Mal
Jul 25, 12:03 AM
I'd be worried about that exept one incontrovertible fact. Steve Jobs has more creative spark in his left pinky than M$ does in it whole genetic tree.
I think that's the idea. The implication I got was that they were going to give Microsoft a generous stretch of rope and let them hang themselves.
jW
I think that's the idea. The implication I got was that they were going to give Microsoft a generous stretch of rope and let them hang themselves.
jW
KnightWRX
Apr 28, 09:42 AM
So, please don't take everything I typed and generalize it, because it's not for everyone.
I do understand where Dejo, Balamw and the others are coming from though. And frankly, they are probably better suited to help you than I am. I don't have a lot of experience with Objective-C and Cocoa, not like they do, having mostly come into it recently.
Back to the code, here is a photo of my connections (ignore canceBigtimer). What you say is true I don't know how NSTimer works entirely , just some parts, I realize that and it is one of the reason I postpone my timer for a future update (need to study it).
I have two timers, because, like I said.. I don't have full knowledge of timers. I know now that 1 timer is enough, even if I use two timers and start them at the same time, the log only shows 1 loop and the countdown in separate labels show e.g. 59 in one and 58 in another and so on.
Ok, how about we work on making 1 timer work then ? The code you posted is very complicated and I don't think it has to be this complicated. Going 1 timer would simplify this.
I see your Start Button is associated to 3 actions. Is this really what you want ? Let's simplify this. As an exercise, make 1 method, call it startTimer (like I did) and have only that action associated with your start button. From there, you can call the other methods yourself as needed.
Once you have modified the code in this way, post again what you have in full, what it is doing and what you think it should be doing. We'll go from there.
You mention my two global variables, It makes sense that the timer does not stop because the variables are outside the method that creates the timer. is that whats going on?
No, the variables are "fine" where they are. They would be better positionned in the @interface block and declared as instance variables, but implementation scope globals work too.
What you need to do however is reset those if you want your timer to start back at 0. Somewhere in your "stop/reset" code, there needs to be an initialization of those back to 0 :
seconds = 0;
minutes = 0;
If your Cancel button is what should reset it, then this should be right now in newActionTimer. But ideally, we'll get rid of that function when you simplify the code down to 1 timer.
Look at my NSLog outputs in my screenshot earlier. There's 3 methods there. updateLabel, cancelTimer, startTimer. This should have given you a big indication of how not complicated you should have made this.
If you want 3 buttons, start, reset, stop, you'd technically need 4 methods, as follows :
-(IBAction) startTimer: (id) sender;
-(IBAction) stopTimer: (id) sender;
-(IBAction) resetTimer: (id) sender;
-(void) updateLabel;
One to update the label as needed, one to start the timer, one to stop it and one to reset it.
Also, NSTimer is not your timer. The timer is what you are creating with ATimerViewController. You need to grasp this. NSTimer simply calls methods, in this case, it should be update label. That's about all it should be doing. Both the stop and reset methods should release the NSTimer object instance. startTimer should always create a new one. However, reset should be the one to set back seconds/minutes to 0.
I do understand where Dejo, Balamw and the others are coming from though. And frankly, they are probably better suited to help you than I am. I don't have a lot of experience with Objective-C and Cocoa, not like they do, having mostly come into it recently.
Back to the code, here is a photo of my connections (ignore canceBigtimer). What you say is true I don't know how NSTimer works entirely , just some parts, I realize that and it is one of the reason I postpone my timer for a future update (need to study it).
I have two timers, because, like I said.. I don't have full knowledge of timers. I know now that 1 timer is enough, even if I use two timers and start them at the same time, the log only shows 1 loop and the countdown in separate labels show e.g. 59 in one and 58 in another and so on.
Ok, how about we work on making 1 timer work then ? The code you posted is very complicated and I don't think it has to be this complicated. Going 1 timer would simplify this.
I see your Start Button is associated to 3 actions. Is this really what you want ? Let's simplify this. As an exercise, make 1 method, call it startTimer (like I did) and have only that action associated with your start button. From there, you can call the other methods yourself as needed.
Once you have modified the code in this way, post again what you have in full, what it is doing and what you think it should be doing. We'll go from there.
You mention my two global variables, It makes sense that the timer does not stop because the variables are outside the method that creates the timer. is that whats going on?
No, the variables are "fine" where they are. They would be better positionned in the @interface block and declared as instance variables, but implementation scope globals work too.
What you need to do however is reset those if you want your timer to start back at 0. Somewhere in your "stop/reset" code, there needs to be an initialization of those back to 0 :
seconds = 0;
minutes = 0;
If your Cancel button is what should reset it, then this should be right now in newActionTimer. But ideally, we'll get rid of that function when you simplify the code down to 1 timer.
Look at my NSLog outputs in my screenshot earlier. There's 3 methods there. updateLabel, cancelTimer, startTimer. This should have given you a big indication of how not complicated you should have made this.
If you want 3 buttons, start, reset, stop, you'd technically need 4 methods, as follows :
-(IBAction) startTimer: (id) sender;
-(IBAction) stopTimer: (id) sender;
-(IBAction) resetTimer: (id) sender;
-(void) updateLabel;
One to update the label as needed, one to start the timer, one to stop it and one to reset it.
Also, NSTimer is not your timer. The timer is what you are creating with ATimerViewController. You need to grasp this. NSTimer simply calls methods, in this case, it should be update label. That's about all it should be doing. Both the stop and reset methods should release the NSTimer object instance. startTimer should always create a new one. However, reset should be the one to set back seconds/minutes to 0.
vixapphire
Jan 15, 05:05 PM
I think the best is the Apple TV. I mean seriously. They did all that and didn't require you to get new hardware. Good one for Apple.
that's only because it was a largely useless p.o.s. product out of the gate, and they've only just gotten around to "repurposing" it in the itunes rental scheme.
that's only because it was a largely useless p.o.s. product out of the gate, and they've only just gotten around to "repurposing" it in the itunes rental scheme.
aeneas07
Oct 6, 11:46 AM
Getting back to the actual advertisement. What self-respecting advertising professional would use someone else's tagline like that.
I had a few friends watching the football game (where we saw the ad) and half of them thought it was an iphone commercial because they were only half paying attention and heard "there's a map for that".
Pretty shoddy work in my opinion.
I had a few friends watching the football game (where we saw the ad) and half of them thought it was an iphone commercial because they were only half paying attention and heard "there's a map for that".
Pretty shoddy work in my opinion.
nosen
Sep 28, 11:19 AM
I wonder what the hold up is with releasing this update? :o
Rodimus Prime
Mar 7, 11:10 AM
Also, because of the tight competition, companies are afraid to take risks. Remember when the USB por had just been introduced? This was a real chicken and egg situation for PC makers. No PC maker wants to be the first to switch to all USB ports because (a) it will cost more money to put the new ports into the board, and (b) they know it will annoy customers who will have to buy all peripherals. Customers will simply buy the competing brand because it's cheaper. Now, someone eventually sells a PC with both USB and PS/2 ports so you can slowly start the upgrade trend, but it's slow for all the above reasons.
Same for the floppy drive: nobody wants to be the first to ship without one. It would be seen as being "too different" and cause lost sales to the competition.
Like Knight said Apple did not lead the charge for USB nor floppy drive.
I will argue that Apple dump the floppy drive WAY WAY to soon as there was no suitable replacement out for it yet. With out a floppy drive there was no way to move small files between computers. Hell those first mac that dump the floppy did not even have a CD burner not that CD were good idea to move small files between computers.
At the time they dump the floppy blank CD were a few dollars a piece, Email was text only and if you could send an attachment your inbox size was limited to 2 megs at most.
What kill the floppy was flash drivers becoming cheap and larger insize, being able to email larger attachments and hi speed internet. It required all of those factors to really kill off the floppy drive. I have a old USB floppy drive I have from 2001 that I will hold on to for the just incase. My desktop I built in 2004 I put in a floppy drive. I call it my 10 buck insurance plan. Sadly I have used it several times over the years. Hell I had a teacher in 2007 that required me to turn in a project on a floppy drive. Let me tell you it felt weird going to Office Depot and asking for a floppy drive but oh well. 10 buck insurance plan that paid off multiple times over.
Same for the floppy drive: nobody wants to be the first to ship without one. It would be seen as being "too different" and cause lost sales to the competition.
Like Knight said Apple did not lead the charge for USB nor floppy drive.
I will argue that Apple dump the floppy drive WAY WAY to soon as there was no suitable replacement out for it yet. With out a floppy drive there was no way to move small files between computers. Hell those first mac that dump the floppy did not even have a CD burner not that CD were good idea to move small files between computers.
At the time they dump the floppy blank CD were a few dollars a piece, Email was text only and if you could send an attachment your inbox size was limited to 2 megs at most.
What kill the floppy was flash drivers becoming cheap and larger insize, being able to email larger attachments and hi speed internet. It required all of those factors to really kill off the floppy drive. I have a old USB floppy drive I have from 2001 that I will hold on to for the just incase. My desktop I built in 2004 I put in a floppy drive. I call it my 10 buck insurance plan. Sadly I have used it several times over the years. Hell I had a teacher in 2007 that required me to turn in a project on a floppy drive. Let me tell you it felt weird going to Office Depot and asking for a floppy drive but oh well. 10 buck insurance plan that paid off multiple times over.
Hovey
Jul 21, 12:41 PM
You seem to have missed the "... MORE than iPhone 3gs" part.
A better antenna should drop FEWER calls (unless there's a flaw)
Yeah but none of us know what that number is. It could be a full 1/100 for all we know. 2-5% is still pretty good. There will NEVER be a phone that never drops a call, ever. We also don't know other manufacturers ratio. There's probably a reason why they don't give that information.
A better antenna should drop FEWER calls (unless there's a flaw)
Yeah but none of us know what that number is. It could be a full 1/100 for all we know. 2-5% is still pretty good. There will NEVER be a phone that never drops a call, ever. We also don't know other manufacturers ratio. There's probably a reason why they don't give that information.
tvachon
Jan 9, 01:52 PM
Ahh, almost worse with the Gates keynote...ha.
I wouldnt trust any youtube link. Since youtube limits to 10 mins, you would need 12 links to cover the keynote
I wouldnt trust any youtube link. Since youtube limits to 10 mins, you would need 12 links to cover the keynote
southernpaws
May 2, 10:33 AM
Now that people know what they're up to, it's "unintentional", and "bugs". :rolleyes:
To you and other conspiracy theorists:
At first I was skeptical at calling it a bug as well. I was convinced by the fact that Apple had nothing to gain by "secretly" slipping it in.
They weren't sending themselves copies of the consolidated.db file-no actual advantage for apple to have extended logs of the location data. And they're not in the business of data mining, so following the money leads to a dead end.
The absolute worst case scenario is that this was a careless oversight. There's simply no evidence or motive for malevolence. Sorry.
To you and other conspiracy theorists:
At first I was skeptical at calling it a bug as well. I was convinced by the fact that Apple had nothing to gain by "secretly" slipping it in.
They weren't sending themselves copies of the consolidated.db file-no actual advantage for apple to have extended logs of the location data. And they're not in the business of data mining, so following the money leads to a dead end.
The absolute worst case scenario is that this was a careless oversight. There's simply no evidence or motive for malevolence. Sorry.
Littleodie914
Mar 28, 02:35 PM
Yes what a heinous crime for Apple to want to promote their new distribution platform and encourage developers to take advantage of it.No kidding. It's like Columbia Records giving out awards to its most innovative musicians, and all the musicians from Sony Music start complaining that they aren't eligible to receive one. :confused:
It's not anyone's "right" to be in the running for any awards. Sheesh.
It's not anyone's "right" to be in the running for any awards. Sheesh.
mmcc
Mar 29, 08:46 AM
Yes, the App Store can give you exposure, but you still have to market and sell your solution for people to find you or want you. Plus, the AppStore is one outlet and your other outlets should never be abandoned.
Yes, but you can't have it both ways. A successful Mac App Store from your perspective means more Apple customers use it to find apps. In my experience to date, this means those other "outlets" become less and less profitable. Marketing is a numbers game and a major disruption like the Mac App Store can quickly shift those numbers to the negative. In my case it is no longer profitable to maintain some of those "other outlets".
Here's a specific example: Google AdWords. Before the Mac App Store opened, many customers gravitated first to Google search to find an app. I would pay for AdWords placement and if I got a click-through I could be assured that my website exclusively captured the attention. Yes, my app still had to be good enough to capture a sale but at least there were no other competitors there -- and no freebie alternatives (except for demos/trials).
The same strategy no longer works with the Mac App Store. First, the traffic in Google search is reduced as more Apple customers gravitate to the Mac App Store first. My conversions costs showed a clear trend upward as soon as the Mac App Store opened (other competitors in my app space have also dropped away from AdWords indicating similar escalating conversion costs). Furthermore, if I try to drive customers to the Mac App Store to buy, to increase my exposure therein, I incur the AdWord conversion costs, plus the 30% to Apple and a reduced price in the Mac App Store to compete in the race to the bottom. Clearly AdWords is a losing strategy in this case.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced.
That's fine if the volume was worthwhile. What I am saying is that impulse buy volume is NOT there at any price to even approach what I was making in my market space before. I've been in the #1 spot for my category and it was not a windfall.
I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive. The Mac App Store has crushed that IMO and I am not sure it will return unless Apple makes huge percentage gains in the traditional PC market (and recent trends show it is leveling off).
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
How exactly would you suggest to market in the Mac App Store? I can't buy ad placement. Lowering my price to 99 cents hasn't given me exposure. I need some (ethical) ideas. :p
Yes, but you can't have it both ways. A successful Mac App Store from your perspective means more Apple customers use it to find apps. In my experience to date, this means those other "outlets" become less and less profitable. Marketing is a numbers game and a major disruption like the Mac App Store can quickly shift those numbers to the negative. In my case it is no longer profitable to maintain some of those "other outlets".
Here's a specific example: Google AdWords. Before the Mac App Store opened, many customers gravitated first to Google search to find an app. I would pay for AdWords placement and if I got a click-through I could be assured that my website exclusively captured the attention. Yes, my app still had to be good enough to capture a sale but at least there were no other competitors there -- and no freebie alternatives (except for demos/trials).
The same strategy no longer works with the Mac App Store. First, the traffic in Google search is reduced as more Apple customers gravitate to the Mac App Store first. My conversions costs showed a clear trend upward as soon as the Mac App Store opened (other competitors in my app space have also dropped away from AdWords indicating similar escalating conversion costs). Furthermore, if I try to drive customers to the Mac App Store to buy, to increase my exposure therein, I incur the AdWord conversion costs, plus the 30% to Apple and a reduced price in the Mac App Store to compete in the race to the bottom. Clearly AdWords is a losing strategy in this case.
However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced.
That's fine if the volume was worthwhile. What I am saying is that impulse buy volume is NOT there at any price to even approach what I was making in my market space before. I've been in the #1 spot for my category and it was not a windfall.
I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive. The Mac App Store has crushed that IMO and I am not sure it will return unless Apple makes huge percentage gains in the traditional PC market (and recent trends show it is leveling off).
Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.
How exactly would you suggest to market in the Mac App Store? I can't buy ad placement. Lowering my price to 99 cents hasn't given me exposure. I need some (ethical) ideas. :p
gooddeal
Apr 8, 01:07 PM
Apple should dump BB base on their "search" practice alone. If you go to BB and search for iPad, BB doesn't show iPad. It shows the options to select iPad or many other tablets. If you search "Sony LCD", you will get "Sony LCD' and not other brands.:rolleyes:
Machead III
Sep 12, 07:54 AM
If they can't be burnt to DVD they're gonna have to be mad cheap.
JML42691
Oct 14, 09:11 PM
Wow. Do you people realize that this topic was originally posted WAY WAY back on Jan 10, 03:12 PM??? 10 months ago?
I did when I made my post, it doesn't change the situation much, if at all. What they did was what they did, and the majority of this discussion was after last year's MWSF, in which case the upcoming MW of which the OP discussed the point of if they should be banned hasn't even happened yet. So this discussion is still very active and relevant.
I did when I made my post, it doesn't change the situation much, if at all. What they did was what they did, and the majority of this discussion was after last year's MWSF, in which case the upcoming MW of which the OP discussed the point of if they should be banned hasn't even happened yet. So this discussion is still very active and relevant.
Lyra
Aug 1, 02:03 PM
Honestly Denmark, Norway and Sweden...
If you don't like it, then get out... Leave it, don't touch it and shut up!
No one is forcing you to buy it, so stop whining... You are not making any sense, you are just acting like desperate little people wanting to bash Apple cause that is the PC way to do things...
Most PC users with an iPod in Scandinavia only rip music and that is all...
So, let me explain it to you, since you don't seem to get it...
IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT... Here it comes... DON'T BUY IT!!!!!!
Stop acting so money hungry... Yeah, Norway wanting to give Apple a fine for their format... Wow... that's rich!
So, if a tiny country (Norway) with a few people wanting money, all they have to do is make a new law that is formulated so that they can "according to their law" say that international companies are violating their laws... Inventive, but very greedy...
There are other ways of getting noticed you know... Like doing something that actually benefits the world... (Max Von Sydow, doesn't count, he was Swedish)
If you don't like it, then get out... Leave it, don't touch it and shut up!
No one is forcing you to buy it, so stop whining... You are not making any sense, you are just acting like desperate little people wanting to bash Apple cause that is the PC way to do things...
Most PC users with an iPod in Scandinavia only rip music and that is all...
So, let me explain it to you, since you don't seem to get it...
IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT... Here it comes... DON'T BUY IT!!!!!!
Stop acting so money hungry... Yeah, Norway wanting to give Apple a fine for their format... Wow... that's rich!
So, if a tiny country (Norway) with a few people wanting money, all they have to do is make a new law that is formulated so that they can "according to their law" say that international companies are violating their laws... Inventive, but very greedy...
There are other ways of getting noticed you know... Like doing something that actually benefits the world... (Max Von Sydow, doesn't count, he was Swedish)
RaZaK
Oct 9, 11:16 AM
i have no love for Verizon, but that was certainly a hilarious commercial.
I guess 'desperation is the mother of all invention' applies here (i know that's not the correct quote :rolleyes:)
it will be interesting to see what happens next year when exclusivity supposedly ends
it will also be interesting to see if Android gains momentum with support from all the phone carriers.
:D
still, :apple: FTW
I guess 'desperation is the mother of all invention' applies here (i know that's not the correct quote :rolleyes:)
it will be interesting to see what happens next year when exclusivity supposedly ends
it will also be interesting to see if Android gains momentum with support from all the phone carriers.
:D
still, :apple: FTW
WestonHarvey1
Jul 21, 12:40 PM
But Apple admitted that it DOES drop more calls than 3GS.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.[/I]
That total number is meaningless to the end user. The Average user will make 100 calls on a 4 and 100 on a 3GS and not see a difference.
It's also a number that could change from week to week depending on all sorts of nebulous factors. This week the stats might favor the 4 by 1 call for all you know.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.[/I]
That total number is meaningless to the end user. The Average user will make 100 calls on a 4 and 100 on a 3GS and not see a difference.
It's also a number that could change from week to week depending on all sorts of nebulous factors. This week the stats might favor the 4 by 1 call for all you know.
Winni
May 4, 02:59 AM
Just like communism
Actually, this also includes American Capitalism -- only a fistful of rich people benefit from it at the expense of the rest of the population that has been led to believe by the media that anybody can eventually become rich if they only work hard enough for it, but the truth is that this almost never happens.
Actually, this also includes American Capitalism -- only a fistful of rich people benefit from it at the expense of the rest of the population that has been led to believe by the media that anybody can eventually become rich if they only work hard enough for it, but the truth is that this almost never happens.
xVeinx
Nov 16, 03:01 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86#Manufacturers
Hopefully Apple will stick with the best for now. (Intel) I've seen the promises AMD has but it's leaning toward 4x4 to compete with Intel. What's on the lower end for the average user when a Core 2 beats the pants off of what AMD has out.
And one more thing....
Introducing the Macbook mini AMD edition!
AMD 4x4 processors at 2.6ghz
Nvidia 4x4 compatible chipset
AMD x1950 graphics w/ 512 memory
12in sxga screen
Superdrive
2 gigs memory standard
Liquid Nitrogen not included...
:p
Hopefully Apple will stick with the best for now. (Intel) I've seen the promises AMD has but it's leaning toward 4x4 to compete with Intel. What's on the lower end for the average user when a Core 2 beats the pants off of what AMD has out.
And one more thing....
Introducing the Macbook mini AMD edition!
AMD 4x4 processors at 2.6ghz
Nvidia 4x4 compatible chipset
AMD x1950 graphics w/ 512 memory
12in sxga screen
Superdrive
2 gigs memory standard
Liquid Nitrogen not included...
:p
jive
Sep 12, 07:30 AM
Disney own/are part of Buena Vista - who make a shedload of movies.
joelom
Apr 15, 10:15 PM
that is a render. notice how the back isnt rounded, and kinda has those "pinches." those are from a bad loft in a rendering program. i do agree with that design. the next iPhone is going to defiantly resemble the iPad...but more so the 3G iPad. like the other said, the aluminum messes with the signal.
shadowbird423
Apr 8, 12:57 PM
http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/funny-pictures-cats-see-what-you-did.jpg
Yeah because before Apple came to Best Buy, Best Buy was in a lot of trouble.
Give me a break dude.
Roasted.
Glad to see not everyones an Apple sheep..
Yeah because before Apple came to Best Buy, Best Buy was in a lot of trouble.
Give me a break dude.
Roasted.
Glad to see not everyones an Apple sheep..
skottichan
Apr 29, 03:52 PM
Yeah, I preferred the iOS scrollbars, and the slider buttons. I know, developers hate change.
DUSTmurph
Oct 6, 04:14 PM
very original commercial.
No comments:
Post a Comment