macplusplus
About
- Username
- macplusplus
- Joined
- Visits
- 293
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 3,141
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 2,119
Reactions
-
Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee reveals 'Solid' plan for users to take control of personal da...
"He is the Director of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), a Web standards organization founded in 1994 which develops interoperable technologies (specifications, guidelines, software, and tools) to lead the Web to its full potential. He is a Director of the World Wide Web Foundation which was launched in 2009 to coordinate efforts to further the potential of the Web to benefit humanity."sflocal said:I give Tim credit for what he did with the Internet. That being said, I'd trust him on modern tech about as much as I'd trust Thomas Edison to repair a Tesla car. Today's Internet is nothing like the Internet he helped create.
It sounds more like Tim is just using/loaning his name to garner interest.
https://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/
-
Photo smackdown: iPhone XS Max versus Samsung's Galaxy Note 9
The bright moon in the black sky is one of the most difficult objects to capture, it appears just like a white spot. An easy cheat is to introduce another light source(s) into the scene. If you shoot the moon together with that secondary light source you can get a better shape of the moon. That secondary light source causes the camera to rearrange exposure and somehow represent the moon better.
Now in those photos, if you'd introduced a secondary bright source to the scene, you'd get better exposure of the body and the face:
What you have photographied in those photos is actually the sun, not the person. Since your guy, despite all of his handsomeness cannot shine more than the Sun, the best sun photo is all you can expect of those shots.AppleInsider said:
Here's where the story changes. When shooting against the sun, the Note 9 does a much better job at dynamic range. The highlights look the same, but the Note 9 is able to keep the darkest areas of the scene looking brighter. There's less lens flare on the Note 9 as well.
Now here's a photo of the same scene except using portrait mode. The sunspot on the Note 9 is larger, but it does much better keeping the subject exposed properly. There's a massive flare on the iPhone XS Max's image again.
And that, only the Xs Max delivers...
Edit:
Ahem..., you may cause people to damage their camera sensors by exposing samples like that. Although reportedly that damage depends on the exposure time, since you have no control on how long people will point their cameras to the sun, a cautious stance might be helpful.
-
Photo smackdown: iPhone XS Max versus Samsung's Galaxy Note 9
Which flower is the correct one? Since any image processing cannot add missing data (but can well discard existing and useful data as in low dynamic range), one can immediately deduce that the prominent pink on the flower leaves cannot be added by iPhone, but simply reproduced by it. Thus the correct color of the flower is the right (iPhone) one. The low dynamic range of the Note 9 introduces an artifical contrast which makes the object appear more "detailed". What is is perceived as "detail" is in fact the the loss of pink tones.AppleInsider said:Photo Detail Comparison
Now let's compare detail without using Portrait or Live focus modes.
In this shot of a flower, both photos look very detailed, but it seems that the Note 9 either has more contrast or it's more detailed compared to the XS Max. You'll have to decide for yourself which photo you think is better at color reproduction.
-
The 2019 Mac Pro will be what Apple wants it to be, and it won't, and shouldn't, make ever...
He is an engineer. Industrial engineering.k2kw said:
I understand where you are coming from. I just don't think that it will happen in Tim Cook's Apple. He's an MBA, not a artist creator , software developer, or engineer.jdw said:
You are perhaps one of the greatest mind readers I’ve ever seen this forum. A diehard Mac lover like me since 1984 who has refused to buy a single Windows PC during all of those years somehow is a “PC hobbyist who would be happier with Dell”!k2kw said:You are a PC hobbyist. The middle class wants the iMac, laptops, and iPads which they don’t upgrade. You would be happier with a Dell.
I’m obviously being deliberately sarcastic here. But the point is that if you’re so wrong about me, and your certainly are, you are definitely just as wrong about what you think regarding “the middle class buyer who wants a pro level Mac.“
Middle-class buyers of Macs, in terms of sheer numbers of people, are often happy with an iMac. But this thread is discussing the Mac Pro. And yes there are all categories of people who would want to Mac Pro for the purpose of being able to expand it overtime and thereby getting more life from that Mac, which they know they cannot do with an iMac.
We cannot talk in terms of “the majority of people,“ for like I said in my previous post, “the majority of people“ use silly Windows PCs! And to extend that logical thinking further, no one can defend Apple’s decision to target only the wealthy with a new Mac Pro costing $10,000 or more, seeing Apple would be limiting their own marketshare for such a machine by pricing it so high. That goes against the iOS device marketing philosophy of pricing it low enough that “most people“ can afford it. And even though I will admit that a Mac is not an iOS device, the point is that Apple is in business to make money and you make money by selling more devices. You know you’re not going to sell more devices if you price them too high.
Saying this another way, to come out with a Mac Pro that is utterly unaffordable to most people in the middle class who otherwise would want to buy an expandable Mac (not a silly Dell running Windoze) is to aim for one thing and one thing only: to profit off the super rich, and from professionals who have contract jobs and can make their money back from that Mac purchase after a single contract, and from rich YouTubers who review these Macs all the time and make millions of dollars a year from YouTube or Patreon. But at the end of the day, the number of these “rich” people who could afford such a Mac Pro are teensy tiny compared to the number of middle-class Mac buyers who would buy such an expandable Mac if the price point of such a Mac was substantially lower like the PowerMacs of old.
Why would a large number of Mac only computer buyers want an expandable Mac? Because if the price is low enough, it’s more frugal to buy that Mac because you can expand it overtime and get more life out of the Mac and keep the computer in tiptop shape performance wise through those years. That’s really what the Power Mac was all about. That’s why my own father purchased a power Mac G5 back in the day.
I honestly don’t know why some of you throw rocks at us Mac-only buyers who want and affordably priced Mac Pro. I just don’t understand it. Again, Apple really isn’t going to make a lot of money off of the Mac Pro anyway in terms of global numbers because Macs are not a significant share of the global PC market. And if they price a Mac Pro into the stratosphere, the share of the market they’re going to get for such a luxury item is even smaller. So it only makes logical sense that Apple come out with an expandable Mac for the masses, not only to sell more Macs but also to spread goodwill to the Mac faithful. There’s nothing wrong with bringing back the glory days of the Power Mac. Nothing wrong with it at all! This isn’t me simply being nostalgic. It is common sense.
-
The 2019 Mac Pro will be what Apple wants it to be, and it won't, and shouldn't, make ever...
The dream of "expandable Mac for the masses" may not be so close to reality in the current state of computing technology. Actually Apple upgrades the Macs: but they do that themselves, on your behalf prior to purchase. And that, not to suck more dollars from you, but to provide the best possible upgrade. "Knowledge" acquired by reading Amazon listings is not enough to upgrade a state-of-the-art computer whether it is from Apple, HP, Dell or whatever, there are a lot of undocumented specs available only to OEMs and not even to them and discovered after extensive testing. Apple pays attention to upgradability whenever that makes sense. The 2016 13" Macbook Pro w/o TBar, the most affordable rMBP, came with a removable SSD for example. The RAM is soldered not because of Apple's obsession with thinness but because LPDDR3 requires such a socket. The RAM is not removable desktop RAM because putting a desktop RAM into a Macbook would severely disrupt the delicate thermal balance reached after extensive testing and engineering, and would require also the development of a totally different memory controller, adding at least to the cost. If Intel's LPDDR4 support was pushed to the end of 2018 this is a bottleneck of the whole industry, not only Intel's nor Apple's. The technology has significantly changed since the cheese grater Mac Pro. Just plug your brand new graphics card, close the lid and go, not so simple anymore. The actual graphics cards draw considerable power and you have to change the power supply as well, and to do that, you must carefully recalculate the total consumed power taking as input the power consumption of all components, RAM, SSD, CPU, GPU, Thunderbolt... Is that the "expandable Mac for the masses"?jdw said:
You are perhaps one of the greatest mind readers I’ve ever seen this forum. A diehard Mac lover like me since 1984 who has refused to buy a single Windows PC during all of those years somehow is a “PC hobbyist who would be happier with Dell”!k2kw said:You are a PC hobbyist. The middle class wants the iMac, laptops, and iPads which they don’t upgrade. You would be happier with a Dell.
I’m obviously being deliberately sarcastic here. But the point is that if you’re so wrong about me, and your certainly are, you are definitely just as wrong about what you think regarding “the middle class buyer who wants a pro level Mac.“
Middle-class buyers of Macs, in terms of sheer numbers of people, are often happy with an iMac. But this thread is discussing the Mac Pro. And yes there are all categories of people who would want to Mac Pro for the purpose of being able to expand it overtime and thereby getting more life from that Mac, which they know they cannot do with an iMac.
We cannot talk in terms of “the majority of people,“ for like I said in my previous post, “the majority of people“ use silly Windows PCs! And to extend that logical thinking further, no one can defend Apple’s decision to target only the wealthy with a new Mac Pro costing $10,000 or more, seeing Apple would be limiting their own marketshare for such a machine by pricing it so high. That goes against the iOS device marketing philosophy of pricing it low enough that “most people“ can afford it. And even though I will admit that a Mac is not an iOS device, the point is that Apple is in business to make money and you make money by selling more devices. You know you’re not going to sell more devices if you price them too high.
Saying this another way, to come out with a Mac Pro that is utterly unaffordable to most people in the middle class who otherwise would want to buy an expandable Mac (not a silly Dell running Windoze) is to aim for one thing and one thing only: to profit off the super rich, and from professionals who have contract jobs and can make their money back from that Mac purchase after a single contract, and from rich YouTubers who review these Macs all the time and make millions of dollars a year from YouTube or Patreon. But at the end of the day, the number of these “rich” people who could afford such a Mac Pro are teensy tiny compared to the number of middle-class Mac buyers who would buy such an expandable Mac if the price point of such a Mac was substantially lower like the PowerMacs of old.
Why would a large number of Mac only computer buyers want an expandable Mac? Because if the price is low enough, it’s more frugal to buy that Mac because you can expand it overtime and get more life out of the Mac and keep the computer in tiptop shape performance wise through those years. That’s really what the Power Mac was all about. That’s why my own father purchased a power Mac G5 back in the day.
I honestly don’t know why some of you throw rocks at us Mac-only buyers who want and affordably priced Mac Pro. I just don’t understand it. Again, Apple really isn’t going to make a lot of money off of the Mac Pro anyway in terms of global numbers because Macs are not a significant share of the global PC market. And if they price a Mac Pro into the stratosphere, the share of the market they’re going to get for such a luxury item is even smaller. So it only makes logical sense that Apple come out with an expandable Mac for the masses, not only to sell more Macs but also to spread goodwill to the Mac faithful. There’s nothing wrong with bringing back the glory days of the Power Mac. Nothing wrong with it at all! This isn’t me simply being nostalgic. It is common sense.
