magicpinkdrink
Apr 23, 09:50 AM
I got a replacement iPhone 4 about 2 months ago when the lock button broke on my original one. A few weeks ago my battery life took a turn for the worst but I chalked it up to the iOS updates and got used to taking my charger everywhere "just in case". Not a big deal, just annoying.
Well, last night I went out with some friends and went to go pull my phone out to take some pictures. To my surprise, my phone that had been fully charged and working fine 5 minutes earlier was completely dead. It would not turn on, and trying a hard reset did nothing. Completely ticked me off. I spent $200 on this thing, plus the monthly bill, and I've had 2 phones go bad on me since September?
When I got home, I threw it on the charger, not holding my breath and to my amazement it powered on, still showing a fully charged battery and it's been acting fine ever since. However, I'm wondering what may have caused my phone to be a temporary brick? It's not water damaged, never been jailbroken, and is treated better than a newborn baby. Has anyone had this happen? Is it a fluke thing or do I need to march down to the apple store an hour away and get ANOTHER replacement?
Thanks in advance!
Well, last night I went out with some friends and went to go pull my phone out to take some pictures. To my surprise, my phone that had been fully charged and working fine 5 minutes earlier was completely dead. It would not turn on, and trying a hard reset did nothing. Completely ticked me off. I spent $200 on this thing, plus the monthly bill, and I've had 2 phones go bad on me since September?
When I got home, I threw it on the charger, not holding my breath and to my amazement it powered on, still showing a fully charged battery and it's been acting fine ever since. However, I'm wondering what may have caused my phone to be a temporary brick? It's not water damaged, never been jailbroken, and is treated better than a newborn baby. Has anyone had this happen? Is it a fluke thing or do I need to march down to the apple store an hour away and get ANOTHER replacement?
Thanks in advance!
mrkramer
Apr 23, 12:38 AM
Trump is basically the male version of Palin, so I don't want him anywhere near the whitehouse. He's way too far to the right, and I'm pretty sure he would totally mess up the country if he somehow was elected.
bigjobby
Apr 12, 06:26 PM
I've downloaded the update - how do I get ical and Outlook to sync?
I can't get this to work either even when the correct sync services box is checked. :confused:
I can't get this to work either even when the correct sync services box is checked. :confused:
EliteGamer
Nov 14, 10:15 AM
This is a great idea of apple to do actually. It will help them expand alot more and if they put demo versions on plans it will advertise to another customer base.
more...
bobbleheadbob
Mar 28, 08:36 AM
Can't wait to head back to SF! :apple:
WilliamG
May 1, 01:23 AM
Runs perfectly with high (not ultra) settings at 2560x1440 on my i7 iMac. :) Really fun game, though nothing really *new*. Blizzard playing it safe but making a solid game here.
more...
fishkorp
Mar 28, 03:15 PM
Question for folks who have gone (or purchased ticket voucher). From the looks of it, you buy a voucher, which you then redeem online for a ticket, correct? Can you buy the voucher now, but fill in the attendee ticket details at a later time? I'm going to buy, but there's the off chance I won't be able to attend, so I'd like to give the ticket to someone else. The ticket holder needs photo ID to get in, so they obviously can't use my ticket. So I'd have to wait until I know for sure to claim the voucher, or put the other developer's information in.
Can that be done? Or do I need to claim the ticket at time of purchase? Based on the recent track record of WWDC selling out in a week, I'd like to make the purchase ASAP. Thanks.
Can that be done? Or do I need to claim the ticket at time of purchase? Based on the recent track record of WWDC selling out in a week, I'd like to make the purchase ASAP. Thanks.
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
more...
ijimk
Oct 10, 03:04 PM
do you think these updated macbooks will have a true video card and not an intergrated one? :confused:
Gregg2
Apr 27, 09:04 PM
To me, your user name perfectly sums up the risk of messing with your Dock. There are all kinds of threads on this forum from (usually novice) users who run into big headaches from doing what you propose to do. If you were an expert user, you wouldn't be asking this, you'd know what to do and what not to do.
more...
MikeTheC
Nov 3, 01:19 AM
I'd like to tackle a few points in the discussion here.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
blow45
Mar 23, 01:35 PM
excellent news, although the atv fills that role too.
more...
robbieduncan
Sep 25, 11:22 AM
yes, by ME !
Well then what was your question? That list is what you want: a list of all supported cameras. The 9500 is not supported.
Well then what was your question? That list is what you want: a list of all supported cameras. The 9500 is not supported.
imaginex20
Mar 28, 10:33 AM
my thoughts: iOS 5 will have a new revamped UI. The dock will now have a launchpad icon that will bring up all the applications. There will be no need for badges as the notifications will be present on the main page just like widgets. There will be feeds/social widgets on homepages that integrate with social networks i.e. Ping, Facebook, and Twitter..
Just my 2 cents.
Just my 2 cents.
more...
pmz
Apr 5, 10:51 AM
Have you ever gone to move your finger across the trackpad and find that it registered it as a tap instead? Drives me nuts.
That has never happened to me, or anyone, that is intentionally using Tap to Click.
That does happen to people who live with buttons, who aren't expecting it, and for some reason tend to mash their trackpad with giant gorilla hands.
People I know that use click instead of tap have broken the trackpads on white macbooks after a few years of use.
That has never happened to me, or anyone, that is intentionally using Tap to Click.
That does happen to people who live with buttons, who aren't expecting it, and for some reason tend to mash their trackpad with giant gorilla hands.
People I know that use click instead of tap have broken the trackpads on white macbooks after a few years of use.
saint
Sep 6, 08:31 AM
I doubt its a feature we will see on any future versions of Mac OS X.
It isn't happening on login, as there is a picture and a quicktime movie being opened as it is all happening.
And see how everything is coming in from off the screen.
It looks like some sort of animation they have made as a demonstration, not something they have done with the actual OS.
But it certainly is interesting, and the shadow effect is very cool.
It isn't happening on login, as there is a picture and a quicktime movie being opened as it is all happening.
And see how everything is coming in from off the screen.
It looks like some sort of animation they have made as a demonstration, not something they have done with the actual OS.
But it certainly is interesting, and the shadow effect is very cool.
more...
integlspwr
Apr 19, 03:37 PM
dude those vietkong mf's a'ways seem to cop the exclusive apple s.hit
LinMac
Dec 27, 10:48 PM
Let's stop for a moment and think about this without any knee jerk reaction against at&t.
The at&t network in New York City is not able to handle any additional network traffic. It makes sense due to the amount of users in such a small area.
What should at&t do?
I think it is reasonable to temporarily stop selling the iPhone considering the network in New York City. They can resume sales after the network has been upgraded to handle the additional traffic.
at&t has not sunk to a new low. They are finally taking responsibility for their network by not overloading it with any additional data heavy iPhone users.
Note: This post is based on speculation about speculation. Please take it how it was intended. :)
The at&t network in New York City is not able to handle any additional network traffic. It makes sense due to the amount of users in such a small area.
What should at&t do?
I think it is reasonable to temporarily stop selling the iPhone considering the network in New York City. They can resume sales after the network has been upgraded to handle the additional traffic.
at&t has not sunk to a new low. They are finally taking responsibility for their network by not overloading it with any additional data heavy iPhone users.
Note: This post is based on speculation about speculation. Please take it how it was intended. :)
Cinch
Nov 2, 12:29 PM
I don't see Apple getting more than 10% marketshare anytime soon unless they do something significant.
I don't know anybody who has switched. I've known a few people who seriously considered it, but when they learned they'd have to spend another $200 for Windows XP so they can run their 'XP Only' things, they settled on a PC.
I think Apple is more concern with building beautiful computers and fabulously looking music player than they are about selling large amount of PCs or mp3 players. Case in point, my office mate has a dell laptop and when we place our laptops next to one another (mine is a black MacBook) you can definitely tell. Personally, the reason why I brought the MacBook instead of a HP laptop that cost $500 less is because the HP laptop is ugly. It is simple. I don't care about the amazing video card that has a trillion bytes of RAM that I will never see. My MacBook works well (iLife, Safari and Office suite) and looks gorgeous!
If Apple continues to create stylist electronic devices that are simple to use and help people do things easily, they will gain marketshare albeit not by much.
Cinch
I don't know anybody who has switched. I've known a few people who seriously considered it, but when they learned they'd have to spend another $200 for Windows XP so they can run their 'XP Only' things, they settled on a PC.
I think Apple is more concern with building beautiful computers and fabulously looking music player than they are about selling large amount of PCs or mp3 players. Case in point, my office mate has a dell laptop and when we place our laptops next to one another (mine is a black MacBook) you can definitely tell. Personally, the reason why I brought the MacBook instead of a HP laptop that cost $500 less is because the HP laptop is ugly. It is simple. I don't care about the amazing video card that has a trillion bytes of RAM that I will never see. My MacBook works well (iLife, Safari and Office suite) and looks gorgeous!
If Apple continues to create stylist electronic devices that are simple to use and help people do things easily, they will gain marketshare albeit not by much.
Cinch
snberk103
Mar 17, 10:47 PM
In response to all the "Recommend Me a Camera/Lens/Editor etc" threads, I offer this. Comments or additions?
...
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
...
Dale
This can be expanded to include buying gear in general, like strobes and backdrops, etc...
... I have noticed I feel a bit intimidated by portrait type photography. I don't have the right equipment for it (flashes, strobes, backdrops, studio...), and I'm not sure I want to go that route. ...
I think you need to read that bit above again.
You don't need much gear at all to get started doing great photography - you just need to be good with people and have reasonable photo skills. If you are have that, then all you need is a reasonably sharp and long-ish lense and a window. See Lloyd Erlick (http://www.heylloyd.com/) for example. I don't think he is still active, but he was shooting 4x5 BW portraits by window light. I think some of his portraits are the best I have seen. I've learned from him to try and keep my portraits simple. I tell my students that doing portraiture is both the easiest and the most difficult kind of photography there is. Easy because you can make great portraits with window light, and one good lense on a camera. If you want to get fancy you can add a reflector :) . Difficult, because you need to work with people.
... I also don't care for sports in general, so that's not a likely path for me, either....
Good decision. If you don't love the stuff you shoot, it shows.
One of the best rock-n-roll photographers you will not have heard of in North America (if not the world), is Dee Lippingwell (http://www.deelippingwell.com/). She had a daytime job, but loved music. So she approached an entertainment weekly and offered to take photos, in order to get the press passes into the events. She then quit the daytime job to do the photography full time. Still loves the music and the music biz.
I've sat through a couple of seminars she has done (short on technical advice, but huge on rock-n-roll stories!
Don't let the website fool you. She doesn't actually need to advertize much. She was one of less than a dozen photographers that Mick Jagger personally invited to shoot the big SARS concert in Toronto a few years ago. I have the honour of calling her a friend, and in one of her band shots on the website you can see my former studio reflected in the subject's sunglasses.
She loves what she does, it shows, and her clients know that.
So keep banging away. It gets easier, then more difficult, then it plateaus into sort of easy again. Well, not really - but you love what you do so much you don't notice that it's difficult.
... of the above are imho, of course....
PS: Thanks Dale for the OP!
...
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
...
Dale
This can be expanded to include buying gear in general, like strobes and backdrops, etc...
... I have noticed I feel a bit intimidated by portrait type photography. I don't have the right equipment for it (flashes, strobes, backdrops, studio...), and I'm not sure I want to go that route. ...
I think you need to read that bit above again.
You don't need much gear at all to get started doing great photography - you just need to be good with people and have reasonable photo skills. If you are have that, then all you need is a reasonably sharp and long-ish lense and a window. See Lloyd Erlick (http://www.heylloyd.com/) for example. I don't think he is still active, but he was shooting 4x5 BW portraits by window light. I think some of his portraits are the best I have seen. I've learned from him to try and keep my portraits simple. I tell my students that doing portraiture is both the easiest and the most difficult kind of photography there is. Easy because you can make great portraits with window light, and one good lense on a camera. If you want to get fancy you can add a reflector :) . Difficult, because you need to work with people.
... I also don't care for sports in general, so that's not a likely path for me, either....
Good decision. If you don't love the stuff you shoot, it shows.
One of the best rock-n-roll photographers you will not have heard of in North America (if not the world), is Dee Lippingwell (http://www.deelippingwell.com/). She had a daytime job, but loved music. So she approached an entertainment weekly and offered to take photos, in order to get the press passes into the events. She then quit the daytime job to do the photography full time. Still loves the music and the music biz.
I've sat through a couple of seminars she has done (short on technical advice, but huge on rock-n-roll stories!
Don't let the website fool you. She doesn't actually need to advertize much. She was one of less than a dozen photographers that Mick Jagger personally invited to shoot the big SARS concert in Toronto a few years ago. I have the honour of calling her a friend, and in one of her band shots on the website you can see my former studio reflected in the subject's sunglasses.
She loves what she does, it shows, and her clients know that.
So keep banging away. It gets easier, then more difficult, then it plateaus into sort of easy again. Well, not really - but you love what you do so much you don't notice that it's difficult.
... of the above are imho, of course....
PS: Thanks Dale for the OP!
NinjaHERO
Oct 6, 12:05 PM
This rumor sounds sketchy at best, but man I would love a bigger iphone.
sfwalter
Mar 8, 08:43 PM
With all these places selling the iPad 2 (Apple Store, Best Buy, Target, Walmart) I really wonder if there will be much of a line at all.
Cindori
Apr 19, 11:22 AM
Right on last question
About overheating, not an issue. Hard drives are like 30-40c. Won't overheat the card. And the card will probably raise the hard drive temps maximum 5-8 degrees.
However, both cards really suck. Get a single 5770 to replace them both. It will run all your displays and the performance will be night and day.
About overheating, not an issue. Hard drives are like 30-40c. Won't overheat the card. And the card will probably raise the hard drive temps maximum 5-8 degrees.
However, both cards really suck. Get a single 5770 to replace them both. It will run all your displays and the performance will be night and day.
Celeron
Apr 30, 03:21 PM
Blizzard makes native games, so no, it isn't a cider port.
