Designer Dale
Mar 3, 03:13 PM
^^ Interesting literal interpretation of the topic. The couple are so alike and different at the same time. Looks good from the hight point of view.
Dale
Dale
JackAxe
Sep 27, 06:17 PM
yes, my set up is very much like yours. I have 6gig RAM
Well, Apple replace logic board, processors and memory and the problem was still there. finally they did replace the Gt card. It was great. Still pretty stable, but like I said once a week I get a kernel panic. The only thing I can think about is the GT card. I even tried the basic set up with only mouse and keyboard. Not sure what to do next.
Once a week problem is not a bad thing. It just bad to know that the problem still there. I guess the next thing is to try to complete replace the machine or the GT card for a different model.
I'll try to replace my 3rd party RAM, even thought I don't think it is the problem.
Thanks for the interest.
My friend had nothing but problems with his G5. The computer was constantly in for repairs and would spew out kernal-panics often. It ended up being a bad memory module, which was undetectable even with an extensive hardware test. The only reason he figure it out, is because he had lowned the additional RAM to a mutual friend while his G5 was in the shop for the last time.
<]=)
Well, Apple replace logic board, processors and memory and the problem was still there. finally they did replace the Gt card. It was great. Still pretty stable, but like I said once a week I get a kernel panic. The only thing I can think about is the GT card. I even tried the basic set up with only mouse and keyboard. Not sure what to do next.
Once a week problem is not a bad thing. It just bad to know that the problem still there. I guess the next thing is to try to complete replace the machine or the GT card for a different model.
I'll try to replace my 3rd party RAM, even thought I don't think it is the problem.
Thanks for the interest.
My friend had nothing but problems with his G5. The computer was constantly in for repairs and would spew out kernal-panics often. It ended up being a bad memory module, which was undetectable even with an extensive hardware test. The only reason he figure it out, is because he had lowned the additional RAM to a mutual friend while his G5 was in the shop for the last time.
<]=)
haruhiko
Apr 5, 09:12 AM
Oh, last time they don't even recommend what they rate as the best smartphone in the market, and now they recommend the iPad 2? Either because there is virtually no tablets on the market or the popularity of iPhone 4 is killing the credibility of CR.
coolbreeze
Jan 4, 11:33 AM
Is the animation smooth or jerky like all Garmins (unlike TomTom's smooth animation).
more...
gngan
Mar 28, 09:03 AM
When does Apple usually release OSX after the WWDC? I am looking to get a MBP when Back to School Promotion is on (ie July-Aug).
fortunecookie
Mar 14, 01:37 PM
What if it just says Made in USA, wht if it really is made somewhere else? Think twice.
more...
bowens
Aug 14, 03:49 PM
When Apple aired those Intel ads of the Intel fab plant talking about dull PCs, a lot of PC users got angry over that. There was quite a backlash against Apple when they do negative advertising like that, simply making PC users look stupid (which they are of course ;)). It harkens back to the days, post-1984 ad, when they shown PC users as lemmings walking off a cliff. Hehe. :)
I loved that ad. Jack Bauer (Kiefer Sutherland) talking about Apple computers. How much better can it get?
By the way, 24 is the most addicting show I've ever watched.
I loved that ad. Jack Bauer (Kiefer Sutherland) talking about Apple computers. How much better can it get?
By the way, 24 is the most addicting show I've ever watched.
genshi
Aug 20, 10:45 AM
Though I am well over 30 I had been using Foursquare for the past couple of months only because most of my friends (who are mostly 20 somethings) are using it, but I did get pretty bored with it and always thought to myself "Why am I even bothering." (I know, to unlock the badges for some reason.) Facebook's Places is identical to Foursquare and they will be integrating both apps together soon, apparently.
But I just saw a TedTalk from a guy who has a company called Scvngr (http://www.ted.com/talks/seth_priebatsch_the_game_layer_on_top_of_the_world.html) and they have an app (also called Scvngr: link to app (http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/scvngr/id323248984?mt=8)) much like Places but with an added layer in which you have very specific goals to achieve in order to make it more fun. For example, if you walk into an American Apparel and check in, you then have the task of taking a photo of yourself posed like the Mannequin in the store window. When you do this [enough times at various locations] you unlock a reward of a badge. Apparently all of these badges (for both Scvngr and Foursquare) are supposed to, eventually, give you discounts at these various stores... it hasn't happened for me yet.
So, security concerns aside, do you think these things add value for the consumer? Of course it does for the companies gathering the market research data (it's a goldmine for them!) but what do these Location Services apps need to do to make this worth opening the app and "checking in" each time you walk into a place? Scvngr seems to have made their's a little more interesting by adding this game layer to the "check in" process (your life as a game) but is it enough?
I recommend watching the TedTalk that I linked to above as it explains it all better, but I still ask myself, "why the hell am I bothering to 'check in' ".
But I just saw a TedTalk from a guy who has a company called Scvngr (http://www.ted.com/talks/seth_priebatsch_the_game_layer_on_top_of_the_world.html) and they have an app (also called Scvngr: link to app (http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/scvngr/id323248984?mt=8)) much like Places but with an added layer in which you have very specific goals to achieve in order to make it more fun. For example, if you walk into an American Apparel and check in, you then have the task of taking a photo of yourself posed like the Mannequin in the store window. When you do this [enough times at various locations] you unlock a reward of a badge. Apparently all of these badges (for both Scvngr and Foursquare) are supposed to, eventually, give you discounts at these various stores... it hasn't happened for me yet.
So, security concerns aside, do you think these things add value for the consumer? Of course it does for the companies gathering the market research data (it's a goldmine for them!) but what do these Location Services apps need to do to make this worth opening the app and "checking in" each time you walk into a place? Scvngr seems to have made their's a little more interesting by adding this game layer to the "check in" process (your life as a game) but is it enough?
I recommend watching the TedTalk that I linked to above as it explains it all better, but I still ask myself, "why the hell am I bothering to 'check in' ".
more...
ddtlm
Oct 2, 08:16 PM
ooartist:
While both Solaris and OSX are Unix OS's, that does not mean that OSX can scale as well as Solaris any more than it means that Solaris can run the OSX interface (which it obviously cannot).
The fact that OSX is some sort of Unix means a lot less than you seem to think. It is good because it means it adheres to certain standards, but it says little or nothing about the machinery that makes it go.
While both Solaris and OSX are Unix OS's, that does not mean that OSX can scale as well as Solaris any more than it means that Solaris can run the OSX interface (which it obviously cannot).
The fact that OSX is some sort of Unix means a lot less than you seem to think. It is good because it means it adheres to certain standards, but it says little or nothing about the machinery that makes it go.
str1f3
Dec 27, 10:16 PM
You can't be serious. The Holiday season is when online fraud is at it's peak, especially in places like NYC.
Again that may be true, but it would not offset the significant gains mAde through online sales.
more...
Pixie Acia
Again that may be true, but it would not offset the significant gains mAde through online sales.
more...
aristotle
Jun 11, 03:01 PM
Here in Canada, we have:
Bell Mobility - 3G 850/1900 (official iPhone/iPad carrier)
tattoos of your recent ex,
more...
some photos of Pixie Acia?
All or Nothing Tattoo
more...
Pixie+acia+joey+castillo
TATTOO middot; Pixie Acia
more...
Pixie Acia
Bell Mobility - 3G 850/1900 (official iPhone/iPad carrier)
thatisme
Mar 28, 05:38 PM
I think you both just said exactly the same thing, so I'm not sure why Full of Win is arguing?
If I shoot my 50mm 1.8 II through my 7d I am effectively multiplying the lenses focal length with the cameras crop factor to give the photographs field of view. ie 50x1.6=80.
So focal length 50mm= field of view 80mm. (On a 1.6 crop)
Allthough...This statement from thatisme 'So, you WILL get different focal lengths from 2 identically marked lenses where one is an EF-S lens and the other is an EF lens.' is false.
You will, in fact, get two different Field of Views but the same Focal Length.
Thanks for the correction, and good catch.
So, for the OP, the difference between EF-sand EF lenses is that EF-S are lighter and cheaper and are tied to 1.6 sensor cameras. EF is more versatile since they work on all EF mount cameras (including EF-S). They can be very cheap or very expensive(and good) when you get into L series lenses.
There is really no good reason to compare focal length or field of view between the two since construction wise, they are like apples and oranges.
Where it becomes relevant, is when you have an EF lens, and you own different format cameras ( like I do). my 400mm 2.8 L IS lens is a true 400mm on my 5D mark II, and 520mm on my 1D mark IIn (1.3) and 640mm on my old 20D. I don't really care about the EF-S mount since it only applies to one of the 3 camera bodies.
Is not true: a 50mm EF lens and a 50mm EF-s lens will have the same focal length and field of view on a crop camera.
This is not correct.
A EF-s 50 mm lens is 50 mm on a 1.6 camera. A 50mm EF lens on that same camera is similar in image to a 80mm EF-S lens. The reason for the difference comes into play by the amount of the lens the camera is using to record the image and the proximity of the rear element to the camera sensor.
If I shoot my 50mm 1.8 II through my 7d I am effectively multiplying the lenses focal length with the cameras crop factor to give the photographs field of view. ie 50x1.6=80.
So focal length 50mm= field of view 80mm. (On a 1.6 crop)
Allthough...This statement from thatisme 'So, you WILL get different focal lengths from 2 identically marked lenses where one is an EF-S lens and the other is an EF lens.' is false.
You will, in fact, get two different Field of Views but the same Focal Length.
Thanks for the correction, and good catch.
So, for the OP, the difference between EF-sand EF lenses is that EF-S are lighter and cheaper and are tied to 1.6 sensor cameras. EF is more versatile since they work on all EF mount cameras (including EF-S). They can be very cheap or very expensive(and good) when you get into L series lenses.
There is really no good reason to compare focal length or field of view between the two since construction wise, they are like apples and oranges.
Where it becomes relevant, is when you have an EF lens, and you own different format cameras ( like I do). my 400mm 2.8 L IS lens is a true 400mm on my 5D mark II, and 520mm on my 1D mark IIn (1.3) and 640mm on my old 20D. I don't really care about the EF-S mount since it only applies to one of the 3 camera bodies.
Is not true: a 50mm EF lens and a 50mm EF-s lens will have the same focal length and field of view on a crop camera.
This is not correct.
A EF-s 50 mm lens is 50 mm on a 1.6 camera. A 50mm EF lens on that same camera is similar in image to a 80mm EF-S lens. The reason for the difference comes into play by the amount of the lens the camera is using to record the image and the proximity of the rear element to the camera sensor.
more...
KingYaba
Apr 28, 07:12 PM
Isn't the current federal tax on gas a type of driving tax? :)
Somewhat, and it will be interesting to see what happens when more and more people take up electric, natural gas, and other such vehicles. Washington recently proposed taxing (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5go26-4g43i4meaM4jjBs0Y9QMDBA?docId=ddcb71454dc0425bb15212f48379e2ec) electric drivers $100/yr, for example. I guess it never ends...
Somewhat, and it will be interesting to see what happens when more and more people take up electric, natural gas, and other such vehicles. Washington recently proposed taxing (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5go26-4g43i4meaM4jjBs0Y9QMDBA?docId=ddcb71454dc0425bb15212f48379e2ec) electric drivers $100/yr, for example. I guess it never ends...
Brometheus
Apr 19, 02:31 PM
On a more personal note: I do not need and I do not want Apple to tell me what I can read or see on my device. If I want to see naked flesh, then it's none of Apple's business and they have ZERO rights to deny me that. (I'm European - we're not prude here and we prefer sex over violence.) If I want to use software that directly competes with Apple's own offers, then obviously their competition is giving me something that I like better than Apple's software products.
As much as I like Apple's computers, I hate their entire AppStore and iPhone SDK policies with a passion.
My impression is that Apple does not want to tell you what to watch on your iPhone. If Apple had built tools into Safari that prevented you from visiting x-rated sites or somehow made it impossible to for you to transfer adult content from your computer to your iPhone, then you definitely could accuse them of trying to control what you watch on your phone. My sense is that Apple cares about the reputation of their app store. They don't want it to be known for pornography. I can envision a situation in which pornography could dominate the top paid and free apps list. I can easily understand why Apple would not want that. Another important thing to consider is that in today's world it doesn't take much for a media frenzy to develop if your product is linked to some kind of sensational crime or scandal. That could undo all of their years of working to create a certain image. You can certainly watch pornography or other sexual content on your iPhone. Apple simply does not want you to use the apps in the app store to do it.
As much as I like Apple's computers, I hate their entire AppStore and iPhone SDK policies with a passion.
My impression is that Apple does not want to tell you what to watch on your iPhone. If Apple had built tools into Safari that prevented you from visiting x-rated sites or somehow made it impossible to for you to transfer adult content from your computer to your iPhone, then you definitely could accuse them of trying to control what you watch on your phone. My sense is that Apple cares about the reputation of their app store. They don't want it to be known for pornography. I can envision a situation in which pornography could dominate the top paid and free apps list. I can easily understand why Apple would not want that. Another important thing to consider is that in today's world it doesn't take much for a media frenzy to develop if your product is linked to some kind of sensational crime or scandal. That could undo all of their years of working to create a certain image. You can certainly watch pornography or other sexual content on your iPhone. Apple simply does not want you to use the apps in the app store to do it.
more...
adk
Apr 11, 07:23 PM
I can't imagine a fancy Swiss watch is any different from a Citizen or a Seiko. I would recommend going to one of those watch kiosks in a shopping mall and picking out a new band. Most of these places will install it for free.
thatisme
Mar 28, 05:38 PM
I think you both just said exactly the same thing, so I'm not sure why Full of Win is arguing?
If I shoot my 50mm 1.8 II through my 7d I am effectively multiplying the lenses focal length with the cameras crop factor to give the photographs field of view. ie 50x1.6=80.
So focal length 50mm= field of view 80mm. (On a 1.6 crop)
Allthough...This statement from thatisme 'So, you WILL get different focal lengths from 2 identically marked lenses where one is an EF-S lens and the other is an EF lens.' is false.
You will, in fact, get two different Field of Views but the same Focal Length.
Thanks for the correction, and good catch.
So, for the OP, the difference between EF-sand EF lenses is that EF-S are lighter and cheaper and are tied to 1.6 sensor cameras. EF is more versatile since they work on all EF mount cameras (including EF-S). They can be very cheap or very expensive(and good) when you get into L series lenses.
There is really no good reason to compare focal length or field of view between the two since construction wise, they are like apples and oranges.
Where it becomes relevant, is when you have an EF lens, and you own different format cameras ( like I do). my 400mm 2.8 L IS lens is a true 400mm on my 5D mark II, and 520mm on my 1D mark IIn (1.3) and 640mm on my old 20D. I don't really care about the EF-S mount since it only applies to one of the 3 camera bodies.
Is not true: a 50mm EF lens and a 50mm EF-s lens will have the same focal length and field of view on a crop camera.
This is not correct.
A EF-s 50 mm lens is 50 mm on a 1.6 camera. A 50mm EF lens on that same camera is similar in image to a 80mm EF-S lens. The reason for the difference comes into play by the amount of the lens the camera is using to record the image and the proximity of the rear element to the camera sensor.
If I shoot my 50mm 1.8 II through my 7d I am effectively multiplying the lenses focal length with the cameras crop factor to give the photographs field of view. ie 50x1.6=80.
So focal length 50mm= field of view 80mm. (On a 1.6 crop)
Allthough...This statement from thatisme 'So, you WILL get different focal lengths from 2 identically marked lenses where one is an EF-S lens and the other is an EF lens.' is false.
You will, in fact, get two different Field of Views but the same Focal Length.
Thanks for the correction, and good catch.
So, for the OP, the difference between EF-sand EF lenses is that EF-S are lighter and cheaper and are tied to 1.6 sensor cameras. EF is more versatile since they work on all EF mount cameras (including EF-S). They can be very cheap or very expensive(and good) when you get into L series lenses.
There is really no good reason to compare focal length or field of view between the two since construction wise, they are like apples and oranges.
Where it becomes relevant, is when you have an EF lens, and you own different format cameras ( like I do). my 400mm 2.8 L IS lens is a true 400mm on my 5D mark II, and 520mm on my 1D mark IIn (1.3) and 640mm on my old 20D. I don't really care about the EF-S mount since it only applies to one of the 3 camera bodies.
Is not true: a 50mm EF lens and a 50mm EF-s lens will have the same focal length and field of view on a crop camera.
This is not correct.
A EF-s 50 mm lens is 50 mm on a 1.6 camera. A 50mm EF lens on that same camera is similar in image to a 80mm EF-S lens. The reason for the difference comes into play by the amount of the lens the camera is using to record the image and the proximity of the rear element to the camera sensor.
more...
cdfarrar
Aug 19, 09:07 PM
not available in my region yet.
Pixie loves to surround
Pixie Acia (My Angel) LA Ink
rgs3
Apr 24, 04:27 PM
seriously just shut ur pretty faces with the tired backlit keyboard anthem. this is like the least desirable feature esp since it has a direct impact on battery life.
so simple really:
-more power
-longer battery life
-IPS display
-less weight
-runs cool
the new x220 does the mba better in three items above today for a fact. time for apple to step it up again.
lol..i think the universe revolves around this guy.
BTW - BLK might be the biggest requested feature.
so simple really:
-more power
-longer battery life
-IPS display
-less weight
-runs cool
the new x220 does the mba better in three items above today for a fact. time for apple to step it up again.
lol..i think the universe revolves around this guy.
BTW - BLK might be the biggest requested feature.
gatearray
Oct 6, 01:29 PM
Two new models, a "high end" and a smaller "low end" model???
Already exists. They are called the 8gb iPhone 3GS for $99, and the 32gb iPhone 4 for $299.
Next year, there will be an iPhone 4 with 8gb for $99, and the iPhone 5 will take over the $199/$299 spots with new, fantastic features. :)
How much cheaper does Apple need to make the phone to entice buyers? What can they do to make a more expensive phone for "high end" customers? Make it gold-plated, or possibly an iPhone with 24" spinner rims?
I agree with everyone else here, Shaw Wu should stop being a fake analyst and get to work at his new, more appropriate job� asking me if I want fries with that.
Already exists. They are called the 8gb iPhone 3GS for $99, and the 32gb iPhone 4 for $299.
Next year, there will be an iPhone 4 with 8gb for $99, and the iPhone 5 will take over the $199/$299 spots with new, fantastic features. :)
How much cheaper does Apple need to make the phone to entice buyers? What can they do to make a more expensive phone for "high end" customers? Make it gold-plated, or possibly an iPhone with 24" spinner rims?
I agree with everyone else here, Shaw Wu should stop being a fake analyst and get to work at his new, more appropriate job� asking me if I want fries with that.
rdowns
Apr 7, 04:26 PM
The whole thing is pathetic. From the Democrats inability to pass a 2010 budget, to the Republican obstruction and the Tea Party wackos who have co-opted the party who don't understand the concept of compromise. History will be very unkind to late 20th -early 21st century America.
Trius
Apr 22, 09:09 AM
I'm still using an Original iPhone, so no matter what the next version of the iPhone I'm gonna get it and I'm gonna be happy.
I like the way you think :apple:
I like the way you think :apple:
kingdonk
Mar 1, 10:31 PM
more of the same.
Thom_Edwards
May 7, 11:22 PM
don't take this the wrong way, but these "biggots" you speak of are a lot like the born-again christians that corner you at the coffee machine trying to get you to go to church with them. (in fact, i even remember a mac fac site called "evangelista"!) macs offer simplicity, stability, and peace of mind--we do not have to travel through the blue screen of death, because the mac is with us! most of us, at one time, were just like you, using those evil windoze machines. but now "we have seen the light!" and can't possibly imagine how you could continue in your suffering. you don't know the peace you could have if you just gave the mac a chance. do you see the metaphor here?
and one thing many windoze people say is, "if macs are so much better, why only 5% market share?" well, christianity started with less market share than that, and it is certainly better than baal or ishtar, just to name a few!
and just for the record, i am a mac biggot. would you like to come over sunday? i can show you how to use iMovie!!!!:D
PS-like i said, i mean no offense by this. in fact, i tried to tie some humor into this, so take it all with a grain of salt.
and one thing many windoze people say is, "if macs are so much better, why only 5% market share?" well, christianity started with less market share than that, and it is certainly better than baal or ishtar, just to name a few!
and just for the record, i am a mac biggot. would you like to come over sunday? i can show you how to use iMovie!!!!:D
PS-like i said, i mean no offense by this. in fact, i tried to tie some humor into this, so take it all with a grain of salt.
thejadedmonkey
May 1, 09:48 AM
For anyone who got in with the PC beta, the OS X beta now available for download, you don't need a new key or anything.
I have an older mac at home, I'll download it and give some fps stats and the like.
I have an older mac at home, I'll download it and give some fps stats and the like.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment