redeye be
Jun 10, 03:37 AM
Back at my computer, finally.
A lumbago kept me laying down in front of my tv since sunday. sucks.
Thx for helping out with the user questions.
Time to do some work on the widget :D
A lumbago kept me laying down in front of my tv since sunday. sucks.
Thx for helping out with the user questions.
Time to do some work on the widget :D
Veinticinco
Apr 7, 04:02 AM
Nobody is upset that after 4+ years they're STILL using the chrome back?!?!?
Easily fixed as it's always been right back to the old iPods.
Easily fixed as it's always been right back to the old iPods.
MacModMachine
Nov 18, 07:31 AM
Stolen goods or not, nevermind that - but $300 per kit? :eek:
Why not just buy a white case?
lol yup,
white case is what?...$10-$20 ?
and you can replace it in a second.
anything over 40$ is a joke for a few pieces of plastic.
Why not just buy a white case?
lol yup,
white case is what?...$10-$20 ?
and you can replace it in a second.
anything over 40$ is a joke for a few pieces of plastic.
djellison
Mar 22, 10:09 AM
Dude, seriously, it's $499. That's $100 more than a crappy netbook ...
...that has a proper keyboard. A larger screen. A 160 or maybe 250 or even 500 gb hard drive. multiple USB ports, vga and maybe even HDMI. Can multitask, run the Office apps the business world actually uses, play any movie format including HD content, DIvx, H264 etc, browse the web with Safari. Or Firfox. Or Opera. With flash...that works.
Compared to a 'Crappy' netbook, even the cheap iPad is very expensive.
I may very well get one, entirely depending on how well it plays video, and how well it manages and displays PDF's. But lets not pretend it's cheap, or even reasonably priced, compared to Netbooks.
...that has a proper keyboard. A larger screen. A 160 or maybe 250 or even 500 gb hard drive. multiple USB ports, vga and maybe even HDMI. Can multitask, run the Office apps the business world actually uses, play any movie format including HD content, DIvx, H264 etc, browse the web with Safari. Or Firfox. Or Opera. With flash...that works.
Compared to a 'Crappy' netbook, even the cheap iPad is very expensive.
I may very well get one, entirely depending on how well it plays video, and how well it manages and displays PDF's. But lets not pretend it's cheap, or even reasonably priced, compared to Netbooks.
more...
Polo5
Oct 6, 10:00 AM
Really? that would be interesting
Michael CM1
Jun 20, 12:49 AM
Maybe some of you who own one of the two HD systems can help me out.
I own a Wii. I really like it, but you've got companies like EA who think it's only 5-year-olds and grannies playing it. Therefore, we get things like NCAA Football 09. That was by far the worst sports game I have ever played. It was like EA took NCAA 06 for the PS2, stripped out everything good and put in a mascot game. EA didn't make NCAA Football 10, and I see no indication of NCAA Football 11 for Wii.
Thus with the newer designs of the 360 and PS3, I'm considering getting one. I mainly would like HD games at times, especially the college football one. I looked into the 360 Arcade version and balked immediately because it sounds like something for people who never want to save a game. Oh yeah, it has NO WIFI. No WiFi is a dealbreaker on the Pro or whatever 360 as well.
I have a neighbor who manages a GameStop, so I plan on asking him about this. But I'm just curious as to what you guys think. I have zero interest in buying any movies or music online through this. I really don't know much about games specific to each platform. A friend told me there was a Magic: The Gathering game for XBox. That would be pretty neat, especially if I could trade all those damn cards I have for it. I don't plan on doing any Rock Band or Guitar Hero for those because I dropped $150 on the set for Wii. I saw Final Fantasy XIII was on the 360, but I bought friggin' Final Fantasy X for $20 and never played it on my PS2.
I also doubt I'll have much interest in these systems' motion controls because of cost. I'm really not wanting to go all in on these things. I just want an alternative to Wii for when the developers get sloppy and don't release a game I like for Wii. I own a crapload of BDs, so that is in my mind for the PS3. But I already have two BD players for my two HDTVs. So thanks for any input.
I own a Wii. I really like it, but you've got companies like EA who think it's only 5-year-olds and grannies playing it. Therefore, we get things like NCAA Football 09. That was by far the worst sports game I have ever played. It was like EA took NCAA 06 for the PS2, stripped out everything good and put in a mascot game. EA didn't make NCAA Football 10, and I see no indication of NCAA Football 11 for Wii.
Thus with the newer designs of the 360 and PS3, I'm considering getting one. I mainly would like HD games at times, especially the college football one. I looked into the 360 Arcade version and balked immediately because it sounds like something for people who never want to save a game. Oh yeah, it has NO WIFI. No WiFi is a dealbreaker on the Pro or whatever 360 as well.
I have a neighbor who manages a GameStop, so I plan on asking him about this. But I'm just curious as to what you guys think. I have zero interest in buying any movies or music online through this. I really don't know much about games specific to each platform. A friend told me there was a Magic: The Gathering game for XBox. That would be pretty neat, especially if I could trade all those damn cards I have for it. I don't plan on doing any Rock Band or Guitar Hero for those because I dropped $150 on the set for Wii. I saw Final Fantasy XIII was on the 360, but I bought friggin' Final Fantasy X for $20 and never played it on my PS2.
I also doubt I'll have much interest in these systems' motion controls because of cost. I'm really not wanting to go all in on these things. I just want an alternative to Wii for when the developers get sloppy and don't release a game I like for Wii. I own a crapload of BDs, so that is in my mind for the PS3. But I already have two BD players for my two HDTVs. So thanks for any input.
more...
wsteineker
May 26, 01:48 AM
Originally posted by Ryan1524
i'm just curious about all the people that stated how PCs are troublesome when we're adding hardwares. after i installed XP, i did not even installed any driver and everything was recognized as soon as i plugged them in and working in no time, from keyboards, mouses, to routers, scanners, graphics cards, printers, digital cameras. i had the drivers ready, expecting the onslaught of hardware setup wizard typical of 98, but instead, there's the little pop up box near the system tray that stated that these hardwares have been recognized, drivers installed, and ready for use. and sure enough, they are. as for the hardware incompatibilities, remember that PC hardwares and softwares are made by two different companies, while any apple computers ae assembled and prepared by on company who manufactured both. therefore, they KNOW what their software needs in order for them to work perfectly.
Ok, here's a nightmare for you just to illustrate the kind of headaches we're talking about. First, let me start by saying that I upgraded my Cube from OS 9.2.2 to OS X 10.1 all the way through 10.2.4 with no problems, and that I recently installed a Pioneer A05 DVD-R/RW in my Quicksilver tower without so much as a hiccup. So on to my Windows XP hell...
Here's the deal. I was running a Dell with Windows 98 SE, all updates and service packs installed. The system specs were as follows: 1.2 GHz P4, 1 GB RDRAM, 80 GB HD, DVD ROM (all stock) and a Geforce 3 Ti and Sony CDRW (upgrades). Everything was hunky dory, but I was wondering what this new Microsoft OS was about. A buddy of mine is an IT admin and was just RAVING about the thing, so I figured I'd give it a try. His company bought XP on a corporate license (without the hardware registration and activation, and with one token serial for the entire company) so he gave me a copy just to try out. I appreciatively installed it on my machine which well outpaced the recommended minimum config, and got to work. The install crashed twice, but I managed to get past that.
Once I had successfully installed, I realized that everything was running well. I went to the prefs pane to take care of that Fisher-Price My First Interface (TM), and everything was fantastic. It really was more stable, though not so much so that I never crashed at all. In fact, I still crashed once a day, but that was so much of an improvement over 98 that I didn't complain. The only real problem I had for the better part of a month was that every time something went south the machine asked me if I wished to send an error report to Microsoft. Ugh.
So things are great for around 3 weeks when all of the sudden my CDR just stops working. Seriously, just like that. I wake up, boot, and BOOM! It's gone. It's not in My Computer, and I can't use it at all. It's visible in the BIOS, and it's obviously drawing power, but XP just decided that it wasn't welcome anymore. I got in touch with Sony after I was unable to find an XP driver on their site, and they told me that XP didn't actually need drivers. They recommended trying the 2000 Pro driver. That didn't work either, so I called Microsoft. They recommended a reformat. To this day they have no idea what went wrong. No service pack has been able to fix this, and it cost me countless hours (on top of those already detailed) to remove the HD, install it as a slave on a 2000 machine (because it was NTFS formatted) and recover my data to 65 individual CDs. What a nightmare.
My experience may be atypical, but from talking to friends and reading the horror stories here I've come to doubt it. Simply put, XP really is the best OS Microsoft has ever produced (except for 2000 Pro, but we're quibbling). That being said, being a higher grade piece of ***** doesn't count for much. It's still a piece of ***** after all, and it's still got more buggy code than it does functional code. Since I switched to the Mac my life has been simpler. Period. End of story. Even when using OS 9 I never experienced horrors like this. OS X has been a breeze since 10.1 on 3 year old hardware. When was the last time someone could say that about ANY Microsoft OS? Seriously, the only hardware problems I've had at all on my Mac were directly related to bad memory, and that's not the fault of the OS. That's why we bitch and moan about Windows, my friend. That's why. :)
i'm just curious about all the people that stated how PCs are troublesome when we're adding hardwares. after i installed XP, i did not even installed any driver and everything was recognized as soon as i plugged them in and working in no time, from keyboards, mouses, to routers, scanners, graphics cards, printers, digital cameras. i had the drivers ready, expecting the onslaught of hardware setup wizard typical of 98, but instead, there's the little pop up box near the system tray that stated that these hardwares have been recognized, drivers installed, and ready for use. and sure enough, they are. as for the hardware incompatibilities, remember that PC hardwares and softwares are made by two different companies, while any apple computers ae assembled and prepared by on company who manufactured both. therefore, they KNOW what their software needs in order for them to work perfectly.
Ok, here's a nightmare for you just to illustrate the kind of headaches we're talking about. First, let me start by saying that I upgraded my Cube from OS 9.2.2 to OS X 10.1 all the way through 10.2.4 with no problems, and that I recently installed a Pioneer A05 DVD-R/RW in my Quicksilver tower without so much as a hiccup. So on to my Windows XP hell...
Here's the deal. I was running a Dell with Windows 98 SE, all updates and service packs installed. The system specs were as follows: 1.2 GHz P4, 1 GB RDRAM, 80 GB HD, DVD ROM (all stock) and a Geforce 3 Ti and Sony CDRW (upgrades). Everything was hunky dory, but I was wondering what this new Microsoft OS was about. A buddy of mine is an IT admin and was just RAVING about the thing, so I figured I'd give it a try. His company bought XP on a corporate license (without the hardware registration and activation, and with one token serial for the entire company) so he gave me a copy just to try out. I appreciatively installed it on my machine which well outpaced the recommended minimum config, and got to work. The install crashed twice, but I managed to get past that.
Once I had successfully installed, I realized that everything was running well. I went to the prefs pane to take care of that Fisher-Price My First Interface (TM), and everything was fantastic. It really was more stable, though not so much so that I never crashed at all. In fact, I still crashed once a day, but that was so much of an improvement over 98 that I didn't complain. The only real problem I had for the better part of a month was that every time something went south the machine asked me if I wished to send an error report to Microsoft. Ugh.
So things are great for around 3 weeks when all of the sudden my CDR just stops working. Seriously, just like that. I wake up, boot, and BOOM! It's gone. It's not in My Computer, and I can't use it at all. It's visible in the BIOS, and it's obviously drawing power, but XP just decided that it wasn't welcome anymore. I got in touch with Sony after I was unable to find an XP driver on their site, and they told me that XP didn't actually need drivers. They recommended trying the 2000 Pro driver. That didn't work either, so I called Microsoft. They recommended a reformat. To this day they have no idea what went wrong. No service pack has been able to fix this, and it cost me countless hours (on top of those already detailed) to remove the HD, install it as a slave on a 2000 machine (because it was NTFS formatted) and recover my data to 65 individual CDs. What a nightmare.
My experience may be atypical, but from talking to friends and reading the horror stories here I've come to doubt it. Simply put, XP really is the best OS Microsoft has ever produced (except for 2000 Pro, but we're quibbling). That being said, being a higher grade piece of ***** doesn't count for much. It's still a piece of ***** after all, and it's still got more buggy code than it does functional code. Since I switched to the Mac my life has been simpler. Period. End of story. Even when using OS 9 I never experienced horrors like this. OS X has been a breeze since 10.1 on 3 year old hardware. When was the last time someone could say that about ANY Microsoft OS? Seriously, the only hardware problems I've had at all on my Mac were directly related to bad memory, and that's not the fault of the OS. That's why we bitch and moan about Windows, my friend. That's why. :)
fairbanx
Feb 24, 10:11 AM
it would be great if the "full" version is included. maybe you're forced to purchase additional "packs" via app-store if you want to enhance a "basic" server version, i.e. mail-server etc.
more...
OllyW
Mar 11, 03:02 PM
I struggled for a while to think of anything I own which is made in the USA but just remembered my mountain bike has a titanium frame made in Washington (though it's Canadian branded) and forks made in California. :)
rhett7660
Mar 24, 02:50 PM
Crap... that is a freaking steel and well there just went the resell value of everyone's first gen iPad, including me. Oh well.
more...
2 Replies
Apr 19, 11:29 AM
Also, oopsie hardware releases aside, how would a "supposedly" early software build of iOS5 end up in the prototype phone of some guy in South East Asia? Hardware production is outsourced to Asia, yes, but software would be held pretty damn closely. Maybe I'm wrong?
BS- IMHO this is a shamster.
(Bold added for reference.)
Read the article title again genius. :rolleyes:
... or actually RTFA. (second to last paragraph).
BS- IMHO this is a shamster.
(Bold added for reference.)
Read the article title again genius. :rolleyes:
... or actually RTFA. (second to last paragraph).
SPUY767
Nov 21, 09:47 PM
In the business world, you need to be able to make a good impression. If you have a flashy website and nothing behind it, you're going nowhere. If you have good substance but poor presentation of it, you can still succeed, but it can be a lot harder than if you've got it presented well.
Sitting down for an hour with GoLive would provide them with a much better front door to the world. Starting a tech company is hard, but it's easier if you excel in all areas of your business. And yes, publicity is one of those areas.
It's not that they didn't take the time, it's just that your website has to look like that if you're going to comply with Every W3C and CSS regulation. :D
Sitting down for an hour with GoLive would provide them with a much better front door to the world. Starting a tech company is hard, but it's easier if you excel in all areas of your business. And yes, publicity is one of those areas.
It's not that they didn't take the time, it's just that your website has to look like that if you're going to comply with Every W3C and CSS regulation. :D
more...
RacerX
Apr 3, 03:00 AM
I think that Apple was probably aiming to make Pages into a desktop publishing program but then found halfway through that most of the features added in were pretty similar to what word has. Maybe that's why Jobs decided to put it head to head with Word?
Pages is a resurrected application from more than 10 years ago. It's feature set and implementation are pretty much the same, just as the reaction of both the media and users.
Pages was never designed to be a page layout replacement. It is designed to be a step above the standard word processor layout aimed squarely at people who know nothing about page layout. This has been (in it's original form) and currently is a template driven application.
What is so amazing is that people are reacting the same way now as they did before. Always thinking that it'll become more than it currently is. This application has had more than 10 years to be rethought out and improved. If it was aiming for page layout, there was plenty of time to move it in that direction.
Pages is to page layout what painting by numbers is to art. Anyone expecting the freedom that a page layout program offers has missed what this is about. It isn't about freedom, it is about empowering people with little or no experience to produce quality documents.
The only reason Pages has been resurrected is that it was an application that Steve Jobs really liked and thought had a place even if it didn't fit into any defined category.
Steve Jobs, 1993: Pages is a stunning product, and I believe it will become a major mainstream product on NEXTSTEP.
Pages could be a good product... as soon as people start taking it for what it is rather than projecting what they want it to be onto it.
Lets look at a 1992 description of Pages from NeXTWorld:The flip side of PasteUp's carte-blanche approach to page design is a layout program from Pages Software, which after several years in the making is close to release under the name Pages by Pages. It guides users to produce well-designed business documents by limiting their choices to a preset range provided in a companion "design model."
Pages by Pages will ship with seven design models, most aimed at corporate design (other models will be available separately from Pages and third parties). A separate program, the Pages Designer Edition, is used to create models.
Each model contains rules for typeface control, column layout, headline styling, and other elements that make up a page design. The idea is that an organization will use the product to standardize on a common look for all its documents. The constrained approach also allows users to create attractive designs easily, with a fairly flat learning curve.
The Pages user interface groups 26 page elements under six basic palettes. All elements are dragged and dropped on the page, and they interact appropriately. For example, a subhead will know that it lives in a column, so it scales to the column width.
Once users are comfortable with a design model, they have several ways to expand or change it. Every element has an inspector with controls to adjust the behavior of the element. Users may also alter a design model by overriding one or more rules, and then saving it as a style sheet. They can also create a design model from scratch with the Designer Edition.
Pages believes it has hit on a fundamentally new ap-proach to page design. It is aimed squarely at business publishing, leaving the graphic-design market to other products.
Does any of this sound familiar?
The first week Pages was out a lot of people were crowing about a new "Word-killer" and I really felt that was offbase because the better comparison really is to Microsoft Publisher. It reminds me of a light version of Pagemaker from 10 years ago.
Pages was compared with PageMaker during it's original run also.
PageMaker was a very powerful application 10 years ago, I should know, I have PageMaker 1.0-6.5 (and still use Aldus PageMaker 5.0a on my PowerBook 2300c today).
Trying to compare Pages to PageMaker does both a disservice. Pages wasn't attempting to be like PageMaker and PageMaker was never as limiting as Pages.
As for the comparison to Publisher... that I don't know about.
I, personally, don't have a need for Pages. TextEdit (with the help of services from other apps) does most of what I need and when I need more than that I have Create. But even though it is not a product I would want, I know people whom this product would be great for.
The best thing to do is to stop comparing it and give it a fair chance based on what it does. If it fills a need for you, great. If it doesn't, then move to what does.
Pages is a resurrected application from more than 10 years ago. It's feature set and implementation are pretty much the same, just as the reaction of both the media and users.
Pages was never designed to be a page layout replacement. It is designed to be a step above the standard word processor layout aimed squarely at people who know nothing about page layout. This has been (in it's original form) and currently is a template driven application.
What is so amazing is that people are reacting the same way now as they did before. Always thinking that it'll become more than it currently is. This application has had more than 10 years to be rethought out and improved. If it was aiming for page layout, there was plenty of time to move it in that direction.
Pages is to page layout what painting by numbers is to art. Anyone expecting the freedom that a page layout program offers has missed what this is about. It isn't about freedom, it is about empowering people with little or no experience to produce quality documents.
The only reason Pages has been resurrected is that it was an application that Steve Jobs really liked and thought had a place even if it didn't fit into any defined category.
Steve Jobs, 1993: Pages is a stunning product, and I believe it will become a major mainstream product on NEXTSTEP.
Pages could be a good product... as soon as people start taking it for what it is rather than projecting what they want it to be onto it.
Lets look at a 1992 description of Pages from NeXTWorld:The flip side of PasteUp's carte-blanche approach to page design is a layout program from Pages Software, which after several years in the making is close to release under the name Pages by Pages. It guides users to produce well-designed business documents by limiting their choices to a preset range provided in a companion "design model."
Pages by Pages will ship with seven design models, most aimed at corporate design (other models will be available separately from Pages and third parties). A separate program, the Pages Designer Edition, is used to create models.
Each model contains rules for typeface control, column layout, headline styling, and other elements that make up a page design. The idea is that an organization will use the product to standardize on a common look for all its documents. The constrained approach also allows users to create attractive designs easily, with a fairly flat learning curve.
The Pages user interface groups 26 page elements under six basic palettes. All elements are dragged and dropped on the page, and they interact appropriately. For example, a subhead will know that it lives in a column, so it scales to the column width.
Once users are comfortable with a design model, they have several ways to expand or change it. Every element has an inspector with controls to adjust the behavior of the element. Users may also alter a design model by overriding one or more rules, and then saving it as a style sheet. They can also create a design model from scratch with the Designer Edition.
Pages believes it has hit on a fundamentally new ap-proach to page design. It is aimed squarely at business publishing, leaving the graphic-design market to other products.
Does any of this sound familiar?
The first week Pages was out a lot of people were crowing about a new "Word-killer" and I really felt that was offbase because the better comparison really is to Microsoft Publisher. It reminds me of a light version of Pagemaker from 10 years ago.
Pages was compared with PageMaker during it's original run also.
PageMaker was a very powerful application 10 years ago, I should know, I have PageMaker 1.0-6.5 (and still use Aldus PageMaker 5.0a on my PowerBook 2300c today).
Trying to compare Pages to PageMaker does both a disservice. Pages wasn't attempting to be like PageMaker and PageMaker was never as limiting as Pages.
As for the comparison to Publisher... that I don't know about.
I, personally, don't have a need for Pages. TextEdit (with the help of services from other apps) does most of what I need and when I need more than that I have Create. But even though it is not a product I would want, I know people whom this product would be great for.
The best thing to do is to stop comparing it and give it a fair chance based on what it does. If it fills a need for you, great. If it doesn't, then move to what does.
Scooterman1
Jun 10, 06:47 PM
Competition is always GOOD.
more...
LagunaSol
Apr 19, 09:41 AM
Is that the hand of a Samsung employee holding the phone? ;)
mdgm
May 6, 07:31 AM
You're welcome. Hope you like your SSD upgrade. You may wish to take a look at http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1125400
Some older Mac Minis can have the CPU upgraded, but on both 09 Minis (they are very, very similar) the CPUs are definitely soldered on. This kind of info would be shown in a teardown of a Mac (these tend to be done fairly quickly after a new model is released)
Some older Mac Minis can have the CPU upgraded, but on both 09 Minis (they are very, very similar) the CPUs are definitely soldered on. This kind of info would be shown in a teardown of a Mac (these tend to be done fairly quickly after a new model is released)
more...
CanadaRAM
Nov 22, 11:10 AM
I remember reading either here or on Appleinsider that if this goes well enough, they can use this chip to replace batteries. The thing with that is, if we take away the battery, where does the original power come from?
From a heat source such as a butane flame or other combustion.
We're talking two different applications here
1) recover some waste heat from the CPU back to electricity
2) generate electricity by applying a much higher heat source to one side of the thing - as a potential replacemenmt for batteries, fuel cells, etc.
From a heat source such as a butane flame or other combustion.
We're talking two different applications here
1) recover some waste heat from the CPU back to electricity
2) generate electricity by applying a much higher heat source to one side of the thing - as a potential replacemenmt for batteries, fuel cells, etc.
Swift
Mar 23, 02:12 PM
I thought I'd hate the Apple TV 2, but, hey, it was cheap so I tried it. The part that makes it superb is its implementation of streaming. It is so cool to take out your iPhone, or your iPad, or to your Home Sharing network, and click on that little icon, choose a target device, and then start streaming. It pops right up, and plays perfectly on my Samsung 50" TV. I wonder if it will be possible to redirect a stream: I start watching a stream to my iPhone, and I can relay the stream to the computer or iPad or TV or audio device or whatever. WiFi is a wonderful thing.
Yes, it makes the job of decryption harder for pirates, but recording a direct stream -- if it's got a url -- is easy as pie. At any rate, this is really what the home ecosystem needs. Instant pairing with a number of devices.
Yes, it makes the job of decryption harder for pirates, but recording a direct stream -- if it's got a url -- is easy as pie. At any rate, this is really what the home ecosystem needs. Instant pairing with a number of devices.
flosseR
Mar 29, 09:31 AM
thatisme....give up.. you are trying in vain to recover from a grave mistake..
effectively you HAVE argued wrong:
Originally Posted by thatisme
YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF
This WILL in fact create the eEXACT same image... It does not matter what focal length it is, the SENSOR will create the image.. the only difference is that the EFs lens has a smaller image circle.. NOTHING ELSE changes!!! absolutely NOTHING. I don't get what your problem is.. the mm amount on the lens is what matters... if you only get a 1.6x crop out of the resulting image in comparison to a full 35mm frame has no relevance to the lens.
THE MILLIMETER OF THE ACTUAL FOCAL LENGTH ARE ALWAYS THE SAME!
end of story.
A canon 55-200 EF-s and a 70-200L lens at 200mm on a canon 7D will produce the exact same image...the same as if you would mount both lenses on a full frame body and crop the image by 1.6.
end of this meaningless discussion now.. geez
effectively you HAVE argued wrong:
Originally Posted by thatisme
YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF
This WILL in fact create the eEXACT same image... It does not matter what focal length it is, the SENSOR will create the image.. the only difference is that the EFs lens has a smaller image circle.. NOTHING ELSE changes!!! absolutely NOTHING. I don't get what your problem is.. the mm amount on the lens is what matters... if you only get a 1.6x crop out of the resulting image in comparison to a full 35mm frame has no relevance to the lens.
THE MILLIMETER OF THE ACTUAL FOCAL LENGTH ARE ALWAYS THE SAME!
end of story.
A canon 55-200 EF-s and a 70-200L lens at 200mm on a canon 7D will produce the exact same image...the same as if you would mount both lenses on a full frame body and crop the image by 1.6.
end of this meaningless discussion now.. geez
*LTD*
Apr 30, 06:07 PM
Considering that nearly all "Pro IT" overwhelmingly used Windows
Their entire careers depend on maintaining an OS that needs constant maintenance. Windows is inherently broken, and an entire industry grew up to take full advantage of exactly that. Too funny.
Their entire careers depend on maintaining an OS that needs constant maintenance. Windows is inherently broken, and an entire industry grew up to take full advantage of exactly that. Too funny.
rasmasyean
May 1, 12:02 PM
Android vs. iOS vs. WP7 vs. WebOS...
It's so sad how the "OS Wars" has stooped to this level. I mean, what the heck, your DVD player and TiVo has an "OS" too! These are PHONES! Although they run "Apps", they don't run "Applications" where you do some real work with. No one sits as a desk to balance the daily sales on an iPhone or hash out some history assignment on a Droid. Just because they have a "CPU" in them, it doesn't make them a "computer" in the Mac/PC sense.
And for those who think..."Well. not now, but because of miniturization, blah blah, they are getting there and soon everyone will be working out of their pockets..." BALONEY! Do you think that the computer industry (and the rest of the industries that use computers) will settle for "a pocket computer reminiscent of the last decade for every employee"? When your iPhone can run the equivalent of MS Office the "computer" will run MS Office 2020! When you can do Adobe Photoshop on your Android, Adobe Holoshop will be what's required to stay in business! :cool:
It's so sad how the "OS Wars" has stooped to this level. I mean, what the heck, your DVD player and TiVo has an "OS" too! These are PHONES! Although they run "Apps", they don't run "Applications" where you do some real work with. No one sits as a desk to balance the daily sales on an iPhone or hash out some history assignment on a Droid. Just because they have a "CPU" in them, it doesn't make them a "computer" in the Mac/PC sense.
And for those who think..."Well. not now, but because of miniturization, blah blah, they are getting there and soon everyone will be working out of their pockets..." BALONEY! Do you think that the computer industry (and the rest of the industries that use computers) will settle for "a pocket computer reminiscent of the last decade for every employee"? When your iPhone can run the equivalent of MS Office the "computer" will run MS Office 2020! When you can do Adobe Photoshop on your Android, Adobe Holoshop will be what's required to stay in business! :cool:
RichTF
Nov 6, 09:12 AM
We use RFID chips in ID card for public transportation here in the Netherlands. I can't say it's the most efficient system but I can see the potential of having one set up in a device you carry with you all the time like an iPhone.
Interesting to hear you say that -- I use the Oyster RFID card for public transport here in London, and it's incredibly efficient. Compared to paper tickets, it's faster to use, faster to pay for, and much more durable.
Would be great to have this built into my iPhone...
EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oyster_card#Usage_statistics to see just how massively popular RFID technology is here. Only 4% of Tube users use cash, the rest use RFID for their journeys!
Interesting to hear you say that -- I use the Oyster RFID card for public transport here in London, and it's incredibly efficient. Compared to paper tickets, it's faster to use, faster to pay for, and much more durable.
Would be great to have this built into my iPhone...
EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oyster_card#Usage_statistics to see just how massively popular RFID technology is here. Only 4% of Tube users use cash, the rest use RFID for their journeys!
HBOC
Mar 29, 02:13 AM
here are some good references to get a grasp of the differences. As others have stated, the lens is the same focal length, but on a smaller sensor body (APC), the image is essentially "cropped". Some websites..
Site #1 (http://www.extremeinstability.com/topic-full-frame.htm)
Site #2 (http://www.petapixel.com/2010/10/02/full-frame-vs-crop-sensor-comparison/)
Site #3 (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/canon-lenses/field-of-view-crop-factor.aspx)
The second site is a video that is nice. 3rd site has good info.
Site #1 (http://www.extremeinstability.com/topic-full-frame.htm)
Site #2 (http://www.petapixel.com/2010/10/02/full-frame-vs-crop-sensor-comparison/)
Site #3 (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/canon-lenses/field-of-view-crop-factor.aspx)
The second site is a video that is nice. 3rd site has good info.
NinjaHERO
May 2, 01:14 PM
It's just that black is slimming. ;)
No comments:
Post a Comment