Anyone else feel they would benefit from a 'LIKE' button when texting ?

I find when iMessaging a group of people there is some messages i find the want to just LIKE it as in the way you would like a comment it post on Facebook ? I definitely think it should be considered in the next update !

We're all just users here so if you have a suggestion for Apple send them feedback. See http://www.apple.com/feedback/

Similar Messages

RE : Who would benefit from Forte?

RE : Jerry Fatcheric's message about "Who would benefit from Forte?"
With regards the point mentioned in the attached message from Jerry
Fatcheric below, I would like to illustrate my point. I implemented in both
Visual Basic and Delphi, the example that is mentioned in the attached
message, about a browser application, having the capability to browse
thousands of records with the inital screenful needing to come ASAP. It took
me less than 2 minutes to implement this in VB (I timed it). Just threw a
"remote data" control and a "DBGrid" control on a form, set a few properties
and wrote a "select *" sql specifying that only 30 records be returned at a
time. For a table with 4K records, the first 30 came in and got displayed in
less than 2 seconds. In Delphi, the response was even better and whole 4K of
record could be retrieved in less than 4 second. (Yes less than 4 seconds
for retrieving 4000 records from a DB2/NT database running on a remote
machine). Even I could not believe the performance of Delphi which I haven't
used that much. These tools are THE fastest way to get the data from a
database server to a windows client. These will perform any day better than
FORTE. One of the problem that I came across FORTE in one of situations like
this was data movement across nodes is very costly. In one of our
applications, since we stored the data as objects, in a similar situation as
you have mentioned, the performance of moving a lot of data form the server
to the client was not very good and in consulation with FORTE technical
support we had to convert the data in objects to scalar (delimited string),
move across node, and convert the data back to object at a client.
Performance increase - 40 secs. vs 120 secs. earlier.
About my background. I have worked about 8 years in application development
and for the past 4 years have been working in a client server environment.
Being a consultant, I have used many tools, including FORTE for one year, to
provide my clients with the most bang for their buck, which to me is the
topmost priority as a Consultant. I do not decide for my clients what
technology they should use but sure evaluate the various options they have
and recommend more than one solutions, listing the advantages and
disadvantages.
Currently working on coming up with a solution for a client with a customer
service application need with around 50 users now, scaling up to 100 users
in the future. The best solution that I could come up with was a logical
3-tier with the presentation and the business layer running on NT
workstation (client) and the database on NT server (server). With all the
processing on a powerful and healthy (not "fat") client the system, I feel
can scale very well. For a 500 user system, you literally have 500
application server (physically on the client machine) being served by one
data server. To the data server, having a physical middle tier between the
client and the data server, I feel would not help, at least in our
situation. Almost everything that the middle tier could do to reduce the
load on the data server can be handled by the "business layer" running on
the client machine. It does mean that each user connects to the database
directly so in a case of 500 user, there are 500 connections to the database
but lately with the sophisticated DBMS, this is no longer an issue. The DBMS
can manage this many user very economically (read the benchmark about SQL
server with 5000, yes 5k user at "www.microsoft.com/sql") and almost as well
as a middle tier. It is fault tolerant - nothing can bring down the system
except a client failure, the data server failure or a network failure, the
same failure points as a N-Tier solution unless you are replicating or
duplicating the database. In our solution our application is as scaleable as
the database is, and the databases available today are very scaleable if you
look at the current database technology offerings.
As you may have guessed the abovementioned solution is cheaper with a very
fast "time to market" than a forte solution (we started this about 6 months
back and are in production for the past 1 month). This may not have all the
features that FORTE offers, but for our purposes and I feel in similar
applications, what we got was what we needed. By no means, this is going to
meet all information tecnology needs for everyone and in many situations I
believe FORTE would be well suited than any other tool.
I still use FORTE can would continue to do so for some of the solutions that
we develop, but I do not think that one shoud be using FORTE for "any
development that is bigger than a breadbox" as Mr. Fatcheric suggests in the
attached message, simply because if I do that, than I think that in some
cases I would be selling the user a tank when the user just needs a rifle.
I consider giving my clients the most value for their money in getting this
solution developed. I would suggest my clients FORTE when I think they needs
them but would definitely suggest another solution if I think that they can
get their solution developed and get more value for their money using some
other tool. Towards this end I would like to find out what kind of solutions
people are developing and what kind of performance they are getting
specially related to Windows platform.
Any information about the benefits (actual benefits) you are getting from
FORTE would be highly appreciated which would let a lot of us decide when to
use FORTE and when not to use FORTE to meet ours and our clients'
everchanging information technology needs.
- Ari Singh
[email protected]
Ari Singh wrote a provocative piece questioning the benefits of Forte
in "Windows only", non-large scale applications. Rather than get into
a large philosopical discussion, I would like to illustrate my point
with an example taken from a current Forte project.
First, my background: 10+ years in Client server applications. Worked
for several years at Oracle and have experience with Sybase. Worked
extensively with a 2 tiered CS product (Uniface) and write C and C++.
NOT a Windows expert.
In our current application, the requirement is to allow the user to
browse literally thousands of records on the Windows Client. There will
never be lots of users doing this, but the ones that do must have
reasonable performance. Our initial tests indicated that if we simply
had the server pump the data to the client, we would have significant
performance problems and face memory limitations on the PC. SO we
utilized Forte's N-tiered capabilities. When the user starts a query
(using dynamic sql with user controlled WHERE and ORDER BY), we start
an asynchronous retrieval on the server with data is cached in an
anchored object on the server. When the query has found the first
THIRTY (30) records (2 screens worth), it posts an event to the client
and the client request the first thirty. The retrieval process continues
independently while the user can browse data on the client. Not until
the user scrolls down far enough does the client again request more
data. If the user quits from the screen or starts a new query, the
first one is cancelled. Otherwise, the query runs to completion on the
server.
This approach gives us 3-5 second response time regardless of the size
of the query result set. It minimizes the data on the client (moving
us toward a thin client). The kicker is that with the help of Martha
Lyman from Forte, we developed this technique in about 4 hours! Add
to this all the standard inheritance, OO stuff, partitioning,
customized monitoring, etc, etc, and IT IS MY OPINION that Forte
is a GOOD tool for any development that is bigger than a breadbox
and worth the $$$. And that's the way it is.... SO there...
Jerry Fatcheric
Relational Options, Inc.
Florham Park, New Jersey
201-301-0200
201-301-00377 (FAX)
[email protected]

RE : Jerry Fatcheric's message about "Who would benefit from Forte?"
With regards the point mentioned in the attached message from Jerry
Fatcheric below, I would like to illustrate my point. I implemented in both
Visual Basic and Delphi, the example that is mentioned in the attached
message, about a browser application, having the capability to browse
thousands of records with the inital screenful needing to come ASAP. It took
me less than 2 minutes to implement this in VB (I timed it). Just threw a
"remote data" control and a "DBGrid" control on a form, set a few properties
and wrote a "select *" sql specifying that only 30 records be returned at a
time. For a table with 4K records, the first 30 came in and got displayed in
less than 2 seconds. In Delphi, the response was even better and whole 4K of
record could be retrieved in less than 4 second. (Yes less than 4 seconds
for retrieving 4000 records from a DB2/NT database running on a remote
machine). Even I could not believe the performance of Delphi which I haven't
used that much. These tools are THE fastest way to get the data from a
database server to a windows client. These will perform any day better than
FORTE. One of the problem that I came across FORTE in one of situations like
this was data movement across nodes is very costly. In one of our
applications, since we stored the data as objects, in a similar situation as
you have mentioned, the performance of moving a lot of data form the server
to the client was not very good and in consulation with FORTE technical
support we had to convert the data in objects to scalar (delimited string),
move across node, and convert the data back to object at a client.
Performance increase - 40 secs. vs 120 secs. earlier.
About my background. I have worked about 8 years in application development
and for the past 4 years have been working in a client server environment.
Being a consultant, I have used many tools, including FORTE for one year, to
provide my clients with the most bang for their buck, which to me is the
topmost priority as a Consultant. I do not decide for my clients what
technology they should use but sure evaluate the various options they have
and recommend more than one solutions, listing the advantages and
disadvantages.
Currently working on coming up with a solution for a client with a customer
service application need with around 50 users now, scaling up to 100 users
in the future. The best solution that I could come up with was a logical
3-tier with the presentation and the business layer running on NT
workstation (client) and the database on NT server (server). With all the
processing on a powerful and healthy (not "fat") client the system, I feel
can scale very well. For a 500 user system, you literally have 500
application server (physically on the client machine) being served by one
data server. To the data server, having a physical middle tier between the
client and the data server, I feel would not help, at least in our
situation. Almost everything that the middle tier could do to reduce the
load on the data server can be handled by the "business layer" running on
the client machine. It does mean that each user connects to the database
directly so in a case of 500 user, there are 500 connections to the database
but lately with the sophisticated DBMS, this is no longer an issue. The DBMS
can manage this many user very economically (read the benchmark about SQL
server with 5000, yes 5k user at "www.microsoft.com/sql") and almost as well
as a middle tier. It is fault tolerant - nothing can bring down the system
except a client failure, the data server failure or a network failure, the
same failure points as a N-Tier solution unless you are replicating or
duplicating the database. In our solution our application is as scaleable as
the database is, and the databases available today are very scaleable if you
look at the current database technology offerings.
As you may have guessed the abovementioned solution is cheaper with a very
fast "time to market" than a forte solution (we started this about 6 months
back and are in production for the past 1 month). This may not have all the
features that FORTE offers, but for our purposes and I feel in similar
applications, what we got was what we needed. By no means, this is going to
meet all information tecnology needs for everyone and in many situations I
believe FORTE would be well suited than any other tool.
I still use FORTE can would continue to do so for some of the solutions that
we develop, but I do not think that one shoud be using FORTE for "any
development that is bigger than a breadbox" as Mr. Fatcheric suggests in the
attached message, simply because if I do that, than I think that in some
cases I would be selling the user a tank when the user just needs a rifle.
I consider giving my clients the most value for their money in getting this
solution developed. I would suggest my clients FORTE when I think they needs
them but would definitely suggest another solution if I think that they can
get their solution developed and get more value for their money using some
other tool. Towards this end I would like to find out what kind of solutions
people are developing and what kind of performance they are getting
specially related to Windows platform.
Any information about the benefits (actual benefits) you are getting from
FORTE would be highly appreciated which would let a lot of us decide when to
use FORTE and when not to use FORTE to meet ours and our clients'
everchanging information technology needs.
- Ari Singh
[email protected]
Ari Singh wrote a provocative piece questioning the benefits of Forte
in "Windows only", non-large scale applications. Rather than get into
a large philosopical discussion, I would like to illustrate my point
with an example taken from a current Forte project.
First, my background: 10+ years in Client server applications. Worked
for several years at Oracle and have experience with Sybase. Worked
extensively with a 2 tiered CS product (Uniface) and write C and C++.
NOT a Windows expert.
In our current application, the requirement is to allow the user to
browse literally thousands of records on the Windows Client. There will
never be lots of users doing this, but the ones that do must have
reasonable performance. Our initial tests indicated that if we simply
had the server pump the data to the client, we would have significant
performance problems and face memory limitations on the PC. SO we
utilized Forte's N-tiered capabilities. When the user starts a query
(using dynamic sql with user controlled WHERE and ORDER BY), we start
an asynchronous retrieval on the server with data is cached in an
anchored object on the server. When the query has found the first
THIRTY (30) records (2 screens worth), it posts an event to the client
and the client request the first thirty. The retrieval process continues
independently while the user can browse data on the client. Not until
the user scrolls down far enough does the client again request more
data. If the user quits from the screen or starts a new query, the
first one is cancelled. Otherwise, the query runs to completion on the
server.
This approach gives us 3-5 second response time regardless of the size
of the query result set. It minimizes the data on the client (moving
us toward a thin client). The kicker is that with the help of Martha
Lyman from Forte, we developed this technique in about 4 hours! Add
to this all the standard inheritance, OO stuff, partitioning,
customized monitoring, etc, etc, and IT IS MY OPINION that Forte
is a GOOD tool for any development that is bigger than a breadbox
and worth the $$$. And that's the way it is.... SO there...
Jerry Fatcheric
Relational Options, Inc.
Florham Park, New Jersey
201-301-0200
201-301-00377 (FAX)
[email protected]

My sister had a problem with call volume being too low on the iPhone 5S. Is the iPhone 6 louder? Is anyone else feeling that call volume on iPhone 5S isn't loud enough?

My sister had a problem with call volume being too low on the iPhone 5S. Is the iPhone 6 louder? Is anyone else feeling that call volume on iPhone 5S isn't loud enough?

I personally haven't experienced much of the "reverberation/feedback" when using a headset on the i4S...
Yes, I have near-perfect hearing too (for scope, squeaky brakes hurt my ears) I come from many conversations on many phones and types and first off, CDMA technology is great for coverage, terrible for voice quality. HD Voice in Europe made for some of the best phone conversations I've ever had.
Back on track, feedback is most noticable (similar to the landline phone) when using the iPhone without a headset, but for me it's not an absolute criticality mainly because I use VoIP apps alot, so maybe it has desensitized me some over the past year.
But whenever I'm on a call, and the other person has me on speakerphone, I have alot of trouble talking because of the feedback loop caused. So the less of my voice I hear the better I can talk.
Have you tried a bluetooth headset yet?

HT1222 I just wish we had a "backwards" half circle to hit when we need to go back one page. Does anyone else feel the same way? How did I find this page anyway?

I just wish we had a "backwards" half circle to hit when we need to go back one page. Does anyone else feel the same way? How did I find this page anyway?

how about you just swipe from left to right. works for me.

FW: Who is FORTE for ? Who would benefit from FORTE?

Hi-
You made some good points in your recent posting. I like Forte' but also
see
advantages to using other tools based on specific requirements. See my
responses
below.
From: [email protected][SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, August 12, 1996 10:03 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Who is FORTE for ? Who would benefit from FORTE ?
Who is forte really for ? Who would benefit from FORTE ?
The main benefit of Forte' is the abilitity to develop on a particular
platform and deploy to a multi-tier environment with platforms of any
type.
Specifically I am wondering if it makes a lot of sense for
shops having all Microsoft Windows platform - both for client and
server to gain from FORTE.
IMHO, Forte' may not be the ideal solution in that kind of
environment. Although, it would work fine, there are plenty
of windows based tools and apps that would work fine and
probably faster and cleaner.
I think that there are so many easy-to-use and economical tool
which can do RAD and give decent client-server performance on
Microsoft Windows platform costing much less than a FORTE solution.
I agree. Forte' is expensive and would be overkill if you just needed
a C++ app using ODBC going against a small local database.
And with these solutions you can easily put your data server on a
Unix box and access it seamlessly on Windows platform without
any extra tools (almost all popular databases come with
this database connectivity built-in).
Correct, as long as you don't need to put business logic
on the same server as well. You add a lot of complexity
going to multi-tier but add the advantage of load balancing
and failover.
What I think is unless you have run your application (or at least
a piece of your application) on operating systems like Unix or DEC
or unless if you have different platforms in your organization to
deploy your application on, there is not much you'll gain from FORTE.
I like Forte', but I have to agree with you. In a straight Windows 95/NT
environment with a Unix database server, I'd go with something like
MS Viz C++ and MS Access or Oracle. Forte' offers a lot for the multi-
platform environment but does have a fairly steep learning curve,
especially
when it comes to the system admin piece. And initially, your system will
need a lot of hand holding till all the pieces fit. The lack of CM,object persistence,
use of their proprietary object broker etc are things that they'llneed to address
in upcoming releases to remain competitive.
Also if your application is not for a large number of users (large,
I think is 200+ user), you gain little from your investment in FORTE.
I believe that in this case you do not need a middleware, you can
have logical 3-tier (or n-tier) and deploy your application on
physical 2-tier (client and server) with more than one logical tier
running on one of the physical tier (client or server). Middleware,
I believe, is not worth the cost, effort and time unless you
absolutely need it.
Agreed, but it depends on your needs and requirements. We
at Corning, are developing some apps in Forte' and some in
C++ and are looking at object broker middleware to allow all
apps to share common objects. Our determination as to which
language/environment to use is based on many factors, some of
which you've already mentioned. Our servers are Vax OVMS, Alpha VMS,
and Alpha NT. Our clients are PCs (NT 3.51, NT4.0, W95, W3.1) and Alpha NT.
We had a couple of Macs but development and end user response was so
painfully
slow that they were replaced with far superior NT PCs (again, IMHO).
PS- You may want to check out Forte' Express before you make adecision, especially
if you are building DB apps with table editors/browsers. It is anexcellent rapid development
tool, and teamed with Select Enterprise (for round trip Development<--> Documentation)
it makes a great package._______________________________
Jeff Austin
Corning / CTE
[email protected]
http://fortefy.wilmington.net

>
Hi-
You made some good points in your recent posting. I like Forte' but
also see
advantages to using other tools based on specific requirements. See my
responses
below.
From: [email protected][SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, August 12, 1996 10:03 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Who is FORTE for ? Who would benefit from FORTE ?
Who is forte really for ? Who would benefit from FORTE ?
The main benefit of Forte' is the abilitity to develop on a particular
platform and deploy to a multi-tier environment with platforms of any
type.Specifically I am wondering if it makes a lot of sense for
shops having all Microsoft Windows platform - both for client and
server to gain from FORTE.
IMHO, Forte' may not be the ideal solution in that kind of
environment. Although, it would work fine, there are plenty
of windows based tools and apps that would work fine and
probably faster and cleaner.I think that there are so many easy-to-use and economical tool
which can do RAD and give decent client-server performance on
Microsoft Windows platform costing much less than a FORTE solution.
I agree. Forte' is expensive and would be overkill if you just needed
a C++ app using ODBC going against a small local database.And with these solutions you can easily put your data server on a
Unix box and access it seamlessly on Windows platform without
any extra tools (almost all popular databases come with
this database connectivity built-in).
Correct, as long as you don't need to put business logic
on the same server as well. You add a lot of complexity
going to multi-tier but add the advantage of load balancing
and failover.What I think is unless you have run your application (or at least
a piece of your application) on operating systems like Unix or DEC
or unless if you have different platforms in your organization to
deploy your application on, there is not much you'll gain from FORTE.
I like Forte', but I have to agree with you. In a straight Windows 95/NT
environment with a Unix database server, I'd go with something like
MS Viz C++ and MS Access or Oracle. Forte' offers a lot for the multi-
platform environment but does have a fairly steep learning curve,
especially
when it comes to the system admin piece. And initially, your system will
need a lot of hand holding till all the pieces fit. The lack of CM,
object persistence,
use of their proprietary object broker etc are things that they'll
need to address
in upcoming releases to remain competitive.Also if your application is not for a large number of users (large,
I think is 200+ user), you gain little from your investment in FORTE.
I believe that in this case you do not need a middleware, you can
have logical 3-tier (or n-tier) and deploy your application on
physical 2-tier (client and server) with more than one logical tier
running on one of the physical tier (client or server). Middleware,
I believe, is not worth the cost, effort and time unless you
absolutely need it.
Agreed, but it depends on your needs and requirements. We
at Corning, are developing some apps in Forte' and some in
C++ and are looking at object broker middleware to allow all
apps to share common objects. Our determination as to which
language/environment to use is based on many factors, some of
which you've already mentioned. Our servers are Vax OVMS, Alpha VMS,
and Alpha NT. Our clients are PCs (NT 3.51, NT4.0, W95, W3.1) and
Alpha NT.
We had a couple of Macs but development and end user response was so
painfully
slow that they were replaced with far superior NT PCs (again, IMHO).
PS- You may want to check out Forte' Express before you make a
decision, especially
if you are building DB apps with table editors/browsers. It is an
excellent rapid development
tool, and teamed with Select Enterprise (for round trip Development
<--> Documentation)
it makes a great package._______________________________
Jeff Austin
Corning / CTE
[email protected]
http://fortefy.wilmington.net

Who thinks AppleTV would benefit from having Safari on it? ... I do!!!

Who thinks AppleTV would benefit from having Safari on it? I do!!! It wouldn't have to be a full "computer style"/MacOS implementation; I think it could be done in a method similar to the Safari on the iPhone. I was thinking how nice it would be to add the capabilities of web browsing to AppleTV very similar to and right next to YouTube in the menu. Then I could do things like listen and watch my xmradio.com website on my AppleTV. I think the possibilities are endless! How would we suggest such a thing to Apple? do you feel there is an interest in such a feature? Do you feel Safari would benefit AppleTV?

Chenks... buying a mac mini to me is the "just throw another computer at it mindset"... to me that goes against the direction I'm going... simplification, of having one computer be a repository of all my media (FYI a mini would be a tad light for that task) , I feel the whole future of computing going in a "thinner" direction. What I like about AppleTV is the ability to have AV content stream and/or store at point where I can watch it on my HDTV and 5.1 Sound System. So to me it solves the problem of connection of my (current & already owned) MAC's "output" to another device (the value to me in it leverages an expensive TV set as a device to my MAC). So adding another computer only muddies those waters and was not my goal there. As such, I feel the AppleTV could be even better with a 'lite' implementation of Safari. What say you?

Does anyone else feel that the iPhone is sluggish after update 1.1.1?

Is it just me or does anyone else feel that the iPhone feels more sluggish after update 1.1.1? I haven't unlocked or hacked the phone in any way and so it must be due to the update. I thought that the sluggish behavior could be due to a recent update and so I reset the phone. But I still feel that the iPhone has lost that responsiveness that it used to have before. Any one else experiencing this?

Yes, without question I thought typing, especially, was sluggish at first. However, after a day it has seemed to speed up and now, I'd say, is back to original performance, or close to it.
Also, I have lots of contacts (2500), and the phone has been very slow to make the first identification of email addresses when I start typing. Specifically, it freezes for several seconds after the first letter is typed. However, I believe that process is a bit faster after this update.
Derek

IMac, just had repaired new Harddrive erase deverything,wheres my iPhoto n all those apps, i know the gone from hard drive but i thought they would transfer from my phone

iMac, just had repaired new Harddrive erase deverything,wheres my iPhoto n all those apps, i know the gone from hard drive but i thought they would transfer from my phone? HELP ?

Those Apps would not transfer from your iPhone because the iPhone apps are iOS 5 based and the iMac apps are OSX based. They are not the same Apps. You will need to transfer the OSX based apps over from your external hardware backup you have kept up, Or you can reinstall the OSX based apps from their original DVD's.
Hope this helps

Anyone else have a problem printing from an iMac OS-X 10.9.3 to a wireless Epson Artisan printer? Sometimes it prints but must often I get "The printer is not connected" and I have to retry printing 8, 10 or 12 times before it will print?

Anyone else have a problem printing from an iMac OS-X 10.9.3 to a wireless Epson 835 Artisan printer? Sometimes it prints but must often I get "The printer is not connected" and I have to retry printing 8, 10 or 12 times before it will print? I have followed all the instructions from Epson about upgrading, etc. but it is very frustrating when I have to repeatedly try to print. Epson says talk to Apple???

Try checking thru these, maybe some help.
Mac OS X: How to reset the printing system
http://www.macworld.com/article/2029528/mac-troubleshooting-what-to-do-when-you- cant-print.html
Also try deleting the printer from your printer Q system preferences, then reinstalling it (highlight the printer click the minus symbol, then click the plus symbol and add it again. Reboot, and try.

An iphone update has wiped all my puchased songs, i can see them in my purchased history but they are missing from my iphone and when i log into itunes on my pc, how do i retrieve them?

an iphone update has wiped all my puchased songs, i can see them in my purchased history but they are missing from my iphone and when i log into itunes on my pc, how do i retrieve them?

Restore from previous backup, be sure use the same iTunes and account you used to store your stuff into your device.

Anyone else feel like an idiot?

Hi Guys,
Just wondering if anyone shares how I feel. I bought a G5 Imac 2.1 Ghz a little over a month ago, I am doing some video editing etc.....
Now with this new one out so soon, I feel like an idiot buying the other one (20' inch at $1700).... I could really use the extra speed (if it's true that it's twice as fast.)
I wish they would have offered some type of an upgrade offer for people who bought their Imacs just recently..
Anyone understand me?!!

YES!!! add me to the list!!! i'm ******, and feel like an idiot!!!
aargh!!
I was planing to wait until the intel macs came out to buy a new computer (My first Mac btw).... but when the G5 iMacs with iSight came out, i couldn't resist... and convinced myself that i would be waiting a long while till the intel macs were released... so i got one...
now i'm ******...
sure, the new ones might have a few problems, but i can handle that, i would rather that, than this G5 that is going to age FAR quicker than the new Intel ones... and my iMac is only ONE MONTH old... and it is out of date already!!
y did they release the iMac G5s with iSight at all???.. they shouldn't have.. just released the iMac Intel with iSight... GRR!!
OR they should have told us this.. frankly it is RUDE!!.. and i feel ripped off!
I even bought the 3-year extended warranty... is there anyway i can trade, or pay a little bit more and get an intel one??
is it possible to return this one?? (considering it is only 1 month old??).. then i will buy an intel one .. so apple won't really loose their money...
I am a student.. just finishing off my university studies in graphic design (college i think you call it in the states).. so i wanted a computer that would last a good while, and handle the applications etc that i need... this was a big purchase for me too, considering im a student.. infact the MOST expensive thing i own... so u can understand my frustration..
grr!!.. i feel so stupid!...
Next time, i am going to be EXTREMELY cautious buying anything from Apple... if they are lucky enough that i would consider EVER buying anything from them again!! grr!
Apple, I never expected you would be this rude, especially to a new customer... who you could have earned for life.. (i did love apple, and my ipod.. but this rudeness and inconsiderate behaviour has just changed my mind).. you are the same as all the other companies... forget my loyalty, BYE!
(PS. I am aware apple probably won't read this.. but i just had to vent my frustration..)

Anyone else having trouble deleting artists from Music in iOS6?

The 'slide to delete' function is seemingly buggy in the updated Music app from iOS6, some artists with longer names are harder to delete, others randomly don't respond. Anyone else?

Same here in SC. Also a Road Runner customer. Been working fine until Friday, the 20th. I was getting the broken links and really slow, but today (22nd) I can't even access it. I'm getting the network connection errors also. If I manually check for updates it comes back immediately that I'm running the current version, so I know the application can access the net. Then tried the store again and got the slow broken links home page again.

Anyone else sorry they bought the iPod Touch 5g?

Did anyone else purchase the iPod Touch 5G about 2 weeks ago before you know about the iPad Mini? I did...and now I am being told I can't exchange my 2 week old iPod Touch 5g toward and PAY THE DIFFERENCE for the new iPad Mini. This is garbage....Apple dropped the ball on this product release. I will not eat the $300 I just paid for my ipod to then go pay another $430 for the iPad mini...sorry, won't happen. And if this is how you continue on I will not be buying future Apple Products.

unless your head was stuck in the sand for the last month, the iPad mini has been on the cards for a long time, if that was something you wanted then you would should have just waited.
The iPod and iPad are for different uses.
But as other have said the forum is not the place for your isses, your iPod touch works you just dont like it.

Is anyone else having problems with books from Lulu?

I am working on a Mac and recently downloaded Adobe Digital Editions. I have a book from Google and a free book from Adobe, both are fine. But I recently purchased two books from Lulu, an ePub for Digital Editions and a PDF for Digital Editions. When I try to download them I receive the .acsm file, but when I click on it, I get an error message in ADE of:
Error getting license
Server communication problem: E_ADEPT_IO
I tried uninstalling and reinstalling the software. I tried the chat support but was not able to fix my problem. The attempted solutions were to check my clock settings (automatic and correct), download Google Chrome (ugh, my third browser, really?) and then turn off the firewall and ensure the proxy settings are set to bypass for http://adeactivate.adobe.com/. Still not successful. I keep getting the same error message. Has anyone else successfully fixed this error? Haha, old school books are looking better and better right now.

Stuck in the software time warp, eh?
First, the error message isn't described very well - and shame on Adobe for
that. If I understand it correctly, it's telling you that you can't
establish a connection with your ebook source because of security issues.
Monkeying around with ADE software isn't going to help at all, as you've
found out. Cross your fingers that something inside ADE hasn't gone awry
with all of the installs you've done.
You're in a MAC world, and I'm still a Windows guy, so I can speak only
generically about what's going on. No - you don't need a new browser.
It's probably not a clock issue either, because that's a different cryptic
error message. So, we're back to the security settings. Something isn't
right - but not being a MAC guy, I don't know what knobs to tweak.
===============

Is anyone else experiencing difficulty downloading photos from an iPhone 5 to Elements 10?

I just got an iPhone 5 and tried to download photos from it in the same way I did my iPhone 4 to Elements 10. While I can still download photos from my iPad, Elements 10 will not accept them. Is anyone else having this problem and if so, have you figured out a solution to the problem? Thank you.

Hi
I keep getting battery low error if I request to delete originals. Resolves when this option to delete is not chosen.
Chris

Anyone else feel they would benefit from a 'LIKE' button when texting ?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for