But if you ever watch any of Apple's keynotes about their phones, they always inevitably contain a section where they gush about the camera and show pictures shot "by a professional photographer" with the phone.
Professional photographers would recognize the limitations of using the iPhone for photography. Only amateur photographers who can't afford a decked out DSLR would whine that the iPhone wasn't a decked out DSLR.
Or if that's too much, perhaps read the summary that helpfully provides several reasons.
The problem I see with many people using the iPhone is that they're too lazy to manage the space that they have. A friend with an 128GB iPhone can't update iOS because he ran out of space from having too many apps, pictures and music files. If Apple offered a 256GB phone, he would run out of space in six months or less. The idea of — gasp! — removing unneeded apps, photos and music seems incomprehensible to some people.
No photographer is going to use a camera without removable media.
What does that have to do with iPhones? A photographer will use the right tool for the job, which presumably would be a camera with different lenses, battery packs and memory cards.
Pinch $120 out to your diamond-pressure level ass and upgrade to something built in the last 5 years.
I paid $1200 for my MacBook, including the $200 premium to get a black case. It's still a useful machine. I'm not ready to pop out another diamond out of my ass for the newest and greatest MacBook.
Britain, an island with a natural "wall" 19 miles wide at its narrowest point, is having an immigration problem.
You're overlooking several things in regards to Britain. A rail-and-automotive tunnel that goes underneath the "wall" to connect Britain with the rest of Europe. As a member of the European Union, any citizen from any country in the EU can travel to Britain without a passport. Also, the British economy is doing a lot better than the rest of Europe. Hence, they have an immigration problem.
Did you cry that XP didn't run on your 9 year old 486 in 2001 or Windows 95 won't run on your 9 year old 8086 IBM XT with 1 meg of ram?
I only had a used 486 computer for six months before I got a Pentium. DOS ran just fine on my IBM AT until I retired the system in 1997. This week I'm replacing the nine-year-old system that I built for Windows Vista in 2007.
Technology moves forward for the rest of us
Sometimes old technology keeps on working just fine.
How can anyone honestly attempt to answer this question in 2016, when the release under development is still currently 16.10, and 18.04 won't be receiving its first patch release marking it as stable for more than another two years?
It's a rhetorical question. Especially since I have a 32-bit processor that can't run a 64-bit operating system. Not the same as running a 32-bit operating system on a 64-bit processor.
If Ubuntu 18.10 is 64-bit only, is that a problem?
You don't need to reply to every comment, you know. If you don't understand the question or have anything useful to add, you can just sit there quietly.
Let me rephrase this: A 64-bit operating system does not run on a 32-bit processor.
Is that when you started or when it finished? I'm asking because it might have been Gentoo.
I started in 1997 with Debian in a book distro. Ran SUSE for many years. Used Ubuntu, Fedora or Mint at work, depending on whatever was popular with the engineers. When I worked at Google, I used Goobuntu (Ubuntu variation). These days I'm banging on Red Hat Linux to see if I want to go for the certification.
Second, it's funny how the democrats complain about money in politics yet they are the biggest recipients from unions, businesses, and now international entities.
Funny how much Republican money is sitting on the sidelines because Trump is the nominee.
Well, at least you can look forward to our next president not being Donald Trump.
Are you kidding? Donald Trump has no money, no campaign staff in the battleground states, and the electoral map is stacked against him. The Republicans can kiss the White House, Senate, and maybe the House, goodbye.
The single IT tech had to search multiple floors in a office building to find the half-dozen rogue routers hidden behind multiple workstations underneath the desks.
I would hope a fortune 500 would do things better than have such an open network in this day and age.
This particular company had an open network where anything plugged in could get on the network. I've worked at other Fortune 500 companies that required a help desk ticket to open a port on the switch. If you have a rogue wireless access point at Cisco, security will immediately show up to confiscate the AP and investigate you for criminal intent.
If they don't have dedicated switches, they probably aren't very good engineers. They are like 10 bucks for a 5 port switch and no network issues.
These engineers were trained computer scientists. From my experience with computer scientists, they don't know squat about hardware. They just pulled hardware out of their junk boxes, put it into service and whined to help desk when the network goes FUBAR.
Why does a router need "a domain through which to configure it"?
Corporate networks typically have domain servers.
Don't you just connect to a 192.168 address with a browser?
Most corporate networks are set to 10.0.0.0 for addresses. When I did a PC refresh project at a Fortune 500 company, the engineers wanted to keep their old workstation but the IT department wouldn't open more ports and/or provide switches. The engineers brought old routers from home to use the switch portion but didn't turn off the DCHP server for the router. Nearby workstations picked up the 192.168.0.0 addresses, unable to access the corporate network, and users complained to help desk. Took the IT department all morning to track down the half-dozen rogue routers.
Slashdot Mirror
right but when you can fill a gig up in a matter of minutes now adays, removable would be nice even for the non professional
Get the Lightning to SD Card Reader adapter. Not all solutions need to be built into a phone.
http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJYT2AM/A/lightning-to-sd-card-camera-reader
Maybe because 32GB of flash costs $10, and everything else is gratuitous markups on Apple's part?
What does that have to do with the fact that I have 8GB free space on a 16GB iPhone?
But if you ever watch any of Apple's keynotes about their phones, they always inevitably contain a section where they gush about the camera and show pictures shot "by a professional photographer" with the phone.
Professional photographers would recognize the limitations of using the iPhone for photography. Only amateur photographers who can't afford a decked out DSLR would whine that the iPhone wasn't a decked out DSLR.
Or if that's too much, perhaps read the summary that helpfully provides several reasons.
The problem I see with many people using the iPhone is that they're too lazy to manage the space that they have. A friend with an 128GB iPhone can't update iOS because he ran out of space from having too many apps, pictures and music files. If Apple offered a 256GB phone, he would run out of space in six months or less. The idea of — gasp! — removing unneeded apps, photos and music seems incomprehensible to some people.
No photographer is going to use a camera without removable media.
What does that have to do with iPhones? A photographer will use the right tool for the job, which presumably would be a camera with different lenses, battery packs and memory cards.
I got 8GB free on my 16GB iPhone. Not sure why I would want 24GB free on a 32GB iPhone.
Pinch $120 out to your diamond-pressure level ass and upgrade to something built in the last 5 years.
I paid $1200 for my MacBook, including the $200 premium to get a black case. It's still a useful machine. I'm not ready to pop out another diamond out of my ass for the newest and greatest MacBook.
Britain, an island with a natural "wall" 19 miles wide at its narrowest point, is having an immigration problem.
You're overlooking several things in regards to Britain. A rail-and-automotive tunnel that goes underneath the "wall" to connect Britain with the rest of Europe. As a member of the European Union, any citizen from any country in the EU can travel to Britain without a passport. Also, the British economy is doing a lot better than the rest of Europe. Hence, they have an immigration problem.
Did you cry that XP didn't run on your 9 year old 486 in 2001 or Windows 95 won't run on your 9 year old 8086 IBM XT with 1 meg of ram?
I only had a used 486 computer for six months before I got a Pentium. DOS ran just fine on my IBM AT until I retired the system in 1997. This week I'm replacing the nine-year-old system that I built for Windows Vista in 2007.
Technology moves forward for the rest of us
Sometimes old technology keeps on working just fine.
Rolaid would be better and might have saved an extra life.
FTFY
How can anyone honestly attempt to answer this question in 2016, when the release under development is still currently 16.10, and 18.04 won't be receiving its first patch release marking it as stable for more than another two years?
It's a rhetorical question. Especially since I have a 32-bit processor that can't run a 64-bit operating system. Not the same as running a 32-bit operating system on a 64-bit processor.
If Ubuntu 18.10 is 64-bit only, is that a problem?
You don't need to reply to every comment, you know. If you don't understand the question or have anything useful to add, you can just sit there quietly.
Let me rephrase this: A 64-bit operating system does not run on a 32-bit processor.
A [Washington, ..., Lincoln, ..., Obama] Presidency will be the end of the republic.
FTFY
Is that when you started or when it finished? I'm asking because it might have been Gentoo.
I started in 1997 with Debian in a book distro. Ran SUSE for many years. Used Ubuntu, Fedora or Mint at work, depending on whatever was popular with the engineers. When I worked at Google, I used Goobuntu (Ubuntu variation). These days I'm banging on Red Hat Linux to see if I want to go for the certification.
As we see, a geek would just compile his own kernel to his machine and wouldn't need to worry about if one already existed compiled for his machine.
I haven't compiled a kernel since the 1990's.
Second, it's funny how the democrats complain about money in politics yet they are the biggest recipients from unions, businesses, and now international entities.
Funny how much Republican money is sitting on the sidelines because Trump is the nominee.
That might have been true, except for the gift the Republicans received when Hillary bought the Democratic nomination.
The only thing that changed since Hillary won the Democratic nomination is Trump's sinking poll numbers, especially in the battleground states.
What's wrong with running 18.04 until the hardware dies?
I've never got Ubuntu to install successfully on the MacBook. Mint Linux install fine.
Well, at least you can look forward to our next president not being Donald Trump.
Are you kidding? Donald Trump has no money, no campaign staff in the battleground states, and the electoral map is stacked against him. The Republicans can kiss the White House, Senate, and maybe the House, goodbye.
If Ubuntu 18.10 is 64-bit only, is that a problem?
For a 32-bit processor, yes.
I guess I'm stuck using Windows 10 (32-bit) on my vintage 2006 MacBook (Intel Duo Core 32-bit processor).
Took all morning? Really?
The single IT tech had to search multiple floors in a office building to find the half-dozen rogue routers hidden behind multiple workstations underneath the desks.
I would hope a fortune 500 would do things better than have such an open network in this day and age.
This particular company had an open network where anything plugged in could get on the network. I've worked at other Fortune 500 companies that required a help desk ticket to open a port on the switch. If you have a rogue wireless access point at Cisco, security will immediately show up to confiscate the AP and investigate you for criminal intent.
Nothing to see here, move along.
If they don't have dedicated switches, they probably aren't very good engineers. They are like 10 bucks for a 5 port switch and no network issues.
These engineers were trained computer scientists. From my experience with computer scientists, they don't know squat about hardware. They just pulled hardware out of their junk boxes, put it into service and whined to help desk when the network goes FUBAR.
Why does a router need "a domain through which to configure it"?
Corporate networks typically have domain servers.
Don't you just connect to a 192.168 address with a browser?
Most corporate networks are set to 10.0.0.0 for addresses. When I did a PC refresh project at a Fortune 500 company, the engineers wanted to keep their old workstation but the IT department wouldn't open more ports and/or provide switches. The engineers brought old routers from home to use the switch portion but didn't turn off the DCHP server for the router. Nearby workstations picked up the 192.168.0.0 addresses, unable to access the corporate network, and users complained to help desk. Took the IT department all morning to track down the half-dozen rogue routers.