antster94
Apr 2, 05:28 PM
You Americans got it lucky, petrol here in the UK is about �5.15 per gallon, or $8.30.
kd5jos
Jun 19, 09:06 AM
Does nobody realise that you have to support the exFAT format (from Microsoft, currently NOT supported on OS X, and has to be licensed by Microsoft) to be able to use more than 32 GB? (or the up to 2 TB). Otherwise if you format it with the old formats you are stuck on the same limits as you would with ad SDHC card..
Sort of.
Lets separate reading and writing exFAT. If I can read it, I can pull stuff off of it. So OS X will require the ability to read exFAT in order to make it compatible with non apple devices that will be using this format. HOWEVER, it is not required that Apple choose to read exFAT. You could format with HFS+. Then any device that can read HFS+ could read and write to it.
If I can write to exFAT, then I can place data (even 4GB+ media files) on the card. Apple may create a driver that allows you to read exFAT but not write to it.
This matters if you are going to use the card to store media files (4 GB+), or are planning on using the card with non Apple devices. I could get a 128 GB SDXC card, format 100 GB in FAT32 for a user directory, and format 3 8GB swap spaces (one for OS X, one for Windows, and one for Unix). Then I'd have my user files and swap space with me wherever I go, and it would be cross platform compatible (everyone reads and writes FAT32). Yes, FAT32 does have a maximum partition size, this is why I used a 128 GB SDXC card as the example. And yes, I wouldn't have my media files (movies) on the card (I'd need one of the 2 TB cards to do this).
Since Pretec is selling an ExpressCard SDXC reader, this is what I plan to do with my triple boot MBP (see sig). I'll point my OS X user directory to the directory that will be on this card, I'll do the same for Win7, and BackTrack. Each OS will also have swap space on the card. This increases security too. If I have my SDXC card with me, someone using the laptop can't see my files at all. It also increases speed (maybe and a little) because I'm using a different storage device and bus to put my user files/swap space on.
Sort of.
Lets separate reading and writing exFAT. If I can read it, I can pull stuff off of it. So OS X will require the ability to read exFAT in order to make it compatible with non apple devices that will be using this format. HOWEVER, it is not required that Apple choose to read exFAT. You could format with HFS+. Then any device that can read HFS+ could read and write to it.
If I can write to exFAT, then I can place data (even 4GB+ media files) on the card. Apple may create a driver that allows you to read exFAT but not write to it.
This matters if you are going to use the card to store media files (4 GB+), or are planning on using the card with non Apple devices. I could get a 128 GB SDXC card, format 100 GB in FAT32 for a user directory, and format 3 8GB swap spaces (one for OS X, one for Windows, and one for Unix). Then I'd have my user files and swap space with me wherever I go, and it would be cross platform compatible (everyone reads and writes FAT32). Yes, FAT32 does have a maximum partition size, this is why I used a 128 GB SDXC card as the example. And yes, I wouldn't have my media files (movies) on the card (I'd need one of the 2 TB cards to do this).
Since Pretec is selling an ExpressCard SDXC reader, this is what I plan to do with my triple boot MBP (see sig). I'll point my OS X user directory to the directory that will be on this card, I'll do the same for Win7, and BackTrack. Each OS will also have swap space on the card. This increases security too. If I have my SDXC card with me, someone using the laptop can't see my files at all. It also increases speed (maybe and a little) because I'm using a different storage device and bus to put my user files/swap space on.
King Cobra
Sep 15, 02:23 PM
I'll PM you about it, since it would move the thread well off topic.
CubusX
Mar 13, 09:50 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8F190)
New iOS update, same old story. With all the time it takes Apple to release these updates, will they ever get it right,
New iOS update, same old story. With all the time it takes Apple to release these updates, will they ever get it right,
more...
Chef Medeski
Nov 21, 06:41 PM
For example, with the cell operating at 600 degrees there is not much of a differential change between room temperature and plus/minus 10 degrees.
My Pb.... quite a hot computer runs 140F at the GPU. Id say your pushing no more than 150 at the CPU. No more than 170 on any laptop. 170F
=76 C. 90F = 32 C. 80F = 26C. T = 76-32= 44C. 76-26= 50C. 12% difference. Yes.... quite unnoticeable :rolleyes: . Thats if its a direct relationship... if its a secondary or tertiary relationship.... well then your looking at huge difference being created.
I dont know where you got 600 :rolleyes: or negligible.... but...
My Pb.... quite a hot computer runs 140F at the GPU. Id say your pushing no more than 150 at the CPU. No more than 170 on any laptop. 170F
=76 C. 90F = 32 C. 80F = 26C. T = 76-32= 44C. 76-26= 50C. 12% difference. Yes.... quite unnoticeable :rolleyes: . Thats if its a direct relationship... if its a secondary or tertiary relationship.... well then your looking at huge difference being created.
I dont know where you got 600 :rolleyes: or negligible.... but...
Waybo
Mar 14, 10:23 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5082/5258900474_266e7d179b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/69707513@N00/5258900474/)
I agree with fcortese: I really like the picture, but would love it if there was more space to the right, where the horse is looking. Could you crop the left and top a bit? I think that would make it more powerful. IMHO, Rule of Thirds would turn this good shot into a great shot.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5298/5515712207_7aa9475c8f_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/22077805@N07/5515712207/)
I'm still trying to decide if I love it or hate it! It's beautiful, yet ugly ... all at once. I definitely see all 4 elements -- another nice contrast. I think it would have done well in the surreal contest we just had.
I agree with fcortese: I really like the picture, but would love it if there was more space to the right, where the horse is looking. Could you crop the left and top a bit? I think that would make it more powerful. IMHO, Rule of Thirds would turn this good shot into a great shot.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5298/5515712207_7aa9475c8f_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/22077805@N07/5515712207/)
I'm still trying to decide if I love it or hate it! It's beautiful, yet ugly ... all at once. I definitely see all 4 elements -- another nice contrast. I think it would have done well in the surreal contest we just had.
more...
-SD-
Oct 9, 08:41 PM
I'm quite looking forward to this myself too. Capcom and Konami made some absolutely fantastic side scrolling beat 'em ups during the '90s.
:apple:
:apple:
yenko
Sep 17, 02:19 AM
So I come to you this eve, asking advice to this extent:
How would one go about dating an Apple employee??
(of a local Apple store....not Apple corporate, perhaps it doesn't matter, I don't know)
Did you try asking! :D
How would one go about dating an Apple employee??
(of a local Apple store....not Apple corporate, perhaps it doesn't matter, I don't know)
Did you try asking! :D
more...
baleensavage
Oct 10, 01:17 PM
"If you play with Billy down the street, we're not going to be your friends any more! Nah Nah."
Target and Walmart sound like they are run by bratty jealous kids. Besides, I can't see how movie downloads are going to threaten DVD sales anyway. HBO didn't stop VHS sales. Netflix hasn't stopped DVD sales. Cable on Demand hasn't stopped DVD sales either. People want to buy things. They want to own them. They want something to hold in their hand with pictures and a booklet. Sure people will download TV shows or some movies to watch on their iPods on a commute, but it's not going to kill the DVD market. The only thing likely to kill the DVD market is this bogus format war going on between Sony and Toshiba. Now noone is going to want to buy any HD format because they dont want their purchase to be obsolete next year.
On another note, how is this kind of corporate bullying legal? Doesn't the government actually try to enforce any antitrust laws any more? (rhetoric question)
Target and Walmart sound like they are run by bratty jealous kids. Besides, I can't see how movie downloads are going to threaten DVD sales anyway. HBO didn't stop VHS sales. Netflix hasn't stopped DVD sales. Cable on Demand hasn't stopped DVD sales either. People want to buy things. They want to own them. They want something to hold in their hand with pictures and a booklet. Sure people will download TV shows or some movies to watch on their iPods on a commute, but it's not going to kill the DVD market. The only thing likely to kill the DVD market is this bogus format war going on between Sony and Toshiba. Now noone is going to want to buy any HD format because they dont want their purchase to be obsolete next year.
On another note, how is this kind of corporate bullying legal? Doesn't the government actually try to enforce any antitrust laws any more? (rhetoric question)
cantthinkofone
Sep 27, 09:00 AM
I hope so, 10.4.7 is still the prime suspect for breaking my Firewire audio interface.
im not to fond of 10.4.7 either. i think 10.3.7 was when my G5 crashed and i had to re-install OS X :eek: when 10.5.7 rolls around, i think ill skip it.
im not to fond of 10.4.7 either. i think 10.3.7 was when my G5 crashed and i had to re-install OS X :eek: when 10.5.7 rolls around, i think ill skip it.
more...
thatisme
Mar 29, 12:37 PM
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-is-lens-review.aspx
go down to COMPARED ..
now roll over the images.. if you tell me that that 55-250 shot is a 1.6 crop and the 70-X shots are very different you DO live on another plant (the 55-250 shot was manualy zoomed to match the 70-X shot hence the SLIGHT difference in focal length).. I am assuming same camera..as the review is about the lens and the FoV is too close to be recreated beteen full frame and crop.
you are twisting things nicely around now..
@Cliff, my bad I remember seen the high speed crop also on the D3 series but I might be wrong. The D700 however does have a crop but also allows you to shoot your DX lens on full frame (which will vignette) but has no speed increase over the full frame mode.
Thatisme:
It is kind of funny how you try to wiggle yourself out of this though...
We (a buddy and me here, pro photographer but you would dismiss this anyway as him not knowing either, are having a great time with your "knowledge" and your way of going from the 200mm debacle to IMAGE... and no, the image will still not be different between an EF-s and an EF lens at the same focal length on the same body.
End of story..if you are so sure.. why don't YOU prove ME wrong? you posted 1 picture of a modified 5d, which wasnt even yours. there is no 10mm on full frame (hence the vigneting) so you would have to shoot that 52 with the 10-22 at 22mm and then use a full frame 22 milimeter lens and compare it, because you ARE arguing, at least now, that the image will be different. It won't except for the vignetting.. re-read your own statements from before and watch how you ended up now on the "image" :)
Don't worry, by Monday I will prove it to you but why don't you prove me wrong before?.. I dare you.
EF-s lens and EF (or DX and FX for me) at the same focal length on the same camera, same f stop, same shutter speed... Exif data intact.
To the OP: I have to apologize for this and this is the last post related to Thats me from my side:
To answer your question: EF-s is cheaper as stated before the mess and is targeted specifically for the crop sensor bodies. You CAN fit both EF-s and EF on a crop sensor body and you will get the same image. EF lenses are just made for full frame as also stated before.
sorry for the mess.
With your link provided, I agree there is a slight difference there, but as you said, you ASSUME that it was with the same camera.... That would be my assumption as well, however, that example hardly makes your case, as the 70mm had to be manually dialed in... a small change has a big effect at long distances.... just saying... Show it using a prime (can't) or at the long end of the lens where there is no room for error or adjustment (200mm example). Eliminate all variables.
So, quit your arguing and prove it with a real world example with your gear. I don't own any EF-S lenses anymore, so let's get that in the great wide open, so I can't run this comparison for you. There is a fundamental reason for that, which gets more to the point of the OP... Image quality is flat out crap as compared with Canon's L glass, which just so happens to be only in the EF mount. Right, wrong or somewhere in-between, this discussion has no bearing for me, since I will never own another EF-S lens anyway. To that point, I won't ever own a 1.6 crop camera again either, for what it's worth.
I have no further interest in this discussion, so have fun. Enjoy.
go down to COMPARED ..
now roll over the images.. if you tell me that that 55-250 shot is a 1.6 crop and the 70-X shots are very different you DO live on another plant (the 55-250 shot was manualy zoomed to match the 70-X shot hence the SLIGHT difference in focal length).. I am assuming same camera..as the review is about the lens and the FoV is too close to be recreated beteen full frame and crop.
you are twisting things nicely around now..
@Cliff, my bad I remember seen the high speed crop also on the D3 series but I might be wrong. The D700 however does have a crop but also allows you to shoot your DX lens on full frame (which will vignette) but has no speed increase over the full frame mode.
Thatisme:
It is kind of funny how you try to wiggle yourself out of this though...
We (a buddy and me here, pro photographer but you would dismiss this anyway as him not knowing either, are having a great time with your "knowledge" and your way of going from the 200mm debacle to IMAGE... and no, the image will still not be different between an EF-s and an EF lens at the same focal length on the same body.
End of story..if you are so sure.. why don't YOU prove ME wrong? you posted 1 picture of a modified 5d, which wasnt even yours. there is no 10mm on full frame (hence the vigneting) so you would have to shoot that 52 with the 10-22 at 22mm and then use a full frame 22 milimeter lens and compare it, because you ARE arguing, at least now, that the image will be different. It won't except for the vignetting.. re-read your own statements from before and watch how you ended up now on the "image" :)
Don't worry, by Monday I will prove it to you but why don't you prove me wrong before?.. I dare you.
EF-s lens and EF (or DX and FX for me) at the same focal length on the same camera, same f stop, same shutter speed... Exif data intact.
To the OP: I have to apologize for this and this is the last post related to Thats me from my side:
To answer your question: EF-s is cheaper as stated before the mess and is targeted specifically for the crop sensor bodies. You CAN fit both EF-s and EF on a crop sensor body and you will get the same image. EF lenses are just made for full frame as also stated before.
sorry for the mess.
With your link provided, I agree there is a slight difference there, but as you said, you ASSUME that it was with the same camera.... That would be my assumption as well, however, that example hardly makes your case, as the 70mm had to be manually dialed in... a small change has a big effect at long distances.... just saying... Show it using a prime (can't) or at the long end of the lens where there is no room for error or adjustment (200mm example). Eliminate all variables.
So, quit your arguing and prove it with a real world example with your gear. I don't own any EF-S lenses anymore, so let's get that in the great wide open, so I can't run this comparison for you. There is a fundamental reason for that, which gets more to the point of the OP... Image quality is flat out crap as compared with Canon's L glass, which just so happens to be only in the EF mount. Right, wrong or somewhere in-between, this discussion has no bearing for me, since I will never own another EF-S lens anyway. To that point, I won't ever own a 1.6 crop camera again either, for what it's worth.
I have no further interest in this discussion, so have fun. Enjoy.
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.
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.
Sky Blue
Mar 23, 03:58 PM
Might as well spend some of that bloated budget on something good.
more...
CaptMurdock
Apr 10, 11:24 AM
I believe the crucial difference is that you believe when government taxes and spends the money on a service, it's better than not taxing at all.
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/CaptMurdock/scarecrow_argument.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/CaptMurdock/scarecrow_argument.jpg
wizard
Oct 6, 01:38 PM
I think it does, all other manufactures are spitting out models every month and Apple has two models that they sell every year and they sell more then these other manufactures. Why change that? Can Apple succeeded at selling more models when nobody else can?
First off Apple isn't even close to first in sales, so your thoughts are based on faulty data. Second even if they where first in sales selling even more hardware is better. Given the right features more models simply means more sales.
First off Apple isn't even close to first in sales, so your thoughts are based on faulty data. Second even if they where first in sales selling even more hardware is better. Given the right features more models simply means more sales.
more...
BornAgainMac
Nov 11, 05:28 AM
I wonder if they'll do a version of the ad with the female camera that speaks Japanese, but make her an American camera that speaks English. :-)
They can have the actor that does the "PC Home Movie" make a comment of a digital camera made in a person's garage in the U.S.
They can have the actor that does the "PC Home Movie" make a comment of a digital camera made in a person's garage in the U.S.
JPyre
Apr 12, 05:00 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)
I guess one could argue that scalpers are inflating at&t's numbers.
I chose AT&T for my second gen ipad because I've had every iPhone and iPad on day one and AT&T has treated me good with no issues.
That being said my vzw work droid is defiantly slower but has better coverage.
I guess one could argue that scalpers are inflating at&t's numbers.
I chose AT&T for my second gen ipad because I've had every iPhone and iPad on day one and AT&T has treated me good with no issues.
That being said my vzw work droid is defiantly slower but has better coverage.
JoEw
Jun 12, 02:54 PM
I don't understand why T-Mobile is using 700/2100 instead of 2100 up and down. The iPhone and other handsets support 2100 but not 700.
because the 700 spectrum has theoretical data speeds much higher then the "standard" spectrum.
my family has been happy with t-mobiles service where we live for over 6 years and there rates are very affordable.
The only reason i went to ATT is because of the iPhone and if the iphones does come to t-mobile i will be switching back.
because the 700 spectrum has theoretical data speeds much higher then the "standard" spectrum.
my family has been happy with t-mobiles service where we live for over 6 years and there rates are very affordable.
The only reason i went to ATT is because of the iPhone and if the iphones does come to t-mobile i will be switching back.
GGJstudios
May 5, 12:12 PM
In Windows 7, all that is needed is a good free Antivirus ...
Hence, the "antivirus tax".
Hence, the "antivirus tax".
jacg
Sep 25, 04:58 PM
?????????
I can display a 10,000 x 8.000 pixel picture on an iPod if I throw away 99% of the data as well. But why would you want to use such a huge file for no reason? Not only would it take up vast amounts of space, but you have to process all that "throwing away" info on the fly.
The new videos take longer for you to download, use more storage space on the iPod, require the iPod to downsample at playback, and cost Apple more bandwidth.
So why would Apple do all this if they weren't in fact planing to USE the new format on an iPod? Soem may say "it's for rregular Macs", but this size is too SMALL for to build a new standard for computers. So the only conclusion I can reach is that it has to be for a new iPod to come...
Front Row? iTV?
I can display a 10,000 x 8.000 pixel picture on an iPod if I throw away 99% of the data as well. But why would you want to use such a huge file for no reason? Not only would it take up vast amounts of space, but you have to process all that "throwing away" info on the fly.
The new videos take longer for you to download, use more storage space on the iPod, require the iPod to downsample at playback, and cost Apple more bandwidth.
So why would Apple do all this if they weren't in fact planing to USE the new format on an iPod? Soem may say "it's for rregular Macs", but this size is too SMALL for to build a new standard for computers. So the only conclusion I can reach is that it has to be for a new iPod to come...
Front Row? iTV?
matt303
Mar 23, 02:20 PM
This trend on these forums of people making posts without apparently reading the original post or any other posts in the thread before making a post is getting a little annoying.
Which of those things allows you to stream video and audio from an IOS device?
If iOS supported DLNA you would be able to do this without any new standard, there is no need for a new apple developed standard for this, I can stream video from my android phone to my TV, Bluray and PVR already. This is something devices have been able to do before Airplay came along.
It's not hat these devices need a new standard, just for apple to support an already industry wide used one.
Which of those things allows you to stream video and audio from an IOS device?
If iOS supported DLNA you would be able to do this without any new standard, there is no need for a new apple developed standard for this, I can stream video from my android phone to my TV, Bluray and PVR already. This is something devices have been able to do before Airplay came along.
It's not hat these devices need a new standard, just for apple to support an already industry wide used one.
WillEH
Apr 27, 06:46 PM
no, he doesn't. and thankfully it should mean that he'll have no chance of getting anywhere near being President.
I didn't know who he was before I googled his name. Thought he was the model for Ken, from the Barbie range. (When he was younger) he looks like plastic.
I didn't know who he was before I googled his name. Thought he was the model for Ken, from the Barbie range. (When he was younger) he looks like plastic.
itcheroni
Apr 4, 05:16 AM
However, both the OP and citizenzen's posts show that lowering a state's tax rate doesn't guarantee either high-income for its citizens or create high tax receipts.
This is a common refrain from conservatives who will often reference the Laffer Curve and will argue that if only a state lowered its taxes, more money would become available.
I wasn't making that argument so I guess I was confused why it was brought up. I've only been making an argument that the article can't conclude cutting taxes resulted in the budget problem. A state may have cut taxes and their economy might not have improved since cutting taxes, but the author of the article needs to fill in the gap and explain why there is a correlation/causation. I propose that you could run a state with some income tax or no income tax if the budget was made competently. So, IMO, cutting taxes does not, in and of itself, mean it has caused a budget shortfall. I personally think cutting taxes does help the economy but that's not what is at issue here.
I have only a general understanding of the theories those guys you mentioned are famous for. I think Austrian economics make much more sense. A theory of how to get the maximum tax dollars out of the people is irrelevant to me. It's like studying how much blood you can drain from people while keeping them alive. My preferred income tax rate is 0.
You understand that you're probably unique in your circumstances.
I wouldn't have believed it 3 years ago but now I can say from experience that anyone can do it if that's what they want to do. It's all a matter of hard work and willingness to live cheaply. The only thing that might tie you down is a family. I live for traveling so I've just worked my life to be able to do what I like. 3 years ago I was a law school dropout with no prospects and a monthly loan repayment of $1100. The highest paying job I qualified for was tutoring.
This is a common refrain from conservatives who will often reference the Laffer Curve and will argue that if only a state lowered its taxes, more money would become available.
I wasn't making that argument so I guess I was confused why it was brought up. I've only been making an argument that the article can't conclude cutting taxes resulted in the budget problem. A state may have cut taxes and their economy might not have improved since cutting taxes, but the author of the article needs to fill in the gap and explain why there is a correlation/causation. I propose that you could run a state with some income tax or no income tax if the budget was made competently. So, IMO, cutting taxes does not, in and of itself, mean it has caused a budget shortfall. I personally think cutting taxes does help the economy but that's not what is at issue here.
I have only a general understanding of the theories those guys you mentioned are famous for. I think Austrian economics make much more sense. A theory of how to get the maximum tax dollars out of the people is irrelevant to me. It's like studying how much blood you can drain from people while keeping them alive. My preferred income tax rate is 0.
You understand that you're probably unique in your circumstances.
I wouldn't have believed it 3 years ago but now I can say from experience that anyone can do it if that's what they want to do. It's all a matter of hard work and willingness to live cheaply. The only thing that might tie you down is a family. I live for traveling so I've just worked my life to be able to do what I like. 3 years ago I was a law school dropout with no prospects and a monthly loan repayment of $1100. The highest paying job I qualified for was tutoring.
0 comments:
Post a Comment