timmillwood
Oct 16, 05:31 PM
I would love to see a 4gb nano phone which qwerty keyboard, 3mp camera, wi-fi and GPS
iPhone Pro would be a good name
iPhone Pro would be a good name
uv23
Aug 14, 09:53 AM
Worst Apple ads ever. You attract more flies with sugar than vinegar, and Apple's all about the vinegar.
digitalbiker
Oct 12, 11:07 AM
OSX alone is worth spending 10 grand on a laptop.
lips. tattoo inside lip
more...
tattoo lips
tattoos of lips. Tattoo Of Lips; Tattoo Of Lips. iBeard. Sep 6, 09:37 AM. you people are never happy.
more...
Tattoos Of Lips On The Neck.
Aries Tattoos longhorn tattoo
more...
Recent uploads tagged tattoo
lip tattoos. xveganx lip
more...
A lip print of his girlfriend
piercing tattoo. Lip tattoo
more...
Tattoos On Lips | Tattoo Lover
Lips tattoos,love tattoos
more...
tattoos of lips.
Sore lips tattoo.
more...
Similar tattoos, hair, lips,
Tattoos Of Lips For Girls. Lip Tattoo for Girls 2011; Lip Tattoo for Girls 2011. fun173. Apr 22, 01:27 AM. I#39;ve flagged it.
hmm sexy woman tattoo lips
iWonderwhy
May 2, 02:13 PM
The amount of scrutiny these devices go through is ridiculous.
more...
chrmjenkins
Apr 21, 03:24 PM
Of course mine are speculation, I brought the argument up because I'd like to hear someone else's opinion.
Rumors are saying the next iPhone iteration could be having the same package of the current iPhone. I'm bringing two facts up, the A5 die is bigger then the A4 as both are 45nm. And at the iPad2 keynote they said how could they manage to get the same hours of battery life with a much powerful processor, the answer was that their engineer had a workaround - later to be found an additional pack of battery.
The only redesign they had to do for the battery is fit it in an enclosure 33% thinner. The charge capacity is the exact same. Just because the processor is more powerful does not mean it uses more power as well. The more powerful a processor, the more the processor can sit idle, saving battery life.
Considered this I think that Apple will redesign the internals of the new iteration if they are going to use the same package.
That's a given. They've changed the internals every single generation of iPhone.
About the network, this: Full coverage by 2013.
Second of all: Verizon. What about AT&T?
AT&T roll out begins this year. Full coverage is not a requisite for roll out. Do you honestly think AT&T had full 3G coverage when the iPhone 3G came out? The area where I'm from, Southern Illinois, only got 3G in the past year. Verizon is rolling out LTE there before the end of the year.
Third and I repeat this, you guys should not be considered special compared to the rest of the world.
We are apple's home market and their largest one. If you look at iPhone sales, we represent 40% of them, a significant chunk. iPhones represent 50% of their revenue, so domestic iPhone sales represent 20% of Apple's revenue. That's a huge chunk for one product. If they think LTE coverage is good enough and the power draw of an LTE radio is worth it, they'll deploy it.
The fact that Apple used GSM technology for the first iPhone was infact that they could rollout their product to other countries as CDMA is not adopted as much as GSM worldwide. The same applies to LTE/4G. There is no reason of adding hardware that can be adopted by a quarter of the customers if not less that that. It's a waste of money in design and implementation, let alone that even Apple is not willing to make the leap with compromise that are not willing to make by adopting this fairly new technology.
LTE will actually bring about greater compliance, as AT&T's and Verizon LTE networks will use the exact same protocol.
Europe will be using the 800 MHz range for their LTE/4G deployment, so there's not even necessarily a guarantee there will be a one size fits all LTE radio (much like T-mobile and AT&T handsets require different 3G radios despite both being GSM carriers). If that's the case, the deployment of LTE there will be irrelevant as it will necessitate a new radio regardless.
Rumors are saying the next iPhone iteration could be having the same package of the current iPhone. I'm bringing two facts up, the A5 die is bigger then the A4 as both are 45nm. And at the iPad2 keynote they said how could they manage to get the same hours of battery life with a much powerful processor, the answer was that their engineer had a workaround - later to be found an additional pack of battery.
The only redesign they had to do for the battery is fit it in an enclosure 33% thinner. The charge capacity is the exact same. Just because the processor is more powerful does not mean it uses more power as well. The more powerful a processor, the more the processor can sit idle, saving battery life.
Considered this I think that Apple will redesign the internals of the new iteration if they are going to use the same package.
That's a given. They've changed the internals every single generation of iPhone.
About the network, this: Full coverage by 2013.
Second of all: Verizon. What about AT&T?
AT&T roll out begins this year. Full coverage is not a requisite for roll out. Do you honestly think AT&T had full 3G coverage when the iPhone 3G came out? The area where I'm from, Southern Illinois, only got 3G in the past year. Verizon is rolling out LTE there before the end of the year.
Third and I repeat this, you guys should not be considered special compared to the rest of the world.
We are apple's home market and their largest one. If you look at iPhone sales, we represent 40% of them, a significant chunk. iPhones represent 50% of their revenue, so domestic iPhone sales represent 20% of Apple's revenue. That's a huge chunk for one product. If they think LTE coverage is good enough and the power draw of an LTE radio is worth it, they'll deploy it.
The fact that Apple used GSM technology for the first iPhone was infact that they could rollout their product to other countries as CDMA is not adopted as much as GSM worldwide. The same applies to LTE/4G. There is no reason of adding hardware that can be adopted by a quarter of the customers if not less that that. It's a waste of money in design and implementation, let alone that even Apple is not willing to make the leap with compromise that are not willing to make by adopting this fairly new technology.
LTE will actually bring about greater compliance, as AT&T's and Verizon LTE networks will use the exact same protocol.
Europe will be using the 800 MHz range for their LTE/4G deployment, so there's not even necessarily a guarantee there will be a one size fits all LTE radio (much like T-mobile and AT&T handsets require different 3G radios despite both being GSM carriers). If that's the case, the deployment of LTE there will be irrelevant as it will necessitate a new radio regardless.
Origin
Sep 19, 04:27 PM
I'm running RAID0 too !
more...
Bubba Satori
Mar 25, 12:29 PM
Darn greedy company.
Don't talk about iApple that way.
Don't talk about iApple that way.
rovex
Apr 5, 11:11 AM
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)
Capacitive home button sounds believable as apple has gone away with buttons on the MacBooks trackpad. Apple likes touch, not clicking. Lol
Capacitive home button (and volume) is the way to go. Plastic makes the expensive feeling iPhone feel cheap. and it will just look sexy having the home button flush with the glass.
Another thing which hasn't been wanted as far as I know is the home button to glow in dark as it were. Pretty annoying to press the wrong side when you are in complete darkness.
Capacitive home button sounds believable as apple has gone away with buttons on the MacBooks trackpad. Apple likes touch, not clicking. Lol
Capacitive home button (and volume) is the way to go. Plastic makes the expensive feeling iPhone feel cheap. and it will just look sexy having the home button flush with the glass.
Another thing which hasn't been wanted as far as I know is the home button to glow in dark as it were. Pretty annoying to press the wrong side when you are in complete darkness.
more...
crazy dave
Apr 5, 05:41 PM
The problem with CR's iPhone 4 report was not that they didn't recommend the iPhone 4 when it originally came out on AT&T but that they then reiterated their "Not recommend" labeling for the Verizon iPhone 4 for having the same 'death grip' issue. They did this despite that the Verizon version had a different antenna design. Anandtech, who were amongst the first to quantify the 'death grip' issue for the AT&T version, showed that in fact the VZ iPhone 4 fared no worse than other smartphones. For the original iPhone 4, CR felt while it was great in many categories, it's antenna issue was too great a problem in their eyes. One could argue that they overstated the problem given that most users didn't seem to mind, but their position of "Not recommended" is not unjustifiable for the AT&T iPhone 4. However, CR clearly screwed up on the VZ iPhone 4.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/03/technology/verizon_iphone/index.htm
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4163/verizon-iphone-4-review/
http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/03/technology/verizon_iphone/index.htm
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4163/verizon-iphone-4-review/
Bosunsfate
Nov 21, 04:43 PM
Interesting concept, but their website (http://www.eneco.com/) scares me away in a hurry. What was that about making a good first impression?
I find these comments about the website interesting...I guess we care more about a flashy site than a site that just provides the information on what they do in a simple effective way....
I take it that they are spending their money on developing the chip and not on web design. :p
I find these comments about the website interesting...I guess we care more about a flashy site than a site that just provides the information on what they do in a simple effective way....
I take it that they are spending their money on developing the chip and not on web design. :p
more...
King Cobra
Sep 15, 12:31 PM
>Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
>Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
:D
scem, I think in due time the price of Apple's hardware will come down. Take a look at the prices of the Macintosh/Apple product line. The Macintosh II was valued at I think over $6000. The G4/G3 motherboard was worth up to $3500 I think. Now, the Dual 1.25GHz model sells for around $3300, if you don't feel like chugging in THAT much RAM.
My guess is that in a couple of years Apple's PowerMacs will be reduced to near equivalent prices as when the first dual GHz PowerMacs came out, topping out at $3000.
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
>Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
:D
scem, I think in due time the price of Apple's hardware will come down. Take a look at the prices of the Macintosh/Apple product line. The Macintosh II was valued at I think over $6000. The G4/G3 motherboard was worth up to $3500 I think. Now, the Dual 1.25GHz model sells for around $3300, if you don't feel like chugging in THAT much RAM.
My guess is that in a couple of years Apple's PowerMacs will be reduced to near equivalent prices as when the first dual GHz PowerMacs came out, topping out at $3000.
puckhead193
Apr 5, 10:48 AM
looks fake, you would think if they did get their paws on the new touch they would have you know at least focused the camera... just a thought :rolleyes:
more...
Lord Blackadder
Feb 18, 04:58 PM
Or how about the lack of pictures? This had photo op written all over it, but we the taxpayer only get one picture? I think the number of pictures were limited due to Steve Jobs current condition.
It could be a body double. Or even Photoshopped, with the rest of the people at the table sworn to secrecy on pain of death.
It could be a body double. Or even Photoshopped, with the rest of the people at the table sworn to secrecy on pain of death.
Slip Jigs
Dec 28, 10:05 AM
This may just be the beginning. The article in Wired talks about "Data Hogs" and how ATT has been trying to get them to throttle back their usage. How, I don't know. I've been noticing more and more dropped calls on 3G as of late, so much that I have to disable it just to be able to make and complete a call.
Think about it for a second: if this were really an effort to reduce network traffic, it would be a piss-poor way of going about it. For one thing, denying the iPhone to new customers would be far less dependable than throttling data speed. For another, they're closing down only one of many distribution channels, meaning that people in NYC will still be able to get all the iPhones they want. Finally, this would be a public admission that their network is insufficient...and more fodder for the Verizon commercials. You can't tell me that that's not first in every AT&T Wireless executive's mind right now.
I don't know what's going on -- everything is just speculation based on what some low-level AT&T employees (probably new ones who couldn't get out of the holiday shift) said. And I'm not going to jump to any conclusions. I'm just saying that the Consumerist's interpretation doesn't make much sense.
But, if it was really about fraud in certain areas - wouldn't that mean that you can't purchase ANY phone from ATT online? Why would it only apply to the iPhone?
Think about it for a second: if this were really an effort to reduce network traffic, it would be a piss-poor way of going about it. For one thing, denying the iPhone to new customers would be far less dependable than throttling data speed. For another, they're closing down only one of many distribution channels, meaning that people in NYC will still be able to get all the iPhones they want. Finally, this would be a public admission that their network is insufficient...and more fodder for the Verizon commercials. You can't tell me that that's not first in every AT&T Wireless executive's mind right now.
I don't know what's going on -- everything is just speculation based on what some low-level AT&T employees (probably new ones who couldn't get out of the holiday shift) said. And I'm not going to jump to any conclusions. I'm just saying that the Consumerist's interpretation doesn't make much sense.
But, if it was really about fraud in certain areas - wouldn't that mean that you can't purchase ANY phone from ATT online? Why would it only apply to the iPhone?
more...
blow45
Apr 14, 01:28 PM
those 2 people that have voted negative (of 5 that have so far voted ) please speak up. We really like to hear your opinions on not taking your antidepressants. :rolleyes:
Analog Kid
Nov 22, 03:28 AM
As a mechanical engineer, I'm not exactly cynical about this application of Eneco's technology, but I remain very, very skeptical. With such a relatively small temperature difference, I would say it is very unlikely that such a device would be economically feasible. A quick visit to Eneco's site shows me that they don't even have lab data for temperature differences of less than 100 deg C!
They obfuscate the issue of efficiency by referring to the Carnot efficiency to inflate the numbers to the uninitiated. Sadi Carnot showed that an ideal heat engine that operated between two infinite reservoirs at temperatures, T(hot) and T(cold) would have an efficiency of ( T(hot)-T(cold) ) / T(hot), and the temperatures have to be on an absolute scale like Kelvin or Rankine. The "Carnot efficiency" compares the performance of the system in question to this ideal heat engine.
Suppose you ran your chip at a very warm 90 deg C (363 K) and could dump the heat to your 25 deg C (298 K) room, your perfect efficiency would be about 18%! This means that for every 5W of heat you dissipate from the chip, you get a little less that 1 W of electric power. Something with an impressive-sounding 50% Carnot efficiency would really have a measly 9% real efficiency.
Unless Eneco sells these things very cheaply and makes them very small, I can't see Apple going through the trouble and expense of adding them to their portables for such a small benefit in recycled power. I remain skeptical, yet open-minded.
Finding efficiency data for temperatures below 100C would be important since the max junction temperature for most processors is below that. Power supply devices max out at about 150C. You just can't get hotter than that and expect silicon to function as a semiconductor.
If the Intel chips burn 100W, then 9% conversion efficiency would generate 9W of electricity. In absolute terms, that's not too bad. You can do a lot with 9W. If you have a 5 hour battery life now, and can use these on all the major power sinks, you'd get 5.5 hours of battery life.
(Those are big "if"s, but putting them in bold seemed a bit too cynical...)
Interesting, but not earth shattering yet... If this became widespread though and we could cut world energy consumption by 10%-- that would be a big deal. Personally, I think there's more to be gained in cars (hotter and less efficient to begin with) than computers, but who knows.
They obfuscate the issue of efficiency by referring to the Carnot efficiency to inflate the numbers to the uninitiated. Sadi Carnot showed that an ideal heat engine that operated between two infinite reservoirs at temperatures, T(hot) and T(cold) would have an efficiency of ( T(hot)-T(cold) ) / T(hot), and the temperatures have to be on an absolute scale like Kelvin or Rankine. The "Carnot efficiency" compares the performance of the system in question to this ideal heat engine.
Suppose you ran your chip at a very warm 90 deg C (363 K) and could dump the heat to your 25 deg C (298 K) room, your perfect efficiency would be about 18%! This means that for every 5W of heat you dissipate from the chip, you get a little less that 1 W of electric power. Something with an impressive-sounding 50% Carnot efficiency would really have a measly 9% real efficiency.
Unless Eneco sells these things very cheaply and makes them very small, I can't see Apple going through the trouble and expense of adding them to their portables for such a small benefit in recycled power. I remain skeptical, yet open-minded.
Finding efficiency data for temperatures below 100C would be important since the max junction temperature for most processors is below that. Power supply devices max out at about 150C. You just can't get hotter than that and expect silicon to function as a semiconductor.
If the Intel chips burn 100W, then 9% conversion efficiency would generate 9W of electricity. In absolute terms, that's not too bad. You can do a lot with 9W. If you have a 5 hour battery life now, and can use these on all the major power sinks, you'd get 5.5 hours of battery life.
(Those are big "if"s, but putting them in bold seemed a bit too cynical...)
Interesting, but not earth shattering yet... If this became widespread though and we could cut world energy consumption by 10%-- that would be a big deal. Personally, I think there's more to be gained in cars (hotter and less efficient to begin with) than computers, but who knows.
more...
solvs
Sep 16, 12:33 AM
Originally posted by fourthtunz
Sounds like your not using X.2 or a New Mac.
Why do you waste your time on here?
Again, find a better deal than the New dual 867 on the Pc side, I'll buy it.
Daniel
I was speaking mostly of what others see when comparing. Believe it or not it, matters. True, numbers don't mean that much. It's all about the real-world performance. But you know what? Apple gets their butt kicked most of the time. You can quote benchmarks all you want, and for light stuff who cares? But for the hardcore stuff, Macs need to be faster and cheaper. That's all there is to it. They want to entice more Audio/Video/Image editing people, that's what they're gonna have to do.
Why is it anytime anyone critizes the Mac, they are automatically written off as trolls? Are you just going to accept whatever Apple does? They aren't perfect you know (though they do seem that way next to a PC). I've had many, many computers. Several of them were Apples. My 6400 was slow as molasess and froze all the time, but it got the job done (most of the time). I've since sold off or given away all but a custom built AMD running Windows 2000. I would have had a new G4 Tower, but my project lost funding and now I'm moving.
For the record, after I get settled in the new place, I was going to get an iBook and a Tower later (or a new PowerBook maybe). Why you ask? Because video editing in Windows sux. But it still bothers me that a very fast computer I built for a very small amount of money bests a $3,000 "SuperComputer". I'd rather use FCP (I've played with it, it's nice) instead of Premier. And OS X instead of Windows (any version, don't get me started on why XP sux so much).
But not all of us can always afford a Lexus when a Toyota will work just fine (notice I didn't say Kia or something. I didn't buy a Gateway).
Don't get me wrong, I'm actually happy with the 167 FSB, the large drive support, the dual CD Drives, etc. The Dual 1.25s look pretty zippy. But compare it to a PC (don't fool yourself, people do. Don't just tell them to buy a PC if they don't like it, cuz you know what, that's exactly what they do), it doesn't look so good. Apple is a business. WinTels are their competitors. We all have to recognize this. Apple has to keep up to stay alive in the long run.
I'd rather have a Mac, but don't fool yourself. You can build a really nice PC for less than $2,000 (with plenty of basic software that helps you crash Windows even faster) that blows the $3,000+ machines out of the water. You get a nice, out of the box experiance with OS X.2, but is it worth it for the higher price and slower performance. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
I'm just so tired of PC weenies saying Macs are all style, no substance. And like many computer users who actually use their computers, I'm torn. Speed and price, or style and stability?
Only when Real-Time is really Real-Time, only then will I be truly happy.
Sounds like your not using X.2 or a New Mac.
Why do you waste your time on here?
Again, find a better deal than the New dual 867 on the Pc side, I'll buy it.
Daniel
I was speaking mostly of what others see when comparing. Believe it or not it, matters. True, numbers don't mean that much. It's all about the real-world performance. But you know what? Apple gets their butt kicked most of the time. You can quote benchmarks all you want, and for light stuff who cares? But for the hardcore stuff, Macs need to be faster and cheaper. That's all there is to it. They want to entice more Audio/Video/Image editing people, that's what they're gonna have to do.
Why is it anytime anyone critizes the Mac, they are automatically written off as trolls? Are you just going to accept whatever Apple does? They aren't perfect you know (though they do seem that way next to a PC). I've had many, many computers. Several of them were Apples. My 6400 was slow as molasess and froze all the time, but it got the job done (most of the time). I've since sold off or given away all but a custom built AMD running Windows 2000. I would have had a new G4 Tower, but my project lost funding and now I'm moving.
For the record, after I get settled in the new place, I was going to get an iBook and a Tower later (or a new PowerBook maybe). Why you ask? Because video editing in Windows sux. But it still bothers me that a very fast computer I built for a very small amount of money bests a $3,000 "SuperComputer". I'd rather use FCP (I've played with it, it's nice) instead of Premier. And OS X instead of Windows (any version, don't get me started on why XP sux so much).
But not all of us can always afford a Lexus when a Toyota will work just fine (notice I didn't say Kia or something. I didn't buy a Gateway).
Don't get me wrong, I'm actually happy with the 167 FSB, the large drive support, the dual CD Drives, etc. The Dual 1.25s look pretty zippy. But compare it to a PC (don't fool yourself, people do. Don't just tell them to buy a PC if they don't like it, cuz you know what, that's exactly what they do), it doesn't look so good. Apple is a business. WinTels are their competitors. We all have to recognize this. Apple has to keep up to stay alive in the long run.
I'd rather have a Mac, but don't fool yourself. You can build a really nice PC for less than $2,000 (with plenty of basic software that helps you crash Windows even faster) that blows the $3,000+ machines out of the water. You get a nice, out of the box experiance with OS X.2, but is it worth it for the higher price and slower performance. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
I'm just so tired of PC weenies saying Macs are all style, no substance. And like many computer users who actually use their computers, I'm torn. Speed and price, or style and stability?
Only when Real-Time is really Real-Time, only then will I be truly happy.
WoFat
Apr 1, 08:59 AM
Viacom? Oh the humanity! Anyone watch it? Anyone miss it? Anyone Care?
DanielK
Oct 16, 04:37 PM
Hmm... I've held off on buying both a new phone and a new iPod for a while now, assuming that I'd want whatever phone Apple eventually comes out with, but the mention of battery life issues concerns me. If the battery goes dead on my iPod, no big deal, I don't listen to music until I charge it again. But if the battery goes dead on my phone, I could miss an important call. And if I have to monitor how much music I listen to to ensure that I can still receive calls, that might be a problem. Ideally, they could address this concern by having some software that told you well in advance that if you stop listening to music now, you still have so much time left on your phone.
Eric5h5
Sep 27, 02:23 PM
Oh noes! The dreaded off-topic discussion on numbering schemes that pops up after each os update. ;)
Which is why it is MANDATORY that Apple release 10.4.10, even if it's exactly the same as 10.4.9 with a change log that says "Updates from 10.4.9: Er, nothing really, sorry." That way these obnoxious discussions can end once and for all.
The numbering scheme just looks like it's base 10. It ain't.
It most certainly is. What else would it be? Hex? Octal? Binary? Of course it's base 10. It's just not a flippin' decimal. ;) The fact that there are TWO dots makes it pretty blindingly obvious that it's just a separator...you know, like they use in phone numbers...please don't tell me anyone thinks phone numbers are decimals....
You know, I often see this posted on the forums, yet I can't think of any example in the past that proves it. Every version after a .9 that I know of has been the last of that series.
Blender: 2.42
Safari: 416.12 (AKA 2.0.2) (Yes, I know it's old ;) )
Wings3D: 0.98.29
Warcraft III: 1.18
Pan: 0.14.2
...etc.
And as far as Quake on a MacBook...that's Quake *1*? Even the crappy GMA950 should be playing that at hundreds of frames per second. Heck, it could do that in software mode! If you're having problems, that's not something OpenGL is gonna fix...probably Rosetta issues unless there's a UB....
--Eric
Which is why it is MANDATORY that Apple release 10.4.10, even if it's exactly the same as 10.4.9 with a change log that says "Updates from 10.4.9: Er, nothing really, sorry." That way these obnoxious discussions can end once and for all.
The numbering scheme just looks like it's base 10. It ain't.
It most certainly is. What else would it be? Hex? Octal? Binary? Of course it's base 10. It's just not a flippin' decimal. ;) The fact that there are TWO dots makes it pretty blindingly obvious that it's just a separator...you know, like they use in phone numbers...please don't tell me anyone thinks phone numbers are decimals....
You know, I often see this posted on the forums, yet I can't think of any example in the past that proves it. Every version after a .9 that I know of has been the last of that series.
Blender: 2.42
Safari: 416.12 (AKA 2.0.2) (Yes, I know it's old ;) )
Wings3D: 0.98.29
Warcraft III: 1.18
Pan: 0.14.2
...etc.
And as far as Quake on a MacBook...that's Quake *1*? Even the crappy GMA950 should be playing that at hundreds of frames per second. Heck, it could do that in software mode! If you're having problems, that's not something OpenGL is gonna fix...probably Rosetta issues unless there's a UB....
--Eric
Iscariot
Apr 10, 12:09 AM
The point of PP seems to be to get rid of the consequences
PP offers a too easy fix to people's indiscretion
Made up nonsense.
PP offers a too easy fix to people's indiscretion
Made up nonsense.
koruki
Apr 5, 05:45 PM
Oh Snap! I just got normalised :(
Abulia
Aug 14, 02:52 PM
You are wrong.
Proven by Apples rising market share.;)
You cant keep saying that these ads are hurting apple if they keep selling more and more computers.
It makes no sense.:confused:Sure, they're selling more computers this quarter in spite of the ads.
They (the ads) have only been out, what, two months? Sales for the last quarter were in the bag before those commericals came out. Let's see how the next quarter is?
Proven by Apples rising market share.;)
You cant keep saying that these ads are hurting apple if they keep selling more and more computers.
It makes no sense.:confused:Sure, they're selling more computers this quarter in spite of the ads.
They (the ads) have only been out, what, two months? Sales for the last quarter were in the bag before those commericals came out. Let's see how the next quarter is?
Laird Knox
Mar 5, 04:18 PM
I saw some of the difficulties in cropping this, and wondered if an oval crop would help. Once I started playing with it, then I started really seeing the ovals/circles: chips, cups, table, his hat, her glasses, tomatoes. And I saw the rectangles: floor tiles, trays, paper dishes. More contrasts! After experimenting with the oval crop, it felt right to put this within a rectangle frame --another contrast, and it makes me feel more like I'm sneaking a peek at this couple, as Keleko did when shooting this pict.
What do you think?
Honestly, it doesn't really work for me. Not sure why. The black shirt does fall into the black of the crop but there is something else I can't explain.
Although when you mentioned the circles and squares I did see something else. Had you been able to stage the picture it might have been interesting to align the trays and their contents with the tile pattern. But then if you staged it you probably would have lost the candid nature.
What do you think?
Honestly, it doesn't really work for me. Not sure why. The black shirt does fall into the black of the crop but there is something else I can't explain.
Although when you mentioned the circles and squares I did see something else. Had you been able to stage the picture it might have been interesting to align the trays and their contents with the tile pattern. But then if you staged it you probably would have lost the candid nature.
No comments:
Post a Comment