[OT] Apple users

On 20 Feb 2011 00:35:24 GMT, notbob wrote:

LOL! Maybe so, but Apple was the BIG brat.... ME! ME! ME! Mine, Mine,
Mine, I WON'T SHARE!

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
 
On 20 Feb 2011 00:35:24 GMT, notbob wrote:

LOL! Maybe so, but Apple was the BIG brat.... ME! ME! ME! Mine, Mine,
Mine, I WON'T SHARE!

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
 
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 17:45:44 +0000 (UTC), Nad R
wrote:


I said *not many*. My 21st century artists include Lady Gaga,
Eminem & Josh Groban.

My taste in music is like my taste in food-- I like variety & I never
know when I'll like something until I sample some.

Jim
 
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 01:00:22 +0000 (UTC), [email protected]
(Steve Pope) wrote:

I've seen a commercial twice now that's for a new product I'm actually
interested in.... and I don't think it's an apple. It's a phone that
hooks into something that looks like a computer. I think AT&T is
advertising it. At&T needs something new now that Verizon can market
Phones and over a better network.


--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
 
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 03:35:01 -1000, dsi1 wrote:


My problem is I usually have too many tabs open at one time, so that
part slows me down.


My kids were surprised to see I wasn't using Chrome yet, I have to
check it out one of these days.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
 
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 01:00:22 +0000 (UTC), [email protected]
(Steve Pope) wrote:

I've seen a commercial twice now that's for a new product I'm actually
interested in.... and I don't think it's an apple. It's a phone that
hooks into something that looks like a computer. I think AT&T is
advertising it. At&T needs something new now that Verizon can market
Phones and over a better network.


--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
 
sf wrote:

Last time Apple shared, by allowing other computer manufactures to use
their operating system, Apples profits plummeted. Then they learned and
stopped doing it. This happened when Steve Jobs was not at the helm.

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)
 
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 17:45:44 +0000 (UTC), Nad R
wrote:


I said *not many*. My 21st century artists include Lady Gaga,
Eminem & Josh Groban.

My taste in music is like my taste in food-- I like variety & I never
know when I'll like something until I sample some.

Jim
 
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 07:48:21 -1000, dsi1 wrote:


I'm unconvinced that these auxiliary devices will ever supplant the
standalone computer. While they will outnumber the PCs (Macs incuded,
natch), i still think the need for the computer will continue and thus
gives rise to more of these narrow-mission devices.


the 15sec boot time is partly (mostly?) due to the SSD. In my Windoze
machines, I get ~25sec boot to XP, and 30sec to Win7 (~15sec excluding
the time for my liquid cooling system to start up).


Platter HDs are likely to stay around for a long time. My 256GB SSD
was ~$700. My 2TB HD was $110. For storage needs, i definitely use
HDs, but for boot drives? definitely SSD. And for portable devices,
natch, SSD. I guess we can thank the iPod for really pushing that
technology so quickly?


lol. One of the startup exercises the MBErr walks you thru is to take
a picutre of yourself to use an an avatar. Uh, DECLINE. kthxbye! :)

-goro-
 
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 19:27:07 -0500, "Nancy Young"
wrote:


When I have a question, I ask a sales person or repairman. Manuals
are so poorly written, they might as well be in Greek.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
 
sf wrote:

Last time Apple shared, by allowing other computer manufactures to use
their operating system, Apples profits plummeted. Then they learned and
stopped doing it. This happened when Steve Jobs was not at the helm.

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)
 
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 07:48:21 -1000, dsi1 wrote:


I'm unconvinced that these auxiliary devices will ever supplant the
standalone computer. While they will outnumber the PCs (Macs incuded,
natch), i still think the need for the computer will continue and thus
gives rise to more of these narrow-mission devices.


the 15sec boot time is partly (mostly?) due to the SSD. In my Windoze
machines, I get ~25sec boot to XP, and 30sec to Win7 (~15sec excluding
the time for my liquid cooling system to start up).


Platter HDs are likely to stay around for a long time. My 256GB SSD
was ~$700. My 2TB HD was $110. For storage needs, i definitely use
HDs, but for boot drives? definitely SSD. And for portable devices,
natch, SSD. I guess we can thank the iPod for really pushing that
technology so quickly?


lol. One of the startup exercises the MBErr walks you thru is to take
a picutre of yourself to use an an avatar. Uh, DECLINE. kthxbye! :)

-goro-
 
On 2011-02-22, sf wrote:



Operator error.

I read the manual for everything I buy, if one is provided. They
all make perfect sense to me.

The days of poorly translated Asian manuals is long gone.

nb
 
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:45:32 -0500, "Nancy Young"
wrote:


I think the Shuffle is ok, but certainly not great. What is to keep
in mind is that there was a progression of iPod and really, the
shuffle is not meant as a person's SOLE ipod.

By the time the shuffle came out, there had been multiple flavors of
iPods for quite a while. The mission of Apple was not how to sell
someone an iPod (they had already succeeded in that), but how to sell
them ANOTHER iPod. So what we started seeing was narrow-mission
iPods, iPods with different storage and form factors for different
reasons. If i don't want a full size iPod to take to the gym, i could
get a mini... or a nano. If i wanted video and touch, i get the iPod
Touch. Then the shuffle for just a sampling of songs for a gym trip
or a bicycle trip, etc. The feature of shuffling in music from itunes
so that you can just fill it up with a bunch of songs is indicative of
how "they" expect you to use it.

So there's a built-in momentum here. If you already had 1 or 2 iPods,
your musical library is already established with iTunes, and you
decided to get a shuffle, it really becomes a relatively painless
(theoretically) effort to hook your new shuffle in and load it up with
the songs you already like.

The interface is ok, i suppose. Certainly it's usable if not great,
but given the focus on form (size/weight), that's what they came up
with. Notable is that the previous gen of the shuffle was seemingly a
failure which is why this newest one somewhat reverts to 2gen ago
shuffle. And then the newest Nano now looks like a slightly bigger
shuffle with touch screen. This is a nice interface, but there's a
tradeoff in that the size difference is noticeable, especially if you
are doing alot of movement while having it clipped on.

I'm surprised that your shuffle died on you so quickly; that might be
a Q/A issue.

btw, I really hate iTunes, also. It's a pain, slow, wtf is
"determining gapless playback"?!, hate the prompts (What exactly does
clicking "don't ask me again" do, since i get asked again each time
anyway?). BUt overall I have really enjoyed using my iPods. But if
you are happy with what you have now, that's quite excellent, too!

-goro-
 
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:45:32 -0500, "Nancy Young"
wrote:


I think the Shuffle is ok, but certainly not great. What is to keep
in mind is that there was a progression of iPod and really, the
shuffle is not meant as a person's SOLE ipod.

By the time the shuffle came out, there had been multiple flavors of
iPods for quite a while. The mission of Apple was not how to sell
someone an iPod (they had already succeeded in that), but how to sell
them ANOTHER iPod. So what we started seeing was narrow-mission
iPods, iPods with different storage and form factors for different
reasons. If i don't want a full size iPod to take to the gym, i could
get a mini... or a nano. If i wanted video and touch, i get the iPod
Touch. Then the shuffle for just a sampling of songs for a gym trip
or a bicycle trip, etc. The feature of shuffling in music from itunes
so that you can just fill it up with a bunch of songs is indicative of
how "they" expect you to use it.

So there's a built-in momentum here. If you already had 1 or 2 iPods,
your musical library is already established with iTunes, and you
decided to get a shuffle, it really becomes a relatively painless
(theoretically) effort to hook your new shuffle in and load it up with
the songs you already like.

The interface is ok, i suppose. Certainly it's usable if not great,
but given the focus on form (size/weight), that's what they came up
with. Notable is that the previous gen of the shuffle was seemingly a
failure which is why this newest one somewhat reverts to 2gen ago
shuffle. And then the newest Nano now looks like a slightly bigger
shuffle with touch screen. This is a nice interface, but there's a
tradeoff in that the size difference is noticeable, especially if you
are doing alot of movement while having it clipped on.

I'm surprised that your shuffle died on you so quickly; that might be
a Q/A issue.

btw, I really hate iTunes, also. It's a pain, slow, wtf is
"determining gapless playback"?!, hate the prompts (What exactly does
clicking "don't ask me again" do, since i get asked again each time
anyway?). BUt overall I have really enjoyed using my iPods. But if
you are happy with what you have now, that's quite excellent, too!

-goro-
 
On 2/19/2011 8:00 PM, Steve Pope wrote:

I don't think its just Apple. Apple simply learned how to attract many
who have no personal identity and think they are purchasing one when
sporting something with a label that is recognized by others like them
as "important".
 
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 20:29:20 -1000, dsi1 wrote:


Netscape was bought by AOL.

IE was based on NCSA Mosaic.

IE's market share has been dropping terribly over the past 2-3 years.
It's now well under 50% of the market share.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers

Momentum is now on the side of alternate browsers and it's now more
and more commonplace for users to get Firefox or Chrome or Opera than
it was before.

Microsoft's paradigm of EEE (Embrace, Enhance, Extinguish) has led
them down a pretty bad path w/IE. Since its inception, it has been
non-standards compliant and so web developers have had to build around
the quirks of IE (often building dual branches, 1 for standards
compliant browsers like Firefox and one for IE). And now that IE 8 is
MORE standards compliant, old IE websites are breaking.

And with AJax being more prevalent online, things like Chrome's huge
performance increase in javascript engine are very notable. Especially
when you compare it against the slow and problematic IE javascript
engine.

-goro-
 
On 2/19/2011 8:00 PM, Steve Pope wrote:

I don't think its just Apple. Apple simply learned how to attract many
who have no personal identity and think they are purchasing one when
sporting something with a label that is recognized by others like them
as "important".
 
Back
Top