OllyW
May 5, 02:44 PM
Where did they say in the website that you need to buy antivirus software?
You don't need to buy antivirus software.
You don't need to buy antivirus software.
Thomas Veil
Apr 9, 01:53 PM
Considering we have evidence to suggest PP workers aiding and abetting pimps and child prostitutes (fake) in acquiring abortion I don't see how lying and doctoring documents is above them. A lie from the physician and the paperwork for that abortion getting "misplaced" are all it takes.
Also I'm very surprised at only one website "exposing" her and a couple sites commenting on it. Abby Johnson lying would come out as a bang not a whimper.I don't know how many people have even ever heard of Abby Johnson, so I doubt anything she says would come out with a bang.
Another website asserts that neither witnesses nor paperwork (http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/flashback-abby-johnson�s-suspicious-conversion-anti-choice-movement) seem to back up Johnson's story.
Also I'm very surprised at only one website "exposing" her and a couple sites commenting on it. Abby Johnson lying would come out as a bang not a whimper.I don't know how many people have even ever heard of Abby Johnson, so I doubt anything she says would come out with a bang.
Another website asserts that neither witnesses nor paperwork (http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/flashback-abby-johnson�s-suspicious-conversion-anti-choice-movement) seem to back up Johnson's story.
GFLPraxis
Apr 5, 04:52 PM
Fantastic. Apple should have Thunderbolt across most of their Mac line by the time this comes out on the iPhone 5/iPad 3, and most new PCs will have USB 3.
Super-high-speed syncing, plus possibly external devices due to Thunderbolt's daisy chain ability?
It could make an iPad/iPhone accessories market of Thunderbolt devices that pushes adoption...
Super-high-speed syncing, plus possibly external devices due to Thunderbolt's daisy chain ability?
It could make an iPad/iPhone accessories market of Thunderbolt devices that pushes adoption...
Popeye206
May 2, 03:15 PM
Not sure if this has been asked... but does it blend? :p
more...
Cabbit
Apr 5, 06:03 PM
Yep, it's those pesky 25MB images and 1080P video that keep me at my desk with my iMac. I would love to be able to touch up my full-sized images on the iPad. Give it 5 years.
I don't think it needs 5 years, the hardware is already powerful enough to handle image editing and sorting it just needs a well designed app and someway of assessing wireless storage.
I don't think it needs 5 years, the hardware is already powerful enough to handle image editing and sorting it just needs a well designed app and someway of assessing wireless storage.
kiljoy616
Apr 15, 12:05 AM
I like the mop behind him. Is he the janitor of the data center?
hahahahaha good one.
Liquid on isle 4 came to mind. :rolleyes:
hahahahaha good one.
Liquid on isle 4 came to mind. :rolleyes:
more...
lolnick
Mar 11, 02:19 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Northpark is reaching 100
Northpark is reaching 100
springscansing
May 6, 01:29 AM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Chill out, springscansing. Either this guy is a troll, and not worth it, or he's actually looking for discussion and not a flamefest.
Give him a chance.
Must bash troll, must bash troll!
Honestly, just looking for something to do while I debug this stupid ass program. Takes about 5 minutes between results, so I get boredish.
Chill out, springscansing. Either this guy is a troll, and not worth it, or he's actually looking for discussion and not a flamefest.
Give him a chance.
Must bash troll, must bash troll!
Honestly, just looking for something to do while I debug this stupid ass program. Takes about 5 minutes between results, so I get boredish.
more...
robbieduncan
Sep 25, 10:55 AM
The site has been updated!
http://www.apple.com/aperture/
Direct link to the "What's New" page (http://www.apple.com/aperture/newfeatures/index.html)
http://www.apple.com/aperture/
Direct link to the "What's New" page (http://www.apple.com/aperture/newfeatures/index.html)
coder12
Mar 25, 09:39 AM
Second that.
Motion passed. Court dismissed?
Motion passed. Court dismissed?
more...
MorphingDragon
Apr 15, 08:36 AM
still cheaper than a lot of the competition. before we went to sql 2005 we looked at Oracle. by the time you bought the add on packs it was almost $1 million for our installation. SQL was 1/4 that.
AD might be a bit expensive but the AD forests people created in Windows 2000 can be upgraded every version with minimal issues and it works out of the box. with other products you first have to spend months creating your schema, pray it doesn't break when used with other products and upgrading can be a big PITA. AD is the apple of corporate IT. you don't need a team of geeks toiling away for months to code a ldap schema, it just works out of the box
1. You aren't looking very hard if your choices became MSSQL vs OracleDB.
2. If you spend months creating your LDAP or even AD schema/map, you need to go back to your clients/customer/contractee/er and do some proper planning.
3. AD was quickly dumped by the likes of Wall Street and Cox Industries. AD is a solution, not the Apple of Corporate IT.
AD might be a bit expensive but the AD forests people created in Windows 2000 can be upgraded every version with minimal issues and it works out of the box. with other products you first have to spend months creating your schema, pray it doesn't break when used with other products and upgrading can be a big PITA. AD is the apple of corporate IT. you don't need a team of geeks toiling away for months to code a ldap schema, it just works out of the box
1. You aren't looking very hard if your choices became MSSQL vs OracleDB.
2. If you spend months creating your LDAP or even AD schema/map, you need to go back to your clients/customer/contractee/er and do some proper planning.
3. AD was quickly dumped by the likes of Wall Street and Cox Industries. AD is a solution, not the Apple of Corporate IT.
King Cobra
Sep 14, 07:08 AM
>(MacBandit) First of all what do you consider great boot times? Not that this matters a lot. I have a new Dual Ghz/DDR and it starts from cold boot to login in screen in 27secs with 10.2 and from login to operating finder is nearly instantaneous.
With 10.2, sure, boot time on the Mac has significantly improved. But I've noticed that with the PCs at PHHS the PCs boot in under a minute. But, just this past week I thought I logged out of one of the P3s and I actually restarted it. The restart to log-in, then to the OS was approximately the same as you said, MB. What would a computer with 3x/4x the GHz seem like?
>Second of all as I have stated before the true reason Mhz doesn't matter is because something like %98 of all computer users are not power users these are the people that will go buy a new computer tomorrow and if there is a 2.8Ghz computer sitting next to a 800Mhz computer they couldn't care they're going to buy the cheap one.
>(MacBandit, in a previous post) The people that really desire the speed at least most of them know the difference between Mhz and overall system speed.
My entire previous post, starting from the first lengthy paragraph was trying to explain why MHz doesn't matter. I agree with your point of view, but I am trying to expand the MHz/GHz speeds of a G4 to how it would compare against a P4 of ≈ same speed. My post had approximations, so that's why I say approximately equal to, not =. But my point is that the G4 can actually surpass the P4 at 3 or 4GHz speeds if the right apps are used.
>They don't even care how much ram it has. I know this because I went computer shopping with my boss for work(yes for a PC). He wanted my help. Well little help I was he bought the cheapest computer he could get with 64MB of Ram I suggested we upgrade it later and he agreed well that was 2 years ago still it sits with 64MB of RAM in it. Oh and I might add it still has all the stickers on the front of it.
Well I didn't mention RAM, but I will now. Try running OS X (even 10.1) on ANY computer with 128MB of RAM or less. I have with my iMac 233 (w/64MB of RAM) and my iBook 467 (with 128MB). The iMac was a complete drag. My iBook is rather slow, but it works fine. My Cube G4 has 1GB of RAM and must be at least 2 or 3 times faster than my iBook, depending on what tasks I perform.
>These people don't care about this stuff all it's used for is mail and the occasional websearch and most people are like this.
Now this brings up a different issue (as well as MHz): OS Stability. Sure, XP may have fixed *some* :snicker: of the errors from older versions of Win. Yet it still isn't totally stable.
Wherever there is a PC for that stuff, there is a low-end PowerMac for them. It's called an iMac. :cool:
With 10.2, sure, boot time on the Mac has significantly improved. But I've noticed that with the PCs at PHHS the PCs boot in under a minute. But, just this past week I thought I logged out of one of the P3s and I actually restarted it. The restart to log-in, then to the OS was approximately the same as you said, MB. What would a computer with 3x/4x the GHz seem like?
>Second of all as I have stated before the true reason Mhz doesn't matter is because something like %98 of all computer users are not power users these are the people that will go buy a new computer tomorrow and if there is a 2.8Ghz computer sitting next to a 800Mhz computer they couldn't care they're going to buy the cheap one.
>(MacBandit, in a previous post) The people that really desire the speed at least most of them know the difference between Mhz and overall system speed.
My entire previous post, starting from the first lengthy paragraph was trying to explain why MHz doesn't matter. I agree with your point of view, but I am trying to expand the MHz/GHz speeds of a G4 to how it would compare against a P4 of ≈ same speed. My post had approximations, so that's why I say approximately equal to, not =. But my point is that the G4 can actually surpass the P4 at 3 or 4GHz speeds if the right apps are used.
>They don't even care how much ram it has. I know this because I went computer shopping with my boss for work(yes for a PC). He wanted my help. Well little help I was he bought the cheapest computer he could get with 64MB of Ram I suggested we upgrade it later and he agreed well that was 2 years ago still it sits with 64MB of RAM in it. Oh and I might add it still has all the stickers on the front of it.
Well I didn't mention RAM, but I will now. Try running OS X (even 10.1) on ANY computer with 128MB of RAM or less. I have with my iMac 233 (w/64MB of RAM) and my iBook 467 (with 128MB). The iMac was a complete drag. My iBook is rather slow, but it works fine. My Cube G4 has 1GB of RAM and must be at least 2 or 3 times faster than my iBook, depending on what tasks I perform.
>These people don't care about this stuff all it's used for is mail and the occasional websearch and most people are like this.
Now this brings up a different issue (as well as MHz): OS Stability. Sure, XP may have fixed *some* :snicker: of the errors from older versions of Win. Yet it still isn't totally stable.
Wherever there is a PC for that stuff, there is a low-end PowerMac for them. It's called an iMac. :cool:
more...
tcreasy
Apr 25, 02:06 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Apple Bitch? Really? Lovely name.
Apple Bitch? Really? Lovely name.
JoeG4
Apr 22, 05:51 PM
I'll take the Fonz mantra here: If you're cool, you know it and don't have to tell everyone. I think the guy that wrote that article is probably a moron in a depressed state trying to make himself feel better.
more...
AppleScruff1
Apr 22, 05:21 PM
The report found that 67% of Mac users have a college or advanced degree, as opposed to 54% of PC users. Mac loyalists are 80% more likely than PC users to be vegetarians, and, unlike PC fans, would rather ride a Vespa scooter than a Harley.
Mac users also are more likely to describe themselves as computer-savvy and "early adopters."
1. Real men ride Harleys.
And Mac users consider themselves as computer savy, LOL! They prefer a simple OS that a monkey could use. Now that's savy.
Mac users also are more likely to describe themselves as computer-savvy and "early adopters."
1. Real men ride Harleys.
And Mac users consider themselves as computer savy, LOL! They prefer a simple OS that a monkey could use. Now that's savy.
robbieduncan
Sep 27, 09:35 AM
I hope it fixes the USB connection to Canon cameras. They broke it with 10.4.7. I'm still booting from my portable backup drive when shooting tethered (looks really pro on location).
I dread the going-backwards-sytem-reinstall BS tho, so that's what I have been doing.
My EOS 400D works fine (in tethered mode as well as just transfering from the memory card)?
I dread the going-backwards-sytem-reinstall BS tho, so that's what I have been doing.
My EOS 400D works fine (in tethered mode as well as just transfering from the memory card)?
more...
ro2nie
Aug 14, 10:22 AM
Yay! 20 more ads
Oh here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rjpn3L3bSJQ&mode=related&search=) I found some new "get a mac" ads
Oh here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rjpn3L3bSJQ&mode=related&search=) I found some new "get a mac" ads
crazy dave
Apr 5, 05:41 PM
The problem with CR's iPhone 4 report was not that they didn't recommend the iPhone 4 when it originally came out on AT&T but that they then reiterated their "Not recommend" labeling for the Verizon iPhone 4 for having the same 'death grip' issue. They did this despite that the Verizon version had a different antenna design. Anandtech, who were amongst the first to quantify the 'death grip' issue for the AT&T version, showed that in fact the VZ iPhone 4 fared no worse than other smartphones. For the original iPhone 4, CR felt while it was great in many categories, it's antenna issue was too great a problem in their eyes. One could argue that they overstated the problem given that most users didn't seem to mind, but their position of "Not recommended" is not unjustifiable for the AT&T iPhone 4. However, CR clearly screwed up on the VZ iPhone 4.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/03/technology/verizon_iphone/index.htm
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4163/verizon-iphone-4-review/
http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/03/technology/verizon_iphone/index.htm
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4163/verizon-iphone-4-review/
Dreadnought
Jun 23, 05:50 PM
Cool redeye, thanks for the update! And it's here about the same, the heat that is. Too hot to get some sleep. So, installing the widget at 00:48 CET is the best thing to do! :D And I think it's time to get this baby out of its Beta status and make it version 1.05. After this update, you have earned your rest, for the weekend that is :p
LethalWolfe
Apr 22, 07:50 PM
I believe both the current versions of Avid Media Composer and Adobe Premiere Pro can edit 3D.
Lethal
Lethal
Master-D
Mar 14, 03:34 PM
Nice one! :)
Thanks. I found out my D700 & 70-200mm VR ii is indeed weather proof at this match. Not much fun getting such an expensive toy wet for the first time, but nice to know it works.
This was a pretty unusual opportunity. I find you end up taking a lot of similar pictures at these games, so when you have an interesting setting with the mud, and the interesting contrast of the new player, it's a rare and nice opportunity. Happened fast though, his team mates had covered him with hand prints in seconds.
Thanks. I found out my D700 & 70-200mm VR ii is indeed weather proof at this match. Not much fun getting such an expensive toy wet for the first time, but nice to know it works.
This was a pretty unusual opportunity. I find you end up taking a lot of similar pictures at these games, so when you have an interesting setting with the mud, and the interesting contrast of the new player, it's a rare and nice opportunity. Happened fast though, his team mates had covered him with hand prints in seconds.
BigDukeSix
Mar 25, 07:46 PM
Apple marketing at it's best. I got one, but did I need one? NO!
But, I did get something I don't really need at 40% off. WINNING!! LOL!
But, I did get something I don't really need at 40% off. WINNING!! LOL!
xUKHCx
Jan 9, 08:33 AM
As per the FAQ (http://guides.macrumors.com/Help:MacRumors_FAQ#What_do_I_do_about_annoying_ads.3F)
If you could post a screenshot and the URL the advert goes to then we can see about getting it removed.
MacRumors uses an advertising service that supplies ads from a pool. We do not select the specific ads shown or the specific advertisers who participate.
If you find a particular ad especially annoying (e.g., an ad that is oversized, obscures the page, moves around, or has sound), let us know by posting a screenshot in our Site and Forum Feedback forum and telling us the URL it links to. Using this information we can ask to have it removed from the ad pool.
If you find all ads annoying, remember that ads support the site and allow us to provide free news, rumors, and discussion, and that ads are suppressed for paid members. See How do I contribute to MacRumors.com? above.
If you could post a screenshot and the URL the advert goes to then we can see about getting it removed.
MacRumors uses an advertising service that supplies ads from a pool. We do not select the specific ads shown or the specific advertisers who participate.
If you find a particular ad especially annoying (e.g., an ad that is oversized, obscures the page, moves around, or has sound), let us know by posting a screenshot in our Site and Forum Feedback forum and telling us the URL it links to. Using this information we can ask to have it removed from the ad pool.
If you find all ads annoying, remember that ads support the site and allow us to provide free news, rumors, and discussion, and that ads are suppressed for paid members. See How do I contribute to MacRumors.com? above.
thatisme
Mar 29, 07:24 AM
robbieduncan is right-on with his explanation, you're making incorrect claims: focal lengths are independent of the size of the sensor, a 50 mm lens will be a 50 mm lens on a medium format body, a full frame analog body or an APS-C-sized dslr. What changes is the field of view, which is an angle. It is this angle which is different on the above-mentioned cameras. The reason why people write something to the effect `a 50 mm lens on a crop body is equivalent to 75~80 mm lens on a full frame body' is that we've gotten used to associating focal lengths on 35 mm bodies to FOVs. Sort of like Americans got used to measuring distances in miles rather than kilometers.
which is why I have not made the claim that 200mm on one lens is not equal to 200mm on the other (by actual measurements). What I have claimed is that the EFFECTIVE (perceived) focal length is different, when angle is taken into effect (the size of the sensor in relation to the size of the rear element).
YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF. on the EF lens, the 200mm assumes you are using the ENTIRE image circle of the lens, which you are not. You ARE using the ENTIRE image circle on the EF-S lens, which is a True 200mm for that camera. You have to use the ENTIRE image circle to get a true measure of the focal length. when you use only a portion of that image circle, you have to apply the FOVCF to get the EFFECTIVE focal length.
Your last 2 sentences actually prove my point for me. Everything in today's photography arsenal (at least in DSLR) is based on the old film standard of 35mm image recording space (or sensor size). It is you standard of measure. It has not changed with Digital. This is why we have conversion factors and have to talk of EFFECTIVE focal lengths.
which is why I have not made the claim that 200mm on one lens is not equal to 200mm on the other (by actual measurements). What I have claimed is that the EFFECTIVE (perceived) focal length is different, when angle is taken into effect (the size of the sensor in relation to the size of the rear element).
YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF. on the EF lens, the 200mm assumes you are using the ENTIRE image circle of the lens, which you are not. You ARE using the ENTIRE image circle on the EF-S lens, which is a True 200mm for that camera. You have to use the ENTIRE image circle to get a true measure of the focal length. when you use only a portion of that image circle, you have to apply the FOVCF to get the EFFECTIVE focal length.
Your last 2 sentences actually prove my point for me. Everything in today's photography arsenal (at least in DSLR) is based on the old film standard of 35mm image recording space (or sensor size). It is you standard of measure. It has not changed with Digital. This is why we have conversion factors and have to talk of EFFECTIVE focal lengths.
No comments:
Post a Comment