AppleMc
Mar 15, 10:25 AM
Stonebriar had 15 iPads this morning and a line of about 50.
rgs3
Apr 23, 11:35 PM
Backlit keyboard would take it to another level. Theres just something very awesome about the backlit keyboards. I dont need to look at the keys to type, I just like the esthetics of it all. I would also like to see current gen processors in a current gen model. The last thing that I could ask for would be edge to edge display with zero bezel around the display and trim up around the keyboard. Thats all extra bulk as far as Im concerned.
rumorguy
Apr 4, 05:08 PM
To the left of Steve is a reflection in the window, you see two men--one is holding a reader board--probably the scrip that Steve is using. Or is it Woz, with his new Ipad? :apple:
phillipduran
Feb 18, 02:47 PM
Just think, if they all got food poisoning and died - America would be brought to its knees. For a few days.
Nah, American leadership weathers stuff like that with ease. It's one of the effective things about our military leadership too.
Nah, American leadership weathers stuff like that with ease. It's one of the effective things about our military leadership too.
more...
Kenrik
Mar 2, 08:19 AM
Um.. All of that looks the same. I really don't see many changes since Snow Leopard Server.. I will feel relieved as long as everything is still there. It all works pretty well once you know what you're doing.
I don't want to have to switch back to linux server admin... that's a nightmare.
More or less OSX server has always just been normal OSX with some server bits thrown in. Most of the packages are just open source unix/linux programs with a GUI on top.
You can install Apache and configure it yourself on a normal OSX install but.. I prefer the GUI rather then sort through httpd.conf in nano or vi.
I don't want to have to switch back to linux server admin... that's a nightmare.
More or less OSX server has always just been normal OSX with some server bits thrown in. Most of the packages are just open source unix/linux programs with a GUI on top.
You can install Apache and configure it yourself on a normal OSX install but.. I prefer the GUI rather then sort through httpd.conf in nano or vi.
wtfk
Nov 14, 08:08 PM
They were for it before they were against it. Seems I've heard that somewhere before.
more...
Kyle?
Apr 17, 07:06 AM
Interesting thought though. His rejection said it was for ridiculing public figures, but their policy rejects defamatory material. There is certainly a fine line, but the line most certainly exists. You can ridicule someone till the cows come home without engaging in defamation. The distinction is probably too difficult for anyone without extensive legal background to make on a regular basis and in a timely manner.
Apple should just drop the defamation clause, which may be difficult for them to do to.
I'd say Fiore flirts with that line often enough, Pulitzer winner or no. I don't know the legal technicalities, but I would think Apple would do themselves a favor by letting the lawyers figure out what's defamation and what isn't. I can't see how they could be held responsible for someone else's words, but I'm not a lawyer.
Apple should just drop the defamation clause, which may be difficult for them to do to.
I'd say Fiore flirts with that line often enough, Pulitzer winner or no. I don't know the legal technicalities, but I would think Apple would do themselves a favor by letting the lawyers figure out what's defamation and what isn't. I can't see how they could be held responsible for someone else's words, but I'm not a lawyer.
rdowns
Dec 7, 05:22 PM
Sad that she died so young. I thought she handled her battle with cancer and her husband's affair with grace and dignity.
Well said.
Well said.
more...
Gus
Jul 14, 02:02 AM
See this post:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?threadid=27709
Regards,
Gus
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?threadid=27709
Regards,
Gus
Mactagonist
Mar 26, 04:31 PM
Judging by the body language I'd venture to guess whatever it was they were talking about Jobs had the upper hand.
Yeah, Schmidt has open and receptive body language in one pic. But in the one with his legs crossed he looks like he is not happy with what he is hearing.
I though steve drove a SLR like a true baller? What is this SL55 crap, what is he a dentist? :cool:
Yeah, Schmidt has open and receptive body language in one pic. But in the one with his legs crossed he looks like he is not happy with what he is hearing.
I though steve drove a SLR like a true baller? What is this SL55 crap, what is he a dentist? :cool:
more...
Eraserhead
Jun 11, 04:41 PM
Right its just the Guides category to go, so I'm going to stop for today.
eenu
Sep 19, 07:20 PM
What about a firmware update for the 24" iMac?
and why would this be needed?
and why would this be needed?
more...
Arcus
Nov 14, 09:07 AM
I know who Ill be flying with. Nice.
VulchR
Mar 24, 06:11 AM
I do wish people in this forum stop referring to 'the military' as though they were some sort of alien life-forms. 'The military' are people, and even if you happen to be in the oh-so-unique moral high ground of opposing war and violence from your comfortable desk, soldiers deserve the best kit we can afford to give them. Ditto for the returning veterans. And their families.
more...
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.
kiljoy616
Apr 17, 08:17 AM
I can't say I am a fan of Adobe Flash as I am a big supporter of an open web, but I must say that if cross-compiled apps are inferior then the customers in the app store will certainly vote with their dollars to favor the natively written apps.
You really don't know much about consumers do you. You have a lot of psychology to learn, the customer is for the most part dumb and does not vote with their dollars, if they do then you have a really bad marketing department, what a utopian believe haha.
You must remember a product of say 100 dollars is not about selling to the whole world but just a percentage of it, a good product or a bad product its all the same for marketing its about the perception. Just look around your world its full of bad and really bad products and there are still people buying them. Palm sold for years good products and then started selling crap and yet people bought, even today Palm still sells and its their Marketing that really has gone down.
Apple not only makes good things but they have a top notch marketing department. ;)
You really don't know much about consumers do you. You have a lot of psychology to learn, the customer is for the most part dumb and does not vote with their dollars, if they do then you have a really bad marketing department, what a utopian believe haha.
You must remember a product of say 100 dollars is not about selling to the whole world but just a percentage of it, a good product or a bad product its all the same for marketing its about the perception. Just look around your world its full of bad and really bad products and there are still people buying them. Palm sold for years good products and then started selling crap and yet people bought, even today Palm still sells and its their Marketing that really has gone down.
Apple not only makes good things but they have a top notch marketing department. ;)
more...
gopher
Sep 28, 03:04 PM
Every update I see people come on Apple Discussions claim that the update fried their computer. Nothing can be farther from the truth. Without certain precautions data corruption, directory issues, font issues, incompatible drivers, will make an update look bad on the surface. That's why I wrote this FAQ to prevent most upgrade problems. Please everyone take a look at it before you upgrade and decide for yourself when you are ready and finished with those precautions:
http://www.macmaps.com/upgradefaq.html
http://www.macmaps.com/upgradefaq.html
ExoticFish
Apr 2, 04:18 PM
i think it's been cool for the couple of "design" documents i've done with it. i made a fake newspaper and a form for work. i'm happy with it but i'm not trying to do anything too complex either.
Tones2
Apr 12, 04:48 PM
Not a good survey. The stats seem wrong based on what I'm seeing everywhere else. 2000 people is not a large enough sample set. And although the 40% higher demand makes sense given the full year that took place between introduction of "tablets" as a concept versus as an established product, it means very little. These Apple speculator people need real jobs.
ghostlyorb
Apr 14, 04:09 PM
Hopefully this is a sign that the new data center is opening soon!
hayesk
Mar 28, 09:41 AM
Anyone else thinks that Apple is readying the merger between iOS and MacOSX, at last?
I mean, why would the OSX get sliders instead of buttons (-> finder, etc)? And how would otherwise be the file-sharing in a cloud-centric iOS possible?
Looking quite forward to it!
What remains to clear how they would deal with the custom Apple ARM vs Intel chipsets programming issue (just as ppc and intel?), programming of apps (.app vs .ipa) ...
Oh, a lot more remains to be clear than that. Like the fact that MacOS X and iOS have completely different UI layers, Window managers, input methods, memory systems, etc.
People often think a few UI elements are all that make up the OS, but there is so much more happening under the hood, and in the way the user interacts with the machine, that it's pretty clear that a merge between desktop and touch-based OSes are a loooong way off, if ever.
I mean, why would the OSX get sliders instead of buttons (-> finder, etc)? And how would otherwise be the file-sharing in a cloud-centric iOS possible?
Looking quite forward to it!
What remains to clear how they would deal with the custom Apple ARM vs Intel chipsets programming issue (just as ppc and intel?), programming of apps (.app vs .ipa) ...
Oh, a lot more remains to be clear than that. Like the fact that MacOS X and iOS have completely different UI layers, Window managers, input methods, memory systems, etc.
People often think a few UI elements are all that make up the OS, but there is so much more happening under the hood, and in the way the user interacts with the machine, that it's pretty clear that a merge between desktop and touch-based OSes are a loooong way off, if ever.
Blue Velvet
Oct 21, 05:15 PM
If you see a svelte, chic, gorgeous and charismatic woman surrounded by a ton of admirers...
...it won't be me. :p
If I'm there, I shall be wearing black, as all well-dressed OS X releases usually are. ;)
...it won't be me. :p
If I'm there, I shall be wearing black, as all well-dressed OS X releases usually are. ;)
chrfr
Mar 29, 09:30 AM
Never said it was
But you are describing totally incorrect behavior of how EF and EF-S lenses work.
But you are describing totally incorrect behavior of how EF and EF-S lenses work.
chisnic
Apr 12, 04:38 PM
It does. You need to go into Tools --> Synch Services and enable calendar sync. I then restarted Outlook and iTunes, synced my iPhone (Info --> Advanced --> Replace info on this iPhone) and everything was there when I went into the calendar.
:apple:
EDIT: It also keeps the category colours from Outlook which is awesome, as Entourage never managed to do this.
Well, I just recently switched from Windows to Mac OS X. In Windows, one is able to sync Outlook through iTunes with the iPhone. But in OS X, iTunes shows only the sync options with iCal and Address Book contacts, nothing from Outlook. I'm probably missing something here and would appreciate some enlightenment. Thanks to anyone in advance!
:apple:
EDIT: It also keeps the category colours from Outlook which is awesome, as Entourage never managed to do this.
Well, I just recently switched from Windows to Mac OS X. In Windows, one is able to sync Outlook through iTunes with the iPhone. But in OS X, iTunes shows only the sync options with iCal and Address Book contacts, nothing from Outlook. I'm probably missing something here and would appreciate some enlightenment. Thanks to anyone in advance!
No comments:
Post a Comment