MAMA's Techno-Geek Thread

[MGB Boy]

Quote: Originally Posted by snid

I'm gonna pull a 3M on you guys if you're not careful.

Okay, buttercup...

-Ricardo

[Actual Size]

Quote: Originally Posted by snid

... after all, we all hate Adelphia, right?

...and Comcast is going to be better when they take over? Gotta love historic districts too. We can't get satellite tv in the downtown area...dishes are banned.

[GadgetGav]

Quote: Originally Posted by jwardell

This is why I really wanted that mac mini PVR to get announced yesterday.

Yeah, right..! Where was the iPod Boombox too..? That one was supposed to be a near certainty wasn't it..? Actually a Mac mini with PVR capabilities would be high on my wish list too.
Funny how the Mac community always find something to complain about; Apple just launched TWO new machines with INTEL processors in with 2X - 5X SPEED INCREASES over the old models, and what are a lot of the Mac news sites saying..?? "Why didn't they do a radical redesign of the casing?" Come on people..! The MacBook is actually quite a lot different (though not necessarily better without FW800 and DL burner). It looks like its got a wide aspect touchpad too which seems like a nice touch and the break away connector is a nice idea. OK, so the iMac isn't a lot different on the outside although it sounds like it is different inside. For years the Mac sites have moaned that there is not enough performance in the processor, now they're complaining that the outside doesn't look different.
I'm thinking that there might be a 20" iMac in my future, or maybe wait and see what the 30th anniversary Mac will look like, or the new towers... What a year it's going to be..!

[MGB Boy]

Quote: Originally Posted by GadgetGav

Apple just launched TWO new machines with INTEL processors in with 2X - 5X SPEED INCREASES over the old models, and what are a lot of the Mac news sites saying..?? "Why didn't they do a radical redesign of the casing?" Come on people..!

At the risk of getting my butt flamed off by all the MacHeads around here... I'd say that's because for a decent size chunk of people (both within and without the Apple community) Apple has become known more for form than function. Not saying anything good/bad/indifferent about function, but to much of the public, that's not what Apple is about, it's about spacey packaging and shiny new ever-smaller ipods every 6 months and the latest too-cool-for-school sheet metal (or rather plastic), not what's inside...

-Ricardo

[GMINI]

smoothness of software and fortification of security....

oh man. if it were just the box and not the kickass features of the bulletproof software.

[snid]

Someone needs to improve the templates for the new mac blog stuff (iWeb)..

From what I can see so far, they're pretty bad. Look here:
http://www.mac.com/web/en/Blog/Blog.html
What's with wasting 50 pixels or so on the left side of the page, so that some of the content gets chopped off in my browser window, and all kinds of negative space off the right side of the content, causing a horizontal scroll bar that doesn't get you anywhere? Really bad design. All so they can get that trendy gradient background? As p(P)ez would say, lame.


They should be pretty ashamed of rushing those templates into production, cause they're just bad.

[GadgetGav]

Quote: Originally Posted by MGB Boy

At the risk of getting my butt flamed off by all the MacHeads around here... I'd say that's because for a decent size chunk of people (both within and without the Apple community) Apple has become known more for form than function. Not saying anything good/bad/indifferent about function, but to much of the public, that's not what Apple is about, it's about spacey packaging and shiny new ever-smaller ipods every 6 months and the latest too-cool-for-school sheet metal (or rather plastic), not what's inside...

-Ricardo

But that's my point. When all they had was form, the web community complained about function. Now they've got function, they're complaining about the form that they were so smug about the superiority of not 6 months ago. Can't please any of the people any of the time..!

[GadgetGav]

Quote: Originally Posted by snid

Someone needs to improve the templates for the new mac blog stuff (iWeb)..

From what I can see so far, they're pretty bad. Look here:
http://www.mac.com/web/en/Blog/Blog.html
What's with wasting 50 pixels or so on the left side of the page, so that some of the content gets chopped off in my browser window, and all kinds of negative space off the right side of the content, causing a horizontal scroll bar that doesn't get you anywhere? Really bad design. All so they can get that trendy gradient background? As p(P)ez would say, lame.


They should be pretty ashamed of rushing those templates into production, cause they're just bad.

I don't see chopped content, but the horizontal scroll off into nowhere is a bit odd...
Anyway, it's not all bad for us non-web types... This is what Jane made in an hour while watching Lost with the iLife06 she just loaded on her laptop:
http://web.mac.com/gavinmckeown/iWeb...croft.Com.html

[snid]

Quote: Originally Posted by GadgetGav

I don't see chopped content, but the horizontal scroll off into nowhere is a bit odd...
Anyway, it's not all bad for us non-web types... This is what Jane made in an hour while watching Lost with the iLife06 she just loaded on her laptop:
http://web.mac.com/gavinmckeown/iWeb...croft.Com.html

Jane's is showing up pretty well on my computer.

You might not be seeing the Apple blog as "chopped off" becuase your default browser window width is wider than mine. My default browser window is something like 650 pixels wide... which is just a little too narrow for the Apple blog. My complaint is that page design should not make any assumptions about the user's browser window size.

[GadgetGav]

Ah... yes, my browser is pretty wide. Why does that horizontal bar just go out into acres of background space..? That seems very odd. Almost like the page design thinks it's 1200 wide but only puts text in 800...

[snid]

Quote: Originally Posted by GadgetGav

Almost like the page design thinks it's 1200 wide but only puts text in 800...

Close, they're forcing the "page" to be 2500 pixels wide. Why? Who knows. But if you do a view source on it, there's a bunch if instance of "width:2500px"

[jwardell]

It is specific to that template, for some reason they are forcing placement instead of centering the page within the window. Most wouldn't have an issue, except for Jason who is apparently still browsing on a 9" B&W Mac SE/30. Jane's page is properly centered.

I haven't heard a single person complain about the macbook design, but I've heard everything else. My biggest complaint is the loss of firewire 800. Others here are ticked they can no longer use their PCMCIA EVDO cards. And how bout the loss of screen resolution and dual-layer dvd burning?

Whatever. It's still a great deal. But I don't take it as being all that fast, don't forget it is dual processor; so in reality 2-3x is 1-1.5x speed per cpu, and that's nothing impressive. What do you expect with a pipeline long enough to ship oil from alaska?

[snid]

Jeesh:

http://www.nikon.co.uk/press_room/re...w.aspx?rid=201

[GadgetGav]

Quote: Originally Posted by snid

Close, they're forcing the "page" to be 2500 pixels wide. Why? Who knows. But if you do a view source on it, there's a bunch if instance of "width:2500px"

Not even the 30" cinema display is that wide is it..??

[jwardell]

Quote: Originally Posted by snid

Mac? option-0. 3º here.

Funny. I've always typed it as opt-shft-8. And now that I try both, they both produce slightly different symbols. ° º Which is which?