Iphoto Measure V.3.1.1.4714 Rc1

Posted on

Moley,quote:OT, but the shittiest browser ever is not IE for Mac, it was IE for solarisAlso OT, but:I didn't do a lot of Solaris, but I did do a lot of IE on HP-UX. It was infinitely better than Navigator for HP-UX. IE had custom libraries to render text and widgets, whereas Nav used whatever stock X widgets were available.I had a hard time convincing the Unix hardliners to switch, but we lined up IE on Windows, Nav on Windows, IE on HP-UX and Nav on HP-UX. When we visited the same pages, the only one that looked hopelessly different and clunky was Nav on HP-UX.

After they switched they never went back.theBorg. I've been browsing ars for quite some time now, and I don't think I've stumbled across anybody who feels the way I do about computers and whatnot. I just 'switched' to a flat panel imac from my 900mhz athlon win2k machine. OSX is noticably prettier, and noticiablly slower. And that is actually the 'reason' I switched.I could've assembled a PC myself that would be twice as fast as the imac, and cost a little over half as much. However, I'm actually trying to downplay the amount of my life a computer takes up. If I built my own PC, I would be in it CONSTANTLY, fiddling with bios, breaking it, fixing it, upgrading it, etc etc.

Thats what I was doing with my old PC, and I loved it, but it was taking up too much time. I decided to buy an imac because its a fairly limited machine without much upgrade capability. I can't open it up and start dicking around with cards because I don't even know how As long as it can play me music, check forums and run photoshop, its all I need. I bit the price difference because I'm shallow and I thought the imac was 'pretty'. I'm hoping that buying a more consumer oriented machine will limit the amount of time I spend tinkering with it, and leave me more time to work on my art, read a book, etc.Obviously I have given up computer gaming.

I bought a gamecube for all my gaming needs. Garaunteed 100% compatible with any game that comes out for it!Conclusion.

Pro

I am in the wrong forum! Seriously though, its not such a black and white issue. There are intelligent computer-savy people who buy slower machines because they just don't need lots of power, just like there are computer-illiterate buyers who get the biggest and baddest just because they can, not because they'll ever utilize it. Plus, some of us don't like to be called switchers because it associates us with the idiots in those ads. 'My pc wasn't plug-and-play, it was plug-and-get-mad'. If somebody ever actually said that to me, I would pass out. Quote:The answer isn't a closed-system Mac, it's addressing your compulsion towards always messing with your PC smile Purposefully limiting your options with inferior hardware seems a lot like cutting off your nose to spite your face.I'm not blaming the PC.

I know its all my fault. I've always been a little on the compulsive side. I think 'inferior' hardware (while probably true) might be a little harsh.

Basically I didn't want something with widespread upgradability that would become a time and money pit. Instead I got an apple loan which seems to be an entirely new money pit altogether So much for that idea.I still think I made a good decision though. So far its a very capable machine for what I need to do. And since I spent so much money I don't have on it. Maybe it'll curb my urge to constantly buy other things that I don't need. Thats a huge maybe, of course.Edit: I think it was a big mistake to even imply that I was myself 'computer-savy'. I think I need to remember where I'm posting.

Quote:iMac is superior to anything on the market in it's price range. It is flawless as a digital hub for your digital camera, and if you add a digital camcorder or an iPod it outclasses anything on the Wintel side at any price. Go to an Apple Store and get a demo of how well it integrates all the features of the digital age with the World Class software that comes with it.Which world were you thinking of, in 'world-class'?Sorry, iPhoto is a fairly good implementation of a kind of program that people only need basic functionality from, and iTunes appears to have no redeeming features over the basics.Perhaps you can pick the PC programs that you think is inferior to these programs and tell us why. Quote:Originally posted by Venture. ITunes appears to have no redeeming features over the basics.Perhaps you can pick the PC programs that you think is inferior to these programs and tell us why.Having used mp3 players on Windows and Linux for years, I've never seen anything that comes close to iTunes3. And when you add the integration with the iPod, it comes as close to perfect as I've ever seen.Regardless of what I say, I know Venture will just ignore it or claim that they're features he doesn't care about or would never use.

But if you've never used iTunes, here are some features I think are pretty nice:1) Automatic ripping of CDs - and I mean 'automatic'. Push a CD into the slot load on my TiBook, and iTune launches, connects to the CDDB to get the artist, title, album, genre, and year, rips the CD, and ejects it when done. Very simple.2) Burn audio CDs or mp3 CDs directly from iTunes - especially nice because you can just burn a playlist (see below).3) You can adjust the volume or equalizer settings on each individual mp3 file, and this is automatically sync'd to your iPod too. So you can correct a substandard rip you've downloaded.4) 'Search' function is actually useful - type in any part of an artist name, song name, album title, or genre, and iTunes will only display the matching files.5) Browse function - it's hard to describe, but you can get the idea by watching.6) Playlists. Playlists are just brilliantly implemented.

You can use them for everything from syncing to portable players to burning CDs. With the new 'Smart Playlists' you can do cool things like 'select 2 GBs of random songs that I've rated with 4 or 5 stars and rotate them automatically'.

So now I've got a playlist in iTunes and my iPod of my favorite tracks, but I'm always pleasantly surprised to hear songs I haven't played in months.Heh - I sound like a giddy little schoolgirl. But it's okay. MS will rip off iTunes soon enough, and then everyone can be happy too. Aphelion said.quote:iMac is superior to anything on the market in it's price range.

It is flawless as a digital hub for your digital camera, and if you add a digital camcorder or an iPod it outclasses anything on the Wintel side at any price. Go to an Apple Store and get a demo of how well it integrates all the features of the digital age with the World Class software that comes with it.I like to consider myself a pretty big Mac-head, but every time I read one of your posts it reminds me of an Apple press release. Another 'adder' here.

I recently got a TiBook to go along with my XP and Linux desktops. There's no substitute for well-roundedness.I'll second (or third) the iTunes sentiment. There's just nothing that compares on Windows or Linux (and I've used a bunch).

With the automatic ripping I ripped my entire collection in two days, and all I had to do was change disks. The organization is awesome no matter how big or how small your collection is. And the iPod integration is amazing - even though I don't own one, I can borrow a friend's, painlessly replace his collection with mine, and his is restored the next time he syncs. Quote:You just described WMP from 2 years ago. Congrats!Bullshit!WMP is more awkward to use compared to iTunes. It takes exactly three keyboard stokes to import a CD into iTunes, two of which are opening and closing the drive door. The iTunes interface is better, plus the sync with the iPod is freakin amazing.I got three jazz CDs from my man in LA, twenty minutes later they are on my PowerMac and iPod.

And most of the time is spent getting the packaging off the cases.The only saving grace to using my CL Jukebox on Windows is a third party piece of software called. And it doesn't rip or encode.q. Quote:Originally posted by Quality:WMP is more awkward to use compared to iTunes.

It takes exactly three keyboard stokes to import a CD into iTunes, two of which are opening and closing the drive door. The iTunes interface is better, plus the sync with the iPod is freakin amazing.Hmm, by that method of counting WMP9 takes exactly 1 step (which is slipping the CD into my slot-loading DVD-ROM drive) to import a CD into my media library in a lossless audio format (something iTunes can't do in any number of steps). Quote:Originally posted by Quality:quote:Hmm, by that method of counting WMP9 takes exactly 1 step (which is slipping the CD into my slot-loading DVD-ROM drive) to import a CD into my media library in a lossless audio format (something iTunes can't do in any number of steps).Who wants lossless? In that case I could just make a copy of the CD. I'm not editing the damn thing.

The point is to get the music onto the iPod or on the HD of the computer where it takes up the least amount of space and still retains listening quality.qUmmm, I'd imagine most people would want it, at least as an option. The giant advantage to compressed lossless audio formats, besides the bit perfect quality, is the ability to reencode to another (better) format, if it comes along, and at no degradation to the audio (because it's identical to the original source).If you want the best quality mp3 audio at a reasonable size you should be using LAME on either platform (though probably with EAC under Windows). If you want want the best quality at a small size, in a format that is actually supported by a number of players, wma9 is probably your best bet (for example with the Nomad Zen). Quote:Originally posted by dogstar:Sorry must have missed something further up the page all I saw was your comment a few post up but as to why I might want something like aiff well it would be along the lines ofThat product looks pretty cool, but what does it have to do with aiff? It looks like it has it's own built in optical drive to rip straight to some proprietary format. Actually, does their LINTEK PC Utility even support OS X (from glancing at the manuals it they only every mention Windows)?

Quote:Originally posted by Venture:Which world were you thinking of, in 'world-class'?Sorry, iPhoto is a fairly good implementation of a kind of program that people only need basic functionality from, and iTunes appears to have no redeeming features over the basics.Perhaps you can pick the PC programs that you think is inferior to these programs and tell us why.Well the World I was speaking of was of course My World. When it comes to iPhoto and other digital photography management programs I think I can speak pretty authoritatively. My interest in photography precedes my interest in computers, in the late '70's I had an aerial photography business (Overview Aviation). I did work for the Army Corps of Engineers (among others) doing vertical mapping using a Ziess mapping camera that cost more the the aircraft that carried it. Oblique shots were done with a Hassleblad EL using high capacity 70mm magazines. I would venture that I owned my first Nikon before most of you were born.Before my switch to the Mac I had an Olympus D-320L (1.4 mega pixel) that I used with my Sony 505 to explore digital photography.

After installing the drivers needed to import the images from a somewhat kludgy 3.5' drive adapter that accepted the SmartMedia cards. I used Sony PictureGear software to view and manipulate the images.

I tried MCI photosuite a bit, but as in the Sony product, it was underwhelming.The purchase of my Cube, and the subsequent use of iPhoto is what fully delivered me to digital. I upgraded to a Sony CyberShot (2.1 megapixel) and took my shots to the next level. IPhoto, like iTunes, is intuitive and easy. It doesn't get in the way, just plug in the USB cord and iPhoto opens up, recognizes my CyberShot by name (no drivers needed), offers to download the images, and asks if I want to erase the memory stick, which 99% of the time I do. The images are imported into the image library and that's it. No naming files (unless I want to) or other hoops to navigate to store and organize the shots. It's just EASY, it works without effort, it doesn't get in the way.I recently took my digital commitment to the next level, with the purchase of a Nikon D100 (6.1 megapixel) and added a Nikkor AF-D 24-85 zoom to take advantage of the features of this fine camera (autofocus plus expansive metering options).

Iphoto Measure V.3.1.1.4714 Rc1 10

Of course, as this Nikon uses the same F-mount lenses, I can also use my 35 years worth of Nikkor lenses, but rarely do, as in the same way that iPhoto makes things easy, the newer Nikkors also make things easy. No struggle to get a sharp focus, or perfect exposure it just works!Although the Nikon comes supplied with 'Nikon View', a cross platform application to download the images, I have found iPhoto to be the best way to deal with the fine (and large, up to 17MB!) images this camera produces. If iPhoto can meet my needs, from snapshot to professional level, Apple has done something right here. Much like iTunes, it's easy, intuitive, and capable. I focus on my images, not on the software.This is what makes the iApps from Apple World Class, the simplicity that makes the use of them transparent. They don't get in the way of getting things done.

You want to make a movie? IMovie makes it easy. Want to organize your music library and burn CD's? ITunes makes it easy. Digital photos?

IPhoto is the best of class. World Class indeed.

Quote:Originally posted by Aphelion:iPhoto, like iTunes, is intuitive and easy. It doesn't get in the way, just plug in the USB cord and iPhoto opens up, recognizes my CyberShot by name (no drivers needed), offers to download the images, and asks if I want to erase the memory stick, which 99% of the time I do. The images are imported into the image library and that's it. No naming files (unless I want to) or other hoops to navigate to store and organize the shots. It's just EASY, it works without effort, it doesn't get in the way.That's great. But it's just as painless under XP.

Iphoto Measure V.3.1.1.4714 Rc1 2

You plug in the USB cord and if it's the first time you ever connected that specific camera an Autoplay Options dialog pops up. From there you have a number of options.You can click to have photos printed directly off your camera, you can view a slideshow of the contents of your camera, you can have Explorer open up and display a folder showing the contents of the camera, you can have any third party app you have installed launch and deal with your camera (for example, as you mentioned NikonView, it creates an autoplay option to have NikkonView copy your images off your camera), you can choose to have the Scanner and Camera Wizard copy the images off your camera or you can choose to do nothing. You can also check a checkbox to have one of the above always occur automatic when you plug in your camera (most commonly you'd want the Scanner and Camera wizard to always launch).The Scanner and Camera wizard shows you all the pictures on your camera and you can just grab them all or select individual photos to move to your HDD. You can enter a name for the series of images and it will auto increment/name them as it copies them over (ex: Beach Trip 2002 01, Beach Trip 2002 02, Beach Trip 2002 03, etc) or not. Like you mentined with iPhoto you can also have it clear the camera when finished.Very simple and very quick.EDIT: Watch to see exactly how it works.This message was edited by casper ghost on December 07, 2002 at 11:14. Quote:Ummm, I'd imagine most people would want it, at least as an option.

The giant advantage to compressed lossless audio formats, besides the bit perfect quality, is the ability to reencode to another (better) format, if it comes along, and at no degradation to the audio (because it's identical to the original source).Most people don't. Tunes come from CDs and go to computer and iPod with no issues. Painless music. You can do an entire average collection of CDs in a weekend or less. If they want more, they would use other options. But not all are audiophiles.

Leave time for messing with other things.q. Quote:Originally posted by Quality:Most people don't.It's nice that you can authoritatively speak for computer users at large, telling us that that we wouldn't even want the option of a compressed lossless audio format.quote:You can do an entire average collection of CDs in a weekend or less. If they want more, they would use other options. But not all are audiophiles. Leave time for messing with other things.Right, and like I said, by your own measure, it's even easier under WMP9, all you do is put in the CD.This message was edited by casper ghost on December 07, 2002 at 11:35. Quote:WMP is more awkward to use compared to iTunes. It takes exactly three keyboard stokes to import a CD into iTunes, two of which are opening and closing the drive door.Gee whiz, just like WMP from two years ago.

Who woulda thunk it?quote:I got three jazz CDs from my man in LAPolygamy is illegal. I hope you aren't married to more than one guy.quote:Who wants lossless?People that want lossless and that can encode lossless, more than likely.quote:It's nice that you can authoritatively speak for computer users at large, telling us that that we wouldn't even want the optionOf course, you should never want an option. Unless apple forces it on you. Quote:Originally posted by casper ghost:That's great. But it's just as painless under XP. You plug in the USB cord and if it's the first time you ever connected that specific camera an Autoplay Options dialog pops up.

From there you have a number of options.I have a Nikon Coolpix 4300 and I've used a Nikon D1X (the younger brother of the above mentioned D100). In my two years of experience both of these cameras were just as easy to use under Windows XP as they are under MacOS X. I've had to use the D1X under both OSes and I never had a problem with either, they both found the camera and downloaded the pictures for me, no hassles.

Iphoto Measure V.3.1.1.4714 Rc1 Tool

Quote:Originally posted by seta:quote:Automatic ripping of CDs.Burn audio CDs or mp3 CDs directly.You can adjust the volume or equalizer settings on each individual mp3 file'Search' function is actually usefulBrowse functionPlaylists.You just described WMP from 2 years ago. Congrats!Maybe so. But WMP was (and is) such a horribly designed piece of software that I gave it up and went back to EAC+LAME, Tag&Rename, and WinAmp both times I tried to 'switch' to WMP.I'm curious how many people actually use WMP over WinAmp, or encode in a lossless format through WMP.But in reality - I don't care.

Y'all can spout about how great WMP is, but I've tried it, and found it lacking. I think that quite a few BFers need to look up 'cognitive dissonance'. Quote:Originally posted by casper ghost:That's great. But it's just as painless under XP.You plug in the USB cord. Autoplay Options dialog pops up.

From there you have a number of options.You can click. You can view.

You can have Explorer open up., you can click. You can choose. You can also check a checkbox. Scanner and Camera wizard. Can just grab them. You can enter a name. Like you mentined with iPhoto you can also have it clear the camera when finished.I like that last feature, but sometimes less is more as in Keep It Simple Sir.

If I want more choices I'll just pop an image into PhotoShop and get all the complexities I need. Does the job of importing and organizing my images without configuration, Wizards, Dialogs or Autoplay options. It just does the job and stays out of the way, that's the best feature of Apple Computers in general and iPhoto in particular. Quote:Originally posted by Aphelion:I like that last feature, but sometimes less is more as in Keep It Simple Sir. If I want more choices I'll just pop an image into PhotoShop and get all the complexities I need. Does the job of importing and organizing my images without configuration, Wizards, Dialogs or Autoplay options.

It just does the job and stays out of the way, that's the best feature of Apple Computers in general and iPhoto in particular.Did you watch the video I linked to? I listed most the the options for the sake of thoroughness but if you go with the defaults it's just a few clicks and you're done. Quote:Originally posted by bdrago:But in reality - I don't care. Y'all can spout about how great WMP is, but I've tried it, and found it lacking. I think that quite a few BFers need to look up 'cognitive dissonance'.You've tired WMP9 RC1 as well? They've cleaned up the interface quite a bit and it has new features like retrieving all the missing tags automatically for an mp3/wma.I'm still use WinAmp 2.8x for mp3 listening because of it's minuscule CPU usage and tiny title-bar sized mini-mode (WMP9 kind of addressed that with a taskbar player) but I definitely prefer it over winamp 3 (for me the number one requirement in an mp3 player is for it to use less than 1% CPU.

I want to feel that it's using such a negligible amount of system resources that it has no effect on anything even in the slightest).