifically for the crop sensor bodies. You CAN fit both EF-s and EF on a crop sensor body and you will get the same image. EF lenses are just made for full frame as also stated before.
sorry for the mess.
With your link provided, I agree there is a slight difference there, but as you said, you ASSUME that it was with the same camera.... That would be my assumption as well, however, that example hardly makes your case, as the 70mm had to be manually dialed in... a small change has a big effect at long distances.... just saying... Show it using a prime (can't) or at the long end of the lens where there is no room for error or adjustment (200mm example). Eliminate all variables.
So, quit your arguing and prove it with a real world example with your gear. I don't own any EF-S lenses anymore, so let's get that in the great wide open, so I can't run this comparison for you. There is a fundamental reason for that, which gets more to the point of the OP... Image quality is flat out crap as compared with Canon's L glass, which just so happens to be only in the EF mount. Right, wrong or somewhere in-between, this discussion has no bearing for me, since I will never own another EF-S lens anyway. To that point, I won't ever own a 1.6 crop camera again either, for what it's worth.
I have no further interest in this discussion, so have fun. Enjoy.
go down to COMPARED ..
now roll over the images.. if you tell me that that 55-250 shot is a 1.6 crop and the 70-X shots are very different you DO live on another plant (the 55-250 shot was manualy zoomed to match the 70-X shot hence the SLIGHT difference in focal length).. I am assuming same camera..as the review is about the lens and the FoV is too close to be recreated beteen full frame and crop.
you are twisting things nicely around now..
@Cliff, my bad I remember seen the high speed crop also on the D3 series but I might be wrong. The D700 however does have a crop but also allows you to shoot your DX lens on full frame (which will vignette) but has no speed increase over the full frame mode.
Thatisme:
It is kind of funny how you try to wiggle yourself out of this though...
We (a buddy and me here, pro photographer but you would dismiss this anyway as him not knowing either, are having a great time with your "knowledge" and your way of going from the 200mm debacle to IMAGE... and no, the image will still not be different between an EF-s and an EF lens at the same focal length on the same body.
End of story..if you are so sure.. why don't YOU prove ME wrong? you posted 1 picture of a modified 5d, which wasnt even yours. there is no 10mm on full frame (hence the vigneting) so you would have to shoot that 52 with the 10-22 at 22mm and then use a full frame 22 milimeter lens and compare it, because you ARE arguing, at least now, that the image will be different. It won't except for the vignetting.. re-read your own statements from before and watch how you ended up now on the "image" :)
Don't worry, by Monday I will prove it to you but why don't you prove me wrong before?.. I dare you.
EF-s lens and EF (or DX and FX for me) at the same focal length on the same camera, same f stop, same shutter speed... Exif data intact.
To the OP: I have to apologize for this and this is the last post related to Thats me from my side:
To answer your question: EF-s is cheaper as stated before the mess and is targeted specifically for the crop sensor bodies. You CAN fit both EF-s and EF on a crop sensor body and you will get the same image. EF lenses are just made for full frame as also stated before.
sorry for the mess.
With your link provided, I agree there is a slight difference there, but as you said, you ASSUME that it was with the same camera.... That would be my assumption as well, however, that example hardly makes your case, as the 70mm had to be manually dialed in... a small change has a big effect at long distances.... just saying... Show it using a prime (can't) or at the long end of the lens where there is no room for error or adjustment (200mm example). Eliminate all variables.
So, quit your arguing and prove it with a real world example with your gear. I don't own any EF-S lenses anymore, so let's get that in the great wide open, so I can't run this comparison for you. There is a fundamental reason for that, which gets more to the point of the OP... Image quality is flat out crap as compared with Canon's L glass, which just so happens to be only in the EF mount. Right, wrong or somewhere in-between, this discussion has no bearing for me, since I will never own another EF-S lens anyway. To that point, I won't ever own a 1.6 crop camera again either, for what it's worth.
I have no further interest in this discussion, so have fun. Enjoy.
Gondry
Oct 26, 02:10 PM
Amazed to see the queue down the street and round the corner, joined it at 6.30pm fortunately it moved fast and was out the door with my copy within 20 minutes. Would have been quicker if I'd known about the upstairs!
SlamJam12
Oct 13, 10:42 PM
I like the iPhone 4 form factor. I am tempted to get one. But with early controversy about the antenna problems and the prone problems of delicate glass, I would not mind a new form factor that could help improve future iPhones.
more...
kingdonk
Feb 28, 06:38 PM
server admin
itcheroni
Apr 10, 04:56 AM
All right, let me rephrase that: government funds plenty of things, like libraries and parks, that aren't "necessary" but wanted. If you want to keep the argument on the federal level, substitute your own examples, including national parks. (Remember Bush trying to push them towards privatization?)
If you have a balanced budget, and you suddenly unbalance it with tax cuts, the difference between revenue loss and spending is pretty much a matter of semantics. You had the money, and now you don't. At least when you spend it on a service, you expect to get something for it.
Maybe one of the problems with House Republicans is that they don't think of tax cuts that they can't afford as spending.
I was wondering when the rich were screaming about parks. Never mind, it's not important.
I believe the crucial difference is that you believe when government taxes and spends the money on a service, it's better than not taxing at all. Do you believe in any exceptions to this rule?
If you have a balanced budget, and you suddenly unbalance it with tax cuts, the difference between revenue loss and spending is pretty much a matter of semantics. You had the money, and now you don't. At least when you spend it on a service, you expect to get something for it.
Maybe one of the problems with House Republicans is that they don't think of tax cuts that they can't afford as spending.
I was wondering when the rich were screaming about parks. Never mind, it's not important.
I believe the crucial difference is that you believe when government taxes and spends the money on a service, it's better than not taxing at all. Do you believe in any exceptions to this rule?
more...
stridemat
Apr 24, 01:54 PM
When I get home I will have a look at setting it up again, Im not sure how good an iPhone would be at folding :cool:
Pismo
Apr 2, 04:26 PM
I like Pages. I haven't had any problems with it. I haven't used all of the features though. I mostly use it for printing envelopes which works great. It will only get better and I'm sure Apple will add more features like spread sheets and maybe a GUI front-end for SQL.
more...
Huntn
May 3, 04:27 PM
Not all lives are "equal". One life of an important financial worker who perished at WTC might be worth more than 1000 soldiers. That's the order of society. A soldier's life is meant to be sacrificed to protect the worker. Some "warriors" are born to be this way, like army ants. The worker is more important because he makes guns to put into the hands of new soldiers. And of course, as you may have noticed, many of the front line (infantry) consists of would be rejects of society that have been conditioned and given a chance to serve a greater purpose than to become delinquents or menial workers that they would have been. "Unimportant Lives" in the big picture despite what their own families think of them. That's the unwritten rule.
In history, war is the driver of innovation...from the measly dart, to the nuclear warhead. Whether we will sustain through it to reap the benefits ourselves may be another story....like Nazi Germany where we stole all their world changing innovations after we collapsed them. Although it may bring disgust to some ppl today, Nazi Germany was one of the greatest economic, technological, and war machines ever devised and Adolf Hitler was one of the most influential and greatest men who ever lived...for his people. He just lost so we don't believe in what he tried to establish.
If there is no war, we would build more capitalistic indulgence crap to make eachother happy and lazy. But in war, we build things that help us survive. Advanced in bomb detection leads to better sensors for medical diagnosis.
Advances in robots leads to better prosthetics and automating.
Advances in field portable displays leads to large LED screens for remote surgery.
Advances in nanotech will potentially change everything we know of as "technology" today.
Many of the above will assist the "cure for cancer", or whatever it is that scares you to death. If you think that during "peacetime", everyone and their mom will devote their lives to "finding the cure", you are sadly mistaken. Humans are lazy...until their life is immediately threatened. War is why we evolved so far past the next "animal".
I can see your description of the "order of society". There is some truth there, but due to the perceived value of humans and the efficiency of robots, I believe robots will replace humans on the force end of policy.
We've had this discussion before but every time you equate human advances to man's selfishness and tendency to kill each other to gain advantage it is thoroughly depressing. No matter how much we enrich ourselves and advance tecnically, we'll be losers until we can realize other motivators to reach a higher level of existence.
For Your Reference: It was just reported on MSNBC that the U.S.budget has been cut $38B which equals 19 weeks in Afghanistan. Think about what this war is costing us. We can just hand over our social programs to keep the fighting going, no biggy, right?
In history, war is the driver of innovation...from the measly dart, to the nuclear warhead. Whether we will sustain through it to reap the benefits ourselves may be another story....like Nazi Germany where we stole all their world changing innovations after we collapsed them. Although it may bring disgust to some ppl today, Nazi Germany was one of the greatest economic, technological, and war machines ever devised and Adolf Hitler was one of the most influential and greatest men who ever lived...for his people. He just lost so we don't believe in what he tried to establish.
If there is no war, we would build more capitalistic indulgence crap to make eachother happy and lazy. But in war, we build things that help us survive. Advanced in bomb detection leads to better sensors for medical diagnosis.
Advances in robots leads to better prosthetics and automating.
Advances in field portable displays leads to large LED screens for remote surgery.
Advances in nanotech will potentially change everything we know of as "technology" today.
Many of the above will assist the "cure for cancer", or whatever it is that scares you to death. If you think that during "peacetime", everyone and their mom will devote their lives to "finding the cure", you are sadly mistaken. Humans are lazy...until their life is immediately threatened. War is why we evolved so far past the next "animal".
I can see your description of the "order of society". There is some truth there, but due to the perceived value of humans and the efficiency of robots, I believe robots will replace humans on the force end of policy.
We've had this discussion before but every time you equate human advances to man's selfishness and tendency to kill each other to gain advantage it is thoroughly depressing. No matter how much we enrich ourselves and advance tecnically, we'll be losers until we can realize other motivators to reach a higher level of existence.
For Your Reference: It was just reported on MSNBC that the U.S.budget has been cut $38B which equals 19 weeks in Afghanistan. Think about what this war is costing us. We can just hand over our social programs to keep the fighting going, no biggy, right?
Nishi100
Mar 23, 01:15 PM
PS3 / 4 / super-slim / add on?
more...
*LTD*
May 5, 01:43 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134 Safari/6533.18.5)
Devil's Advocate:
I bought a Netbook Holiday Special ($199 normally $399 with ATI chip and graphics and Win 7 Home Premium) from the MS Store last Dec.
MS took off the manufacturer's build (with tons of bloat-ware) and put their own on. It included a lot MS of extras (photo, video editing, music editor - sounding familiar?) and their premium Anti-Virus with lifetime subscription.
When it booted, it only asked for my username and the type of network to connect to (again - familiar? LOL)
I haven't had any problems with it whatsoever... :eek:
Just food for thought...
A lot of people on this board forget that Windows is the OS leader for a reason...
Universal licensing.
Devil's Advocate:
I bought a Netbook Holiday Special ($199 normally $399 with ATI chip and graphics and Win 7 Home Premium) from the MS Store last Dec.
MS took off the manufacturer's build (with tons of bloat-ware) and put their own on. It included a lot MS of extras (photo, video editing, music editor - sounding familiar?) and their premium Anti-Virus with lifetime subscription.
When it booted, it only asked for my username and the type of network to connect to (again - familiar? LOL)
I haven't had any problems with it whatsoever... :eek:
Just food for thought...
A lot of people on this board forget that Windows is the OS leader for a reason...
Universal licensing.
maclaptop
May 2, 04:57 PM
Consequently, the difference may be an issue of quality control with some phones exhibiting the difference while others do not, rather than an intentional design change to specify the thicker profile.
I can most definitely believe this.
I've personally witnessed the rather dramatic decline in Apple quality control over the last year.
It's unlike ever before and very discouraging.
Although I'm the first to admit Apple is excellent about replacing defective units, one would think it would save them money to build them right the first time.
An approach like that would save the customer the time and trouble of having to return, return, return as I went through with FOUR BTO MBP's where each of the faults were confirmed as significant by the Genius at my local Apple store.
Lucky for me, I have an Apple Store just three miles from my house.
I would hate to think of the poor souls that have to drive a long ways to visit one.
Apple is an excellent company, there is no excuse for letting product quality slip down to Dell Levels.
I can most definitely believe this.
I've personally witnessed the rather dramatic decline in Apple quality control over the last year.
It's unlike ever before and very discouraging.
Although I'm the first to admit Apple is excellent about replacing defective units, one would think it would save them money to build them right the first time.
An approach like that would save the customer the time and trouble of having to return, return, return as I went through with FOUR BTO MBP's where each of the faults were confirmed as significant by the Genius at my local Apple store.
Lucky for me, I have an Apple Store just three miles from my house.
I would hate to think of the poor souls that have to drive a long ways to visit one.
Apple is an excellent company, there is no excuse for letting product quality slip down to Dell Levels.
more...
4mat
Mar 24, 06:10 AM
Wirelessly posted (SAMSUNG-SGH-A821/1.0 SHP/VPP/R5 NetFront/3.4 SMM-MMS/1.2.0 profile/MIDP-2.0 configuration/CLDC-1.1)
New iPhone, now available on black, white or camo
New iPhone, now available on black, white or camo
Cerano
Apr 23, 10:00 AM
Or maybe people who simply prefer the 320 over the 3000?
I like to do some light gaming on-the-go, and while I have my M11x for that, I mostly carry around my Air now.
Before you tell me that the 3000 isn't as bad as I make it out to be, I have a 2011 13" Pro (i7-2.7/4/HD3000). CODMW2 on Medium settings on that, I can barely eke out 20fps while I can get 30 on my Air (although I did slightly OC the 320M).
nice and the new MBA version of the HD IGP will be even lower clocked and the slower processor will only make it worse
I like to do some light gaming on-the-go, and while I have my M11x for that, I mostly carry around my Air now.
Before you tell me that the 3000 isn't as bad as I make it out to be, I have a 2011 13" Pro (i7-2.7/4/HD3000). CODMW2 on Medium settings on that, I can barely eke out 20fps while I can get 30 on my Air (although I did slightly OC the 320M).
nice and the new MBA version of the HD IGP will be even lower clocked and the slower processor will only make it worse
more...
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.
iGary
Sep 13, 08:52 AM
I've had general anesthisia about 11 times now (long story ...).
The gas is fine i remember once the anesthitist asked me to count to 10 whilst he put the mask over my nose and mouth. ( i reached 3 or so :D)
The IV isn't much worse (and i'm not a huge fan of needles!).
You do feel pretty groggy afterward when you come to, well i least i did, and its definately worth getting someone along to help take you home. They could just be there to pick you up and make sure you get into bed ok when you get home. You'll prob be asleep for a good 10 hours after that.
On the whole the administration of the anesthetic is not unpleasant.
Best of luck with your surgery iGary
Unless they keep me overnight, I'm having the midshipman I sponsor from the Naval Academy pick me up and get me settled at home. I'm sure I'll be just fine - I'm just a worrier. :rolleyes:
The gas is fine i remember once the anesthitist asked me to count to 10 whilst he put the mask over my nose and mouth. ( i reached 3 or so :D)
The IV isn't much worse (and i'm not a huge fan of needles!).
You do feel pretty groggy afterward when you come to, well i least i did, and its definately worth getting someone along to help take you home. They could just be there to pick you up and make sure you get into bed ok when you get home. You'll prob be asleep for a good 10 hours after that.
On the whole the administration of the anesthetic is not unpleasant.
Best of luck with your surgery iGary
Unless they keep me overnight, I'm having the midshipman I sponsor from the Naval Academy pick me up and get me settled at home. I'm sure I'll be just fine - I'm just a worrier. :rolleyes:
more...
xdhd350
Aug 20, 05:21 PM
The amount of stupidity in this thread is mind-blowing. Don't want people to know where you are? Don't check in. It's so simple.
+1
And LEARN to manage your FB privacy settings. Every friend should belong to some type of list, with privacy settings to match your comfort level.
+1
And LEARN to manage your FB privacy settings. Every friend should belong to some type of list, with privacy settings to match your comfort level.
thisisahughes
Apr 14, 01:24 PM
A good hire, Apple deserves him;)
i-Phone? i-Pad? your opinion is worthy.
i-Phone? i-Pad? your opinion is worthy.
DeSnousa
May 23, 04:37 PM
Thanks this is awesome little widget. Thanks for taking time to make it. :)
Small White Car
Jan 4, 10:04 AM
Whoever advised them to now put the maps onboard and download as needed, needs to be fired- poor decision.
bad decision. apps like motion gps I'd pay $0.99 for and use the maps over the air.
If I'm going to pay $40 for a gps app it'd be cause I relied on it. Wouldn't chance having service.
I've been using the iPhone's Google maps in that way for almost 3 years and I have not once had that be an issue.
I dunno, I guess something bad could happen, but it sure doesn't seem likely to me at this point. And even if it does happen to me soon I'm prepard for "once every 3 years" as a failure rate.
Agreed. Downloading anything on Edge is awful, but downloading mission critical graphical maps and directions when you get lost? Just dumb.
Ok, but when a road changes and you don't have the newest map then what are you doing? Manually downloading is what.
I'd rather it be an automatic process.
Both methods have drawbacks: "Not always available" vs. "Not always current."
Given that I've never had a problem with availability, I'm actually interested in an app that promises to stay current without my having to download maps manually ahead of time.
bad decision. apps like motion gps I'd pay $0.99 for and use the maps over the air.
If I'm going to pay $40 for a gps app it'd be cause I relied on it. Wouldn't chance having service.
I've been using the iPhone's Google maps in that way for almost 3 years and I have not once had that be an issue.
I dunno, I guess something bad could happen, but it sure doesn't seem likely to me at this point. And even if it does happen to me soon I'm prepard for "once every 3 years" as a failure rate.
Agreed. Downloading anything on Edge is awful, but downloading mission critical graphical maps and directions when you get lost? Just dumb.
Ok, but when a road changes and you don't have the newest map then what are you doing? Manually downloading is what.
I'd rather it be an automatic process.
Both methods have drawbacks: "Not always available" vs. "Not always current."
Given that I've never had a problem with availability, I'm actually interested in an app that promises to stay current without my having to download maps manually ahead of time.
Ommid
Apr 25, 01:27 PM
I don't want a boring DVD. I want Lion to come on one of those cool MacBook Air-style memory sticks, only compatible with ThunderBolt.
Amazing, and then what? Maybe use it twice in your machine's life?
Amazing, and then what? Maybe use it twice in your machine's life?
SuperCachetes
Mar 12, 04:44 PM
Wow, I came into this thread late. I wonder where the other 39% percent of the Silverado is from? I would guess more than one country. I know about the US Toyota plant, but Honda, too?
Anyway, I kind of like the Honda Fit and if that's helping American workers, then all the more power to them.
Honda has been building cars in Ohio at least since the early '90s. Had a '93 Civic built in East Liberty or Marysville... can't remember which. Sadly, the Fits (I actually own an '09) come from Japan.
Anyway, I kind of like the Honda Fit and if that's helping American workers, then all the more power to them.
Honda has been building cars in Ohio at least since the early '90s. Had a '93 Civic built in East Liberty or Marysville... can't remember which. Sadly, the Fits (I actually own an '09) come from Japan.
KnightWRX
May 1, 09:18 AM
Phht...what a cop out dude. Now you're gonna booey unix based on specific software, designed for unix, among specific personal networks of colleagues. You can tell your "real story" to IDC and hope they change their market research methods! :rolleyes:
IDC talks about revenues and number of boxes. I'm talking about actual environnements. ;)
One day, when you work in IT, you'll understand what the real workhorse of the industry is.
IDC talks about revenues and number of boxes. I'm talking about actual environnements. ;)
One day, when you work in IT, you'll understand what the real workhorse of the industry is.
jelloshotsrule
May 7, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by scem0
Does SJ really think that a 16 year old who
has to pay for his own computer will be able to afford a mac?
i agree that macs could be cheaper... but your reasoning isn't exactly perfect... i mean, does mr. bmw think that a 17 year old who just got his license and has to buy his own car can afford a bmw?
you get the point.
i know it's not the same, but yeah. word.
Does SJ really think that a 16 year old who
has to pay for his own computer will be able to afford a mac?
i agree that macs could be cheaper... but your reasoning isn't exactly perfect... i mean, does mr. bmw think that a 17 year old who just got his license and has to buy his own car can afford a bmw?
you get the point.
i know it's not the same, but yeah. word.
No comments:
Post a Comment