NEWS: Nokia tops iPhone and BlackBerry (again), Apple as Nick Clegg
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: Automatic File Translation Utility for Windows-based Mobile Devices
Next: Help With Free WiFi !!
From: Larry on 19 May 2010 12:06 John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in news:k528v5hc1obo8625gpnjnvb169cc4ptku7(a)navasgroup.com: > Another cool thing I can do with an Android mobile and a memory card > that no iPhone can do: Put a memory card into my (high-quality) digital > camera and take pictures, then move the memory card to my Android mobile > and transmit those pictures over 3G or Wi-Fi. Has proven to be very > useful and handy. :) > > -- > Best regards, > John <http:/navasgroup.com> > > http://www.eye.fi/ John, have you see an eyefi SD card? Really cool stuff. -- Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics. Larry
From: John Navas on 19 May 2010 12:12 On Wed, 19 May 2010 16:02:44 +0000, Larry <noone(a)home.com> wrote in <Xns9D7D7A8A2573Anoonehomecom(a)74.209.131.13>: >John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in >news:sb28v551hbetac3ii46uatasdpm1er19b3(a)navasgroup.com: > >> I don't know about you, but I'm able to do other things while earplugs >> are in my ears. ;) >One of the reasons Apple fabboiz don't mind Apple's toys NOT being >multitasking is because they, themselves, aren't multitasking.....(c;] Good one! LOL -- Best regards, John <http:/navasgroup.com> If the iPhone is really so impressive, why do iFans keep making excuses for it?
From: John Navas on 19 May 2010 12:17 On Wed, 19 May 2010 16:06:37 +0000, Larry <noone(a)home.com> wrote in <Xns9D7D7B32E386Fnoonehomecom(a)74.209.131.13>: >John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in >news:k528v5hc1obo8625gpnjnvb169cc4ptku7(a)navasgroup.com: > >> Another cool thing I can do with an Android mobile and a memory card >> that no iPhone can do: Put a memory card into my (high-quality) digital >> camera and take pictures, then move the memory card to my Android mobile >> and transmit those pictures over 3G or Wi-Fi. Has proven to be very >> useful and handy. :) >http://www.eye.fi/ >John, have you see an eyefi SD card? Really cool stuff. I have, and while it is a cool idea, I personally find it much less handy than my cell phone: * Only works over Wi-Fi, not 3G cellular. * Won't work over Wi-Fi that requires web-based sign-in. * Lack of decent antenna greatly limits range. -- Best regards, John <http:/navasgroup.com> "If the only tool you have is a hammer, you will see every problem as a nail." -Abraham Maslow
From: nospam on 19 May 2010 16:24 In article <k528v5hc1obo8625gpnjnvb169cc4ptku7(a)navasgroup.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > The iTunes database is an abomination that can all too easily get > corrupted / out of sync with the music library, resulting in songs > missing from the index and songs in the index missing from the library. > I've wasted more time fixing such problems for my non-technical friends > than I care to count. nonsense. it does not get out of sync unless you are doing something *very* bizarre. > Android needs no such nonsense. Real-time indexing of music takes only > a few seconds even with a 16GB memory card, and is never out of sync > with the library. what about 160 gig ipods? with 10x the capacity, those 'few seconds' are now 20-30 seconds, assuming a 'few' is 2-3.
From: nospam on 19 May 2010 16:24
In article <2f18v5dj70ea4qp86m2ttvui3iqi12n5c0(a)navasgroup.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >>it's not anything you see. the database makes it very easy to search by > >>song title, artist, album, genre or composer (and on a computer, just > >>about any attribute of a song). > > The database is on the computer, not the phone, completely wrong. > Android can easily search such things very rapidly without a database. it's not as flexible. > >>it's a lot more flexible than file/folder. the largest capacity ipod > >>can hold 40,000 songs. do you really want to manually manage that as > >>files and folders?? ugh. > > Organizing music files is trivial, and I don't have to worry about > wasting huge amounts of time when a database gets corrupted. yes it is, when you aren't restricted to a file hierarchy. > >>it also makes it easy to track play counts, skip counts and song > >>ratings, so that a smart playlist can automatically update. > > Those things don't matter to me -- I see them as more time wasters -- > but if they matter to you, then you should use some sort of database. they matter to many people, one reason why the ipod has a huge market share. > >>one example is have a playlist of songs that haven't been played for > >>six months and copy 50 random songs from it to the ipod each time it's > >>synced. that way you'll always have something new to listen to, in > >>addition to your normal selection of music. rate a song with a 1 star > >>when you're listening to it and it will disappear on the next sync. > >> > >>very easy and significantly more flexible. > > I can't imagine having any desire to do that. that's fine, but others do. > When I want freshness I typically use Pandora, > which is so good I'm playing my recorded music less and less. how well does that work when there is no network connection, like on an airplane? |