or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › IBM plans Lotus for Apple iPad, e-reader eye strain explored
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

IBM plans Lotus for Apple iPad, e-reader eye strain explored - Page 3

post #81 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreyfus2 View Post

Not at all. It is a groupware/collaboration server, a bit like MS Exchange, but much more powerful.

So powerful, that everyone hates it in our 70,000 people corporation. (I have big enough sample to claim it). It is so 20th century (but not fox).
post #82 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Just as I've always maintained (and been criticised for saying here a few times), there is really no evidence that "eye strain" is caused by reading from a screen as opposed to paper, or that ePaper is any easier on the eyes than an LCD. It's basically a popular misconception.

If it weren't for popular misconceptions, half the trolls on this site wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
post #83 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post

For any real spreadsheet use, iWork is grossly inferior to Office, as is OpenOffice. While I feel I know my way around Excel very well, I am not using any macros or functions that shouldn't be supported by other applications. Excel does a better job with complex graphs, large data sets, and data navigation. There are a lot of things Excel does very poorly (scatter graphs with dates don't support "month" increments for major/minor axis divisions for one), but on the whole it does a good job.

If iWork wanted to leapfrog Excel, they would support multi-dimensional tables and innovative keyboard navgation for large data sets.

this is what we call bottom 5%. It's only important to the few people who have even discovered it, and understand it, AND have a use for it, on any sort of regular basis.

aka, ham-handed attempt at putting iWork down
post #84 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

This is telling. Gates' recent comments about how little he thinks of the iPad are undercut by his company's decision to offer Office for it. They are obviously fearful that wide iPad adoption with free iWorks will cut into their software hegemony. Actions speak louder than words. They fear the iPad will be very successful and are hedging their bet.

Apple don't do 'free.'

Quote:
The iWork for iPad apps are $10 each and will be available at the iTunes App Store. The iPad is slated to ship at the end of March.
post #85 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

If it weren't for popular misconceptions, half the trolls on this site wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

It is a popular misconception that trolls need two legs to stand on. They actually have superb balance and often do better on one leg than many non trolls do on two.

In the wild, trolls have occasionally been observed to bite one of their own legs off in order to exploit this advantage.
post #86 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

It is a popular misconception that trolls need two legs to stand on. They actually have superb balance and often do better on one leg than many non trolls do on two.

In the wild, trolls have occasionally been observed to bite one of their own legs off in order to exploit this advantage.

I'm sure it's easier for the trolls to put their foot in their mouth if it isn't attached to their body.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #87 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oflife View Post


Try reading for more than 30 minutes on an LCD at close range in low light and you will get a headache.

I don't. I often take off my glasses and hold the iPhone inches away from my face, and read eBooks for long periods of time.

I'm skeptical of reported eyestrain. I suspect that some of the folks who report eyestrain are also the same folks who report headaches from smelling wet latex paint, or headaches from eating msg-free chinese food, or headaches from any other thing that they imagine might cause headaches.

IOW, I suspect that some portion of the "I get eye strain" folks just like to bitch.
post #88 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

I don't. I often take off my glasses and hold the iPhone inches away from my face, and read eBooks for long periods of time.

I'm skeptical of reported eyestrain. I suspect that some of the folks who report eyestrain are also the same folks who report headaches from smelling wet latex paint, or headaches from eating msg-free chinese food, or headaches from any other thing that they imagine might cause headaches.

IOW, I suspect that some portion of the "I get eye strain" folks just like to bitch.

Who doesn't read on an LCD for more than 30 minutes per day? I have that beat by a very large margin; I assume most others do, too. If this was a problem it would have been diagnosed a long time ago and we wouldn't have seen print crumble in favour of a computer-based option.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #89 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Apple don't do 'free.'

I was under the impression that Macs came with heaps and heaps of shovelware installed on them - everything an unsophisticated user would likely want.

Is that wrong? Do you have to buy all the iSoftware separate? I thought it all came free.
post #90 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

I was under the impression that Macs came with heaps and heaps of shovelware installed on them - everything an unsophisticated user would likely want.

Is that wrong? Do you have to buy all the iSoftware separate? I thought it all came free.

Macs come with Mac OS X and iLife. There is no shovel or crapware on Macs. Not a single app is trial only. The only item on your desktop is the Macintosh HD icon.

The inclusion of iLife is to sweeten the deal, like other OEMs do by including full version apps on their systems. The cheaper the system the more crapware and shovelware you'll find. This helps the OEM lower the cost to the buyer by selling space on their OEM installations and restore discs. These tend to start up in the background even upon the first launch, as I'm sure you are aware.

OEMs have also made the move in recent years to make their own apps to run as widgets on their systems. From my experience these seem to be more of a nuisance than a useful tool.

From what I hear, the MS Stores sell OEM PCs without any crapware. They aren't installed with just Windows but have no trialware, just like Macs.

Note that MS is legally prohibited from supplying Windows with a robust app suite like iLife and supplying other apps, like DVD player, in the OS itself so the oft heard complaints about Windows not having the same apps as Mac OS X are usually unfounded. They're even getting in trouble for bundling Office apps.

Here is a review from PC Pro in the UK testing various OEMs preinstalled crapware. The MacBook came with less RAM than the other machines but it had no crapware, used the least amount of RAM and started up the fastest. You can save money with a crapware filled machine but personally I's prefer to spend a little more not to have it.

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/features/352927/the-crapware-con
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #91 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEKSTUD View Post

Screen size - hands down is the issue. An iPhone or Touch is easily adjustable to avert glare. Try that with a 27" sheet of gloss called the iMac .
I use the PowerSupport anti-glare sheet on my iPhone and absolutely love it- great for outdoors. I've stated before that PowerSupport will make a fortune with the iPad if it takes off.
I would never put a film over a laptop or desktop cause that would look half- arsed- IMHO.

I'm guessing you don't own a gloss Imac. Most people who complain about gloss macs don't own them. Glare on my 27" is zero issue, and never has been on any of my gloss mac screens. However the Matt versions were completely unusable outside or with any direct sunlight hitting them.
post #92 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

I was under the impression that Macs came with heaps and heaps of shovelware installed on them - everything an unsophisticated user would likely want.

Is that wrong? Do you have to buy all the iSoftware separate? I thought it all came free.

You've obviously never used the iLife suite, which is incredible. The software pre-installed on a mac is incredible and very, very high quality.
post #93 of 139
Good to know we were all just imagining the pain in our eyes that comes after reading screens for a while.

The next time I see someone print something off their computer avoid looking at a screen to read it, I'll be sure to call them a nutter and that the cheap printer paper there reading it off could actually be worse than the screen there staring at.

Or perhaps this persons wrong and staring at a screen that is basically a light for an hour while you read, may not actually be that good for you. Could explain why people that look at screens tend to need glasses more than those that don't. That's not to say that there's people it doesn't effect, but given the number of people that say it does I think we can safely say LCD screens cause eye strain (just not for everyone).
post #94 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doorman. View Post

Glossy screens aro really bad. At least for my eyes and (some other persons). I have eye strain and headache after 2 hours of working on the screen of HP Pavilion dv7. My eyes are tired then 2 more days, and it is difficult to have everything in sharp focus.
While on the normal non-glossy panel I can work for 12-14 hours per day without any problems (only get normally tired).

I do not wear eye glasses. My sight is still very good. But I doubt it would take long to worsen it if I work on this sh&ty glossy monitor from HP. Maybe other glossy monitors would have had other effect, but I have my opinion about them based on this experience and those 20-30 monitors/notebooks which I looked on in various shops.

This differs from person to person as well. But to claim that it is a myth or not true in general is wrong. Don't judge only based on your 'non-failure' experience with glossy. It is like smoking in the same room with other person - for some one it is acceptable, for others it is an insult to their person/health. Please, do not insult me saying that it is ok, while I have health problems with it (smoking and glossy). :/

P.S. And it was God sent, when we replaced CRTs with LCDs. It become so much better. I do not have problems with non-glossy LCDs.
Additionally, glossy is bad for any graphical professional. Ask any of them (if they say that it is ok, they are either paid for having (Apple), or try to convince themselves not to regret the purchase, or are not very good at what they are doing).
From all glossy, Apple's makes the best glossy. But it is still worse than non-glossy overall.

It's more than ok. Since swapping to gloss, calibration is a dream, the print always matches what I show the client on the screen, and the Matt screen white-out I used to experience on bright days is a thing of the past. I will never go back to a Matt display.
post #95 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by solarein View Post

There's another reason why LCDs may cause more eyestrain than e-ink that the article briefly mentions but glosses over.

From the article: The new LCDs dont affect your eyes, Mr. Taussig said. Todays screens update every eight milliseconds, whereas the human eye is moving at a speed between 10 and 30 milliseconds.

It's not clear, however, that by simply raising the refresh rate above what's perceptible to the eyes, no eye strain would be caused by the constant refreshing. This may vary from person to person, as there are reports of people perceiving flickering and color-switching effects at refresh rates above what people normally perceive.

It's important to note that e-ink displays are completely stable when not turning pages, etc. The image on the screen does not change at all when displaying a static image. LCDs however do refresh even when displaying a static image. Although LCDs don't flicker like CRTs do, because they have a backlight that's constantly lit, they are still not completely stable when displaying a static image, due to slight variations in the voltage at each pixel causing small changes in the pixel being displayed with each refresh.

You are assuming way too much here. It's been shown over the decades that the eye isn't sensitive to these small changes. in fact, both incandescent bulbs and fluorescent lighting undergo a flickering that is much more drastic than any coming from LCD displays.
post #96 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Not a single app is trial only.

What are you talking about? My 2009 MacBook Pro 5,5 came with trial versions of Both MS Office and iWork.
post #97 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

Good to know we were all just imagining the pain in our eyes that comes after reading screens for a while.

The next time I see someone print something off their computer avoid looking at a screen to read it, I'll be sure to call them a nutter and that the cheap printer paper there reading it off could actually be worse than the screen there staring at.

Or perhaps this persons wrong and staring at a screen that is basically a light for an hour while you read, may not actually be that good for you. Could explain why people that look at screens tend to need glasses more than those that don't. That's not to say that there's people it doesn't effect, but given the number of people that say it does I think we can safely say LCD screens cause eye strain (just not for everyone).

I'd suggest getting yr eyes tested and turning down the backlight. I run a studio with a team of forteen working eight hour days. No eye strain here.
post #98 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

It's more than ok. Since swapping to gloss, calibration is a dream, the print always matches what I show the client on the screen, and the Matt screen white-out I used to experience on bright days is a thing of the past. I will never go back to a Matt display.

Very true.
post #99 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

What are you talking about? My 2009 MacBook Pro 5,5 came with trial versions of Both MS Office and iWork.

Where did you buy that? No such demos here...
post #100 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Where did you buy that? No such demos here...

Hmm... maybe I'm just imagining it then... It must have been my old MacBook that came with those in 2006.
post #101 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

Good to know we were all just imagining the pain in our eyes that comes after reading screens for a while.

The next time I see someone print something off their computer avoid looking at a screen to read it, I'll be sure to call them a nutter and that the cheap printer paper there reading it off could actually be worse than the screen there staring at.

Or perhaps this persons wrong and staring at a screen that is basically a light for an hour while you read, may not actually be that good for you. Could explain why people that look at screens tend to need glasses more than those that don't. That's not to say that there's people it doesn't effect, but given the number of people that say it does I think we can safely say LCD screens cause eye strain (just not for everyone).

No one is saying that eye don't get strained, but you have offered no imperial data, just a weak hypothesis.

Let's look at your last statement... "people that look at [LCD] screens tend to need glasses more than those that don't." Why wouldn't that be genetics? Why wouldn't eye strain be a result of reading small text, in general? Do you have anything to show an explosive growth rate in the corrective lens market or a need for corrective lens at a young age?

Remember, 1st world children have been using game consoles for decades now, while adults have been using computers for work and in their personal life for nearly as long. If there were evidence of monitors ruining our eyesight or causing excessive eye strain that reading print under various light sources and intensities could never cause then Occam's Razor says that this would have been clearly evident without speculation on the matter.

That is not to say that LCDs, monitors, reading anything for a duration, not blinking or intense concentration cannot cause eyestrain, headaches, psychosis, seizures, daylight vision (cone vision), nighttime vision (rod vision) or overall visual degradation (misshaped lens) in some regard, but neither apophenia nor confirmation bias should be used to assess this risk. Scientific method all the way, Baby!
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #102 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Hmm... maybe I'm just imagining it then... It must have been my old MacBook that came with those in 2006.

They used to have the Office for Mac "Test Drive" and then later the iWork 30-Day Trial. Sometime back in Leopard, I think after they updated iWork to include Numbers they dropped both. Most likely they had a contract with MS that required them to include it for x-many years. Now, if you want either you have to get them online in or in their retail boxes.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #103 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

No one is saying that eye don't get strained, but you have offered no imperial data, just a weak hypothesis.

Let's look at your last statement... "people that look at [LCD] screens tend to need glasses more than those that don't." Why wouldn't that be genetics? Why wouldn't eye strain be a result of reading small text, in general? Do you have anything to show an explosive growth rate in the corrective lens market or a need for corrective lens at a young age?

Remember, 1st world children have been using game consoles for decades now, while adults have been using computers for work and in their personal life for nearly as long. If there were evidence of monitors ruining our eyesight or causing excessive eye strain that reading print under various light sources and intensities could never cause then Occam's Razor says that this would have been clearly evident without speculation on the matter.

That is not to say that LCDs, monitors, reading anything for a duration, not blinking or intense concentration cannot cause eyestrain, headaches, psychosis, seizures, daylight vision (cone vision), nighttime vision (rod vision) or overall visual degradation (misshaped lens) in some regard, but neither apophenia nor confirmation bias should be used to assess this risk. Scientific method all the way, Baby!

There's a lot of info about this. It's just a matter of finding the real information, and separating it from the bogus.

http://www.google.com/search?client=...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
post #104 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

They used to have the Office for Mac "Test Drive" and then later the iWork 30-Day Trial. Sometime back in Leopard, I think after they updated iWork to include Numbers they dropped both. Most likely they had a contract with MS that required them to include it for x-many years. Now, if you want either you have to get them online in or in their retail boxes.

Most people would likely prefer iLife anyway.

This is in contrast to the junkware that comes on most PCs. The difference, something that many people don't understand, is that all of those sample programs, starter versions, 30 to 90 day trials are something that the computer manufacturer is getting paid to install on their machines. This can amount to so much money, that for the cheaper machines they sell, it can account for all the profit!

As Apple doesn't do this, it's another reason why their machines cost more. While it wouldn't make much difference for an expensive machine, for something like the Mini, it can add $30 to $50 to the selling price, and that's a decent percentage for some people.
post #105 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Macs come with Mac OS X and iLife. There is no shovel or crapware on Macs. Not a single app is trial only. The only item on your desktop is the Macintosh HD icon.

The inclusion of iLife is to sweeten the deal, like other OEMs do by including full version apps on their systems.

It looks cool. Is it full-featured, or are these starter programs for simple uses?

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The cheaper the system the more crapware and shovelware you'll find. This helps the OEM lower the cost to the buyer by selling space on their OEM installations and restore discs. These tend to start up in the background even upon the first launch, as I'm sure you are aware.

Very true, and very annoying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

OEMs have also made the move in recent years to make their own apps to run as widgets on their systems. From my experience these seem to be more of a nuisance than a useful tool.

Agreed. It's one thing to have stuff for special hardware buttons, but the added UI stuff is usually crap. Not to mention the "Please Subscribe" stuff that the OEM throws in there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Note that MS is legally prohibited from supplying Windows with a robust app suite like iLife and supplying other apps, like DVD player, in the OS itself

Is THAT why you need to DL a DVD player, or plugin, rather than it playing in the stock Media Player? I never knew that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Here is a review from PC Pro in the UK testing various OEMs preinstalled crapware. The MacBook came with less RAM than the other machines but it had no crapware, used the least amount of RAM and started up the fastest. You can save money with a crapware filled machine but personally I's prefer to spend a little more not to have it.
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/features/352927/the-crapware-con

I'll read it.
post #106 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

You've obviously never used the iLife suite,

Right.
post #107 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

Could explain why people that look at screens tend to need glasses more than those that don't.

That's from staring at a fixed focal length for long periods of time, isn't it? I thought that the usual advice for that would be to look into the distance occasionally.

Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

That's not to say that there's people it doesn't effect, but given the number of people that say it does I think we can safely say LCD screens cause eye strain (just not for everyone).

Well, yeah.

But I think that the "need glasses" and "eyestrain" problems have different causes.
post #108 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

It's more than ok. Since swapping to gloss, calibration is a dream, the print always matches what I show the client on the screen, and the Matt screen white-out I used to experience on bright days is a thing of the past. I will never go back to a Matt display.

What kind of calibration do you do? What sort of equipment do you use?

Is there a rough and dirty consumer-grade method you could recommend?
post #109 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

It looks cool. Is it full-featured, or are these starter programs for simple uses?

These are full featured apps. They aren't professional apps, they are consumer apps designed to be simple to use, but that are far from being simple starter apps. For instance, iPhoto can hold over 100k(?) images and video. It has Places and Faces, something Aperture just received. It has smart albums and many consumer-focused non-destructive editing tools. Then iMovie and Garageband are from being simple. I don't even know of a Windows alternative for those two that is priced for a consumer.

Quote:
Agreed. It's one thing to have stuff for special hardware buttons, but the added UI stuff is usually crap. Not to mention the "Please Subscribe" stuff that the OEM throws in there.

As melgross mentions, above, this is big business. Cheap machines could even be sold at a loss and still make a profit on the back end.

Quote:
Is THAT why you need to DL a DVD player, or plugin, rather than it playing in the stock Media Player? I never knew that.

Remember the antitrust issue with Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator? I have no idea where the line would be drawn, but seeing as though many companies make their money from supplying these apps to Windows and hardly anyone was coding for Mac OS back then I'd say it's a fairly good reason for the disparity.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #110 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post
Here is a review from PC Pro in the UK testing various OEMs preinstalled crapware. The MacBook came with less RAM than the other machines but it had no crapware, used the least amount of RAM and started up the fastest. You can save money with a crapware filled machine but personally I's prefer to spend a little more not to have it.

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/features/352927/the-crapware-con



I looked at the article. Their summary for Dell looks about right, from my limited experience: "If you’re searching for a system without the usual crapware then you could do a lot worse than a Dell." Mine still has some stuff on it that no longer starts at boot, but has not yet been uninstalled.

I glanced at the Sony article too, given that I don't like Sony's consumer policies. Har!

"Sony’s extensive range of software was responsible for the worst boot time of any of the laptops, with our sample machine taking more than three minutes to boot.

General application performance was hampered, too, with the VAIO exhibiting one of the biggest performance disparities in our 2D benchmarks"

There's good reasons why Sony should be avoided.

This surprised me: "As expected, then, the MacBook Pro returned a slimline set of test results: a boot time of 49 seconds is faster than every Windows laptop on test that had to churn through dozens of additional applications, although it’s 10 seconds slower than the 37 seconds clean boot time of the Dell Inspiron 1525."

I can't imagine why it's slower to boot than the bottom-of-line economy model Dell.
post #111 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

This surprised me: "As expected, then, the MacBook Pro returned a slimline set of test results: a boot time of 49 seconds is faster than every Windows laptop on test that had to churn through dozens of additional applications, although its 10 seconds slower than the 37 seconds clean boot time of the Dell Inspiron 1525."

I can't imagine why it's slower to boot than the bottom-of-line economy model Dell.

That is a bit of a mystery. Looking at the Windows-based machines, most of the slower machines booted faster than the faster machines, according to their benchmarking. The only thing i can think of is the complexity of the logic board.

The Dell Inspiron 1525 has Intel X3100 integrated graphics while the MBP and perhaps the other Windows machines with higher benchmarks use a GPU. If they would have started up the MBP with the Nvidia 9400M IGP I wonder if it would have been better. I know my 13" MBP boots faster than the MBP they used, but I have no discrete GPU to which to test.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #112 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

What kind of calibration do you do? What sort of equipment do you use?

Is there a rough and dirty consumer-grade method you could recommend?

You can buy a device for as little as $100 from Pantone. I forget the model number. That's about as cheap as you can get.

Apple does have a program built-in for this purpose. It's in the monitor preferences. Go to "color". On the right side the last option is to calibrate your display. If you open that, you will be given the chance to do that manually. But, I have to warn you, even though I've been in the commercial photography industry since 1969, and was an expert in color, even I can't calibrate my display by eye the way you must do with this, and other programs that use no hardware. If you're not experienced in color work, the chance that you will do even a half way decent job is much less.
post #113 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

What kind of calibration do you do? What sort of equipment do you use?

Is there a rough and dirty consumer-grade method you could recommend?

Sorry, i use a professional calibration service who come in once every 6-9 nine months to check workflow based on specific workflows and print bureau - it's not my area of expertise, and I don't trust a £100 piece of hardware with multi-thousand-pound contracts - the calibration is so good that we've actually reduced ink/substrate consumption as we no longer need to print - many repeat business clients are happy to see the very rich glossy display version and accept to print from that. Colours are stronger/truer and we have more control over the displays - the matt would get a white sheen that simply rendered them unusable if too much natural light came into the studio - unless we have a comp that is heavy in black, there is no reflection issue with the glossy - and black on a matt screen tended to look washed out and lacking in intensity anyway. We get to have the blinds open and work in natural daylight now - so much better for working environment and easier on the eye.

I find most people who refuse to purchase the iMac in gloss simply haven't used it day to day and have only seen it on display in apple stores and the like - you lay out your workspace properly and the issues people claim to exist, don't. I was nervous about 'going gloss' before i moved to the gloss range of macs, but once I'd bought my worries disappeared. It seems the people who warned me off had never actually used one - now they've seen the studio, they're all moving in the direction of the gloss screens.

People like to complain without actually experiencing what they're complaining about (for instance those complaining about the iPad, or those who talk about the joy of flash on android devices (who clearly haven't experienced the nightmare of 'flash lite' on android)) - the criticism is based on assumption and heresay, rather than real world experience.
post #114 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

This is telling. Gates' recent comments about how little he thinks of the iPad are undercut by his company's decision to offer Office for it.

It's not HIS company anymore. Why is it that people have such a hard time understanding that concept? Thus Gates' comments about the iPad and Microsoft's potential support are completely unrelated events.
post #115 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

It's not HIS company anymore. Why is it that people have such a hard time understanding that concept? Thus Gates' comments about the iPad and Microsoft's potential support are completely unrelated events.

In addition, the Mac Business Unit was made independent of the Windows business units, so they get to make their own decisions as to what they develop, and how it comes out. As Apple customers become a bigger source of income for MS, that makes sense.

And considering how bad Gate's prediction of the Windows tablet market was, his thoughts on the matter are hardly being taken seriously.
post #116 of 139
e-ink = marketing ploy.

always has been.
always will be.
post #117 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Just as I've always maintained (and been criticised for saying here a few times), there is really no evidence that "eye strain" is caused by reading from a screen as opposed to paper, or that ePaper is any easier on the eyes than an LCD. It's basically a popular misconception.

It's not a popular misconception, I can feel it on my eyes. I don't need bad science to tell me what reading experience kills my eyes. After only a short time on a screen, I have trouble focusing into distance, and I get head aches. The same does not happen with paper, provided it's decent paper. Further, these studies always come out when relevant products show up. Researchers are paid, funded, and they want to get publicity. A study like this is perfect for the purpose, and if you phrase the research topic narrow enough, then you can come up with results that seemingly support almost any premade conclusion.
It's obviously not the fact that the display is active (i.e. a light source) that is the problem, because photons don't carry a label telling the eye that they bounced off of something or come directly from an emitter.

There are IMNSHO mainly THREE factors at work, some of which is being conveniently neglected:

1) screen flicker
2) ambient lighting
3) glare

1) LCD screens are being refreshed, both the display and the backlighting flicker. While perceptually we don't notice that, this doesn't mean that on a low level it doesn't affect our eyes. Our physical bodies react to many things that don't penetrate all the way up to our consciousness, and to neglect these things is rather shortsighted (pun intended).

2) a passive reading surface requires a proper amount of ambient light. If you stare at a bright screen against a dark surrounding, your eye will strain, because it will have trouble adjusting the iris to a proper setting. The light sensitive areas that are responsible for eye adjustment take average light readings, while for proper adjustment in such a setting you'd need a spot meter, to use photography parlance. Thus a passive screen forces you to have proper lighting (unless you start using one of these clip-on book lights and read in total darkness...) An active display allows you to read in almost any lighting condition, regardless how good or bad for the eyes.

3) Apple has become so focused on what sells, that the short-term eye-poping-high-contrast effect of glossy screens has become more important to them than ergonomics, which in a time long ago was one of Apple's strengths. For Computer displays, there would even be a solution: optical coating of the smooth surface screens, like on camera lenses. That would combine the benefits of a glossy screen with massive reduction in glare. Unfortunately, that doesn't come for free, and hence Apple doesn't do it, not even as an option.
Further, for laptops, vendors like Toshiba have long offered transreflective LCD screens as an high-end option. The result is these screens can be used in bright sunlight, when Mac users are force to go packing. The only drawback is a reduction in color fidelity, but that's a minor issue on laptops that people want to use while on the go. (If you need color fidelity, you can have a second screen at home/office).

Unfortunately, optical coating isn't an option on a touch device, because finger prints would render the coating ineffective. Transreflective screens might be too thick for Apple's obsession with thin, to be used in an iPad.

In short, the iPad is pretty much unusable as a serious reading device. It's yet another consumer gadget for the typical US household that has a library with about five books in it. For some casual browsing in Cosmopolitan or Sports Illustrated, watching some You Tube, etc. it may be fine. For anyone who wants either a high-quality e-book reader or a highly mobile computing device, the iPad just doesn't cut it. For the former, the display is not going to be pleasant on the eyes for long stretches of reading, for the latter, the closed nature of the device that won't give the user full access to the hardware they own, is an absolute anathema.

For me, the iPad has only two potential uses:
a) introducing my 80 year old parents to the internet in a device that doesn't require them to learn everything that goes along with a regular computer
b) as a electronic picture frame to bring my photo shoots to clients and demo them, without having to give out copies that could be stolen before they are paid for.

There is obviously some use for the device in vertical markets, since corporations seem to have long ago stopped caring if their data is held hostage or who could get access to the data on the device.
post #118 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

They used to have the Office for Mac "Test Drive" and then later the iWork 30-Day Trial. Sometime back in Leopard, I think after they updated iWork to include Numbers they dropped both. Most likely they had a contract with MS that required them to include it for x-many years. Now, if you want either you have to get them online in or in their retail boxes.

They must have dropped it quite some time after introducing Numbers, the MacBook I got in 2009 came with a iWork demo disc, and it was pre-installed
post #119 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Its not dandy for anyone that needs even moderate functions performed by Excel.

Such as? I can layout data in table form, perform calculations on it, format the data and create graphs of that data, reorder and delete/insert rows/columns. Are those not the base moderate functions? For a piece of software less than four years old, it seems pretty good to me - I'm sure more functionality will be added as the software matures - in the meantime I'd suggest that pages, numbers and keynote do most things that the average user requires.
post #120 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I'm sure it's easier for the trolls to put their foot in their mouth if it isn't attached to their body.

Good job ... thanks for the chuckle.
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › IBM plans Lotus for Apple iPad, e-reader eye strain explored