what they should do i put a camera like right behing the monitor in the middle so when like u have an ichat u look at yourself and the camera
Right, that's what I was dreaming of. Except instead of looking at yourself, you're looking at the other person. The camera is split between a bunch of pixels behind the screen, so when you're looking at the other person's eyes, it is capturing your eyes so that the other person sees you looking at them instead of looking away.
They filed a patent for that very thing but we have no idea if or when they will be coming out with such a product. With as secret as Apple is, I would expect we'd see prototype devices from other manufacturers first as a proof-of-concept, but I don't recall reading about any such device.
They filed a patent for that very thing but we have no idea if or when they will be coming out with such a product. With as secret as Apple is, I would expect we'd see prototype devices from other manufacturers first as a proof-of-concept, but I don't recall reading about any such device.
As far as I know, they really didn't develop any kind of a process that would make that possible. It looks like they only filed the idea which really isn't useful in itself.
Am I askign too much for Apple to make a Windows app that assists switchers in migrating the bookmarks, contracts, saved email and folders, and stores files over a Mac? I found this to be a real chore. For example, I had to install Thunderbird on the Windows machine to import the contacts from Outlook and then export to and send to the Apple's AddressBook.
Wish I knew what to say about that, but I would guess that Apple would have to know about as much about Windows, in its various incarnations, as they do about OS X, for them to be able to duplicate that service.
Quote:
I have an issue that I am not sure there is a resolution for. I can't use the native reolution for the 20" iMac because everything is too small for aging eyes to read. So I had to use a non-native resolution, but that blurs everything, especially text with Font Smoothing on. With it off it looks even worse. Any ideas on how to keep the crispness but increase the size of everything would be great.
There's no real (here it comes, be ready!) resolution for that issue, sorry. This is an LCD problem. Once Apple turns Rez independence on for good, your problem will be solved.
Quote:
That is an issue with the 20" iMac too. until they can put the camera behind the screen there is solution for this that I can see.
The only solution is to make sure one adheres to the guidelines. The top of the screen is supposed to be even with one's eyes.
Quote:
They 20" iMac speakers sounded "tinny" to me. I'd expect the 24" iMac uses better speakers than the 20".
I don't know if they are the same speakers, but the larger machines have more of a chamber inside the machine, so this would lead to somewhat better bass.
Quote:
The keyboards seem to be loved or hated, but a little time spent on it seems to change most people's mind about them. I'm guessing you got the BT model.
Actually no. If Apple offered full keyboards with BT, as they did with the previous generation of white keys, transparent keyboards, than, yes, I would have ordered two. But, both my wife, and daughter, use the extra keys. Don't understand why they did this, they could have offered both. I do have a BT keyboard from the previous generation.
But, one other disadvantage to them is that there are no USB connectors. That's sometimes inconvenient.
Quote:
This was a chore to teach a Windows user how to use the MM.
I tried with my wife as well. No go.
Quote:
I understand that they wouldn't want to put a hole in the aluminium on the side for the remote to attach, but I think they could have allowed it to stick underneath. I may try to rig something up.
Don't forget that at the ends are the speaker grills, and in the middle is the memory slot. It's still aluminum.
They could have done something on one side, on the back. A flattened area, with a magnet behind, say, on the right side, bottom.
As far as I know, they really didn't develop any kind of a process that would make that possible. It looks like they only filed the idea which really isn't useful in itself.
I did read an article somewhere about how it would be done.
The idea was to put sensors, each with its own tiny lens BETWEEN the pixels on the screen.
The lenses and sensors, would be spread out on the screen. The rez would determine just how spread out. 640 sensors would be spread between 1280 pixels. The camera, therefore, would be almost the size of the screen, more, if the rez of the camera was higher.
Then software would stitch the information from each sensor together to form a single high rez image. As the camera would be so large, it wouldn't be seeing from one spot. In other words, it would be looking at you from different angles. How they could fix this odd perspective problem, I'm not sure.
This is how insect eyes work, with their one "sensor" per lens, on their multi faceted eyes.
What I can't determine about this ingenious concept,is how this would affect the monitor itself. Right now, there is NO room between the pixels on an LCD. So, as I "see" it, those pixels would have to be moved apart somewhat. What this would do to the quality of the image, I can only imagine.
Then software would stitch the information from each sensor together to form a single high rez image. As the camera would be so large, it wouldn't be seeing from one spot. In other words, it would be looking at you from different angles. How they could fix this odd perspective problem, I'm not sure.
This is how insect eyes work, with their one "sensor" per lens, on their multi faceted eyes.
It could be used to create a semi-3D image from a 2D image so the viewer could potentially rotate the image on their end to see a varying angle without having the "viewee" move. Though the farther you turn the more on the side you get the less detail you'd have as the image would have to compressed and there would missing segments that were out of line or sight, like behind the ears.
It could be used to create a semi-3D image from a 2D image so the viewer could potentially rotate the image on their end to see a varying angle without having the "viewee" move. Though the farther you turn the more on the side you get the less detail you'd have as the image would have to compressed and there would missing segments that were out of line or sight, like behind the ears.
This could be a real problem. It would be a semi 3D camera, without the advantage of having cameras at different angles, at the same distance. The cameras at the edge would be further away than the cameras at the center. this means that the center parts of the image would be larger than the images progressively further out. software would have to correct that as well, though that would be the easy part, IF the camera knew just how far away from the subject each sensor was. That's a killer.
All cameras would also be facing straight forwards, unless they could figure out a way to tilt them inwards. But, again, unless they knew the distance, they wouldn't get the angles correct. this would mean some sort of distance measurment in real time, and moving sensors and lenses.
Whoa! Too much!
And none of that accounts for the angular differences from the distance from the center. If you turn sideways just a bit so that your nose is facing the cameras on the left, but the right side of your nose is hidden from those cameras, but can be seen by the cameras at the right, we have "hidden views" problems to take care of.
In a 3D mdel, the software removes those views, as does game software. But they know what is hidden, because it's a file where that information is known.
But, can this camera tell what it's looking at to make that determination? I don't think so.
There's no real (here it comes, be ready!) resolution for that issue, sorry. This is an LCD problem. Once Apple turns Rez independence on for good, your problem will be solved.
The Developer Tools has a Resolution Independence app in /Developer/Applications/Graphics Tools/Quartz Debug.app that does the trick, but there are plenty of quirks with the way things like the Finder are displayed. I'll have to do some testing before determining if it's the best solution.
I've been informed that it won't hold the settings on startup so I'll probably have to write an AppleScript that starts the app, sets it correctly and then restarts Finder and other apps so the changes take place across the system. Unfortunately I don't see a way to get it to run in the background. Perhaps I can do it all with the command line.
edit: There is terminal command that writes to a file that initiates the new resolution when you log in. Though, you'll have to do some math to get the settings right. There are certainly some issues, but it looks to be close enough to be a feature of 10.6.
Quote:
Originally Posted by heatmiser @ MacRumors
You can test resolution independence without the dev tools if you use the Terminal:
defaults write -g AppleDisplayScaleFactor x
where "x" = a percentage of your choice. Values of x > 1 will make things bigger; values of x < 1 will make things smaller. For example, if you're on a Macbook (1280x800) and wish to simulate 1440x900 resolution, set up a proportion, where 1440/1280 = 1/x. x =~.89, so plug in .89 into the above terminal line.
You have to reopen an application to see the effects. This also works in Tiger, but the Finder and other applications look much better (more cohesive) in Leopard. To return things to normal, enter a value of 1 for x. I currently have my Macbook set to .89 (a 1440x900 screen in a 13" package is great). Some apps, like Minefield, look wretched with this feature on, so I open them at x=1 before changing the value in the Terminal.
The Developer Tools has a Resolution Independence app in /Developer/Applications/Graphics Tools/Quartz Debug.app that does the trick, but there are plenty of quirks with the way things like the Finder are displayed. I'll have to do some testing before determining if it's the best solution.
I've been informed that it won't hold the settings on startup so I'll probably have to write an AppleScript that starts the app, sets it correctly and then restarts Finder and other apps so the changes take place across the system. Unfortunately I don't see a way to get it to run in the background. Perhaps I can do it all with the command line.
edit: There is terminal command that writes to a file that initiates the new resolution when you log in. Though, you'll have to do some math to get the settings right. There are certainly some issues, but it looks to be close enough to be a feature of 10.6.
There are still problems with this, as well as a lack of support from app developers. While we may still have hope that sometime during 105's lifetime Apple will turn this on by default, I'm not so sure that will happen.
I think Apple included this for exactly the purpose it looks to be, a technology demonstration for those third party (and Apple's own developers) developers to understand, and prepare themselves for, in the 10.6 release.
I'd love to see it earlier, but it's increasingly looking as though it's not to be. I hope that's wrong.
Am I askign too much for Apple to make a Windows app that assists switchers in migrating the bookmarks, contracts, saved email and folders, and stores files over a Mac? I found this to be a real chore. For example, I had to install Thunderbird on the Windows machine to import the contacts from Outlook and then export to and send to the Apple's AddressBook.
If the switcher is also an iphone user, there might be a workaround for contacts, calendar and bookmarks. Sync the items via itunes to the iphone from the PC, and then resync to the new mac with itunes again and hopefully those items will be imported.
If done this with my own PC after a couple of random self destructs. This might also work with a new enough ipod (calendar and contacts, anyway).
If the switcher is also an iphone user, there might be a workaround for contacts, calendar and bookmarks. Sync the items via itunes to the iphone from the PC, and then resync to the new mac with itunes again and hopefully those items will be imported.
If done this with my own PC after a couple of random self destructs. This might also work with a new enough ipod (calendar and contacts, anyway).
I didn't think about using my iPhone for the transfer. That is certainly a doable solution.
Though perhaps more importantly, it proves that Apple has an understanding of Outllook contacts, calenders and email accounts. A well as IE favorites. It shouldn't be too hard to make an app that facilitates the process without an iPhone. Since it's iTunes doing the conversion having a simple option to save as ZIP or DMG that could be emailed or sent over the network would be fine.
I didn't think about using my iPhone for the transfer. That is certainly a doable solution.
Though perhaps more importantly, it proves that Apple has an understanding of Outllook contacts, calenders and email accounts. A well as IE favorites. It shouldn't be too hard to make an app that facilitates the process without an iPhone. Since it's iTunes doing the conversion having a simple option to save as ZIP or DMG that could be emailed or sent over the network would be fine.
Am I askign too much for Apple to make a Windows app that assists switchers in migrating the bookmarks, contracts, saved email and folders, and stores files over a Mac? I found this to be a real chore. For example, I had to install Thunderbird on the Windows machine to import the contacts from Outlook and then export to and send to the Apple's AddressBook.
I have to agree with you there, converting my partner's address book, calendar and emails. I had to jump through some ridiculous hoops to do it, including as you say, installing Thunderbird just to get the files into a readable format.
That video wasn't too helpful in and of itself but it gave me an idea of what to search for (though I'm sure how I came across it). This link uses Eudora instead of Thunderbird to grab the data and then uses an app on the Mac to convert the mail from Eudora to Apple Mail.
I'll try this out this weekend to see if it works. I wish i were a consummate programmer that could make a program that could make this a one step process for the customer. This certainly is an issue that should be dealt with if Apple really wants to make switching simple.
That video wasn't too helpful in and of itself but it gave me an idea of what to search for (though I'm sure how I came across it). This link uses Eudora instead of Thunderbird to grab the data and then uses an app on the Mac to convert the mail from Eudora to Apple Mail.
I'll try this out this weekend to see if it works. I wish i were a consummate programmer that could make a program that could make this a one step process for the customer. This certainly is an issue that should be dealt with if Apple really wants to make switching simple.
Apple do offer a data transfer service in their retail stores for people moving from PC to Mac.
There's also Move2Mac and Outlook2Mac, which together seem to cover most of the bases.
Apple do offer a data transfer service in their retail stores for people moving from PC to Mac.
There's also Move2Mac and Outlook2Mac, which together seem to cover most of the bases.
I've seen Move2Mca before, but the specialized one-time use cable seems pointless and it doesn't do OUtlook. But you also posted a link for that, too.
I need to call the retail stores to verification, but I have a feeling they only move normal data. That theya re concened with moving OUtlook mail and calenders.
iTunes can already parse most of the information like Outlook, calendars, favorites, contacts, photos and music. The rest, like documents, is easily searched and parsed and would be an important aspect to helping people switch. Hell, build the few remaining parts into iTunes for Windows as a "backup tool" that copies to a ZIP/ISO/DMG file.
Enough on that, I am sounding like a broken record now and I have plenty of workarounds to try out. Thank the assistance, everyone.
I think it was about 24 hours before the gradient from left to right started to drive me mad - then I noticed a stuck red pixel just off centre, and 2 dead ones in the bottom right.
Needless to say - it's gone back. I just hope the replacement is better. I'd read about the gradient issue before, but my 24" work iMac at work seemed to be free of this. It is totally unacceptable for a £1300 machine to have these kinds of faults.
I think it was about 24 hours before the gradient from left to right started to drive me mad - then I noticed a stuck red pixel just off centre, and 2 dead ones in the bottom right.
Needless to say - it's gone back. I just hope the replacement is better. I'd read about the gradient issue before, but my 24" work iMac at work seemed to be free of this. It is totally unacceptable for a £1300 machine to have these kinds of faults.
very disappointed with Apple.
Interesting. Neither of the two I just bought have those problems.
I would suggest you ignore the advice below. Never buy the first line of anything from Apple including operating systems. Much better off with a tried and tested machine. Let some other idiots be the guinea pigs!!
I would suggest you ignore the advice below. Never buy the first line of anything from Apple including operating systems. Much better off with a tried and tested machine. Let some other idiots be the guinea pigs!!
And that, of course, is why you decided to comment on a thread about models that aren't even sold any more.
Comments
what they should do i put a camera like right behing the monitor in the middle so when like u have an ichat u look at yourself and the camera
Right, that's what I was dreaming of. Except instead of looking at yourself, you're looking at the other person. The camera is split between a bunch of pixels behind the screen, so when you're looking at the other person's eyes, it is capturing your eyes so that the other person sees you looking at them instead of looking away.
They filed a patent for that very thing but we have no idea if or when they will be coming out with such a product. With as secret as Apple is, I would expect we'd see prototype devices from other manufacturers first as a proof-of-concept, but I don't recall reading about any such device.
Thanks, I was trying to Google the article but was unable to find it. (Rather, I wasn't determined enough to keep looking!)
They filed a patent for that very thing but we have no idea if or when they will be coming out with such a product. With as secret as Apple is, I would expect we'd see prototype devices from other manufacturers first as a proof-of-concept, but I don't recall reading about any such device.
As far as I know, they really didn't develop any kind of a process that would make that possible. It looks like they only filed the idea which really isn't useful in itself.
Am I askign too much for Apple to make a Windows app that assists switchers in migrating the bookmarks, contracts, saved email and folders, and stores files over a Mac? I found this to be a real chore. For example, I had to install Thunderbird on the Windows machine to import the contacts from Outlook and then export to and send to the Apple's AddressBook.
Wish I knew what to say about that, but I would guess that Apple would have to know about as much about Windows, in its various incarnations, as they do about OS X, for them to be able to duplicate that service.
I have an issue that I am not sure there is a resolution for. I can't use the native reolution for the 20" iMac because everything is too small for aging eyes to read. So I had to use a non-native resolution, but that blurs everything, especially text with Font Smoothing on. With it off it looks even worse. Any ideas on how to keep the crispness but increase the size of everything would be great.
There's no real (here it comes, be ready!) resolution for that issue, sorry. This is an LCD problem. Once Apple turns Rez independence on for good, your problem will be solved.
That is an issue with the 20" iMac too. until they can put the camera behind the screen there is solution for this that I can see.
The only solution is to make sure one adheres to the guidelines. The top of the screen is supposed to be even with one's eyes.
They 20" iMac speakers sounded "tinny" to me. I'd expect the 24" iMac uses better speakers than the 20".
I don't know if they are the same speakers, but the larger machines have more of a chamber inside the machine, so this would lead to somewhat better bass.
The keyboards seem to be loved or hated, but a little time spent on it seems to change most people's mind about them. I'm guessing you got the BT model.
Actually no. If Apple offered full keyboards with BT, as they did with the previous generation of white keys, transparent keyboards, than, yes, I would have ordered two. But, both my wife, and daughter, use the extra keys. Don't understand why they did this, they could have offered both. I do have a BT keyboard from the previous generation.
But, one other disadvantage to them is that there are no USB connectors. That's sometimes inconvenient.
This was a chore to teach a Windows user how to use the MM.
I tried with my wife as well. No go.
I understand that they wouldn't want to put a hole in the aluminium on the side for the remote to attach, but I think they could have allowed it to stick underneath. I may try to rig something up.
Don't forget that at the ends are the speaker grills, and in the middle is the memory slot. It's still aluminum.
They could have done something on one side, on the back. A flattened area, with a magnet behind, say, on the right side, bottom.
As far as I know, they really didn't develop any kind of a process that would make that possible. It looks like they only filed the idea which really isn't useful in itself.
I did read an article somewhere about how it would be done.
The idea was to put sensors, each with its own tiny lens BETWEEN the pixels on the screen.
The lenses and sensors, would be spread out on the screen. The rez would determine just how spread out. 640 sensors would be spread between 1280 pixels. The camera, therefore, would be almost the size of the screen, more, if the rez of the camera was higher.
Then software would stitch the information from each sensor together to form a single high rez image. As the camera would be so large, it wouldn't be seeing from one spot. In other words, it would be looking at you from different angles. How they could fix this odd perspective problem, I'm not sure.
This is how insect eyes work, with their one "sensor" per lens, on their multi faceted eyes.
What I can't determine about this ingenious concept,is how this would affect the monitor itself. Right now, there is NO room between the pixels on an LCD. So, as I "see" it, those pixels would have to be moved apart somewhat. What this would do to the quality of the image, I can only imagine.
Then software would stitch the information from each sensor together to form a single high rez image. As the camera would be so large, it wouldn't be seeing from one spot. In other words, it would be looking at you from different angles. How they could fix this odd perspective problem, I'm not sure.
This is how insect eyes work, with their one "sensor" per lens, on their multi faceted eyes.
It could be used to create a semi-3D image from a 2D image so the viewer could potentially rotate the image on their end to see a varying angle without having the "viewee" move. Though the farther you turn the more on the side you get the less detail you'd have as the image would have to compressed and there would missing segments that were out of line or sight, like behind the ears.
It could be used to create a semi-3D image from a 2D image so the viewer could potentially rotate the image on their end to see a varying angle without having the "viewee" move. Though the farther you turn the more on the side you get the less detail you'd have as the image would have to compressed and there would missing segments that were out of line or sight, like behind the ears.
This could be a real problem. It would be a semi 3D camera, without the advantage of having cameras at different angles, at the same distance. The cameras at the edge would be further away than the cameras at the center. this means that the center parts of the image would be larger than the images progressively further out. software would have to correct that as well, though that would be the easy part, IF the camera knew just how far away from the subject each sensor was. That's a killer.
All cameras would also be facing straight forwards, unless they could figure out a way to tilt them inwards. But, again, unless they knew the distance, they wouldn't get the angles correct. this would mean some sort of distance measurment in real time, and moving sensors and lenses.
Whoa! Too much!
And none of that accounts for the angular differences from the distance from the center. If you turn sideways just a bit so that your nose is facing the cameras on the left, but the right side of your nose is hidden from those cameras, but can be seen by the cameras at the right, we have "hidden views" problems to take care of.
In a 3D mdel, the software removes those views, as does game software. But they know what is hidden, because it's a file where that information is known.
But, can this camera tell what it's looking at to make that determination? I don't think so.
There's no real (here it comes, be ready!) resolution for that issue, sorry. This is an LCD problem. Once Apple turns Rez independence on for good, your problem will be solved.
The Developer Tools has a Resolution Independence app in /Developer/Applications/Graphics Tools/Quartz Debug.app that does the trick, but there are plenty of quirks with the way things like the Finder are displayed. I'll have to do some testing before determining if it's the best solution.
I've been informed that it won't hold the settings on startup so I'll probably have to write an AppleScript that starts the app, sets it correctly and then restarts Finder and other apps so the changes take place across the system. Unfortunately I don't see a way to get it to run in the background. Perhaps I can do it all with the command line.
edit: There is terminal command that writes to a file that initiates the new resolution when you log in. Though, you'll have to do some math to get the settings right. There are certainly some issues, but it looks to be close enough to be a feature of 10.6.
You can test resolution independence without the dev tools if you use the Terminal:
defaults write -g AppleDisplayScaleFactor x
where "x" = a percentage of your choice. Values of x > 1 will make things bigger; values of x < 1 will make things smaller. For example, if you're on a Macbook (1280x800) and wish to simulate 1440x900 resolution, set up a proportion, where 1440/1280 = 1/x. x =~.89, so plug in .89 into the above terminal line.
You have to reopen an application to see the effects. This also works in Tiger, but the Finder and other applications look much better (more cohesive) in Leopard. To return things to normal, enter a value of 1 for x. I currently have my Macbook set to .89 (a 1440x900 screen in a 13" package is great). Some apps, like Minefield, look wretched with this feature on, so I open them at x=1 before changing the value in the Terminal.
(SOURCE)
The Developer Tools has a Resolution Independence app in /Developer/Applications/Graphics Tools/Quartz Debug.app that does the trick, but there are plenty of quirks with the way things like the Finder are displayed. I'll have to do some testing before determining if it's the best solution.
I've been informed that it won't hold the settings on startup so I'll probably have to write an AppleScript that starts the app, sets it correctly and then restarts Finder and other apps so the changes take place across the system. Unfortunately I don't see a way to get it to run in the background. Perhaps I can do it all with the command line.
edit: There is terminal command that writes to a file that initiates the new resolution when you log in. Though, you'll have to do some math to get the settings right. There are certainly some issues, but it looks to be close enough to be a feature of 10.6.
There are still problems with this, as well as a lack of support from app developers. While we may still have hope that sometime during 105's lifetime Apple will turn this on by default, I'm not so sure that will happen.
I think Apple included this for exactly the purpose it looks to be, a technology demonstration for those third party (and Apple's own developers) developers to understand, and prepare themselves for, in the 10.6 release.
I'd love to see it earlier, but it's increasingly looking as though it's not to be. I hope that's wrong.
Am I askign too much for Apple to make a Windows app that assists switchers in migrating the bookmarks, contracts, saved email and folders, and stores files over a Mac? I found this to be a real chore. For example, I had to install Thunderbird on the Windows machine to import the contacts from Outlook and then export to and send to the Apple's AddressBook.
If the switcher is also an iphone user, there might be a workaround for contacts, calendar and bookmarks. Sync the items via itunes to the iphone from the PC, and then resync to the new mac with itunes again and hopefully those items will be imported.
If done this with my own PC after a couple of random self destructs. This might also work with a new enough ipod (calendar and contacts, anyway).
If the switcher is also an iphone user, there might be a workaround for contacts, calendar and bookmarks. Sync the items via itunes to the iphone from the PC, and then resync to the new mac with itunes again and hopefully those items will be imported.
If done this with my own PC after a couple of random self destructs. This might also work with a new enough ipod (calendar and contacts, anyway).
I didn't think about using my iPhone for the transfer. That is certainly a doable solution.
Though perhaps more importantly, it proves that Apple has an understanding of Outllook contacts, calenders and email accounts. A well as IE favorites. It shouldn't be too hard to make an app that facilitates the process without an iPhone. Since it's iTunes doing the conversion having a simple option to save as ZIP or DMG that could be emailed or sent over the network would be fine.
I didn't think about using my iPhone for the transfer. That is certainly a doable solution.
Though perhaps more importantly, it proves that Apple has an understanding of Outllook contacts, calenders and email accounts. A well as IE favorites. It shouldn't be too hard to make an app that facilitates the process without an iPhone. Since it's iTunes doing the conversion having a simple option to save as ZIP or DMG that could be emailed or sent over the network would be fine.
This is in Mac Tutorials on moving from a PC to a Mac. It might work for you: http://www.apple.com/findouthow/mac/#tutorial=move
Am I askign too much for Apple to make a Windows app that assists switchers in migrating the bookmarks, contracts, saved email and folders, and stores files over a Mac? I found this to be a real chore. For example, I had to install Thunderbird on the Windows machine to import the contacts from Outlook and then export to and send to the Apple's AddressBook.
I have to agree with you there, converting my partner's address book, calendar and emails. I had to jump through some ridiculous hoops to do it, including as you say, installing Thunderbird just to get the files into a readable format.
This is in Mac Tutorials on moving from a PC to a Mac. It might work for you: http://www.apple.com/findouthow/mac/#tutorial=move
That video wasn't too helpful in and of itself but it gave me an idea of what to search for (though I'm sure how I came across it). This link uses Eudora instead of Thunderbird to grab the data and then uses an app on the Mac to convert the mail from Eudora to Apple Mail.
I'll try this out this weekend to see if it works. I wish i were a consummate programmer that could make a program that could make this a one step process for the customer. This certainly is an issue that should be dealt with if Apple really wants to make switching simple.
That video wasn't too helpful in and of itself but it gave me an idea of what to search for (though I'm sure how I came across it). This link uses Eudora instead of Thunderbird to grab the data and then uses an app on the Mac to convert the mail from Eudora to Apple Mail.
I'll try this out this weekend to see if it works. I wish i were a consummate programmer that could make a program that could make this a one step process for the customer. This certainly is an issue that should be dealt with if Apple really wants to make switching simple.
Apple do offer a data transfer service in their retail stores for people moving from PC to Mac.
There's also Move2Mac and Outlook2Mac, which together seem to cover most of the bases.
Apple do offer a data transfer service in their retail stores for people moving from PC to Mac.
There's also Move2Mac and Outlook2Mac, which together seem to cover most of the bases.
I've seen Move2Mca before, but the specialized one-time use cable seems pointless and it doesn't do OUtlook. But you also posted a link for that, too.
I need to call the retail stores to verification, but I have a feeling they only move normal data. That theya re concened with moving OUtlook mail and calenders.
iTunes can already parse most of the information like Outlook, calendars, favorites, contacts, photos and music. The rest, like documents, is easily searched and parsed and would be an important aspect to helping people switch. Hell, build the few remaining parts into iTunes for Windows as a "backup tool" that copies to a ZIP/ISO/DMG file.
Enough on that, I am sounding like a broken record now and I have plenty of workarounds to try out. Thank the assistance, everyone.
I think it was about 24 hours before the gradient from left to right started to drive me mad - then I noticed a stuck red pixel just off centre, and 2 dead ones in the bottom right.
Needless to say - it's gone back. I just hope the replacement is better. I'd read about the gradient issue before, but my 24" work iMac at work seemed to be free of this. It is totally unacceptable for a £1300 machine to have these kinds of faults.
very disappointed with Apple.
Well, I got my new 24" 3.06Ghz iMac.
I think it was about 24 hours before the gradient from left to right started to drive me mad - then I noticed a stuck red pixel just off centre, and 2 dead ones in the bottom right.
Needless to say - it's gone back. I just hope the replacement is better. I'd read about the gradient issue before, but my 24" work iMac at work seemed to be free of this. It is totally unacceptable for a £1300 machine to have these kinds of faults.
very disappointed with Apple.
Interesting. Neither of the two I just bought have those problems.
I would suggest you ignore the advice below. Never buy the first line of anything from Apple including operating systems. Much better off with a tried and tested machine. Let some other idiots be the guinea pigs!!
And that, of course, is why you decided to comment on a thread about models that aren't even sold any more.