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
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] -
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]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] -
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?
-
How do I know if I would benefit from an SSD?
I use my MacBook Pro (Mid 2010) for development. It hits the CPU hard, but there are also a lot of reads and writes of small files, and sometimes the computer is very sluggish even when Activity Monitor shows the CPU is not maxed out.
What's the maximum data throughput, in MB/sec, I should see in the Disk Activity section of Activity Monitor? It's peaking at a little above 3MB/sec, which seems very low. Would an SSD give me a noticeable speed boost?Have you installed 8GB of RAM? If not, you might do that first.
Regarding the benefits of SSDs, go to the OWC website and look at the bench tests that they have performed with SSDs vs conventional HHDs. They have quantified their results and that should give you a better indication of what to expect than some one saying that 'its way faster'.
Ciao. -
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/
-
Would my 400 AP`s benefit from a static address ?
hi all
just wondering if ap`s would benefit from a static address range
presumably they collect the same address after lease expiry
now i need to find 10 new addresses for new non wireless equipment n order for the server team to have a nice continous address range , if i reboot the ap`s and their existing 10 addresses are taken will they pick up new addresses in that range (given that there is still 10 spare)
many thanks
Megzthanks sabhasin,
i kinda guessed this was the case. if i static the ap`s then at least there fixed with permanent addresses.
is there any kind of risks accociated with ap`s on non statics i.e will a renewal create a blip or is it quicker than that.
how is the layer 3 lwapp working in this way.
great help so far btw ;)
Megz -
How can I get the ai. file? I've made a drawing for a company who would like to use it on a shirt. But they need the ai file. I made it with adobe illustrator for ipad.
Unfortunately logging into your account won't help, because then I don't have access to Illustrator.
I was just trying around a little if you could share it with me, but unfortunately sharing doesn't seem to work with Draw files. You could try and find someone near you who also has an iPad and Illustrator and then try to send it to them via AirDrop. But I don't know if that actually shares the file or just a PNG.
Maybe someone on the Draw forum has an idea how you could send the file to someone else.
Adobe Illustrator Draw -
I'm currently in Auckland NZ for a year. I'm originally from Winnipeg, MB Canada. I spilt liquid on my iphone and need to purchase a new one. I'm still under warranty and would like to know who to contact from Auckland NZ to buy another iphone from Canada and have it shipped to me. So far the numbers that I've called haven't worked. Help!
Apple will not ship out of the country at all.
The warranty is irrelevant. As with any warranty on any product, damage is not covered. -
Okay, so i was on craigslist and found a guy who would trade me his fairly new Macbook 2008 model for my brand new iPad 2. Is this a good deal and should i go throuh with it?
A deal is only a good deal if you get the best value out of the deal.
If you need a MacBook more than an iPad or an iPad more than a MacBook, then it's a good deal.
Comes down to what value the use of the product is to you. -
Can it be possible to disable outlook anywhere for some few users who are working from home ?
One of my customer wants to disable outlook anywhere for some of the users who are working from home.They have exchange server 2013 in their premises and also have outlook 2010/2013 on their clients machine.Please advice?
Hi,
In Exchange 2013, all Outlook connectivity (Internal and External) are using Outlook Anywhere anyways. It is not recommended to use the following command to disable Outlook Anywhere for a specific user:
Set-CASMailbox UserA -MAPIBlockOutlookRpcHttp $True
If you disable it, the UserA would not be able to access the mailbox from both Internal Outlook client (Office) and external Outlook client (Home).
For your requirement about disable Outlook anywhere for some few users instead of all external users, there seems to be no method to achieve it directly in Exchange server. Sorry for any inconvenience.
Regards,
Winnie Liang
TechNet Community Support -
I am a teacher who would like to use my Ipad2 in the classroom -but out school only has projector that has VGA inputs. And just to complicate thing I was to use it wirelessly (I have an Itv also). Can I get true mirrioring?
The one you are looking at I believe is an older model and does not have very good reviews for working with an AppleTV2 / iPad 2 setup.
Here is the one that has worked for our district:
http://www.amazon.com/ViewHD-Component-Converter-Support-Surround/dp/B004F9XVBC/ ref=pd_cp_e_2
I can't say if the one you are referring two works or not, however I can say that based on the reviews, it looks like you may run into problems with the $45 version. -
I downloaded latest update of iTunes (windows 7, 64bit) and have now the problem runtime error R6025 pure virtual function call (Microsoft Visual C runtime library) - Who would have a solution to that problem?
Thanks from Switzerland
<Edited by Host>For general advice see Troubleshooting issues with iTunes for Windows updates.
The steps in the second box are a guide to removing everything related to iTunes and then rebuilding it, which is often a good starting point unless the symptoms indicate a more specific approach. Review the other boxes and the list of support documents further down page in case one of them applies.
Your library should be unaffected by these steps but there is backup and recovery advice elsewhere in the user tip.
(I've asked the hosts to remove your email address)
tt2 -
Why not invent a tablet with a i5 or i7 reader, DVI, USB ... who would wear the name of ipac or imad
why not invent a tablet with a i5 or i7 reader, DVI, USB ... who would wear the name of ipac or imad
Not sure why a tablet would need a Core i5 or a Core i7, particularly given that it would shorten battery life dramatically, but you can submit your suggestion to Apple here:
http://www.apple.com/feedback
The current iPad can output via DVI (using an HDMI to DVI adapter), by the way.
Regards. -
Idea for channel subscription program that would benefit MILLIONS of Verizon subscribers
Hello, Since Verizon is moving towards allowing customers to create their own TV packages to compete with streaming services, I have an idea that would certainly please millions of users. If I want to subscribe to HBO or the French channel, for example, all I have to do is press a button on my remote. However, if I want to cancel these channels, this necessitates a phone call to customer service. The benefit of streaming services is that we can't watch everything at once, so why pay to subscribe to 10 channels, when you can't possibly watch them all within the same month. I think that each time you subscribe to a channel (be it Showtime or the Russian language package), you should be charged a one-month minimum fee. You can cancel the subscription (online or using your remote) at any time, but you still pay for at least one full month. That way, I, for example, can subscribe to the French channel, watch it for a month, then cancel, then subscribe to the Portuguese and German channels, watch them for a month, then cancel, then sign up for Cinemax, watch it for three months... Each network is still getting the benefit of a full month's subscription, plus people would be more willing to sign up (and try out) more channel options if they know that their minimum commitment is only one month. If you haven't guessed by now, I like to watch TV in multiple languages, but I can't sign up for all the channels at once because 1) it's too expensive and 2) I can't watch all these channels in a month. I'm sure other people would sign up for a movie channel package to catch up on their favorite shows (I think people do this anyway with Game of Thrones, etc.) or a sports package until the season is over, etc. In other words, by making it easier for people to cancel channel/specialty package subscriptions online or using the remote (with the understanding that there is a minimum of one month), more people would subscribe to these channels - and some would keep them for several months. With the addition of streaming TV, DVR programming, etc. there is just too much TV available and we can't watch everything, so fewer people sign up for pay-for-view packages. This model would give people more control over how they watch TV. True there would be a lot of turning channels on and off (I, for example, would probably do this frequently). However, there would also be a huge increase in revenue from these channels, even if people cancel after one-month (then the onus is on the network to provide quality programming to retain the customer). Thank you for your time.
This is the message I get:
Please contact the Verizon Local Business Office Your address appears to be part of a home owner's association that has a special agreement with Verizon. We are unable to place your order online, but our National Customer Service Center can help you with your order.
Please contact the National Customer Service Center at {edited}. Representatives are available Monday through Friday (9am - 9pm EST / 8am- 8pm CST).
Maybe you are looking for
-
How to Change the Default Font in Firefox 4 ?
How to Change the Default Font in Firefox 4 , for this >> http://store2.up-00.com/Mar11/AJG18655.png << ?
-
How can I view a website that requires adobe flash player on my ipad
I wish to view a website but a message is displayed the adobe flash player is required but is not supported by my iPad. Any suggestions, I am new to iPad.
-
I need help with Boot Camp 2.1! Win XP
I have downloaded the update on Windows XP SP2, but it will not install. "The installation encountered errors.... Try again at a different time." That's what comes up. I have tried everything! The command shell thing where you have to type the path o
-
Finally.... Video captured from applet in Vista!!
Hello! Hurray!! finally I can see myself smiling and waving back in browser in Vista. I mentioned in another thread just a day earlier that I will post a new topic if I succeed in capturing from applets in Vista, so thats what I am doing.... This thr
-
Diferences between Oracle Standart and Enterprise
What's the differences between Oracle Standard and Enterprise Edition