80s Fan
Jan 9, 03:31 PM
I am now getting no notifications from the FB app. No badges, no sounds, no nothing. I even deleted the app and re-downloaded it but still am not getting any type of pn. Has this happened to anyone else?
Tomorrow
Apr 28, 10:10 PM
Now we also know that tractor trailers run roughly double passenger cars on tire pressure, but the wheels are also bigger.
True.
For that reason, let's assume that the amount of surface area of each tire in contact with the road is consistent across the two.
Incorrect assumption - as a result,
That means that the tractor trailer exerts the 3.25 times the pressure with each tire compared to the prius.
...your math is wrong.
60 psi is 60 psi, period. If the tire pressure in the truck is 60 psi, then the pressure on the road is 60 psi. You can't double the tire pressure and triple the pressure on the road as a result - you'd have a truck that either bounced, or sank. Newton's laws (net vertical force = 0 for no acceleration in the vertical direction) have to be met.
Add in the fact that the damage done by pressure is likely not additive
This may be true - further analysis is needed. Either way, concrete roads (like interstates and state highways) are much more resistant to this type of wear than asphalt. And again, the real culprits are soil conditions and thermal expansion/contraction.
True.
For that reason, let's assume that the amount of surface area of each tire in contact with the road is consistent across the two.
Incorrect assumption - as a result,
That means that the tractor trailer exerts the 3.25 times the pressure with each tire compared to the prius.
...your math is wrong.
60 psi is 60 psi, period. If the tire pressure in the truck is 60 psi, then the pressure on the road is 60 psi. You can't double the tire pressure and triple the pressure on the road as a result - you'd have a truck that either bounced, or sank. Newton's laws (net vertical force = 0 for no acceleration in the vertical direction) have to be met.
Add in the fact that the damage done by pressure is likely not additive
This may be true - further analysis is needed. Either way, concrete roads (like interstates and state highways) are much more resistant to this type of wear than asphalt. And again, the real culprits are soil conditions and thermal expansion/contraction.
Di9it8
Oct 21, 11:28 PM
But then we can all go to the pub :D
Or should that be the Leopard Lounge ;-) http://www.leopard-lounge.com/
Anyhow I hope to be there, maybe we should organise a mini flash mob or we should all wear Leopard scarves, bandanas etc ;)
Or should that be the Leopard Lounge ;-) http://www.leopard-lounge.com/
Anyhow I hope to be there, maybe we should organise a mini flash mob or we should all wear Leopard scarves, bandanas etc ;)
MacCoaster
Sep 20, 11:14 PM
Originally posted by avkills
Microsoft has not beat Apple as far as a 64bit consumer OS goes. Name one consumer chip that is 64bit. Thank you. Carry on.
Also, I think NT is limited to 4 processors unless they have updated that recently. Clustering is not the same as a multi-processor machine. Unix scales better than NT, just deal with it. Apple could easily make a rack server that had 16 processors, with a kick arse OpenGL card and teach SGI a lesson. They don't have the market for that though...yet!
-mark
The Intel Itanium. Granted, it's not for consumers per se, but it's still for high-end consumers. Compare that with Power Mac G4s.
NT can do up to 32 processors per machine as of the Windows .NET family.
Microsoft has not beat Apple as far as a 64bit consumer OS goes. Name one consumer chip that is 64bit. Thank you. Carry on.
Also, I think NT is limited to 4 processors unless they have updated that recently. Clustering is not the same as a multi-processor machine. Unix scales better than NT, just deal with it. Apple could easily make a rack server that had 16 processors, with a kick arse OpenGL card and teach SGI a lesson. They don't have the market for that though...yet!
-mark
The Intel Itanium. Granted, it's not for consumers per se, but it's still for high-end consumers. Compare that with Power Mac G4s.
NT can do up to 32 processors per machine as of the Windows .NET family.
more...
Canadian Guy
Jan 6, 09:43 PM
When I receive a push notification through Facebook on my iPhone, my iPhone won't vibrate (but only the message appears). Does you iPhone vibrate when you receive a Facebook push notification?
Tommyg117
Sep 25, 10:36 PM
whenever i hear podcast i immediately think of apple, so why is apple shutting down free advertising?
Very good point, I associate it with Apple as well. I think it is a part of iTunes kind of like a cd in relation to a best buy.
Very good point, I associate it with Apple as well. I think it is a part of iTunes kind of like a cd in relation to a best buy.
more...
BigBeast
Apr 26, 07:58 PM
Probably because you can actually buy devices with USB 3.0, and at a reasonable price.
I think Thunderbolt is a great idea, and it would be super on the MacBook Air (personally I'd love to see a Thunderbolt Gigabit Ethernet adapter), which is why I named it in the above list, but USB 3.0 is much more widespread and so the peripherals are cheaper.
Compare it to FireWire 800 devices: It would have been great to have an external drive with that connection but I never bought one because in the end it was too much of a price difference. It's a lot easier to put up with USB 2 speeds if it costs 40% less than FW800.
I hope Apple and intel will push Thunderbolt agressively and won't let it become a niche port like the way FW800 ended up. So yes, I do think there is a high risk of it becoming the next firewire.
Personally I'd prefer both but I don't see it happening in the next MBA, not until intel integrates it in their chipset.
USB 3 is more widespread than Thunderbolt (since nothing is yet on the market for TB) but saying "much more" is a bit of a misnomer. USB 2.0 is WIDESPREAD. USB 3.0 has actually shown a very slow uptake by computer and peripheral manufacturers.
You can't compare FW 800 to TB. Here's why: FW 800 while a better IO, was only slightly better than USB 2. Therefore, with the added cost of FW 800 and the minimal increase in performance over USB 2, FW wasn't going to flourish.
However, comparing USB 3 to TB is like comparing VHS to Blu-ray. TB is REMARKABLY faster than USB 3. Couple that with the fact that TB allows for simutaneous transfer in BOTH DIRECTIONS at consistently close to theoretical speeds of 10 Gb/s. USB however as always, fluctuates in speed and almost NEVER reaches close to theoretical speeds and is only one way transfer. TB can daisy chain up to FOUR 1080p HD streams simultaneously (if I recall correctly) while I don't think USB 3 can do even 1.
Add this to the fact that Intel WANTS this tech to reach mass adoption and will make the tech available at cheap prices, it's a no brainer that TB WILL be adopted. Even IF TB ended up being a $20 or so royalty like FW, it so easily outclasses USB 3 that I would readily pay for it.
So like I said in my first post, why have USB 3 on a list before TB? Why have USB 3 at all? TB is where it's at.
I think Thunderbolt is a great idea, and it would be super on the MacBook Air (personally I'd love to see a Thunderbolt Gigabit Ethernet adapter), which is why I named it in the above list, but USB 3.0 is much more widespread and so the peripherals are cheaper.
Compare it to FireWire 800 devices: It would have been great to have an external drive with that connection but I never bought one because in the end it was too much of a price difference. It's a lot easier to put up with USB 2 speeds if it costs 40% less than FW800.
I hope Apple and intel will push Thunderbolt agressively and won't let it become a niche port like the way FW800 ended up. So yes, I do think there is a high risk of it becoming the next firewire.
Personally I'd prefer both but I don't see it happening in the next MBA, not until intel integrates it in their chipset.
USB 3 is more widespread than Thunderbolt (since nothing is yet on the market for TB) but saying "much more" is a bit of a misnomer. USB 2.0 is WIDESPREAD. USB 3.0 has actually shown a very slow uptake by computer and peripheral manufacturers.
You can't compare FW 800 to TB. Here's why: FW 800 while a better IO, was only slightly better than USB 2. Therefore, with the added cost of FW 800 and the minimal increase in performance over USB 2, FW wasn't going to flourish.
However, comparing USB 3 to TB is like comparing VHS to Blu-ray. TB is REMARKABLY faster than USB 3. Couple that with the fact that TB allows for simutaneous transfer in BOTH DIRECTIONS at consistently close to theoretical speeds of 10 Gb/s. USB however as always, fluctuates in speed and almost NEVER reaches close to theoretical speeds and is only one way transfer. TB can daisy chain up to FOUR 1080p HD streams simultaneously (if I recall correctly) while I don't think USB 3 can do even 1.
Add this to the fact that Intel WANTS this tech to reach mass adoption and will make the tech available at cheap prices, it's a no brainer that TB WILL be adopted. Even IF TB ended up being a $20 or so royalty like FW, it so easily outclasses USB 3 that I would readily pay for it.
So like I said in my first post, why have USB 3 on a list before TB? Why have USB 3 at all? TB is where it's at.
Popeye206
Apr 21, 01:42 PM
Could these be Apples baby-steps into the console Market?
I predict we're going to hear about more than baby steps before the end of the year. If Apple really takes on gaming, it could be really cool with all the devices you could have for interaction and play.
I think we'll hear more from the WDC.
I predict we're going to hear about more than baby steps before the end of the year. If Apple really takes on gaming, it could be really cool with all the devices you could have for interaction and play.
I think we'll hear more from the WDC.
more...
xyz1534
Mar 10, 10:26 PM
Still undecided on whether to go to the Apple Store or BB...
Either way will probably head over to Stonebriar since I don't think there's a BB near Willow bend....
Either way will probably head over to Stonebriar since I don't think there's a BB near Willow bend....
Jonasgold
Apr 21, 02:27 PM
1. Apple is an American company. Their products get released in the US first. The US market is and should remain their primary concern. If the US is going to LTE, that's where Apple needs to go.
No offence, but I think Apple goes where most of their customers are, and if most of them are non-Americans, than that is where their priority lies.
No offence, but I think Apple goes where most of their customers are, and if most of them are non-Americans, than that is where their priority lies.
more...
sfwalter
Mar 6, 03:27 PM
Working from home that day, probably head to Willow Bend around 2pm.
GGJstudios
May 5, 12:43 PM
I fail to see how a free antivirus is a tax.
It's a tax on system resources, not financial.
It's a tax on system resources, not financial.
more...
MacCurry
Sep 26, 03:28 PM
This just goes to show that Apple is in reality no better than Wal-Mart (who may be trying to thwart iTV) and Microsoft (criticized for monopolistic practices).
I wish Apple Corps (The Beatles) would sue Apple computer's pants off for infringing on their name.
I wish Apple Corps (The Beatles) would sue Apple computer's pants off for infringing on their name.
mad jew
Sep 17, 10:13 PM
In your case, it's just inaccurate. Shouldn't it be "Lick my nano"? :D
I'd try to argue back but I've seen your photo in the pictures threads and I just don't have the balls. :(
I'd try to argue back but I've seen your photo in the pictures threads and I just don't have the balls. :(
more...
Popeye206
Apr 12, 01:12 PM
One biggie is an enhancement, as opposed to a fix. Outlook can now sync w/iCal. This was present in Entourage, but was dropped from the initial release of Outlook.
Too bad this wasn't released a couple of weeks ago. I could have saved some struggles for my boss who we moved from Windows/Outlook to OS X/Mail/iCal.
Moving from Outlook is a good think no matter what. The databases used stinks. It chokes at about a million records and sooner or later, it will slow down, become lazy and before you know it... done. Corrupted... just like a US politician. :D
Too bad this wasn't released a couple of weeks ago. I could have saved some struggles for my boss who we moved from Windows/Outlook to OS X/Mail/iCal.
Moving from Outlook is a good think no matter what. The databases used stinks. It chokes at about a million records and sooner or later, it will slow down, become lazy and before you know it... done. Corrupted... just like a US politician. :D
erck24
Apr 25, 11:57 PM
64-bit windows, i forgot about that lol. I believe it was released in november
more...
adk
Apr 11, 07:23 PM
I can't imagine a fancy Swiss watch is any different from a Citizen or a Seiko. I would recommend going to one of those watch kiosks in a shopping mall and picking out a new band. Most of these places will install it for free.
WestonHarvey1
Apr 6, 09:40 PM
What's wrong with a keyboard or touch typing? I guess I don't see where you're going with this, as typing on a touch screen for long pieces of work or long periods of time is far less efficient. I see where the touch interface has its uses, but in some places it's just far less practical.
You *can* touch type on an iPad, though. I type long emails on it without looking at the screen. I wonder if people just assume you can't, so they don't try.
You *can* touch type on an iPad, though. I type long emails on it without looking at the screen. I wonder if people just assume you can't, so they don't try.
snberk103
Jun 20, 12:51 PM
The seldom used optical drive is on the back. All the useful stuff is on the front. :D
+1 That is is kind of "Think Different" Apple should be encouraging!
Is Apple thinking that SD cards are going to become the new "floppies"?
Many people who exchange files by 'sneaker net' use CDs, but don't need the capacity of a CD. Plus while rewriteable CDs exist, they are pricey and most people don't use them. Most files are exchanged a barely used CD that then gets shelved and collects dust.
Imagine if people started exchanging SD cards. .....
If Apple can create enough demand for cards, then economies of scale will bring prices down as they become a standard commodity.
As others have mentioned the bigger capacity ones would have all sorts of uses besides the exchange of files. Wow.
Hmm.
I was just having an "idle speculation moment" when the I wrote this. But since several people took the time to respond....
Re-writable optical media was only useful when the price of non-rewritable media was still non-trivial. When the cost of an optical disc is $0.10 in bulk at retail, people stopped caring considering how long it took to "erase" the disc for re-use. ...
Apple is moving towards being a "greener" company. All those nearly blank discs are becoming garbage. Apple may be thinking of pushing people to using a reusable media. Plus.... writing to a CD is not 'minimalist'. Apple makes it easy, but there are several steps involved, and it is not as easy as just dragging and dropping files to another "drive".
? Most people use thumb drives not CD Roms. ...
Yes, except that I usually want my thumb drive back because the cost is not trivial. I did a little research, and the cost per GB of thumb drives vs SD cards in the lower capacity format is slightly higher for thumb drives. I would assume that is because a thumb drive is more substantial (metal plug, metal casing, constructed to stand up to some abuse.) The SD cards I could examine were less substantial. If a factory started churning out 1GB to 4GB SD cards, I think you could bring the cost way down.
No. Apple has an application called Aperture. Many DSLR cameras for professional users (for example the press) use SD cards to save the picture data. HD camcorders use also SD cards to save the video data.
Personally, I use Lightroom myself, since it ties into Photoshop so well, and yes - as a professional photographer I have come across the occasional shooter who uses SD cards as well :rolleyes: (he says tongue in cheek) :).
I was more thinking along the lines of why Apple is suddenly putting SD card readers into several models. They are usually driving new technologies (or ignoring them), not catching up. SD cards have been around for a while now. Why is Apple choosing now to start adding SD card readers. And, in the case of the Mini - on the back. Professional users are not going to use the SD card reader on the back of the Mini (for the most part), they are going to buy a USB SD card reader so that they can use their cards efficiently. At professional rates, saving a minute a card to feed the reader and unload will pay for the USB reader in about a day.
... The reasons why most people do not use [SD cards] for the data exchange are that USB flash drives are much cheaper, more robust and nearly every computer has a USB port.
I don't think USB drives are necessarily cheaper in the small sizes, I did some price shopping - see above for why I think this is so. I agree that every computer has computer a USB port. But that has not stopped Apple before. One of the really big reasons why every computer has a USB port now is that when every computer had a floppy drive, Apple decided it was an old technology and did away with it - before there was an established alternative. USB drives and CD writers picked up the slack, in time.
I'm just wondering *why* Apple is choosing this time to introduce built in SD card readers.
The big flaw to my thinking (besides the fact that there is no compelling reason for it ;) ) is that the Mini puts the SD card reader on the back. That is not user friendly. If you are using an Apple keyboard, you can plug your thumb drives into the very accessible USB ports on the keyboard. Or if you are using the Apple displays, you can use those not quite so convenient USB ports. (Apple may say that you can use your Mini with any keyboard and monitor, but obviously they want you to use their own).
If Apple wanted to make life easy for photographers the SD card reader would have been on the side (front actually, but there was no way Apple was going to clutter up the front) or..... put it into the keyboard in place of a USB port.
So this is just speculation. Think about where Apple may be taking this in the next few months. Can an SDXC card slot be used like an ExpressCard/34 slot?
Cheers
+1 That is is kind of "Think Different" Apple should be encouraging!
Is Apple thinking that SD cards are going to become the new "floppies"?
Many people who exchange files by 'sneaker net' use CDs, but don't need the capacity of a CD. Plus while rewriteable CDs exist, they are pricey and most people don't use them. Most files are exchanged a barely used CD that then gets shelved and collects dust.
Imagine if people started exchanging SD cards. .....
If Apple can create enough demand for cards, then economies of scale will bring prices down as they become a standard commodity.
As others have mentioned the bigger capacity ones would have all sorts of uses besides the exchange of files. Wow.
Hmm.
I was just having an "idle speculation moment" when the I wrote this. But since several people took the time to respond....
Re-writable optical media was only useful when the price of non-rewritable media was still non-trivial. When the cost of an optical disc is $0.10 in bulk at retail, people stopped caring considering how long it took to "erase" the disc for re-use. ...
Apple is moving towards being a "greener" company. All those nearly blank discs are becoming garbage. Apple may be thinking of pushing people to using a reusable media. Plus.... writing to a CD is not 'minimalist'. Apple makes it easy, but there are several steps involved, and it is not as easy as just dragging and dropping files to another "drive".
? Most people use thumb drives not CD Roms. ...
Yes, except that I usually want my thumb drive back because the cost is not trivial. I did a little research, and the cost per GB of thumb drives vs SD cards in the lower capacity format is slightly higher for thumb drives. I would assume that is because a thumb drive is more substantial (metal plug, metal casing, constructed to stand up to some abuse.) The SD cards I could examine were less substantial. If a factory started churning out 1GB to 4GB SD cards, I think you could bring the cost way down.
No. Apple has an application called Aperture. Many DSLR cameras for professional users (for example the press) use SD cards to save the picture data. HD camcorders use also SD cards to save the video data.
Personally, I use Lightroom myself, since it ties into Photoshop so well, and yes - as a professional photographer I have come across the occasional shooter who uses SD cards as well :rolleyes: (he says tongue in cheek) :).
I was more thinking along the lines of why Apple is suddenly putting SD card readers into several models. They are usually driving new technologies (or ignoring them), not catching up. SD cards have been around for a while now. Why is Apple choosing now to start adding SD card readers. And, in the case of the Mini - on the back. Professional users are not going to use the SD card reader on the back of the Mini (for the most part), they are going to buy a USB SD card reader so that they can use their cards efficiently. At professional rates, saving a minute a card to feed the reader and unload will pay for the USB reader in about a day.
... The reasons why most people do not use [SD cards] for the data exchange are that USB flash drives are much cheaper, more robust and nearly every computer has a USB port.
I don't think USB drives are necessarily cheaper in the small sizes, I did some price shopping - see above for why I think this is so. I agree that every computer has computer a USB port. But that has not stopped Apple before. One of the really big reasons why every computer has a USB port now is that when every computer had a floppy drive, Apple decided it was an old technology and did away with it - before there was an established alternative. USB drives and CD writers picked up the slack, in time.
I'm just wondering *why* Apple is choosing this time to introduce built in SD card readers.
The big flaw to my thinking (besides the fact that there is no compelling reason for it ;) ) is that the Mini puts the SD card reader on the back. That is not user friendly. If you are using an Apple keyboard, you can plug your thumb drives into the very accessible USB ports on the keyboard. Or if you are using the Apple displays, you can use those not quite so convenient USB ports. (Apple may say that you can use your Mini with any keyboard and monitor, but obviously they want you to use their own).
If Apple wanted to make life easy for photographers the SD card reader would have been on the side (front actually, but there was no way Apple was going to clutter up the front) or..... put it into the keyboard in place of a USB port.
So this is just speculation. Think about where Apple may be taking this in the next few months. Can an SDXC card slot be used like an ExpressCard/34 slot?
Cheers
DarkForces
Apr 5, 11:03 AM
I just hope I can get an iPad 2, so I can verify CR ;) Still waiting for mine to come in. :(
Caliber26
Oct 6, 09:59 AM
While I obviously think this prediction is just a load of crap, I would NOT mind a larger screen on the iPhone. Not too big to comfortably carry in a pocket or hold up to my ear. A 4.5" would be nice, I think. Definitely not a nano-sized phone.
WildCowboy
Nov 21, 04:10 PM
hmm... i wonder if they're a public company. If they can get rid of those problems, and what they're talking about actually works, then i think that company's stock will get pretty high
No...they're not public.
No...they're not public.
Thunderhawks
Mar 25, 11:41 AM
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).
Fuji is a very good tasting Apple. Hope they don't taste this good because they have emulsion in it:-)
Didn't they join with tsu? and now make Fuji tsu scanners etc.
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).
Fuji is a very good tasting Apple. Hope they don't taste this good because they have emulsion in it:-)
Didn't they join with tsu? and now make Fuji tsu scanners etc.
NathanMuir
Apr 8, 10:18 PM
It appears that a deal has been made.
Yeah, CNN, NYT and Politico are all reporting a short term deal has been made.
How gracious of Boehner.
Yeah, CNN, NYT and Politico are all reporting a short term deal has been made.
How gracious of Boehner.
0 comments:
Post a Comment