Earendil
Sep 27, 04:10 PM
After all of the comments about how great Aperture ran, and considering how crappy it was running on mine, I decided to take into the Apple Store.
The video card is defective and they are replacing it. No wonder my experience with the program stunk.
:)
My comments on having the video card do some heavy lifting, and how that's a good idea for the majority of users ,only applies to those that have a video card :rolleyes:
Without a video card I completely agree with you that it would be faster to use the 4 procs :D
The video card is defective and they are replacing it. No wonder my experience with the program stunk.
:)
My comments on having the video card do some heavy lifting, and how that's a good idea for the majority of users ,only applies to those that have a video card :rolleyes:
Without a video card I completely agree with you that it would be faster to use the 4 procs :D
whiteyanderson
Dec 15, 03:35 AM
I'm a Verizon user and am dying for an iPhone but, AT&T just isn't reliable enough where I live (L.A.). AT&T worked fine for me in Texas when I had them but, as soon as I moved out here, there were too many dead spots and dropped calls. To be honest, I think all the carriers fundamentally suck in principle, I'm just forced to use the one that gives me reliable service.
My question is if AT&T's exclusivity indeed DOESN'T expire until 2012, then what's the deal with the lack of AT&T iPhone commercials on TV these days? There was a time, not so long ago, when it seemd like every other TV commercial was AT&T whoring the iPhone. Now, it seems like I never see iPhone ads on TV and AT&T is touting every other phone EXCEPT the iPhone.
My question is if AT&T's exclusivity indeed DOESN'T expire until 2012, then what's the deal with the lack of AT&T iPhone commercials on TV these days? There was a time, not so long ago, when it seemd like every other TV commercial was AT&T whoring the iPhone. Now, it seems like I never see iPhone ads on TV and AT&T is touting every other phone EXCEPT the iPhone.
ritmomundo
Mar 18, 05:56 PM
I'm not saying that all other smart phones owners are jealous of my iPhone, I think we can all agree thats nonsense.
From your original post --> "It seems that most people feel some kind of envy to me because I own an iPhone 4."
Just sayin...
From your original post --> "It seems that most people feel some kind of envy to me because I own an iPhone 4."
Just sayin...
Hovey
Jul 21, 10:51 AM
Apple should spend the money spent on pointing fingers at others and no a bumper is not a fix. It only happens to 1% of the users? Greeeeat. That's 1% more than it should. So get to work and stop trying to look at others failures that are similar to yours.
What's apple trying to say? That they are failing At fixing something just better?
Nope, they're saying that nearly every phone has the same problem because nobody has been able to figure out a way around physics, so even though barely anybody is calling in to complain or return a phone we are going to give you something for free and other companies won't even though their manuals tell you the same thing we are telling you.
What's apple trying to say? That they are failing At fixing something just better?
Nope, they're saying that nearly every phone has the same problem because nobody has been able to figure out a way around physics, so even though barely anybody is calling in to complain or return a phone we are going to give you something for free and other companies won't even though their manuals tell you the same thing we are telling you.
MUCKYFINGERS
Aug 10, 03:45 PM
You're free to dream, but they don't plan to meet or exceed the Dell in number of units sold, so I wouldn't expect them to meet or exceed them on price either.
B
Even then I doubt Apple would really lower their prices. They're famous for overcharging customers.
B
Even then I doubt Apple would really lower their prices. They're famous for overcharging customers.
mk_in_mke
Sep 26, 07:06 AM
I am the owner of a Fuji S3 Pro and I bought Aperture 1 about a year ago ($499). And there was no support for Fujifilm Raw files. I returned the item to Apple.
I checked again today and the Fuji S3 Pro file format is now listed in the Camera Supported page Apple posted for Aperture 1.5 (http://www.apple.com/aperture/raw/cameras.html)
The web page says OPTIMIZED Support. see below
Aperture 1.5 supports the RAW formats from the following digital cameras, providing optimized support to those cameras followed with an asterisk (*). Shoot JPEG? Using Aperture, you can import JPEG images from virtually all digital cameras.
Fujifilm
FinePix S2 Pro*
FinePix S3 Pro*
Does anyone know what this is about?
I checked again today and the Fuji S3 Pro file format is now listed in the Camera Supported page Apple posted for Aperture 1.5 (http://www.apple.com/aperture/raw/cameras.html)
The web page says OPTIMIZED Support. see below
Aperture 1.5 supports the RAW formats from the following digital cameras, providing optimized support to those cameras followed with an asterisk (*). Shoot JPEG? Using Aperture, you can import JPEG images from virtually all digital cameras.
Fujifilm
FinePix S2 Pro*
FinePix S3 Pro*
Does anyone know what this is about?
Deefuzz
Aug 7, 03:40 PM
Price drops are always a good thing ;)
kernkraft
Oct 1, 04:11 PM
Wow. I suggest finding a phonebook and looking up your nearest therapist because you have major issues. House rapist? You are mental? You have gone bananas so I suppose that avatar suits you. I have no problem with people being good neighbours by not building an eye sore but ultimately those damn conservationists can stick their concerns where the sun does not shine because it is not their property and they would not have paid a single red cent to make that old house livable and earthquake safe. Everything has a life span and that includes houses.
Those conservationists should have given up early on when the facts were presented about the costs of saving the house. They are just crazy busy bodies who are jealous of Job's wealth and expected him to spend money on a house that was not worth saving.
You should realize that everything we have in the physical world deteriorates eventually and that things are not really what is important.
Give me your best shot, not this patronising, insulting crap! The house rapist part was meant to be a bit of a joke, but clearly, it was wasted on you.
I could insult you, but what's the point? You have issues with my banana, whereas you named yourself after one of the greatest classic philosophers? Who the hell do you think you are?! I suggest you suck my banana and put me on your ignore list, because I don't need a monkey on my back, whatever it's called.
Those conservationists should have given up early on when the facts were presented about the costs of saving the house. They are just crazy busy bodies who are jealous of Job's wealth and expected him to spend money on a house that was not worth saving.
You should realize that everything we have in the physical world deteriorates eventually and that things are not really what is important.
Give me your best shot, not this patronising, insulting crap! The house rapist part was meant to be a bit of a joke, but clearly, it was wasted on you.
I could insult you, but what's the point? You have issues with my banana, whereas you named yourself after one of the greatest classic philosophers? Who the hell do you think you are?! I suggest you suck my banana and put me on your ignore list, because I don't need a monkey on my back, whatever it's called.
partyBoy
Apr 10, 09:09 PM
- Lavender polo
- Red t-shirt with this batman old skool comic print
- Red t-shirt with this batman old skool comic print
Verto
Sep 7, 09:54 PM
And he sucked.
NDA74
Jan 12, 09:01 PM
Anyone who leaps to a conclusion over this is foolish and shooting themselves in the foot. Print media is dead in its current form so you'll never see events banning people just because they have an online presence.
No, you will not. But what you will see are event planners being much more selective about who they credential, until the only media you see at events are the same big media companies that have always been there, except now they're online instead of in print. Same monopolies, different medium.
No, you will not. But what you will see are event planners being much more selective about who they credential, until the only media you see at events are the same big media companies that have always been there, except now they're online instead of in print. Same monopolies, different medium.
ArtOfWarfare
Sep 28, 01:15 PM
No screening room (http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/2859/xxapple1984.jpg)?
Thats not apart of what a home should be. Homes are for eating, sleeping, loving, and relaxing. A screening room is for... Well, none of those.
Thats not apart of what a home should be. Homes are for eating, sleeping, loving, and relaxing. A screening room is for... Well, none of those.
Russell L
Aug 15, 01:21 AM
This is getting very messy.
Another purchaser of the 23" contacted AppleCare and reported this in Apple's Monitor Forum:
"I just talked to an AppleCare specialist and he said that this is still the old model based on my serial number. 2A6241XXXXX and manufactured June 2006"
"I called the apple store online on the phone and asked them how I would get the new one that is as the one they sell now. They said, it is guaranteed 100% that I would get the new one online, but through their retail stores, it is very likely to get the previous model, because they still have the old ones."
So both of us (mine made in May ( 2A6211XXXXX) and yours in June 2006 (2A6241XXXXX) have the old model with the following specs according to his report:
Brightness 270cd/m2
contrast ratio 400:1
So I guess no one can be sure of what they are getting, no matter how or where they buy it.
Well, I sprung for a new 23" at the Apple Store in SF last Friday (along with a new Mac Pro!). I asked the salesman to find me one with the highest serial number, which was 2A6251xxxxx (also June 2006). FWIW, the display was set at its highest brightness setting and was just too bright--I've now got it set at about 25% and it looks terrific. No obvious dead pixels, no pink cast. I also purchased the AppleCare warranty, so I should be covered over the next 3 years.
Russell
Another purchaser of the 23" contacted AppleCare and reported this in Apple's Monitor Forum:
"I just talked to an AppleCare specialist and he said that this is still the old model based on my serial number. 2A6241XXXXX and manufactured June 2006"
"I called the apple store online on the phone and asked them how I would get the new one that is as the one they sell now. They said, it is guaranteed 100% that I would get the new one online, but through their retail stores, it is very likely to get the previous model, because they still have the old ones."
So both of us (mine made in May ( 2A6211XXXXX) and yours in June 2006 (2A6241XXXXX) have the old model with the following specs according to his report:
Brightness 270cd/m2
contrast ratio 400:1
So I guess no one can be sure of what they are getting, no matter how or where they buy it.
Well, I sprung for a new 23" at the Apple Store in SF last Friday (along with a new Mac Pro!). I asked the salesman to find me one with the highest serial number, which was 2A6251xxxxx (also June 2006). FWIW, the display was set at its highest brightness setting and was just too bright--I've now got it set at about 25% and it looks terrific. No obvious dead pixels, no pink cast. I also purchased the AppleCare warranty, so I should be covered over the next 3 years.
Russell
gootz
Aug 15, 12:43 AM
I went into my local Apple store yesterday and they denied that there were even upgrades? WTF? I guess they want to sell off there current stock?
robbieduncan
Apr 21, 10:41 AM
Interesting. Although I suspect open to abuse (particularly in PRSI). Also they don't visually line up well with the other buttons...
Rocketman
Oct 29, 10:58 AM
We're talking about information here. It has no intrinsic value.
I do believe you are inherently wrong here.
Information is stored on artifacts (things). Therefore the combination of the artifact and its highly value added information has yet more "intrinsic" value.
What has more value in stopping cars, a red light or a blue light. They are both lights. They only emit different information.
Dictionary.com:
"Of or relating to the essential nature of a thing; inherent."
Rocketman
I do believe you are inherently wrong here.
Information is stored on artifacts (things). Therefore the combination of the artifact and its highly value added information has yet more "intrinsic" value.
What has more value in stopping cars, a red light or a blue light. They are both lights. They only emit different information.
Dictionary.com:
"Of or relating to the essential nature of a thing; inherent."
Rocketman
fivepoint
Mar 4, 11:06 AM
It does not.
Yes, it does.
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Rubber-Room-Doc-Reveals-Teachers-Paid-For-Nothing-90804024.html
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/03/05/why-we-must-fire-bad-teachers.html
Yes, it does.
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Rubber-Room-Doc-Reveals-Teachers-Paid-For-Nothing-90804024.html
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/03/05/why-we-must-fire-bad-teachers.html
Hugh
Apr 5, 10:14 PM
I'm going to start a TV channel that only shows commercials.
They already have it and it's actually quite popular. :D
In 2000 there was a web site that was nothing but ads. Ads from all around the globe. Why is it gone? It got to popular and they were having a hard time paying for the bandwidth. Not to mention that some of the companies wanted money or their ad pulled. It was a great site to see all the Super Bowl ads. :/
rihanna 2011 tour.
They already have it and it's actually quite popular. :D
In 2000 there was a web site that was nothing but ads. Ads from all around the globe. Why is it gone? It got to popular and they were having a hard time paying for the bandwidth. Not to mention that some of the companies wanted money or their ad pulled. It was a great site to see all the Super Bowl ads. :/
Xian Zhu Xuande
Jul 21, 10:21 AM
Completely incorrect, I have always been an Apple customer. I just recently bought an i7 iMac and own a Macbook pro, an iPod touch and an iPhone 3G. I waited in line for the iPhone 4, and I absolutely love the thing to bits. It's the fastest, most awesome phone I've ever owned. But what annoys me is that you have to agree that this is the most serious problem relating to signal attenuation ever been seen. I mean yes, it has been blown out of proportion by the media but when you get down and actually test it out in different signal strength areas, you definitely notice it pretty severely.
But what annoys me the most, is Apple's "couldn't give a s***, let's point out other people's similar mistakes." Apple has never been like this before. Jobs may have saved the company but he's also going to ruin it with this attitude. Wozniak would have recalled the phones.
I'm quite familiar with the circumstance. Placing the antenna on the outside of the unit has changed the way attenuation of the phone's signal manifests. Apple probably failed to predict the way in which this was received. I agree completely with Gruber on this one, though: it is a two steps forward, one step back sort of thing. I have lost a call that I probably wouldn't have lost due to this issue, but at the same time, I have kept far more calls than I would have, in those poor signal areas, had I been using my 3GS. It is a tradeoff (a word Jobs was probably concerned to use) but one I feel is acceptable. That said, discussion of the issue is fine�it really is there�but discussion blowing it clear out of proportion is just mind numbing.
Now, on to your second line, you clearly don't understand PR and how a company Apple's size has to react with the media. They've certainly misstepped at times, but as they have chosen not to do a recall (reasonable, I feel, and it seems their customers are voting with their dollars that they agree) they have to back their decision to support the phone as is. Competitors have gone out of their way to target this issue and Apple has to respond. And it is fair, too. If Nokia is going to come out and say they don't have issues like this they should be prepared to have their products tested and the same goes for other companies. Apple's on the defense here and it has nothing to do with them not giving a ****.
"Jobs is going to ruin the company with this attitude," is hyperbole.
The Woz, as much as I love the guy, absolutely would not be capable of running a company like Apple (or one even remotely near as successful)�or how to resolve a PR issue. He's an engineer through and through. Not a businessman or any sort of social wizard.
LOL. Grow up. You sound paranoid: Everyone is out to get Apple.
Actually, the media does target Apple disproportionately, but it is not because they are haters. Apple is a large, successful company which people have passionate opinions about and that generates interest, page views, ratings, advertising revenue. So actually, that was right in one sense, wrong in another.
And there's something entertaining about the line, "LOL. Grow up."
But what annoys me the most, is Apple's "couldn't give a s***, let's point out other people's similar mistakes." Apple has never been like this before. Jobs may have saved the company but he's also going to ruin it with this attitude. Wozniak would have recalled the phones.
I'm quite familiar with the circumstance. Placing the antenna on the outside of the unit has changed the way attenuation of the phone's signal manifests. Apple probably failed to predict the way in which this was received. I agree completely with Gruber on this one, though: it is a two steps forward, one step back sort of thing. I have lost a call that I probably wouldn't have lost due to this issue, but at the same time, I have kept far more calls than I would have, in those poor signal areas, had I been using my 3GS. It is a tradeoff (a word Jobs was probably concerned to use) but one I feel is acceptable. That said, discussion of the issue is fine�it really is there�but discussion blowing it clear out of proportion is just mind numbing.
Now, on to your second line, you clearly don't understand PR and how a company Apple's size has to react with the media. They've certainly misstepped at times, but as they have chosen not to do a recall (reasonable, I feel, and it seems their customers are voting with their dollars that they agree) they have to back their decision to support the phone as is. Competitors have gone out of their way to target this issue and Apple has to respond. And it is fair, too. If Nokia is going to come out and say they don't have issues like this they should be prepared to have their products tested and the same goes for other companies. Apple's on the defense here and it has nothing to do with them not giving a ****.
"Jobs is going to ruin the company with this attitude," is hyperbole.
The Woz, as much as I love the guy, absolutely would not be capable of running a company like Apple (or one even remotely near as successful)�or how to resolve a PR issue. He's an engineer through and through. Not a businessman or any sort of social wizard.
LOL. Grow up. You sound paranoid: Everyone is out to get Apple.
Actually, the media does target Apple disproportionately, but it is not because they are haters. Apple is a large, successful company which people have passionate opinions about and that generates interest, page views, ratings, advertising revenue. So actually, that was right in one sense, wrong in another.
And there's something entertaining about the line, "LOL. Grow up."
Popeye206
May 4, 07:51 AM
There is a big difference between paying more for service that costs the carriers more and paying for a service/feature that doesn't cost the carriers everything.
America is HUGE compared to Hong Kong to Europe so it costs the carriers far more to get coverage.
What people seem to not get is that the "greedy carriers" are always under pressure to expand. Give better coverage. Faster connections like 4G and so forth. And they need to do this in a market where competition keeps driving the revenue down. So, as consumers, we want them to spend more and make less to give us reliable, fast service everywhere we go. On top of this, technologies on the internet are quickly eating away at their market. So many ways to communicate now it's eating away at their bottom line.
So, the U.S.carriers are doing everything they can to get what they can to help support this. They are a business, and need to make money for their shareholders and so they can stay alive.
Not saying I think it's right that they charge more for tethering, but it is what it is. They've been doing it for years and they're soaking it. But it does not mean it should not change.
America is HUGE compared to Hong Kong to Europe so it costs the carriers far more to get coverage.
What people seem to not get is that the "greedy carriers" are always under pressure to expand. Give better coverage. Faster connections like 4G and so forth. And they need to do this in a market where competition keeps driving the revenue down. So, as consumers, we want them to spend more and make less to give us reliable, fast service everywhere we go. On top of this, technologies on the internet are quickly eating away at their market. So many ways to communicate now it's eating away at their bottom line.
So, the U.S.carriers are doing everything they can to get what they can to help support this. They are a business, and need to make money for their shareholders and so they can stay alive.
Not saying I think it's right that they charge more for tethering, but it is what it is. They've been doing it for years and they're soaking it. But it does not mean it should not change.
AhmedFaisal
Apr 13, 06:52 AM
The radiation dosage from any properly maintained active scanner is still orders of magnitude less than what you get from a 4-hour flight at 10 km. Go ahead and opt out of your full-body scans... if you're doing it for the "health" reason you're tilting at a very small windmill.
Yes, the same dosage in what, a second versus 4 hours? It's a beautiful piece of misinformation you are spreading there. It's the same cumulative dose, however over a vastly different timeframe. If you believe that timescale of exposure has no bearing of the effect of a given dose, then that's your choice.
Yes, the same dosage in what, a second versus 4 hours? It's a beautiful piece of misinformation you are spreading there. It's the same cumulative dose, however over a vastly different timeframe. If you believe that timescale of exposure has no bearing of the effect of a given dose, then that's your choice.
arn
Nov 16, 12:32 PM
please no page 1 vs page 2 comments... :)
peeInMyPantz
Sep 12, 08:18 AM
damn..
since they haven't take down apple store for update, does that mean no new product? just new service? i'm waiting for a MB/MBP update
since they haven't take down apple store for update, does that mean no new product? just new service? i'm waiting for a MB/MBP update
longofest
Oct 19, 09:51 AM
I would love to know what the worldwide figure is for Apple market percentage. I know it says here that its not in the top 5, hence no available data, but it would be interesting to see, particularly here in the UK, as the amount of people I know who have switched in the last year has been huge!!
I know Apple is doing well, but the problem is the Asian companies that are doing extraordinary in their markets continually kick Apple out of the numbers. You want to buy Gartner's report for MacRumors when it comes out :cool:
I know Apple is doing well, but the problem is the Asian companies that are doing extraordinary in their markets continually kick Apple out of the numbers. You want to buy Gartner's report for MacRumors when it comes out :cool:
No comments:
Post a Comment