«

In article <mr->, Sandman
<> wrote:

> > The discussion is destined to be unsatisfying to both
> > sides, because the position of each is irritating to the
> > other.
>
> No "position" is irritating to me. Presenting incorrect statements as
> facts is irritating to me.

same here, and what's worse is they're not interested in learning the
facts. they have their biases and no amount of proof will change their
mind.

> > The frustrated simply want the devotees to acknowledge that, yes,
> > there's an unfortunate design flaw; while the devotess simply want
> > the frustrated to not criticize anything about Apple.
>
> I don't care about Apple or "devotees". I would question the OP's use
> of his appliance had it been from another brand, and I would have
> stood by the selected solutions regardless of which company made them.
> Lightroom was suggested as a remedy for the problems, which clearly is
> not part of the Apple product portfolio

and the bashers immediately assumed lightroom was required, which it is
not. it just happens to be an excellent app for managing photos.

> > No matter which side one is on, the question
> > of whether it's a "valid" use of an iPad to store and then
> > delete large numbers of files is a red herring issue.
>
> Of course it is not. The intended use of an iPad, Samsung Galaxy Tab
> or a Galaxy Nexus 7 have not identified "selecting and deleting all
> photos on the device" as a prime usage. There are thousand and
> millions of things these devices *will not do* as part of the basic
> programing function.

yep, and only apple devices get criticized. if android tablets have the
same problem it's perfectly fine.

also note that the loudest bashers don't even have a tablet of any
sort. they're talking out their ass.

> One could easily argue that the reason for there not being a "delete
> all" function in these devices is a matter of safety, because
> inadvertently pressing it would have serious consequences. And since
> there is a solution with using a computer, the ones programming these
> devices elected to play it safe instead of introducing more
> potentially damaging functions.

it could have a confirmation sheet for the delete, but that's a valid
point.

In article <ab134a21-b3e0-42c2-a27b->,
DanP <> wrote:

> Apple has made built in the iPad a mass storage USB interface. My satnav,
> mobile phone, cameras and mp3 player all have it and it works.
>
> My fault for thinking that iPad USB interface might work in the same way as
> it works for all the other devices.

it works as any digital camera would.

> Don't be silly, the iPad cannot make a cup of tea. You can use it as a chopping board though.

and a skateboard.

> BTW, I still have some of the photos from that iPad on my laptop. Some, so looking on the
> bright side you can get a few photos and maybe all if you spend the time to configure
> it to work. Or if you buy a Mac, that is how Apple lets you transfer your files.

you're running an unsupported system.

out of the box, mac and windows is supported. not linux.

a lot of products only support mac and windows, so linux users should
feel at home getting it to work. apparently, they like the hassles.

> Enough, I feel dumber than a three year old now.

i wouldn't have said three year old, but if you insist.

On 31/10/2012 08:26, nospam wrote:
[]
> reasoned arguments are more than welcome.
>
> what's not welcome is bashing, especially from those who don't own the
> products and likely never will. they just want to find fault, no matter
> how minor it may be, even though the competing products do exactly the
> same thing (which they don't own either). they fixate solely on the
> negative, ignoring all of the positive. they never mention the real
> problems that really *do* affect users.

Fortunately, I do own an iPad, and my comments arise specifically from
problems that I have found when using it. Oh, and my Android has a File
Manager, which allows selecting multiple files for deletion.
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

On 31/10/2012 08:26, nospam wrote:
[]
> yes, a select all would be nice, but most people copy the photos to the
> device and keep them there until they connect it to a computer, where
> they then copy them and delete them, so it's not really as big of a
> deal as some are making it out to be.

Select All would be more than just "nice".

>> Oh, and let's not mention the picture ordering issue when used as a
>> display from images copied from an SD card.
>
> what ordering issue?

Try a mixture of files from different cameras, some edited and some not.
When presenting a show you yould likely wish to have the images in a
particular order, and not necessarily the order in which they were
taken. You would think that the thumbnails view might allow
drag-and-drop sorting, but no. Apple decides the order and you can't
change it.

[I thought the Duck said that was fixed in iOS 6, but it didn't seem to
be for me, unless I've missed a trick...]
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

On 31/10/2012 08:26, nospam wrote:
> In article <k6qk4m$q00$>, David Taylor
> <david-> wrote:
>
>> With my Android phone, there is a File Manager program which runs on the
>> device itself, and it /does/ include a Select All option.
>
> which is separate from the photo viewer.
>
> so now you have to quit one app, launch another, select files and
> delete, then go back to the first app.

Yes, but still far quicker than the thousand tap method for deleting an
entire directory.
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

On Wednesday, October 31, 2012 2:58:44 PM UTC, Sandman wrote:
> In article <ceb6de61-c733-4198-9f56->,
>
> Whisky-dave <> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > I'm not sure this is a valid comparison. The iPad acts as a UBS mass
>
> > > storage device to the computer.
>
> >
>
> > Not quite as you can;t just dump anything on there as if it were a hard
>
> > drive.
>
>
>
> Not only is that not in violation with the USB Mass Storage
>
> specification,

maybe your idea of a mass storage device is differnt to mine then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_mas...e_device_class


>but it also the way your DSLR acts when you connect it
>
> to your computer.

Not quite yet again.

>It will not advertise itself as file volume, but it
>
> does use the USB Mass Storage protocol.

But that protocal means you should be able to drag and drop files in both directions.

>
>
>
> > I used to do that with my 30GB HDD iPod, I used it as an external disc drive,
>
> > but you can;t use teh ipad for that.
>
>
>
> Which has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

yes it does, it's whether or mot you can use it as a mass storage device.
Perhaps your idea of a mass storage device is difernt to mine.
Perhaps you mean mass storage class.


>
> > > And the "limit" here seems to be that Apple did not facilitate
>
> > > deleting thousands of photos easily enough.
>
> >
>
> > I've deleted folders or rather events which contain those sorts of numbers
>
>
>
> Deleting albums (not folders, not events) on the iPad does not delete
>
> the actual photos in that album.

What do you mean by that ?
I have an album called Simba photos on my ipad, I can;t delete them off theipad because they were not taken using the ipad, if I don;t want them on teh ipad then I must unsynch that folder (smart folder in my case) then the photos will no longer appear on my ipad.


>
>
>
> > > Seeing that this doesn't logically fall under the intended use of
>
> > > the iPad, I fail to see how this is an actual limit. Or rather,
>
> > > if that's a limit, Apple also "Limits" you in that you can't
>
> > > monitor NASA spacecraft launches on your iPad homescreen.
>
> >
>
> > Well you can download NASA podcasts, I don;t watch TV on my ipad but I do
>
> > watch NASA and Hubble and various other video casts on the ipad rather than
>
> > my computer.
>
>
>
> *rolleye*

here the point was that it needs to be in a secific format, readable by theipad if you try to put something on there the ipad can;t read is it Applesfault, I don't think so.

>
>
>
> > > but I think it falls squarely outside the scope of normal usage
>
> > > of an iPad.
>
> >
>
> > Perhaps they will in the furture if they find lots of people are putting
>
> > 1000s of photos on their ipad that they don;t want to look at.
>
>
>
> Sure.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Sandman[.net]

On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 09:10:32 -0700, nospam <>
wrote:

>In article <>, tony cooper
><> wrote:
>
>> >> Actually, I neither hate nor like Apple.
>> >
>> >bullshit. your words tell a different story.
>> >
>> >> I'm very neutral about the
>> >> products,
>> >
>> >bullshit. you're always criticizing them, claiming they're overpriced
>> >among other things.
>>
>> No, actually I have said that Macs are more expensive, but not that
>> they are overpriced. To refute that they are more expensive by saying
>> "not when you compare features" is to ignore the fact that not
>> everyone needs or wants those features. It's ignoring a basic
>> understanding of the word "expensive".
>
>nobody said anyone needs those features. don't twist things (again).
>
>> I'm not, in general, critical of the products. All products have some
>> feature or features that can be criticized. Apple products are not
>> alone in this.
>
>true.
>
>> I value the meaning of words in both their dictionary definition and
>> their common usage definition. "Overpriced" has a more literal
>> meaning as "priced unfairly in regard to their cost" and a common
>> usage definition of "priced higher than I choose to spend".
>
>common usage to whom?
>
>steak costs more than pasta. does that make steak overpriced? no.

If you have never heard anyone saying something to the effect of "That
restaurant is overpriced" meaning only that the restaurant offers a
menu selection with only expensive entrees, then you need to listen
better. The statement does not mean the selections are not
value-for-money. It simply means "priced higher than I choose to
spend". The same goes for computers and other devices.

>> If Macs
>> are overpriced to anyone, they are overpriced by the second meaning.
>> I have no idea if they are or are not overpriced according to the
>> first meaning.
>>
>> I am far more neutral about Apple products than you are.
>
>that's a laugh.

You need one. You do come across as a completely humorless ****.

>go look in the mac newsgroups. just last week i was called an
>apple-bashing troll because i dared to criticize something apple did.

That would be like Joe Ratzinger calling Rick Santorum a theological
liberal.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

In article <k6rj4l$96t$>, David Taylor
<david-> wrote:

> >> Oh, and let's not mention the picture ordering issue when used as a
> >> display from images copied from an SD card.
> >
> > what ordering issue?
>
> Try a mixture of files from different cameras, some edited and some not.
> When presenting a show you yould likely wish to have the images in a
> particular order, and not necessarily the order in which they were
> taken. You would think that the thumbnails view might allow
> drag-and-drop sorting, but no. Apple decides the order and you can't
> change it.

get a slide show app and make a slide show with the photos in the order
you want.

expecting the ipad to read your mind and know in which order you want
the photos shown is a bit much.

the photos app can cycle through a photo library but it's not a
dedicated slide show app. again, get the best tool for the job.

> [I thought the Duck said that was fixed in iOS 6, but it didn't seem to
> be for me, unless I've missed a trick...]

i don't use ios 6 and can't test it.

In article <k6rldd$ooq$>, Mayayana
<> wrote:

> | > * Whatever file manager is on the iPad is not capable
> | > of some basic functions like Select All -> Delete
> |
> | The iPad does not have a file manager. It has a basic photo manager.
> | Not file manager.
>
> I stand corrected. I don't experience with iPads
> myself, but I did recently have to help my elderly father
> set up his Android tablet. It's half the price

not one that's comparable, you can't.

for example, the galaxy tab 10.1 is $400, the *same* price as an ipad.

if you bought an android tablet for half the price of an ipad, then
there are compromises to make it that cheap.

> and includes
> a full-scale file manager, so I assumed the iPad had
> *at least* that much functionality.

it's not a question of functionality.

geeks want file managers because they think it's needed. except it's
not.

the target market for these devices are normal people who don't want to
muck with files and likely wouldn't know what to do with any of the
files anyway. they want to get stuff done, so they download an app and
do whatever it is they need to do.

On Wednesday, 31 October 2012 13:47:21 UTC, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2012-10-31 06:28:13 -0700, DanP <> said:
>
> >>
>
> >> Sandman[.net]
>
> >
>
> > Suppose Sony did a camera that worked well only with Sony laptops.
>
> > Would you blame other computer manufacturers for failing to read from
>
> > Sony cameras?
>
> >
>
> > I will blame the company that limits what the consumer can do with the
>
> > product and I am talking about Apple here.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > DanP
>
>
>
> Damn! What is wrong with Apple?
>
> I spend all this $$$ on an iPad and I can't run CS6 or Lightroom on it!
>
> These guys couldn't design a successful, functional tablet in a million
>
> years!

I have tried to download photos from someone elses iPad to my Linux laptop, it stopped twice after about five minutes and I gave up. I did get a few pictures though.

So, I did not attempt to do anything too clever. The iPad looks good but if you want to avoid headaches better use it with Apple products.

That ****ed me off, functionality that we take for granted screwed up because it might increase Apple profits in the future.

>
>
> Don't they know what I want to do with my iPad? This thing is a complete fail!
>
>
>
> Just wait until I bitch at Mercedes, because my E350 does a terrible
>
> job of pulling stumps, which is want I wanted it for. How dare they
>
> limit what I want to do with my car?
>

USB file transfer is nothing shocking for an iPad or too hard to do.

>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Savageduck


DanP