radiohead14
May 3, 03:02 PM
1. Root
2. XDA Forum
3. Side load
4. ???
5. Winning.
it's amazing what those XDA devs could do. great helpful community there.
2. XDA Forum
3. Side load
4. ???
5. Winning.
it's amazing what those XDA devs could do. great helpful community there.
ulbador
Apr 26, 08:43 PM
The OP is shockingly confused. When it says that you can't reuse an invalidated NSTimer, that just means you have to create a new instance. You can reuse that pointer as much as you want once you invalidate and release it.
zoetropeuk
Sep 26, 07:15 AM
I am the owner of a Fuji S3 Pro and I bought Aperture 1 about a year ago ($499). And there was no support for Fujifilm Raw files. I returned the item to Apple.
I checked again today and the Fuji S3 Pro file format is now listed in the Camera Supported page Apple posted for Aperture 1.5 (http://www.apple.com/aperture/raw/cameras.html)
The web page says OPTIMIZED Support. see below
Aperture 1.5 supports the RAW formats from the following digital cameras, providing optimized support to those cameras followed with an asterisk (*). Shoot JPEG? Using Aperture, you can import JPEG images from virtually all digital cameras.
Fujifilm
FinePix S2 Pro*
FinePix S3 Pro*
Does anyone know what this is about?
Isn't it obvious :eek:
I checked again today and the Fuji S3 Pro file format is now listed in the Camera Supported page Apple posted for Aperture 1.5 (http://www.apple.com/aperture/raw/cameras.html)
The web page says OPTIMIZED Support. see below
Aperture 1.5 supports the RAW formats from the following digital cameras, providing optimized support to those cameras followed with an asterisk (*). Shoot JPEG? Using Aperture, you can import JPEG images from virtually all digital cameras.
Fujifilm
FinePix S2 Pro*
FinePix S3 Pro*
Does anyone know what this is about?
Isn't it obvious :eek:
drayon
Apr 30, 12:03 AM
Hey knock it off with all the off topic Windows drivel. Winrumors forums would be a better place to dispute these matters.
more...
MattyMac
Sep 12, 07:36 AM
Oh man Oh man Oh man
slabbius
Nov 24, 08:45 PM
just ordered a nano
more...
err404
May 2, 11:59 AM
It's taking a lot on trust to just click 'Accept' and most of the time it's OK... But check out the South Park episode for how it could go wrong..! :)
The location collection opt-in is NOT simply tied to agreeing to your TOS/EULA. It's a fairly clear and concise dialog and entirely optional:
http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/itunes_location.png
The location collection opt-in is NOT simply tied to agreeing to your TOS/EULA. It's a fairly clear and concise dialog and entirely optional:
http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/itunes_location.png
AppliedVisual
Oct 17, 02:33 PM
Tape!?! :confused: who on earth uses tape anymore? This is.. 2006. And I was always under the impression that a medium with moving parts would be more prone to failure than one without. Certainly my VHS and cassette library have had their share of tapes being chewed up by the machine or worn out from use.
Tape is still the most reliable, long-term archival media available. Newer tape systems can transfer over 150MB/sec. to and from the tape and store several hundred GB on a single tape. Cost-wise, tape is expensive to buy into, but if you have sufficeint archival needs, it pays for itself over time. Many tape solutions once they reach their ROI point afer a year or two, often are cheaper than HDD storage by half or more. Sounds weird, I know, but that's the way it still is.
Most large data centers covering everything from web storage, insurance databases, financial institutions etc... Have mostly converted over to large-scale redundant servers and storage networks using RAID subsystems. This serves all their immediate storage and backup needs on site and is very reliable if managed properly. But nearly all of them still use an additional tape archival workflow for off-site data storage. There really is no other way right now... Wish there was. Hence the reason tape systems also keep evolving and pretty much match HDD capacity with tape capacity in most cases and transfer rates continue to improve. Comparing tape archival systems to VHS or miniDV tape is not a good comparison, data tapes (or at least the good ones) are very robust and actually very hard to damage. Short of placing them in a magnetic field for a period of time, they're mostly indestructable. They do have moving parts, but hardly any compared to a hard drive.
Using hard drives as an archival solution is a bad idea... Hard drives are not designed for this and can corrupt data over time. Not to mention, the platter system and motors are not designed to sit stationary for years at a time for long-term storage. Optical media isn't too bad, but most photo-sensitive dyes and films used in optical media will decay over time. CD-R media was originally claimed to have a lifespan of 30 to 100 years. Now that it's been around for 30+ years, we're finding out that claim was somewhat exaggerated. Recordable DVD media and HD-DVD and BD are no different, just higher data density on the discs. And also not anywhere near practical for large-scale solutions. Just how do you archive and manage 300 petabytes per year to DVD-R???
For small business type users and home users though, DVD-R media in addition to a good redundant RAID setup probably makes the most sense. Unless they're pushing lots of data doing HD video editing or something like that. In which case, it may still make sense to give tape a consideration as the long-term archive solution. Prosumer level tape archive systems exist and are not that expensive and much more reliable than shelved hard drives and much easier to manage than optical media. The VXA2 format can afford someone an external Firewire tape system w/2 tapes for < $1K. Tapes hold up to 160GB each and factoring in the cost of the drive plus enough tapes to back up about 3 terrabytes of data, the cost becomes cheaper than individual hard drives. So a few terrabytes down the road and you could be wishing you had considered tape if you're still using DVD-R. OTOH, DVD-R is just fine and dandy if a terrabyte or two is all you need. Because you can fit a lot of discs in a shoebox and sharpie pen to label them is pretty cheap too.
External drives are *not* long term archiving solutions. They are useful for storing vast amounts of data that presumably you want to actually access and use (and possibly modify) on a regular basis; also, they are good for the kind of incremental backups you refer to, Time Machine, Retrospect, other 3rd party backup tools can be used for this. But if you have important files you know aren't going to change, while having them on HDD is useful for instant access, that's not where they should be permanently archived -- they should be burned to a permanent medium, preferably more than one copy, and stored in a safe place (or places). If your drive fails and you still need the data to be on that drive, you can then restore from the permanent medium.
Um... I guess I got carried away and didn't mean to elaborate on what you already said. But, er... um.. Yep, I agree.
Tape is still the most reliable, long-term archival media available. Newer tape systems can transfer over 150MB/sec. to and from the tape and store several hundred GB on a single tape. Cost-wise, tape is expensive to buy into, but if you have sufficeint archival needs, it pays for itself over time. Many tape solutions once they reach their ROI point afer a year or two, often are cheaper than HDD storage by half or more. Sounds weird, I know, but that's the way it still is.
Most large data centers covering everything from web storage, insurance databases, financial institutions etc... Have mostly converted over to large-scale redundant servers and storage networks using RAID subsystems. This serves all their immediate storage and backup needs on site and is very reliable if managed properly. But nearly all of them still use an additional tape archival workflow for off-site data storage. There really is no other way right now... Wish there was. Hence the reason tape systems also keep evolving and pretty much match HDD capacity with tape capacity in most cases and transfer rates continue to improve. Comparing tape archival systems to VHS or miniDV tape is not a good comparison, data tapes (or at least the good ones) are very robust and actually very hard to damage. Short of placing them in a magnetic field for a period of time, they're mostly indestructable. They do have moving parts, but hardly any compared to a hard drive.
Using hard drives as an archival solution is a bad idea... Hard drives are not designed for this and can corrupt data over time. Not to mention, the platter system and motors are not designed to sit stationary for years at a time for long-term storage. Optical media isn't too bad, but most photo-sensitive dyes and films used in optical media will decay over time. CD-R media was originally claimed to have a lifespan of 30 to 100 years. Now that it's been around for 30+ years, we're finding out that claim was somewhat exaggerated. Recordable DVD media and HD-DVD and BD are no different, just higher data density on the discs. And also not anywhere near practical for large-scale solutions. Just how do you archive and manage 300 petabytes per year to DVD-R???
For small business type users and home users though, DVD-R media in addition to a good redundant RAID setup probably makes the most sense. Unless they're pushing lots of data doing HD video editing or something like that. In which case, it may still make sense to give tape a consideration as the long-term archive solution. Prosumer level tape archive systems exist and are not that expensive and much more reliable than shelved hard drives and much easier to manage than optical media. The VXA2 format can afford someone an external Firewire tape system w/2 tapes for < $1K. Tapes hold up to 160GB each and factoring in the cost of the drive plus enough tapes to back up about 3 terrabytes of data, the cost becomes cheaper than individual hard drives. So a few terrabytes down the road and you could be wishing you had considered tape if you're still using DVD-R. OTOH, DVD-R is just fine and dandy if a terrabyte or two is all you need. Because you can fit a lot of discs in a shoebox and sharpie pen to label them is pretty cheap too.
External drives are *not* long term archiving solutions. They are useful for storing vast amounts of data that presumably you want to actually access and use (and possibly modify) on a regular basis; also, they are good for the kind of incremental backups you refer to, Time Machine, Retrospect, other 3rd party backup tools can be used for this. But if you have important files you know aren't going to change, while having them on HDD is useful for instant access, that's not where they should be permanently archived -- they should be burned to a permanent medium, preferably more than one copy, and stored in a safe place (or places). If your drive fails and you still need the data to be on that drive, you can then restore from the permanent medium.
Um... I guess I got carried away and didn't mean to elaborate on what you already said. But, er... um.. Yep, I agree.
more...
Macula
Oct 28, 04:40 PM
As long as it is MEANINGFUL to run OS/X on generic PCs, technical solutions (and ever better ones for that matter) will always be found.
The only way for Apple to safeguard OS/X from generic machines is to make such hacking MEANINGLESS. The solution is not in security technologies such as TPM but in MARKETING: Building machines that are evidently cheaper, beautiful, feature-rich and FASTER than the competition.
(Same goes for iPod and DRM, which was also cracked recently).
The only way for Apple to safeguard OS/X from generic machines is to make such hacking MEANINGLESS. The solution is not in security technologies such as TPM but in MARKETING: Building machines that are evidently cheaper, beautiful, feature-rich and FASTER than the competition.
(Same goes for iPod and DRM, which was also cracked recently).
JML42691
May 1, 01:23 PM
I'm sure it's been mentioned, but I feel that people shouldn't be able to rate their own posts.
more...
Rocksaurus
Oct 28, 06:30 PM
Yes, big parts of it come from the BSD world.
The BSD terms specifically allow derivatives to keep their sources closed, as long as credit is given.
Okay. Everyone's got their own morals, but if a few people are putting OS X on their PCs, I don't see it as a huge issue. Given how complicated it is it's not really a *problem*. But if a rich company like Apple takes a free thing and makes money off of it and only gives some of it back to the community that created it and gave it away, that seems less moral (this is my opinion) regardless of what the legal documents say.
The BSD terms specifically allow derivatives to keep their sources closed, as long as credit is given.
Okay. Everyone's got their own morals, but if a few people are putting OS X on their PCs, I don't see it as a huge issue. Given how complicated it is it's not really a *problem*. But if a rich company like Apple takes a free thing and makes money off of it and only gives some of it back to the community that created it and gave it away, that seems less moral (this is my opinion) regardless of what the legal documents say.
NoSmokingBandit
Nov 15, 07:47 PM
That depends on the game. Everything after COD4 has had a very shallow campaign that is just boring. I only play the campaign because i find COD's online to be bland. I like MP with different classes, like TF2 or KZ2. I dont like when everyone's job is simply shooting. It gets boring really quickly for me. I played KZ2 online more than any other game because if i got tired or sniping i could go around setting up bots. If i got tired of that i could play Medic and heal the crap out of people. So many things to do whereas in COD everyone has a gun and shoots, thats all.
So i'd rather have Treyarch spend more time on the campaign than MP. Insomniac makes a game with a solid campaign every year (except this year -_-) and they are working with a tiny budget compared to the COD franchise.
So i'd rather have Treyarch spend more time on the campaign than MP. Insomniac makes a game with a solid campaign every year (except this year -_-) and they are working with a tiny budget compared to the COD franchise.
more...
Yannick
Oct 17, 09:53 AM
yawn! the disc is dead.
(dying, at least.)
I personnally don't agree. Movies you can buy and download still have poorer resolution, only one language, no bonus. Plus it takes so much room on your hard drive! You end up having to burn them anyway on a disc, or having to buy two huge hard drives for backup/safety purpose in case your hard drive dies. I own something like 150 DVD. That's about 1 TB (2 TB if you backup)� You really can't compare it to the music situation. Movies on DVD are cheaper than music CD. I get brand new DVDs through internet for an average of 7 � ($8.77). For me to buy a movie on iTunes, it would have to sell for 3 or 4 � ($4 or $5) to be worth it.
(dying, at least.)
I personnally don't agree. Movies you can buy and download still have poorer resolution, only one language, no bonus. Plus it takes so much room on your hard drive! You end up having to burn them anyway on a disc, or having to buy two huge hard drives for backup/safety purpose in case your hard drive dies. I own something like 150 DVD. That's about 1 TB (2 TB if you backup)� You really can't compare it to the music situation. Movies on DVD are cheaper than music CD. I get brand new DVDs through internet for an average of 7 � ($8.77). For me to buy a movie on iTunes, it would have to sell for 3 or 4 � ($4 or $5) to be worth it.
Sesshi
Oct 10, 03:41 PM
I doubt it'll be necessary, given the Pavlovian nature of most failed wannabe tech journalists - aka bloggers for Engadget and Gizmodo, and staff writers for Computerworld for starters - to drool on command when Apple is mentioned
more...
Malcster
Sep 12, 04:36 AM
He did it last year. The 5G event was streamed to Europe and you still can't get TV shows. Neither can we but it wasn't streamed here.
ah i think your right, memory is hazy, the 5G release was so long ago now...
ah i think your right, memory is hazy, the 5G release was so long ago now...
RawBert
Apr 29, 01:20 PM
Damn, I can't wait for the public release of this.
more...
jholzner
Sep 12, 08:45 AM
please read the thread....
When you come across a bit of information that seems to point to some sort of confirmation to a rumor do you read 9 pages of threads or do you just post it? I scolled through real quick to see if the image had been posted and didn't see it. Lay off.
When you come across a bit of information that seems to point to some sort of confirmation to a rumor do you read 9 pages of threads or do you just post it? I scolled through real quick to see if the image had been posted and didn't see it. Lay off.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 9, 09:11 PM
I see you've been educated in the public school system :D
Your point? Do you deny General Lee surrendered on this date in 1865?
This was an important victory for the US.
Actually it looks like you are being sarcastic. LOL
Your point? Do you deny General Lee surrendered on this date in 1865?
This was an important victory for the US.
Actually it looks like you are being sarcastic. LOL
Joshuarocks
Apr 7, 11:39 AM
Also this just in... Windows 8 appears to be running off of a Unix like platform underneath the GUI interface.. this could be the beginning of a Unix based OS similar to MAC OS X itself.
Ballmer has outdone himself this time.
Ballmer has outdone himself this time.
NoSmokingBandit
Nov 15, 07:47 PM
That depends on the game. Everything after COD4 has had a very shallow campaign that is just boring. I only play the campaign because i find COD's online to be bland. I like MP with different classes, like TF2 or KZ2. I dont like when everyone's job is simply shooting. It gets boring really quickly for me. I played KZ2 online more than any other game because if i got tired or sniping i could go around setting up bots. If i got tired of that i could play Medic and heal the crap out of people. So many things to do whereas in COD everyone has a gun and shoots, thats all.
So i'd rather have Treyarch spend more time on the campaign than MP. Insomniac makes a game with a solid campaign every year (except this year -_-) and they are working with a tiny budget compared to the COD franchise.
So i'd rather have Treyarch spend more time on the campaign than MP. Insomniac makes a game with a solid campaign every year (except this year -_-) and they are working with a tiny budget compared to the COD franchise.
VenusianSky
Oct 6, 12:47 PM
Before you pick a phone, pick a network.
This was the funniest part of the fine print. Too bad for Verizon that the customers they lost to AT&T didn't pick the network over the phone. Instead of fine print, they should make that their slogan. Too bad it won't matter. iPhone trumps call quality.
This was the funniest part of the fine print. Too bad for Verizon that the customers they lost to AT&T didn't pick the network over the phone. Instead of fine print, they should make that their slogan. Too bad it won't matter. iPhone trumps call quality.
RaZaK
Oct 9, 11:16 AM
i have no love for Verizon, but that was certainly a hilarious commercial.
I guess 'desperation is the mother of all invention' applies here (i know that's not the correct quote :rolleyes:)
it will be interesting to see what happens next year when exclusivity supposedly ends
it will also be interesting to see if Android gains momentum with support from all the phone carriers.
:D
still, :apple: FTW
I guess 'desperation is the mother of all invention' applies here (i know that's not the correct quote :rolleyes:)
it will be interesting to see what happens next year when exclusivity supposedly ends
it will also be interesting to see if Android gains momentum with support from all the phone carriers.
:D
still, :apple: FTW
Christian247
Apr 15, 01:16 PM
I agree, these photos are not of the real product. although I have seen other photos of a similar iPhone design, but with a chromed bezel that wraps around the entire image, and makes it look much better. and a polished back casing; because Apple is; a well polished company...They arent going to have another unfinished backing.
FAKE, now it's on to the next one...
FAKE, now it's on to the next one...
Nekbeth
Apr 27, 07:49 PM
No, self refers to the instance of the object that is executing the currently running code. It is highly context dependant.
Inside a method of your view controller, yes, self refers to your view controller. Inside a method in your view object, self refers to the view object. Inside the NSTimer object, self refers to the NSTimer.
Yes, that's what I though.. I was asked the meaning of "target", so I gave an example that target:self in NSTimer refer to the timer object (one of my quiz questions), but I can't remember his name.. said that "self" refer to the controller even inside the NSTimer. That's why I said.. interesting, I mean.. all of you should know what your talking about a lot more than me. (specially Master balamw)
About the timer and how it's going... well, I really don't have time to continue to make it work, so I have postpone it for a later update. I just need to learn more about it to fix it. But hey, If you feel like giving the answer, go ahead.
The only thing that I'm missing is to restart the Timer (or use another one). Invalidating my Timer only pauses it, even = nil or releasing it, my Timer just continues where it left.
I have found a tutorial where you can start, stop and reset a timer, I could use that, but I want a datePicker to select time and the tutorial doesn't show that. Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jmTQi98vec&feature=related
Please, let me know if you need more code of the timer. I think I have share all of it.
balamw;12474773]By this point I would have expected Nekbeth to have called us "Nazis" instead of "Pros" in order to satisfy Godwin's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law).
B
that is the dumbest thing I've read in a while :p
Inside a method of your view controller, yes, self refers to your view controller. Inside a method in your view object, self refers to the view object. Inside the NSTimer object, self refers to the NSTimer.
Yes, that's what I though.. I was asked the meaning of "target", so I gave an example that target:self in NSTimer refer to the timer object (one of my quiz questions), but I can't remember his name.. said that "self" refer to the controller even inside the NSTimer. That's why I said.. interesting, I mean.. all of you should know what your talking about a lot more than me. (specially Master balamw)
About the timer and how it's going... well, I really don't have time to continue to make it work, so I have postpone it for a later update. I just need to learn more about it to fix it. But hey, If you feel like giving the answer, go ahead.
The only thing that I'm missing is to restart the Timer (or use another one). Invalidating my Timer only pauses it, even = nil or releasing it, my Timer just continues where it left.
I have found a tutorial where you can start, stop and reset a timer, I could use that, but I want a datePicker to select time and the tutorial doesn't show that. Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jmTQi98vec&feature=related
Please, let me know if you need more code of the timer. I think I have share all of it.
balamw;12474773]By this point I would have expected Nekbeth to have called us "Nazis" instead of "Pros" in order to satisfy Godwin's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law).
B
that is the dumbest thing I've read in a while :p
No comments:
Post a Comment