iPad usefulness?
in [UK Mac]
|
From: T i m on 2 Apr 2010 04:28 On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 07:58:49 +0100, Rod <polygonum(a)ntlworld.com> wrote: >On 02/04/2010 00:09, T i m wrote: ><> >> >> Thanks. >> >> I asked 'if it was teletext' he was using previously to get this list >> of stocks and shares and he didn't know? >> >> I noted their old TV does have twin SCART sockets and I think he >> previously had a Freeview box. Would that have also given him the info >> he requires do you know please (rather than going back to analogue I >> mean). >> >> Cheers, T i m > >Dunno. Sorry. > >But I was thinking, use the W7 netbook... I like it, a bit of lateral thinking. ;-) I'm not sure he's up to it though (83 or so) and I'm not sure 'she' would trust him with her Netbook. ;-( Cheers, T i m p.s. I was just going to suggest they put it back as it was (as well) as that obviously suited him before. If it was analogue TV / Teletext I think the switchover for us in London is 2012 so he'd have it for another couple of years?
From: Peter Ceresole on 2 Apr 2010 04:46 R <me32(a)privacy.net> wrote: > You could argue that all inventions evolve from what came before. > So the computer is no different in that respect. The significance of > the computer is that it is the result of radical breakthroughs in the > way we understand mathematics and formalize reasoning, which > breakthroughs occurred in the first half of the 20th century. Yes, if you like; that was one aspect, but not the one that most affected people like me. The real paradigm change for ordinary members of the public was the computing price crash, and that happened because of the invention and development of the microchip, initially for military purposes. So the second computer revolution, and the one that has changed society most and affected everybody in a conscious way, is quite recent- maybe 30 years ago. It's equivalent to the invention of the telephone; it changed the way people related to each other. And in both cases it was related to price. Society Ladies would communicate by letter, writing in the morning to make an appointment in the afternoon[1]. Then around the turn of the 20th century, they could afford to do it by telephone; but it was another 20 years until the ordinary member of the public could do that- and until the 1960s if you wanted to get in touch with a person in the provincial working classes, you had to send a telegram to arrange to speak to them on the phone, at the local shop or the pub. Now everybody has a phone, fixed or mobile, and telegrams are dead. It's the same with computing- we're on the way to the '60s. When you see internet addresses on the side of white vans, as they are appearing now, you know things are really changing. [1] People of course hark back to those good old days of three postal deliveries a day, but it was killed by the telephone and now by emails. The postal service still serves a vital unifying role, but it's changed. -- Peter
From: Graeme on 2 Apr 2010 04:59 In message <cbabr590vb8u9fa0sn0nhpgld0fqk84vqt(a)4ax.com> T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 07:58:49 +0100, Rod <polygonum(a)ntlworld.com> > wrote: > > >On 02/04/2010 00:09, T i m wrote: > ><> > >> > >> Thanks. > >> > >> I asked 'if it was teletext' he was using previously to get this list > >> of stocks and shares and he didn't know? > >> > >> I noted their old TV does have twin SCART sockets and I think he > >> previously had a Freeview box. Would that have also given him the info > >> he requires do you know please (rather than going back to analogue I > >> mean). > >> > >> Cheers, T i m > > > >Dunno. Sorry. > > > >But I was thinking, use the W7 netbook... > > I like it, a bit of lateral thinking. ;-) > > I'm not sure he's up to it though (83 or so) and I'm not sure 'she' > would trust him with her Netbook. ;-( > > Cheers, T i m > > p.s. I was just going to suggest they put it back as it was (as well) > as that obviously suited him before. If it was analogue TV / Teletext > I think the switchover for us in London is 2012 so he'd have it for > another couple of years? But possibly worse for him to try and learn a new system when he is 85. -- Graeme Wall My genealogy website <www.greywall.demon.co.uk/genealogy/>
From: Graeme on 2 Apr 2010 04:57 In message <1jgbbgw.1p66zrs1x41ux3N(a)de-ster.xs4all.nl> nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote: > Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > > J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > > > > > > > > The description claims it needs a computer running a minimum of Snow > > > > > > Leopard! Rules it out for me as I have a PPC :-( > > > > > > > > > > After upgrading Quicktime and iTunes to the latest version > > > > > on Tiger G5 Mini iTunes is full of iPad mentions too. > > > > > So it will probably work. > > > > > > > > > > iSteve is just trying to tell you > > > > > that you really shouldn't want too, > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are too late Jan, I somehow managed to misread the specs. > > > > > > No, you didn't misread. > > > Apple.com -does- state that you need 10.5.8 minimum. > > > > But Snow Leopard is 10.6, Jan. Are you saying that 10.5.8 won't run on a > > PPC machine? Because that sounds wrong to me. And so you can support an > > iPad with a PPC Mac. As Graeme says, he *did* misread the specs. > > That was the previous round. > I was saying next that the specs are probably exaggerated, > and that it seems likely that 10.4.11 (Tiger) > will do as well, > That's possible but I wouldn't want to lash out 600 quidlets on the off-chance it might work. On the other hand upgrading to Leopard wasn't expensive. I'm now 50% convinced about the practicalities of getting one. -- Graeme Wall My genealogy website <www.greywall.demon.co.uk/genealogy/>
From: J. J. Lodder on 2 Apr 2010 05:19
Graeme <Graeme(a)greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote: > In message <1jgbbgw.1p66zrs1x41ux3N(a)de-ster.xs4all.nl> > nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote: > > > Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The description claims it needs a computer running a minimum > > > > > > > of Snow Leopard! Rules it out for me as I have a PPC :-( > > > > > > > > > > > > After upgrading Quicktime and iTunes to the latest version > > > > > > on Tiger G5 Mini iTunes is full of iPad mentions too. > > > > > > So it will probably work. > > > > > > > > > > > > iSteve is just trying to tell you > > > > > > that you really shouldn't want too, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are too late Jan, I somehow managed to misread the specs. > > > > > > > > No, you didn't misread. > > > > Apple.com -does- state that you need 10.5.8 minimum. > > > > > > But Snow Leopard is 10.6, Jan. Are you saying that 10.5.8 won't run on a > > > PPC machine? Because that sounds wrong to me. And so you can support an > > > iPad with a PPC Mac. As Graeme says, he *did* misread the specs. > > > > That was the previous round. > > I was saying next that the specs are probably exaggerated, > > and that it seems likely that 10.4.11 (Tiger) > > will do as well, > > > > That's possible but I wouldn't want to lash out 600 quidlets on the > off-chance it might work. We'll know soon. > On the other hand upgrading to Leopard wasn't > expensive. I have it, but hesitate about putting it on the Cube. > I'm now 50% convinced about the practicalities of getting one. The iPod Touch is fine on USB1 on the Cube. It just takes some more patience, Jan |