If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Nibbling on an Apple
In article , tonycooper214
@gmail.com says... On Tue, 06 Aug 2013 22:21:49 -0400, nospam wrote: In article , Tony Cooper wrote: file systems are old school. they're eventually going away for nearly all users. system administrators or developers might need to get at individual files, but typical users do not. Crap. You couldn't find your way round my wife's iPad collection of of photographs unless there was a file system you could follow. Otherwise, god knows how many thousands of photographs all in one big heap. Mine are in albums on my iPad. Is that not a file system? no. it's a higher level concept. it's actually a database indexed by content, not a rigid file/folder structure. one photo can be in multiple albums, something not possible with a file system. You have an odd idea of "not possible". I suppose what you've said means something to some people, but I put the same image in several folders by using "Copy to:". Don't bother to explain. I don't give a rat's ass if it's a copy of the same file or an index system accessing the same file. I guess that makes me a hater of higher level concepts. Actually, I prefer a copy since any changes affect the copy only. FWIW, most Unix filesystems allow multiple links to the same file--when you go to delete it it doesn't actually get deleted until the last link goes, unless the superuser orders otherwise. NTFS in Vista and later does as well. By default it's enabled only for administrator accounts. The command is "mklink". it's the same for music. you can search music by various things, such as artist, album, genre or title. you can also create playlists with whatever you want in them. as with photos, one song can be in multiple playlists (or no playlists). playlists can also be smart and automatically update themselves based on rules you define, such as least recently played, rated 4 * or higher or music from the '60s or some other ruleset. if you play a song, it's automatically removed from least recently played and if you downrate it to 3* or less, it will be removed from the 4* or better playlist, all automatically. Whoop-de-doo. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Nibbling on an Apple
On 2013-08-06 20:29:09 -0700, Savageduck said:
On 2013-08-06 19:41:54 -0700, Tony Cooper said: On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 19:06:15 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2013-08-06 18:13:21 -0700, Tony Cooper said: On Wed, 07 Aug 2013 12:49:57 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote: On Tue, 06 Aug 2013 16:50:51 -0400, nospam wrote: file systems are old school. they're eventually going away for nearly all users. system administrators or developers might need to get at individual files, but typical users do not. Crap. You couldn't find your way round my wife's iPad collection of of photographs unless there was a file system you could follow. Otherwise, god knows how many thousands of photographs all in one big heap. Mine are in albums on my iPad. Is that not a file system? Exactly! However, some of us here are curious as to when it was you got yourself an iPad? Month or so ago. I wanted a way to take photos with me to show some people. So far, I've never added a - whaddayacallit - an app? or used for anything else. Rather than let technology lead me by the nose, I add what I want when I want it. I did try to take a photograph with it earlier this evening. The grandsons had wrestling practice, so I tried to take a photo. I found it doesn't work too well with my finger over the lens. Finally got one image and went to the car and got my Fuji compact for the rest. Pop Warner football starts this week, so I'll be back to the Nikon. They got their practice kit. https://www.dropbox.com/s/ohhve1k3je...3-08-05-01.JPG You might want to add Dropbox to your iPad. Another useful app for your desktop and iPad is "Photo Transfer App". http://www.phototransferapp.com/ Also, as a photographer I suggest you take a look at "Eyewitness" from the Guardian. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/the-...363993651?mt=8 The Wikipedia App is worth having installed; https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/wiki...324715238?mt=8 ...and if you want to see just how good streaming video can be on an iPad, check the Smithsonian Channel app https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/smit...377458454?mt=8 I use a couple of birder's field guides (on iPhone & iPad) which saves lugging a paper edition around. Just a few things look at, if they don't interest you, then so be it. BTW: I also have PDF versions of my various manuals installed in the IBooks book shelf. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...%2050%20PM.png ....and then there are Skype & Apple's video call app, Facetime (not to be confused with the terrible Facebook). -- Regards, Savageduck |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Nibbling on an Apple
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote: Mine are in albums on my iPad. Is that not a file system? no. it's a higher level concept. it's actually a database indexed by content, not a rigid file/folder structure. one photo can be in multiple albums, something not possible with a file system. You have an odd idea of "not possible". nothing odd about it. i have an understanding of file systems and you do not. I suppose what you've said means something to some people, but I put the same image in several folders by using "Copy to:". no, you made a copy. now you have *two* (or more) photos, one in each folder. you *cannot* have one photo in more than one folder. it is *not* possible. worse, *you* have to manage it. if you change one photo, you then have to then re-copy them to all of the other folders, assuming you remember where they all were. Don't bother to explain. I don't give a rat's ass if it's a copy of the same file or an index system accessing the same file. I guess that makes me a hater of higher level concepts. translated: you don't want to be proven wrong yet again, so you'll just start off on the attack. Actually, I prefer a copy since any changes affect the copy only. you can still make changes and have two versions. it's blatantly clear you haven't a clue and are talking out your ass again. it's the same for music. you can search music by various things, such as artist, album, genre or title. you can also create playlists with whatever you want in them. as with photos, one song can be in multiple playlists (or no playlists). playlists can also be smart and automatically update themselves based on rules you define, such as least recently played, rated 4 * or higher or music from the '60s or some other ruleset. if you play a song, it's automatically removed from least recently played and if you downrate it to 3* or less, it will be removed from the 4* or better playlist, all automatically. Whoop-de-doo. whop-de-do right back. none of that is possible with the file system alone. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Nibbling on an Apple
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: Mine are in albums on my iPad. Is that not a file system? Exactly - but nospam doesn't seem to realise that. it's not a file system. it's a database. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Nibbling on an Apple
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: file systems are old school. they're eventually going away for nearly all users. system administrators or developers might need to get at individual files, but typical users do not. Crap. You couldn't find your way round my wife's iPad collection of of photographs unless there was a file system you could follow. Otherwise, god knows how many thousands of photographs all in one big heap. Mine are in albums on my iPad. Is that not a file system? no. it's a higher level concept. it's actually a database indexed by content, not a rigid file/folder structure. one photo can be in multiple albums, something not possible with a file system. You can't do any of these things without a file system. internally there is a file system but it's not exposed to the user nor does it need to be. direct access to the file system is archaic and primitive. it's not necessary anymore. there are much better ways to do stuff. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Nibbling on an Apple
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: file systems are old school. they're eventually going away for nearly all users. system administrators or developers might need to get at individual files, but typical users do not. Crap. definitely not crap. it's progress and can't happen soon enough. file system access is primitive. It's your original statement that is crap. not at all. there's nothing crap about it. it's reality and is happening *now*, although far too slowly. You couldn't find your way round my wife's iPad collection of of photographs unless there was a file system you could follow. Otherwise, god knows how many thousands of photographs all in one big heap. then she's not taking advantage of all of its functionality. How can you possibly know that? because you said she has multiple thousands of photos in one big heap. that means she hasn't made any albums and has them in one giant album. if she has them in multiple albums, then they aren't in 'one big heap.' i can only go by what you say, assuming you don't change your story. you don't need direct file system access to manage photos. far from it. the computer can do that *for* you. Twisting. Shifting the goal posts. The question is not whether you have "direct file system access" but whether or not you have a "file system". i'm not twisting a thing and that's *not* the question. it's clear you don't understand this any more than tony does. what goes on under the hood is unimportant to the vast majority of users. there is a tiny subset who might need to do that, such as a sysadmin or software developer, but not the typical user. faces and places automatically groups photos by who is in them and where they were taken, or the photos can be put into one or more albums, something that can't be done with a filesystem. Weasel! You are describing what it is that the file system doe. nope. the file system cannot do faces and places, nor can it have one file in more than one place. that requires a higher level database. you're as confused as tony is. ios 7 also has another way to look at large numbers of photos and quickly figure out which ones are the ones you want to look at, but it's not out yet. ... and it will keep track of them with table of random numbers? Naah. It's got a file system. it does *internally*, but you don't need to access it. it can all be managed in far better and more efficient ways. you don't know which block a file is on the hard drive, do you? no. same for files. in fact, the location on the hard drive can change since modern operating systems relocate commonly used files for speed. all of that is done *for* you. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Nibbling on an Apple
In article , J. Clarke
wrote: FWIW, most Unix filesystems allow multiple links to the same file--when you go to delete it it doesn't actually get deleted until the last link goes, unless the superuser orders otherwise. that's not the same thing and is also restricted to one volume. it's also something the user has to manage. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Nibbling on an Apple
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote: Exactly! However, some of us here are curious as to when it was you got yourself an iPad? Month or so ago. I wanted a way to take photos with me to show some people. So far, I've never added a - whaddayacallit - an app? or used for anything else. Rather than let technology lead me by the nose, I add what I want when I want it. adding apps is hardly letting technology lead you. you get to choose which apps to install and what you do with them. you installed apps on your laptop and desktop computer, so why not on an ipad? It's not "why not?", but "why?". I haven't had the need or the interest. of course, because you like doing things the hard way. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Nibbling on an Apple
On 2013-08-06 21:08:28 -0700, Tony Cooper said:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 20:29:09 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2013-08-06 19:41:54 -0700, Tony Cooper said: On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 19:06:15 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2013-08-06 18:13:21 -0700, Tony Cooper said: On Wed, 07 Aug 2013 12:49:57 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote: On Tue, 06 Aug 2013 16:50:51 -0400, nospam wrote: file systems are old school. they're eventually going away for nearly all users. system administrators or developers might need to get at individual files, but typical users do not. Crap. You couldn't find your way round my wife's iPad collection of of photographs unless there was a file system you could follow. Otherwise, god knows how many thousands of photographs all in one big heap. Mine are in albums on my iPad. Is that not a file system? Exactly! However, some of us here are curious as to when it was you got yourself an iPad? Month or so ago. I wanted a way to take photos with me to show some people. So far, I've never added a - whaddayacallit - an app? or used for anything else. Rather than let technology lead me by the nose, I add what I want when I want it. I did try to take a photograph with it earlier this evening. The grandsons had wrestling practice, so I tried to take a photo. I found it doesn't work too well with my finger over the lens. Finally got one image and went to the car and got my Fuji compact for the rest. Pop Warner football starts this week, so I'll be back to the Nikon. They got their practice kit. https://www.dropbox.com/s/ohhve1k3je...3-08-05-01.JPG You might want to add Dropbox to your iPad. Another useful app for your desktop and iPad is "Photo Transfer App". http://www.phototransferapp.com/ Also, as a photographer I suggest you take a look at "Eyewitness" from the Guardian. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/the-...363993651?mt=8 The Wikipedia App is worth having installed; https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/wiki...324715238?mt=8 ...and if you want to see just how good streaming video can be on an iPad, check the Smithsonian Channel app https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/smit...377458454?mt=8 I use a couple of birder's field guides (on iPhone & iPad) which saves lugging a paper edition around. Just a few things look at, if they don't interest you, then so be it. Just not interested, Duck. I suspected as much. So when you are ready... So far, the only thing I'm interested in doing is having a portable way of displaying my images. I use the Photo Transfer App & Dropbox to move prepared images from my desktop to my iPad albums for display. I was in a situation just after I got it when I wanted to shoot some images of something and the subject was a bit leery of letting me. I brought out the iPad and showed him some albums of similar shots I'd done. He let me take the shots and asked me to email him the results. A great use for the iPad, but not the only one. So far, I've not even tried to use it in a wi-fi hot spot. Haven't had a reason I wanted to. I mostly use mine at home with my home Wi-Fi network. However, there are those hotspots if I need them, and if I am traveling I can either buy a block of 3G/4G bandwidth for the trip, or wirelessly tether to my iPhone to share some of that bandwidth I am paying for with my Verizon phone data plan. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Nibbling on an Apple
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote: I suppose what you've said means something to some people, but I put the same image in several folders by using "Copy to:". no, you made a copy. now you have *two* (or more) photos, one in each folder. Yes, I understood that from the get-go. apparently not, based on what you've written. you *cannot* have one photo in more than one folder. it is *not* possible. worse, *you* have to manage it. if you change one photo, you then have to then re-copy them to all of the other folders, assuming you remember where they all were. Why would I do that? why would you do what? why would you recopy them? because if you change one the others are now out of sync. Perhaps you constantly edit your photos. I don't. The only time I edit a photo later is when I go back to one I made a cropped 4" x 6" image from and make a cropped 8" x 10" or similar. And, I do this from the uncropped original. There's only one folder where the uncropped original stays. it has nothing whatsoever to do with editing photos. you really are out to lunch on this. suppose you go to france and take a photo of your wife in front of the eiffel tower with a nice sunset. that is three categories right there. photos in france, photos of your wife and sunset photos. your way would be to make 3 folders with a copy of the photo in each. if a photo has multiple people or fits multiple categories, then it's even more copies. that's insanity. It sounds like you do a lot of things more complicated than necessary and you need some computer crutch to allow you to do these things. nonsense. it sounds like you're stuck with the limitations that a file system imparts and don't understand that there are much easier and better ways to do things as well as being able to do many more things that were not previously possible. worse, you think everyone has to do it your way and should not want anything better or want more features. the fact that you bought a very capable tablet computer and have yet to install any apps proves this. you're stuck in your ways and not wiling to learn anything new. Why do you assume other people do things that way? An indexed database solves a problem that doesn't exist for some. i don't assume anything. however, making things easier is something all users want. except maybe you. Don't bother to explain. I don't give a rat's ass if it's a copy of the same file or an index system accessing the same file. I guess that makes me a hater of higher level concepts. translated: you don't want to be proven wrong yet again, so you'll just start off on the attack. No, it shows that I understood that from the get-go. actually, it shows the opposite. I understand my system. You are a hater of good systems. A systems basher. you don't understand it as well anywhere near as well as you think you do, and i don't hate anything, nor was i bashing systems. you are once again lying and twisting, trying to change this into something it isn't. it's the same for music. you can search music by various things, such as artist, album, genre or title. you can also create playlists with whatever you want in them. as with photos, one song can be in multiple playlists (or no playlists). playlists can also be smart and automatically update themselves based on rules you define, such as least recently played, rated 4 * or higher or music from the '60s or some other ruleset. if you play a song, it's automatically removed from least recently played and if you downrate it to 3* or less, it will be removed from the 4* or better playlist, all automatically. Whoop-de-doo. whop-de-do right back. none of that is possible with the file system alone. I don't have music on my iPad unless it was pre-loaded from the source. I haven't bothered to look. Why are you nattering on about music? Who brought that up? i brought it up because music is an *excellent* example how technology has advanced beyond the limitations of directly accessing it in the file system. photos are getting there. but must have known that, because you 'understood it from the get-go'. i guess you didn't understand anything. you are fixated with the past and want to remain with those limitations. fortunately, the rest of the world enjoys the additional features and capabilities and ease of doing things that once required more work. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
They are nibbling among the desert now, won't jump stickers later. | Doug Miller | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | June 27th 06 07:08 AM |
just nibbling with a exit under the spring is too quiet for Rob to fill it | Rick Drummerman | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | April 22nd 06 04:48 PM |
try nibbling the morning's young cloud and Jonathan will seek you | Roger A. Young | Digital Photography | 0 | April 22nd 06 04:29 PM |
they are nibbling for the hallway now, won't learn books later | Lionel | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | April 22nd 06 03:50 PM |
he'll be nibbling within stale Valerie until his smog cares easily | MTKnife | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | April 22nd 06 02:06 PM |