iGary
Sep 13, 09:13 AM
Lucky you! :)
Wish i'd had a sailor pick me up and put me to bed when i was having surgery :D As i was a horny teenager at the time this would have been a dream come true waking up to a sexy sailor. Actually given those hospital gowns that may not have been such a good idea :D
Also, agreed with jsw. Take the fasting restrictions very seriously
He's a super-nice kid. And yes, he is super-hot, but I can't lead on that I think that. ;) He knows I am gay (see most embarrasing moments thread), but he would definitely not like me hitting on him.
That said, yes, I don't mind him coming to pick me up.
Wish i'd had a sailor pick me up and put me to bed when i was having surgery :D As i was a horny teenager at the time this would have been a dream come true waking up to a sexy sailor. Actually given those hospital gowns that may not have been such a good idea :D
Also, agreed with jsw. Take the fasting restrictions very seriously
He's a super-nice kid. And yes, he is super-hot, but I can't lead on that I think that. ;) He knows I am gay (see most embarrasing moments thread), but he would definitely not like me hitting on him.
That said, yes, I don't mind him coming to pick me up.
outerspaceapple
Aug 19, 11:53 AM
me 2, me 2! :D
hehe. nice pic too. reminds me of all those spam scams i entered trying 2 get one... i've seen better days.
hehe. nice pic too. reminds me of all those spam scams i entered trying 2 get one... i've seen better days.
robbieduncan
Sep 25, 11:16 AM
the 'what's new' page says "Work with RAW images from more than 50 camera models, including the Fuji S2, Fuji S3 Pro, and Sony A100." but i don't know which ones exactly .. i know the Fujis are new because i have the S9000/9500 which is still not supported and it didn't support any Fujis before
Did you read the previous posts? The complete list of supported cameras (http://www.apple.com/aperture/raw/cameras.html) was posted on the previous page...
Did you read the previous posts? The complete list of supported cameras (http://www.apple.com/aperture/raw/cameras.html) was posted on the previous page...
roadbloc
Dec 21, 06:04 PM
Rage Against The Machine couldn't fill Wembley now. I think Joe will.
What a shame... I regarded Mr Walsh as the one with the most intelligence.
Not anymore methinks.
What a shame... I regarded Mr Walsh as the one with the most intelligence.
Not anymore methinks.
more...
KingYaba
Apr 15, 03:08 PM
I like the mop behind him. Is he the janitor of the data center?
Quote of the week right here.
Quote of the week right here.
bmustaf
Apr 5, 05:56 PM
I think you're misinterpreting my language - I mean "for the user that knows even the most basic amount about technology" the user experience is superior in my estimation.
Not the interpretation you seem to be reading into it that reads more like "anyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot".
How does knowing something about tech make it a superior device? Are you basing it on something like a feature list? It is a highly inferior device because it is an inferior means of accomplishing the vast majority of tablet-related tasks as compared to the iPad. I'm not knocking Android by any means�it will continue to evolve and tablet offerings will improve�but in the tablet world it trails a considerable distance behind iOS and that is what matters most.
By no means. They're just struggling to evolve with the products they review. I agree that they're poorly suited to review some of these more technical devices and I think their methodology renders many such reviews released by them fairly useless, but they serve a valuable purpose, it would be a shame to see this type of service go away, and I can't see how they've become obsolete to many folks out there.
Not the interpretation you seem to be reading into it that reads more like "anyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot".
How does knowing something about tech make it a superior device? Are you basing it on something like a feature list? It is a highly inferior device because it is an inferior means of accomplishing the vast majority of tablet-related tasks as compared to the iPad. I'm not knocking Android by any means�it will continue to evolve and tablet offerings will improve�but in the tablet world it trails a considerable distance behind iOS and that is what matters most.
By no means. They're just struggling to evolve with the products they review. I agree that they're poorly suited to review some of these more technical devices and I think their methodology renders many such reviews released by them fairly useless, but they serve a valuable purpose, it would be a shame to see this type of service go away, and I can't see how they've become obsolete to many folks out there.
more...
jdczar
Mar 11, 01:34 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
At firewheel best buy only 5 people in line they will be handing out tickets at 430
At firewheel best buy only 5 people in line they will be handing out tickets at 430
steve_hill4
Oct 26, 05:51 PM
Why such a negative response? The software out there sucks... more competition means more quality. Sound design needs some major upgrades. It needs to more innovate.
I had a quick play with SoundBooth and this appeared to suck too. I can't see it being a decent replacement just yet.
I had a quick play with SoundBooth and this appeared to suck too. I can't see it being a decent replacement just yet.
more...
MisterMe
Sep 20, 09:28 AM
Originally posted by ColdZero
Oh yea, nice and fast :rolleyes:. A Dual 1.25Ghz G4 vs a single 2.8ghz P4, uhhh isn't that a little unfair. Where is the dual 2.4ghz P4 vs dual 1.25ghz G4 comparison?
You are absolutely correct. We should only compare dual-processor Apple computers to other dual-processor computers. Please list your benchmarks for a dual-processor Dell, HP/Compaq, or Gateway personal computer.
Oh yea, nice and fast :rolleyes:. A Dual 1.25Ghz G4 vs a single 2.8ghz P4, uhhh isn't that a little unfair. Where is the dual 2.4ghz P4 vs dual 1.25ghz G4 comparison?
You are absolutely correct. We should only compare dual-processor Apple computers to other dual-processor computers. Please list your benchmarks for a dual-processor Dell, HP/Compaq, or Gateway personal computer.
Jeffx342
Sep 13, 09:35 PM
I know Steve has some kind of plane to take on the Pentium world hes a smart guy especially if he got this far.
I have 2 Pc's yes still no mac....
Comp 1: P3 700Mhz w/ 256mgs, Geforce 2
Comp 2: p4 2.4 Ghz w/ 512mgs, Geforce 3
Let me tell you I was so excited about the "new Pentium 4 Processor" when it came out. To tell you the truth there is not a whole lot difference between Pentium 3 700Mhz, and Pentium 4 2.4Ghz. I was actually dispointed because everybody made such a big deal about it. The Mhz numbers looked nice on p4 but I waisted my money!
I have 2 Pc's yes still no mac....
Comp 1: P3 700Mhz w/ 256mgs, Geforce 2
Comp 2: p4 2.4 Ghz w/ 512mgs, Geforce 3
Let me tell you I was so excited about the "new Pentium 4 Processor" when it came out. To tell you the truth there is not a whole lot difference between Pentium 3 700Mhz, and Pentium 4 2.4Ghz. I was actually dispointed because everybody made such a big deal about it. The Mhz numbers looked nice on p4 but I waisted my money!
more...
iPhelim
Oct 25, 10:47 AM
im definitely gonna be there tomorrow and was thinking of broadcasting it on JTV (i live only 35 minutes from waterloo, so then its just a quick tube ride:cool:). i thought i'd turn up at like 5.30 but from reading all the above im thinking i should get there earlier....
if i do get there really early and theres no queue i think i'll just spend a few hours in the caffe nero thats practically next door, they should so do a Caffe:apple: even if its just for one day:D
if i do get there really early and theres no queue i think i'll just spend a few hours in the caffe nero thats practically next door, they should so do a Caffe:apple: even if its just for one day:D
geerlingguy
Sep 25, 10:33 AM
If you have a student ADC membership, and still have your hardware discount asset�you can purchase it for $99 (EDU) at the ADC Store.
Alas, I do not.
Alas, I do not.
more...
SPUY767
Sep 28, 07:23 AM
:eek: :eek: :eek:
You're right, whatever will they doooooo??????
Insert InvisiText™ Disclaimer that I know 10.4.10 does not equal 10.5.0 here.
10.4.9.1
You're right, whatever will they doooooo??????
Insert InvisiText™ Disclaimer that I know 10.4.10 does not equal 10.5.0 here.
10.4.9.1
davidjearly
Dec 21, 05:56 AM
Time enough to post about it though ;) Merryxmas
I have no time for the 'campaign'. I have a limited amount of time for debate over the logic behind it.
I have no time for the 'campaign'. I have a limited amount of time for debate over the logic behind it.
more...
D-Love
Feb 18, 11:23 AM
That "picture" of Jobs at the cancer center is clearly not Steve Jobs. Its so obvious that isn't Jobs that its not even funny. Even though the picture is from behind, Jobs looks like he's quite fine at that table.
Why am I not surprised he's the one sitting right next to President Obama? LOL
Why am I not surprised he's the one sitting right next to President Obama? LOL
digitalfrog
Mar 24, 07:01 AM
My goal when my daytime job was IT and photography a hobby was to get the sharpest pics as possible, not blown highlights and details in the shadows ...
My goal today with photography as my daytime job is to deliver the pictures my clients want, which mostly involve styling with lot's of blur, overexposed and grainy pictures, layering textures over and so on ...
My goal today with photography as my daytime job is to deliver the pictures my clients want, which mostly involve styling with lot's of blur, overexposed and grainy pictures, layering textures over and so on ...
more...
Lesser Evets
May 2, 02:59 PM
I think I just yawned.
gmikesell
Mar 4, 07:40 PM
I was in line for the iPhone 4 last June at Stonebriar Mall in Frisco at 11pm. They kicked everybody out (disbursed the line) at something like 2am that morning. Talk about a disaster! I really hope security and Apple have a better plan arranged this time! I'm thinking I may try to get off work early and get in line at around 1:00pm
Azathoth
Mar 25, 10:21 AM
They did not avoid digital at all, in fact they were an early entrant to digital. The problem was that they were used to having a lucrative near-monopoly in film, a fat side business in film processing and a nice low-end camera business built around proprietary "connvenience" film packaging. They were now facing aggressive consumer electronics companies who were used to relently feature upgrades and short model lifecycles. Moreover, they could not rely on their film dominance to keep competitors at a disadvantage. In other words, they had to change their business model completely-- from near monopoly to completely competitive-- in order to success in the new business. Only a fraction of companies manage to do this successfully.
Keep in mind, also, due to the increased competition and lack of a film component, that the opportunity for Kodak in digital was much smaller than their film and related businesses. It's very hard to manage a shrinking company, and even harder if you are also trying to reinvent yourself.
Not only that - but the fact that there is no film in a digital camera - Kodak is a "film emulsion" company. Professionals never bought Kodak cameras or lenses. There is no "film" in a digital camera. The most natural progression would have been for Kodak to make memory cards.
Most of the R&D (and they did some great R&D in chemistry, materials and human image perception) were fundementally irrelevant to digital.
The changes that Kodak would have needed to be relevant were so huge (fire 90% of staff, change the entire core business) that I don't think there was any way they could have been succesful.
The successful camera companies today fall into one of two camps: 1. well established camera companies. 2. Consumer electronics companies.
Afga (a film emulsion company): effectively dead.
Fuji: very limited success (though they almost had their head above water for a while).
Keep in mind, also, due to the increased competition and lack of a film component, that the opportunity for Kodak in digital was much smaller than their film and related businesses. It's very hard to manage a shrinking company, and even harder if you are also trying to reinvent yourself.
Not only that - but the fact that there is no film in a digital camera - Kodak is a "film emulsion" company. Professionals never bought Kodak cameras or lenses. There is no "film" in a digital camera. The most natural progression would have been for Kodak to make memory cards.
Most of the R&D (and they did some great R&D in chemistry, materials and human image perception) were fundementally irrelevant to digital.
The changes that Kodak would have needed to be relevant were so huge (fire 90% of staff, change the entire core business) that I don't think there was any way they could have been succesful.
The successful camera companies today fall into one of two camps: 1. well established camera companies. 2. Consumer electronics companies.
Afga (a film emulsion company): effectively dead.
Fuji: very limited success (though they almost had their head above water for a while).
kingdonk
Feb 28, 08:26 PM
server app screen shots
-hh
Mar 21, 09:24 PM
Its funny that film and film cameras were so difficult to get right, but there was almost no post-processing. Now we shoot computers with lenses attached, get great technical results, yet post-process our photos to death.
Actually, for many people there was quite a bit of post-processing, but it was hidden from them: it was the hand-inspected print from ye olde local camera store, which would dial in what they believed were the appropriate corrections.
I do still suck.
My problem is leaving my camera on Auto. I just don't know which setting to use. The more I read and the more opinions I see, the more confused I get. Plus when I see a good subject I don't want to mess it up with my ill informed selections...
I did just buy the Bryan Peterson Understanding Exposure book, so hopefully that will help set me off in the right direction!
I agree with most of what you say, except.... I don't get the "Shoot only Full Manual" advice that is heard here and in other places.
If I have spent some $$ on a camera with a computer and a light meter, I figure I'm going to make it do at some of the work. The way I see it, I have a management job, and that is to decide what DoF and/or apparent motion I want to capture (composition) - and to ensure good exposure (quality control). The camera gets to do the grunt work of doing the calculations. It's the back-office.
Thanks for saying this.
I think that there's really two different aspects to this that both require appreciation.
The first is that having the personal knowledge of the variables that go into a proper exposure is a good thing...as well as more factors such as the trade-off of DOF versus Shutter, etc...this is most easily learned by inflicting the "pain" of full manual upon the student.
(like that contradiction? "Pain is Easy" :-)
However, once one knows the ropes ... and what is important - - including when it is/isn't important - - why not let the machine do the settings for a 'nominal' exposure? Afterall, that's what it is good at, and you can concentrate on more important stuff - - such as composition.
At the same time, knowing when to be ... unafraid ... of using the various camera settings is still a very good thing. For example, I revisited this just the other night while outside to shoot some 'big moon' photos:
I did a quick setup and did some shots to find that the auto exposure was totally blown out. Did the "quick cheat" to spin the one dial to override to -2 stops ... still too bright. Figured out that this was probably because I had forgotten to set the camera over to spot metering before going out in the dark...and in the dark, couldn't find that control. So instead of stumbling in the dark blind, I just spun it over to Manual and readjusted, recalling reading somewhere that the old "Sunny 16" rule (I had forgotten the "Moony 11" derivative) also applies to bright exposures of the full Moon to get an idea of just how many stops I was still over-exposing things. I didn't remember the correct rule of thumb, but with digital that doesn't matter as much: it got me quite close in just a few shots; the shot I liked best ended up at 1/320sec for a 280mm shot at f/4.9 / ISO 100...a bit more light-gathering than the correct rule, but more importantly, it was a full 7 stops lower than where the camera default settings were, and I got the whole shebang done in <2 minutes.
...which meant that I was able to get quickly back inside, before my wife was able to yell at me for being outside in the cold without any jacket.
-hh
Actually, for many people there was quite a bit of post-processing, but it was hidden from them: it was the hand-inspected print from ye olde local camera store, which would dial in what they believed were the appropriate corrections.
I do still suck.
My problem is leaving my camera on Auto. I just don't know which setting to use. The more I read and the more opinions I see, the more confused I get. Plus when I see a good subject I don't want to mess it up with my ill informed selections...
I did just buy the Bryan Peterson Understanding Exposure book, so hopefully that will help set me off in the right direction!
I agree with most of what you say, except.... I don't get the "Shoot only Full Manual" advice that is heard here and in other places.
If I have spent some $$ on a camera with a computer and a light meter, I figure I'm going to make it do at some of the work. The way I see it, I have a management job, and that is to decide what DoF and/or apparent motion I want to capture (composition) - and to ensure good exposure (quality control). The camera gets to do the grunt work of doing the calculations. It's the back-office.
Thanks for saying this.
I think that there's really two different aspects to this that both require appreciation.
The first is that having the personal knowledge of the variables that go into a proper exposure is a good thing...as well as more factors such as the trade-off of DOF versus Shutter, etc...this is most easily learned by inflicting the "pain" of full manual upon the student.
(like that contradiction? "Pain is Easy" :-)
However, once one knows the ropes ... and what is important - - including when it is/isn't important - - why not let the machine do the settings for a 'nominal' exposure? Afterall, that's what it is good at, and you can concentrate on more important stuff - - such as composition.
At the same time, knowing when to be ... unafraid ... of using the various camera settings is still a very good thing. For example, I revisited this just the other night while outside to shoot some 'big moon' photos:
I did a quick setup and did some shots to find that the auto exposure was totally blown out. Did the "quick cheat" to spin the one dial to override to -2 stops ... still too bright. Figured out that this was probably because I had forgotten to set the camera over to spot metering before going out in the dark...and in the dark, couldn't find that control. So instead of stumbling in the dark blind, I just spun it over to Manual and readjusted, recalling reading somewhere that the old "Sunny 16" rule (I had forgotten the "Moony 11" derivative) also applies to bright exposures of the full Moon to get an idea of just how many stops I was still over-exposing things. I didn't remember the correct rule of thumb, but with digital that doesn't matter as much: it got me quite close in just a few shots; the shot I liked best ended up at 1/320sec for a 280mm shot at f/4.9 / ISO 100...a bit more light-gathering than the correct rule, but more importantly, it was a full 7 stops lower than where the camera default settings were, and I got the whole shebang done in <2 minutes.
...which meant that I was able to get quickly back inside, before my wife was able to yell at me for being outside in the cold without any jacket.
-hh
AvSRoCkCO1067
Aug 14, 03:11 PM
Nonsense. Apple is selling a lot of computers right now because Jobs Osbourned the entire PowerPC range just over a year ago by announcing the switch to Intel. For each model of Mac, sales were artificially low before the Intel version was launched, and artificially higher after.
Additionally, people are happer buying Macs if they know they can switch back to Windows if it doesn't work out. One of the major barriers to owning a Mac has been removed by the Intel switch (whatever my misgivings on the subject.)
It's simply ridiculous to argue that the ads have helped sales. Sales would be much higher now than they would have been six months ago even if Apple had stopped advertising completely. The question is whether they would be even higher if they weren't insulting their target audience. The answer, of course, is yes.
They sold how many macs last quarter? Over a million, right? How many boot camp downloads have they had....?
Of course the ads have helped sales - the question is, how much. Are you seriously implying that no advertising WHATSOEVER would increase sales...? :rolleyes:
Additionally, people are happer buying Macs if they know they can switch back to Windows if it doesn't work out. One of the major barriers to owning a Mac has been removed by the Intel switch (whatever my misgivings on the subject.)
It's simply ridiculous to argue that the ads have helped sales. Sales would be much higher now than they would have been six months ago even if Apple had stopped advertising completely. The question is whether they would be even higher if they weren't insulting their target audience. The answer, of course, is yes.
They sold how many macs last quarter? Over a million, right? How many boot camp downloads have they had....?
Of course the ads have helped sales - the question is, how much. Are you seriously implying that no advertising WHATSOEVER would increase sales...? :rolleyes:
Gem�tlichkeit
Jan 4, 10:45 AM
I can't trust the cellphone networks to stream the data to me. Much rather have the maps on the phone.
AFo1184
Apr 21, 04:21 PM
Hopefully Samsung doesn't sue for the name:rolleyes:
That would be funny if they did. Speaking of Suing for naming rights. You know what would be funny if Volkswagen AG Sued Apple for using the name A4,A5, being those are names of some Audi models. Since everyone is suing everyone else might as well give VW the idea to get in on the fun
That would be funny if they did. Speaking of Suing for naming rights. You know what would be funny if Volkswagen AG Sued Apple for using the name A4,A5, being those are names of some Audi models. Since everyone is suing everyone else might as well give VW the idea to get in on the fun
No comments:
Post a Comment