thatisme
Mar 29, 06:38 AM
There is no such thing as a "crop camera"
FOVCF is the technical term for a crop sensor or crop camera. It stands for FIELD OF VIEW CROP FACTOR, whereby the sensor doesn't see the full image projected from a standard 35 mm format lens (EF lens in this case)
Nikon also created a FULL FRame camera a while back that also had the ability to create a "cropped" image to increase it's rate of capture to achieve results in FPS that were similar to canon's 1D series bodies. Effectively if it captured less pixels per image, it could do so faster.
FOVCF is the technical term for a crop sensor or crop camera. It stands for FIELD OF VIEW CROP FACTOR, whereby the sensor doesn't see the full image projected from a standard 35 mm format lens (EF lens in this case)
Nikon also created a FULL FRame camera a while back that also had the ability to create a "cropped" image to increase it's rate of capture to achieve results in FPS that were similar to canon's 1D series bodies. Effectively if it captured less pixels per image, it could do so faster.
bousozoku
Apr 2, 03:54 PM
I like Pages but it's definitely crude at the moment. They should have gone more for a desktop publishing application than a word processor with desktop publishing features. If they'd included a slide sorter for the pages, it would make so much more sense.
As far as MS Word goes, it was great at version 4, so-so at version 5, really bad at version 6, and it continues to slide downhill. Feature bloat is a problem with most software releases now. One application does not have to do it all, including Pages.
As far as MS Word goes, it was great at version 4, so-so at version 5, really bad at version 6, and it continues to slide downhill. Feature bloat is a problem with most software releases now. One application does not have to do it all, including Pages.
wilburpan
Sep 22, 07:15 AM
Originally posted by MacCoaster
I wouldn't say that 800MHz G4 would match 1.8GHz. Notice the 1.25GHz they used is *DUAL* processor 1.25GHz. Maybe *DUAL* 800MHzs.
Here's the link to their rating of an iMac 800MHz G4 and a 1.8Ghz P4, which puts the two within shouting distance of each other.
http://www.cpuscorecard.com/sys_premium.htm
I wouldn't say that 800MHz G4 would match 1.8GHz. Notice the 1.25GHz they used is *DUAL* processor 1.25GHz. Maybe *DUAL* 800MHzs.
Here's the link to their rating of an iMac 800MHz G4 and a 1.8Ghz P4, which puts the two within shouting distance of each other.
http://www.cpuscorecard.com/sys_premium.htm
bmustaf
Apr 5, 05:59 PM
Well, the Xoom isn't tied to the carrier. Google uses it (currently, at least) as the reference device for their Honeycomb platform.
I think iPad 2 and iOS has advantages, but as an Apple supporter myself and user/dev owner, too, I think the hubris in this community is very dangerous.
The bigger they are, the higher they fly...you know how the saying goes. The U2 wasn't untouchable, and neither is the iPad 2. The sooner we get over this idea that there is an inherent superiority anything Apple, I really think the better off Apple and its products and the ecosystem actually will be!
Ever since Android was released on phones I have been hearing that it "is just a release or two away from being a great OS". The reality is that most Android devices are extremely lucky if they get one upgrade ported to them by their carrier. I'll stick with an iPad2 rather than buying something and hoping that it improves with time.
I think iPad 2 and iOS has advantages, but as an Apple supporter myself and user/dev owner, too, I think the hubris in this community is very dangerous.
The bigger they are, the higher they fly...you know how the saying goes. The U2 wasn't untouchable, and neither is the iPad 2. The sooner we get over this idea that there is an inherent superiority anything Apple, I really think the better off Apple and its products and the ecosystem actually will be!
Ever since Android was released on phones I have been hearing that it "is just a release or two away from being a great OS". The reality is that most Android devices are extremely lucky if they get one upgrade ported to them by their carrier. I'll stick with an iPad2 rather than buying something and hoping that it improves with time.
more...
mdelvecchio
May 3, 04:33 PM
"You're holding it wrong"
"You're looking at it wrong."
"You're looking at it wrong."
.jpg "short valentines day poems for")
countrydweller
Aug 19, 09:49 AM
There will be a way to turn it off(better be), it's not working yet either.
more...
NoSmokingBandit
Jun 14, 04:38 PM
That design is just awful. Reminds me of a cheesy alienware case:
http://patersoninc.com/ebay/computer/ALIEN/alienware-alx.jpg
http://patersoninc.com/ebay/computer/ALIEN/alienware-alx.jpg
wdlove
May 24, 09:26 PM
Thank you for your hard work redeye_be, its appreciated. ;) Maybe something like this will simulate and interest in folding.
I'm not using Tiger yet, so can't use it yet.
I'm not using Tiger yet, so can't use it yet.
more...
Elijahg
Apr 5, 10:52 PM
Once again, I was never talking about the audio out port that also has mic capabilities for iPhone headsets that there are very few of. I was talking about the line-in jack that is useless and does not support power for a typical headset.
http://blogs.computerworld.com/mac_microphone_line_in_only_port_is_a_real_drag
It certainly isn't useless, it's designed so you can get high-quality stereo audio through it. You can't do that with a mic socket, the power in the socket for the mic can affect the sound quality, it causes a buzz. If you want high quality audio get a USB headset or a USB/FW microphone preamp. For the majority the iPhone headphones/mic or the built-in mic work just fine. Why do you need support for PC-style headsets?
http://blogs.computerworld.com/mac_microphone_line_in_only_port_is_a_real_drag
It certainly isn't useless, it's designed so you can get high-quality stereo audio through it. You can't do that with a mic socket, the power in the socket for the mic can affect the sound quality, it causes a buzz. If you want high quality audio get a USB headset or a USB/FW microphone preamp. For the majority the iPhone headphones/mic or the built-in mic work just fine. Why do you need support for PC-style headsets?
nixd2001
Sep 14, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by onemoof
Someone asked the difference between RISC and CISC.
First thing, there isn't that distinction anymore. RISC originally meant that the processor had fixed width instructions (so it wouldn't have to waste time asking the software how big the next instruction will be). CISC mean that the processor had variable width instructions (meaning time would have to be taken to figure out how long the next instruction is before fetching it.) However, Intel has addressed this problem by making it possible for the processor to switch to a fixed-width mode for special processor intensive purposes. The PowerPC is stuck with fixed-width and has no ability to enjoy the flexibility of variable-width instructions for non-processor-intensive tasks. This means that CISC is now better than RISC. (Using the terms to loosely define Pentium as CISC and PowerPC as RISC.)
Originally it was Reduced versus Complex instruction set computer. Making simpler processors go faster is generally easier than making complex processors go faster as there is less internal state/logic to synchronise and keep track of. For any given fabrication technology, this still generally holds true. Intel managed to sidestep this principle by investing massive sums in their fab plants, effectively meaning that the fab processes being compared weren't the same.
The opposite end of the spectrum from RISC is arguably the VAX line. With this instruction set, massive complexities arose from the fact that a single instruction took so long and did so much. It was possible for timers, interrupts and "page faults" to occur midway during an instruction. This required saving a lot of internal state so that it could later be restored. There were examples of performing a given operation with a single instruction or a sequence of instructions that performed the same effect, but where the sequence achieved the join quicker because the internal implementation within the processor was able to get on with the job quicker because it was actually a simpler task being asked of it.
The idea of fixed sized instructions isn't directly coupled to the original notion of RISC, although it is only one step behind. One of the basic ideas with the original RISC processors was that an instruction should only take a single cycle to complete. So a 100MHz CPU might actually achieve 100M instructions per second. (This was often not achieved due to memory latencies, but this isn't the "fault" of the processor core). In this context, having a variable length instruction means that it is easy for the instruction decoding (especially if it requires more than one "word") to require for effort than any other aspect of executing an instruction.
There are situations where a variable width instruction might have advantages, but the argument goes that breaking the overall task down into equal sized instructions means that fetching (including caching, branch predicting, ec) and decoding these instructions becomes simpler, permitting optimisations and speed gains to be made elsewhere in the processor design.
Intel blur RISC and CISC into gray by effectively executing RISC instructions internally, even if they support the apparent decoding of CISC insructions. They only do this for legacy reasons.
Apple will never switch to IA32 (Pentium) because 32 bit processors are a dead-end and maybe have a couple years left. The reason is because they can only have a maximum of 4 GB of RAM [ (2^32)/(1 Billion) = 4.29 GB ]. This limit is very close to being reached in current desktop computers. Apple MAY at some point decide to jump to IA64 in my opinion, and I think they should. Obviously the Intel family of processors is unbeatable unless they have some sort of catastrophe happen to them. If Apple jumped on they'd be back on track. Unfortunately I don't believe IA64 is yet cheap enough for desktops.
I think this "unbeatable" assertion requires some qualification. It may be that Intel will achieve the best price/performance ratio within a suitable range of qualifications, but this is different from always achieving best p/p ratio whatever. Indeed, IA64 versus Power4 is going to be an interesting battle because Intel has bet on ILP (instruction level parallelism) whereas IBM has bet on data bandwidth. Ultimately (and today!), I think IBM's bet has more going for it. But that's if you want ultimate performance. The PC space is often characterised by people apparenntly wanting ultimate performance but actually always massively qualifiying it with severe price restrictions (such as less than 5 digits to the price).
Someone asked the difference between RISC and CISC.
First thing, there isn't that distinction anymore. RISC originally meant that the processor had fixed width instructions (so it wouldn't have to waste time asking the software how big the next instruction will be). CISC mean that the processor had variable width instructions (meaning time would have to be taken to figure out how long the next instruction is before fetching it.) However, Intel has addressed this problem by making it possible for the processor to switch to a fixed-width mode for special processor intensive purposes. The PowerPC is stuck with fixed-width and has no ability to enjoy the flexibility of variable-width instructions for non-processor-intensive tasks. This means that CISC is now better than RISC. (Using the terms to loosely define Pentium as CISC and PowerPC as RISC.)
Originally it was Reduced versus Complex instruction set computer. Making simpler processors go faster is generally easier than making complex processors go faster as there is less internal state/logic to synchronise and keep track of. For any given fabrication technology, this still generally holds true. Intel managed to sidestep this principle by investing massive sums in their fab plants, effectively meaning that the fab processes being compared weren't the same.
The opposite end of the spectrum from RISC is arguably the VAX line. With this instruction set, massive complexities arose from the fact that a single instruction took so long and did so much. It was possible for timers, interrupts and "page faults" to occur midway during an instruction. This required saving a lot of internal state so that it could later be restored. There were examples of performing a given operation with a single instruction or a sequence of instructions that performed the same effect, but where the sequence achieved the join quicker because the internal implementation within the processor was able to get on with the job quicker because it was actually a simpler task being asked of it.
The idea of fixed sized instructions isn't directly coupled to the original notion of RISC, although it is only one step behind. One of the basic ideas with the original RISC processors was that an instruction should only take a single cycle to complete. So a 100MHz CPU might actually achieve 100M instructions per second. (This was often not achieved due to memory latencies, but this isn't the "fault" of the processor core). In this context, having a variable length instruction means that it is easy for the instruction decoding (especially if it requires more than one "word") to require for effort than any other aspect of executing an instruction.
There are situations where a variable width instruction might have advantages, but the argument goes that breaking the overall task down into equal sized instructions means that fetching (including caching, branch predicting, ec) and decoding these instructions becomes simpler, permitting optimisations and speed gains to be made elsewhere in the processor design.
Intel blur RISC and CISC into gray by effectively executing RISC instructions internally, even if they support the apparent decoding of CISC insructions. They only do this for legacy reasons.
Apple will never switch to IA32 (Pentium) because 32 bit processors are a dead-end and maybe have a couple years left. The reason is because they can only have a maximum of 4 GB of RAM [ (2^32)/(1 Billion) = 4.29 GB ]. This limit is very close to being reached in current desktop computers. Apple MAY at some point decide to jump to IA64 in my opinion, and I think they should. Obviously the Intel family of processors is unbeatable unless they have some sort of catastrophe happen to them. If Apple jumped on they'd be back on track. Unfortunately I don't believe IA64 is yet cheap enough for desktops.
I think this "unbeatable" assertion requires some qualification. It may be that Intel will achieve the best price/performance ratio within a suitable range of qualifications, but this is different from always achieving best p/p ratio whatever. Indeed, IA64 versus Power4 is going to be an interesting battle because Intel has bet on ILP (instruction level parallelism) whereas IBM has bet on data bandwidth. Ultimately (and today!), I think IBM's bet has more going for it. But that's if you want ultimate performance. The PC space is often characterised by people apparenntly wanting ultimate performance but actually always massively qualifiying it with severe price restrictions (such as less than 5 digits to the price).
more...
bruinsrme
Apr 6, 08:04 AM
Medicare fraud
Defense spending
Reducing the ridiculous layers of federal, state and local government
Corporate and farm subsidies
Welfare fraud
That's a good start.
Defense spending. Lots of room there
Layers look at the layers just to get a bill passed
Subsidies lots of fraud in these two categories
Welfare it's sickening. I have relatives that are milking the system in so many ways. One is a contractor, no longer allowed to do anything on our house, regardless of the miniscual discount that is offered.
Stop the hand outs.
Defense spending
Reducing the ridiculous layers of federal, state and local government
Corporate and farm subsidies
Welfare fraud
That's a good start.
Defense spending. Lots of room there
Layers look at the layers just to get a bill passed
Subsidies lots of fraud in these two categories
Welfare it's sickening. I have relatives that are milking the system in so many ways. One is a contractor, no longer allowed to do anything on our house, regardless of the miniscual discount that is offered.
Stop the hand outs.
Tha_Sylent1
Aug 14, 09:53 AM
I'm digging those commercials...;)
more...
efoto
Sep 17, 04:39 PM
I know you're a woman and all, but how is coming back and expressing interest "borderline creepy?" I only think it's creepy that he came back the 3rd time at around the same time, on the 3rd consecutive week, knowing that she was working. The 2nd time seems okay. In fact, the 3rd time would have been ok as well..........if she was quite interested. ;)
To my own defense, the three times were not all consecutive, and the actual times of visit were all different, however they were all on a Saturday. I couldn't help my times for a while because I go to school on the east side of the state, and only went to the mall/Apple Store on weekends when I went home to see my friends/family. The first two were back-back weekends when I had stuff happening in town which brought me home, then a one week gap I stayed at school, then home again because my friend wanted to hangout and needed help shopping (because he has zero sense of fashion).
I still don't get how everyone is saying that a glance of eye-contact is "expressing interest", it happens all the time in a lot of different places, one can hardly help it.
devilot76 - But when you show up two more times and you seem to express interest-- that is borderline creepy
CanadaRAM - When you came back later and initated eye contact, it was on your terms, and that changed the whole dynamic, and took the control of the interaction out of her hands and into yours.
Lacero - Trying to, and successfully making eye contact on the 2nd and 3rd visit would have freaked me out. And I'm a guy! Making eye contact after having purchased something probably would have been the more appropriate action to take. Ah well...
Alright, so basically if I go in there, I am going to wear dark glasses and not allow her to see me, like stoop low and hide behind merchandise or something....this is getting difficult, all just to shop!
To my own defense, the three times were not all consecutive, and the actual times of visit were all different, however they were all on a Saturday. I couldn't help my times for a while because I go to school on the east side of the state, and only went to the mall/Apple Store on weekends when I went home to see my friends/family. The first two were back-back weekends when I had stuff happening in town which brought me home, then a one week gap I stayed at school, then home again because my friend wanted to hangout and needed help shopping (because he has zero sense of fashion).
I still don't get how everyone is saying that a glance of eye-contact is "expressing interest", it happens all the time in a lot of different places, one can hardly help it.
devilot76 - But when you show up two more times and you seem to express interest-- that is borderline creepy
CanadaRAM - When you came back later and initated eye contact, it was on your terms, and that changed the whole dynamic, and took the control of the interaction out of her hands and into yours.
Lacero - Trying to, and successfully making eye contact on the 2nd and 3rd visit would have freaked me out. And I'm a guy! Making eye contact after having purchased something probably would have been the more appropriate action to take. Ah well...
Alright, so basically if I go in there, I am going to wear dark glasses and not allow her to see me, like stoop low and hide behind merchandise or something....this is getting difficult, all just to shop!
Jswoosh
May 2, 12:45 PM
Yeah I never understood why the phones would have different thicknesses. The cameras are probably the same too.
more...
solvs
Sep 16, 12:33 AM
Originally posted by fourthtunz
Sounds like your not using X.2 or a New Mac.
Why do you waste your time on here?
Again, find a better deal than the New dual 867 on the Pc side, I'll buy it.
Daniel
I was speaking mostly of what others see when comparing. Believe it or not it, matters. True, numbers don't mean that much. It's all about the real-world performance. But you know what? Apple gets their butt kicked most of the time. You can quote benchmarks all you want, and for light stuff who cares? But for the hardcore stuff, Macs need to be faster and cheaper. That's all there is to it. They want to entice more Audio/Video/Image editing people, that's what they're gonna have to do.
Why is it anytime anyone critizes the Mac, they are automatically written off as trolls? Are you just going to accept whatever Apple does? They aren't perfect you know (though they do seem that way next to a PC). I've had many, many computers. Several of them were Apples. My 6400 was slow as molasess and froze all the time, but it got the job done (most of the time). I've since sold off or given away all but a custom built AMD running Windows 2000. I would have had a new G4 Tower, but my project lost funding and now I'm moving.
For the record, after I get settled in the new place, I was going to get an iBook and a Tower later (or a new PowerBook maybe). Why you ask? Because video editing in Windows sux. But it still bothers me that a very fast computer I built for a very small amount of money bests a $3,000 "SuperComputer". I'd rather use FCP (I've played with it, it's nice) instead of Premier. And OS X instead of Windows (any version, don't get me started on why XP sux so much).
But not all of us can always afford a Lexus when a Toyota will work just fine (notice I didn't say Kia or something. I didn't buy a Gateway).
Don't get me wrong, I'm actually happy with the 167 FSB, the large drive support, the dual CD Drives, etc. The Dual 1.25s look pretty zippy. But compare it to a PC (don't fool yourself, people do. Don't just tell them to buy a PC if they don't like it, cuz you know what, that's exactly what they do), it doesn't look so good. Apple is a business. WinTels are their competitors. We all have to recognize this. Apple has to keep up to stay alive in the long run.
I'd rather have a Mac, but don't fool yourself. You can build a really nice PC for less than $2,000 (with plenty of basic software that helps you crash Windows even faster) that blows the $3,000+ machines out of the water. You get a nice, out of the box experiance with OS X.2, but is it worth it for the higher price and slower performance. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
I'm just so tired of PC weenies saying Macs are all style, no substance. And like many computer users who actually use their computers, I'm torn. Speed and price, or style and stability?
Only when Real-Time is really Real-Time, only then will I be truly happy.
Sounds like your not using X.2 or a New Mac.
Why do you waste your time on here?
Again, find a better deal than the New dual 867 on the Pc side, I'll buy it.
Daniel
I was speaking mostly of what others see when comparing. Believe it or not it, matters. True, numbers don't mean that much. It's all about the real-world performance. But you know what? Apple gets their butt kicked most of the time. You can quote benchmarks all you want, and for light stuff who cares? But for the hardcore stuff, Macs need to be faster and cheaper. That's all there is to it. They want to entice more Audio/Video/Image editing people, that's what they're gonna have to do.
Why is it anytime anyone critizes the Mac, they are automatically written off as trolls? Are you just going to accept whatever Apple does? They aren't perfect you know (though they do seem that way next to a PC). I've had many, many computers. Several of them were Apples. My 6400 was slow as molasess and froze all the time, but it got the job done (most of the time). I've since sold off or given away all but a custom built AMD running Windows 2000. I would have had a new G4 Tower, but my project lost funding and now I'm moving.
For the record, after I get settled in the new place, I was going to get an iBook and a Tower later (or a new PowerBook maybe). Why you ask? Because video editing in Windows sux. But it still bothers me that a very fast computer I built for a very small amount of money bests a $3,000 "SuperComputer". I'd rather use FCP (I've played with it, it's nice) instead of Premier. And OS X instead of Windows (any version, don't get me started on why XP sux so much).
But not all of us can always afford a Lexus when a Toyota will work just fine (notice I didn't say Kia or something. I didn't buy a Gateway).
Don't get me wrong, I'm actually happy with the 167 FSB, the large drive support, the dual CD Drives, etc. The Dual 1.25s look pretty zippy. But compare it to a PC (don't fool yourself, people do. Don't just tell them to buy a PC if they don't like it, cuz you know what, that's exactly what they do), it doesn't look so good. Apple is a business. WinTels are their competitors. We all have to recognize this. Apple has to keep up to stay alive in the long run.
I'd rather have a Mac, but don't fool yourself. You can build a really nice PC for less than $2,000 (with plenty of basic software that helps you crash Windows even faster) that blows the $3,000+ machines out of the water. You get a nice, out of the box experiance with OS X.2, but is it worth it for the higher price and slower performance. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
I'm just so tired of PC weenies saying Macs are all style, no substance. And like many computer users who actually use their computers, I'm torn. Speed and price, or style and stability?
Only when Real-Time is really Real-Time, only then will I be truly happy.
CycloneWarrior
Apr 24, 04:48 PM
ATTENTION: ONLY FOR iOS 3.1X - 4.2
All right, so first off, download iMemory Enhancer from the insanelyi repo. If you don't have it, go to Cydia and then Manage>Sources>Edit>Add>repo.insanelyiph0ne.com.
After downloaded, respring your iDevice.
Then go swipe your status bar at the top for the SBSettings. If you don't have it, download it from the Search icon on Cydia.
Then when you're on the SBSettings, click "Processes", and then "Free up memory". Then, look at your available more at the bottom of the SBSettings. It should have more than it had before.
Good luck! ;)
All right, so first off, download iMemory Enhancer from the insanelyi repo. If you don't have it, go to Cydia and then Manage>Sources>Edit>Add>repo.insanelyiph0ne.com.
After downloaded, respring your iDevice.
Then go swipe your status bar at the top for the SBSettings. If you don't have it, download it from the Search icon on Cydia.
Then when you're on the SBSettings, click "Processes", and then "Free up memory". Then, look at your available more at the bottom of the SBSettings. It should have more than it had before.
Good luck! ;)
more...
-SD-
Oct 9, 08:41 PM
I'm quite looking forward to this myself too. Capcom and Konami made some absolutely fantastic side scrolling beat 'em ups during the '90s.
:apple:
:apple:
sebastianlewis
May 16, 03:16 AM
Because most Apple products have hardware AND software so you might not know where to look for your specific issue/for the information you want.
For example if I was looking up information on the iPod Touch, there will be information on the hardware and information on the software, but they will be in different places.
It is possible to guide the user to the correct information that they're looking for just with decently written Guides and smart use of redirects.
Example:
Problem: The iPod touch is a subset of the iPhone and does not entirely warrant its own article.
Solution: Automatically redirect users from /iPod_Touch to /iPhone#iPod_Touch
Problem: User wants to look up information on the iPod touch's hardware.
Solution: Redirect user from /iPod_Touch to /iPhone#iPod_Touch
Problem: User wants to look up information on the iPod touch's software.
Solution: Redirect user from /iPod_Touch to /iPhone#iPod_Touch and place an iPod Touch Software link at the start of the section which redirects to /iPhone_OS.
Err, well I'm not making suggestions that that's the exact place they should redirect or anything, but I'm making a point that it's possible to guide the user to the place that they are looking for.
Sebastian
For example if I was looking up information on the iPod Touch, there will be information on the hardware and information on the software, but they will be in different places.
It is possible to guide the user to the correct information that they're looking for just with decently written Guides and smart use of redirects.
Example:
Problem: The iPod touch is a subset of the iPhone and does not entirely warrant its own article.
Solution: Automatically redirect users from /iPod_Touch to /iPhone#iPod_Touch
Problem: User wants to look up information on the iPod touch's hardware.
Solution: Redirect user from /iPod_Touch to /iPhone#iPod_Touch
Problem: User wants to look up information on the iPod touch's software.
Solution: Redirect user from /iPod_Touch to /iPhone#iPod_Touch and place an iPod Touch Software link at the start of the section which redirects to /iPhone_OS.
Err, well I'm not making suggestions that that's the exact place they should redirect or anything, but I'm making a point that it's possible to guide the user to the place that they are looking for.
Sebastian
paintblock
May 3, 11:24 AM
what?
that's not the same thing at all. If your mom calls you on the phone and says "i can't run this new app because it says i need to update" you can walk her through it from 2000 miles away. If she's got an ipad and the next version of Angry Birds requires a new iOS version, and she doesn't have a computer, you can't talk her through that. unless you think this would work:
"OK, Mom, what you need to do is go to Best Buy, and go to one of the macs, and then open iTunes, and sync your ipad with it, and then do software update on it, and then erase your account info from the best buy mac, and that's all you have to do!"
right.
OH MY GOD THERE ARE NO OVER THE AIR UPDATES FOR iOS? WHY WOULD ANYONE BUY SUCH A DEVICE?
I never realized this, guess I'm just too used to my G2 ;)
that's not the same thing at all. If your mom calls you on the phone and says "i can't run this new app because it says i need to update" you can walk her through it from 2000 miles away. If she's got an ipad and the next version of Angry Birds requires a new iOS version, and she doesn't have a computer, you can't talk her through that. unless you think this would work:
"OK, Mom, what you need to do is go to Best Buy, and go to one of the macs, and then open iTunes, and sync your ipad with it, and then do software update on it, and then erase your account info from the best buy mac, and that's all you have to do!"
right.
OH MY GOD THERE ARE NO OVER THE AIR UPDATES FOR iOS? WHY WOULD ANYONE BUY SUCH A DEVICE?
I never realized this, guess I'm just too used to my G2 ;)
koruki
Apr 5, 05:45 PM
Oh Snap! I just got normalised :(
wolfshades
Nov 9, 10:07 AM
OK - I admit that I can a certain tendency toward paranoia :o, but...
With respect to credit cards, most eating places where I am in the UK bring a machine to the table rather than taking the card away. A PIN is required. Also, one can erase or cover the 3-digit number on the back so that you reduce the chances of your stolen card being used online. My worry is that the RFID will be so automatic ('convenient') that you'll be able to wave your phone to purchase goods or services, without any other conformation of your identity. And it is true that security so far on RFID is far from perfect: indeed, one can now purchase shielded passport covers that reduce the chance of criminal access to sensitive passport information via RFID .
EDIT: Also, didn't O2 trial something called 'Wallet' that allowed a mobile phone to be used to buy things? I wonder how the trial turned out...
Evidently, sanity prevails in the U.K. Here in Canada - not so much. Since very few places bring the credit card machine to the table, (and since I have an allergy to sketchy waiters) I make a point of walking over to it myself. :)
I really do think your concerns are valid. There are some credit card companies and banks here which have already implemented RFID technology on credit cards and phones (non are iPhones obviously). Not too sure about how the Motorola RIFD phones work but with the credit cards, you only need to wave it at a reader and the transaction is done. I'd like to see what they're security folk have to say about this.
With respect to credit cards, most eating places where I am in the UK bring a machine to the table rather than taking the card away. A PIN is required. Also, one can erase or cover the 3-digit number on the back so that you reduce the chances of your stolen card being used online. My worry is that the RFID will be so automatic ('convenient') that you'll be able to wave your phone to purchase goods or services, without any other conformation of your identity. And it is true that security so far on RFID is far from perfect: indeed, one can now purchase shielded passport covers that reduce the chance of criminal access to sensitive passport information via RFID .
EDIT: Also, didn't O2 trial something called 'Wallet' that allowed a mobile phone to be used to buy things? I wonder how the trial turned out...
Evidently, sanity prevails in the U.K. Here in Canada - not so much. Since very few places bring the credit card machine to the table, (and since I have an allergy to sketchy waiters) I make a point of walking over to it myself. :)
I really do think your concerns are valid. There are some credit card companies and banks here which have already implemented RFID technology on credit cards and phones (non are iPhones obviously). Not too sure about how the Motorola RIFD phones work but with the credit cards, you only need to wave it at a reader and the transaction is done. I'd like to see what they're security folk have to say about this.
NorCalLights
May 1, 09:16 AM
let us know frame rates etc!
My Late-2009 Mac Pro runs it on Ultra settings with no lag or stuttering. I don't know the frame rate, but it looks like it's at least 50fps to me. Very smooth, even during very large battles.
Your i7 iMac should be fine.
My Late-2009 Mac Pro runs it on Ultra settings with no lag or stuttering. I don't know the frame rate, but it looks like it's at least 50fps to me. Very smooth, even during very large battles.
Your i7 iMac should be fine.
BornAgainMac
Apr 5, 12:21 PM
I don't like the bar of soap design like the old iPhones. Prefer the iPhone 4 with the glass back and thin design.
Sminman86
Apr 5, 09:52 AM
"Wipe yourself off, your bleeding."
Screen bleeds on the bottom left hand corner. My only gripe.
This device is amazing.
Screen bleeds on the bottom left hand corner. My only gripe.
This device is amazing.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar