Much better 3G reception since 2.2

I have had an awful time with 3G reception. I am happy to report that since the 2.2 upgrade the reception issues with the phone generally and the 3G reception issues, specifically, have been for the most part addressed.
I live in a fringe ATT area for 3G reception (not that it should be and ATT's 3G map shows my coverage should be great), but my other ATT 3G phones (like the Nokia N95) have done terrifically well. Before this latest iPhone update, I got no 3G reception in my house and after the upgrade, the reception has been good.
There is still an AT&T capacity problem. At 6am today, I did a speed test and got 900 kbps; by 10 am I was down to 200. That said, at least now I am getting 3G!

Yes.
Here is another thread:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=8503779

Similar Messages

My palm calendar wont open after Lion download. Palm is so much better than ical, is it not going to work w/ Lion?

Palm calendar won't open now that I've downloaded Lion. Palm is so much better than ical. Is there a fix?

I miss Palm Desktop for Mac. The integration of contacts, to-dos, notes, appointments, etc. was great. I stopped using it about a year ago when I finally sold my Palm Tungsten T and purchased and iPhone 4. iCal etc. work fine for me, but they're not as good as Palm Desktop was.
I also miss Graffiti 1 handwriting recognition. I could write with it as fast and flawlessly as I can write longhand on paper, and nearly as fast as I can type. It was the best for meetings and interviews, since I could write without having to look at the screen. iOS has nothing that comes close; I've gotten used to the onscreen keyboard but it's slower, I make far more mistakes, and I have to keep my eye on the screen while typing.
As others have pointed out, Palm Desktop was written for PPC processors. Lion does not include and cannot run Rosetta, which is the emulation environment which allowed Intel processors to run PPC code. So Palm Desktop will not run on a Mac running Lion.
I was syncing to my Palm Tungsten T under Snow Leopard (and using Palm Desktop) with no troubles at all. There are third-party sync options available, but they're all kludgy and unreliable compared to Palm's own syncing. Again, though, the Palm software for syncing was written for PPC processors and so won't run on any Mac booting into Lion.

How much better is Logic Pro?

Would it be a real disadvantage to get logic express over Logic, i mean has it still got all the loops, synths, drum machines and actual audio recording capabilities?
Thanks

Pro is much better imo, but depending on your budget and needs you might not need it. What I did was to purchase Logic Express first, learned it, liked it and then upgraded from Logic Express to Logic Pro once I found that I wanted the plugins and some options found in pro, this winter. That's a good route since it doesn't cost much more (Express$ + Upgrade$ ~= Pro$) and allowed me to have a much better idea for why I wanted Pro. I might have chosen not to buy it if I found so, but I did (and a the extra time accumulating money helped :-))

Version 2.0 better mobile reception?

Don't know if it's a coincidence, but my iPhone running version 2.0 is getting much better reception on O2 here. There used to be several places at home where I got nothing, now it gets a signal everywhere. Is this an expected feature?

Dont know about better, but I haven't had any of the problems with wifi or edge that others are talking about. I also had no problems with the install.

How much better is Garageband over free Windows Software?.

I'm running Garageband 2.0.2 because I have an old mac powerbook 800Mhz that apparently won't run the 2 newer versions very well. Honestly, I task this poor old girl pretty hard when using Garageband, but I definitely make it work, since I can't afford to buy a newer mac.
So I posted a video on youtube of the video I did using my 6 year old powerbook with Garageband 2.0, plus a copy of Final Cut Express 3.0... Everything was done on the powerbook. Plus I got a hold of a guy I met over Youtube from the Netherlands (I'm from Denver) to play the guitar parts, I did everything else... He just emailed me mp3 files of his recordings, which I overlaid in Garageband, which worked flawlessly...
So during the video, I made many mentions of using an old mac laptop and the free Garageband software to do the entire recording.... We're getting like 2000 hits a day right now, but no one is mentioned anything about the powerbook or the free software. We're getting a lot of hits because the video/audio that I put up is actually top notch quality (of course, it was done in GB on the mac!!!) and people are blown away by it...
My question is why do people not appreciate what the macs can do out of the box, compared to Windows boxes??? I have a hard time with this topic. I work on PC's for a living, but have used macs for 7 years personally because they are so much better...
Any thoughts?
Also, I"m sorry if this post doesn't belong here, but I wanted to get some feedback (from people that appreciate GB) on how great not only the mac is, but GB, too... Especially for being free software that comes with the computer. Plus, this project opened up, for me, anyway, the real power behind Garageband. I've used it for years, but with this project, I had to learn so much about it... I don't have any books or anything, I just figured it out and it's so easy and intuitive...
Thanks in advance for your feedback.
Jimmy
oh, if you're curious about the project, it's a cover of Hotel California with over 30 tracks of vocals, percussion, piano, guitars, etc., and it's here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAM1g0oX4OE

Actually it's more of the opposite. Unless you are
playing a game like Oblivion, the extra Vram will not
make any noticeable difference in games. The pipes
and frequency are the same on both models. The extra
Vram helps in editting situations as there is more to
draw from.
Never did I say it will make a noticable difference in games, I said 5-10%. I don't know what "editting situations" is but in most programs it does not help at all unless the program uses GPU to render rich 3d graphics such as animation programs.
I just have a MBP so can't offer a firsthand account
but I did read an online magazine I think in the UK
where they compared gaming performance between the
two and it was huge. One some popular games the
performance was like
60 FPS MBP
10 FPS MB
I don't recall the exact games they tested but there
WAS a big gaming difference. So check it out and
google for some test results.
Thats Macbook vs. Macbook Pro i.e. Intel Integraed video card vs. X1600, he wants to know how x1600 256mb compares to the 128mb version.

Videos look awful in iTunes, much better in Quicktime Player

I was, just as many others, deceived by the quality of video clips bought on iTMS (I started with the beautiful Love Profusion, by Madonna, and M.Jackson's Thriller).
The picture appeared in particular pixellated in sull screen, this for many videos.
(and the interface is so stupid : why do you have to play a clip in order to be able to switch to full screen, except maybe to keep Quicktime Pro's full screen in QT Player option alive ?)
Then I just remembered how my videos played beautifully in Quicktime Player, and often awfully in iTunes, since iTunes 4.9.
So I tried them in Quicktime Player (I have a 7.0 Pro license). (select in iTunes, command-R, command-O, command-F, you're done)
They look much much better.
And same goes for my non-iTMS videos, even after being converted to the iPod-friendly format with Quicktime Player.
I just remember reading from a member of the iTunes team how quick it had been to add video capabilities to iTunes (since 4.9 I think).
Maybe it was dine a bit too quickly.
I just thought it would have been fixed BEFORE the release of a video-capable iPod and the sale of video clips on the iTMS.
I now hope that on the video capable iPod (waiting for mine), these videos look more like in QT Player than like in iTunes Mac.
It looks like iTunes 6 forgets to or cannot do H.264 post-processing correctly. By the way, this post-processsing is part of the standard specification, according to Apple's technology brief
(http://images.apple.com/quicktime/pdf/H264TechnologyBrief.pdf), which means that the encoding process takes into account the de-pixellization done in post-processing (unlike divx for example, if I understand correctly), and that iTunes decoding is not even compliant to the H.264 standard.
Having such a bad, broken video player as iTunes 6 for both quality and ergonomy (at least on Mac) is SO STUPID.
I hope someone fixes the quality issue very quickly (Itunes 6.01?). If this person had time to make a "not as stupid as it is right now" interface for playing videos, that would make me happy again.
If anyone can confirm if this is a Mac only, or Mac WIndows issue, I'd be glad to know.

I do see a slight difference in quality between an .m4v file (purchased from the iTunes Music Store) when played in iTunes and QT player. If freezing at a specific frame, you can definitely notice the iTunes software seems to blur things and is less sharp (colors more dull, less pronounced).
As far as the interface is concerned for viewing videos inside of iTunes, the only real concern I have is the performance. QT player resize/scrubbing is much more effective.

Why is MME playing much better than ASIO4ALL

I have a 64 bit acer Aspire R7 with 8GB RAM and runing windows 8.1. i have bin using adobe audition(now using CS6) for about 10 years now and i have never found myself havin this problem:
1)It so happens that my MME drivers are giving less glitches than the ASIO4ALL.(no matter how much i play around with the buffer size)
2)when using the asio4all during play back,the volume is lower compared to that of the MME drivers.
3)the asio4all icon on the system tray keeps flickering from play(green) to an exclamation mark(red) constantly
i cant use my MME for my projects coz i gat quite a bunch of plugins waiting to join the party...hence it will start glitching too sooner than later(((pliz help!!!help help help!!!!

I'm usin the onboard soundcard.i know have to get an external USB soundcard(guilty)...money issues.((but the thing is i used to run the same version of audition on a much smaller laptop(hp,32 bit,3GB RAM) and it worked far much better than the acer.when i play audio in audition with plugin effects:MME used to lag while ASIO4ALL would play it smoothly.n now i have rather the opposite situation.
ryclark wrote:
What audio interface are you using with Audition? If you are using the onboard soundcard you would be much better off using an external USB connected one with proper ASIO drivers which bypass the operating system completely.
There should be no difference between using ASIO4All and MME drivers since ASIO4All uses the windows drivers anyway. It converts them to ASIO for audio interfaces that don't have ASIO drivers. However from what I hear Win 8.1 may be causing the problem with your glitchy audio especially if you are using the built in audio
What do you mean there is no difference between ASIO4ALL and MME drivers?then why does audition prompt to use ASIO4ALL if available??

Does any body have any opinions on how much better CS6 is than Cs4?

Does any body have any opinions on how much better CS6 is than Cs4? The reason I ask is I am trying to convince my business partner that CS6 is worth buying

My pattern has been that every other new version made it worth my while. I spent very little time working in CS4, since I went from CS3, to CS4 with an immediate upgrade to CS5. Then from CS5 to CS5.5 with an immediate upgrade to CS6. I have not gone to the cloud, so cannot comment on the features there. I would still evaluate your price for CS6 against the rental expense.
I like Todd Kopriva's page laying out the CS6 new/changes features:
Premiere Pro CS6: what’s new and changed
That page contains other links (e.g. CS5 and CS5.5 changes).
In addition to cc_merchant's points about 64 bit (which were HUGE and for CS6 included Encore going to 64 bit), I found these items from the "new" list as important to me:
adjustment layers (HUGE)
expanded multi-camera editing, with more multicam angles and improved interface (I hated only having 4 angles, although that usually worked)
improved color features, including integration with SpeedGrade and redesigned Three-Way Color Corrector effect
improved workflows with other applications in Adobe Creative Suite, as well as with Final Cut Pro and Avid software
faster Adobe Media Encoder, redesigned to make authoring for multiple outputs and mobile devices easier (batch processing was added with CS4, but it wasn't until CS6, with other enhancements that I really worked it)
enhanced Adobe Encore for creation of DVDs, Blu-ray Discs, and web DVDs (Bluray chapter playlists finally; I have used the flash output, which has gotten better at each step)

MBP better wireless reception than PD?

Question for previous owners of PowerBooks who have upgraded to a MacBook Pro.
I'm thinking of upgrading to a new MBP 17". Do MBP's have better wireless reception than PowerBooks? I have a powerbook G4 17" 1.5ghz, my friends MacBook (white) has way better reception. The MacBook can see about 10 local wireless networks and connects with good reception while the powerbook rarely sees more than three, and I get barely any signal strength if any at all from the visible networks.
Christo

I can confirm what sig says, to an extent. My MBP does have slightly better reception than a PB, but it's nowhere near as good as an MB (or my iPhone/iPod Touch). I haven't had any issues with dependability. The main issue is the aluminum casing, since the MB and MBP have the same wireless card.
All of them are more than adequate for my needs, though. The MBP gets full strength from my wireless network; so does a laptop with a polycarbonate case, but the latter does see more of the neighbors' networks.

Is the macbook pro much better than any other laptop?

I am currently wanting to buy a laptop, I am deciding whether to buy a macbook pro or just a regular laptop. Is it really worth it to spend so much more?
Thank you! ~ mtumbler

Don't forget where you're asking that question.
Since nearly all people here have Macs, we obviously felt they were worth the price. "Much better than any other laptop" is a fairly subjective statement. All the major manufacturers have excellent high-end options. When comparing prices, you need to compare similar specifications and quality. You can certainly get cheaper PC computers, but similarly spec'd machines with similar build quality are generally around the same price (and actually sometimes somewhat higher).
The areas that most of us would agree puts Apple at the top are OS X, quality/design, and customer service. Only Macs can run OS X. For those of us that use OS X, we typically prefer it over Windows (by quite a bit). However, this isn't always a positive for someone moving over from Windows. There is a little bit of a learning curve. If you are going to need to be able to do everything you want, you need to understand that it might take a little time to figure everything out. You can install Windows alongside the Mac OS to help make the transition a little easier, but that requires that you purchase a copy of Windows. So far as quality and design... Apple has always been a leader in this area. However, as I had mentioned earlier, most major manufacturers have caught up in this area... at least with respect to their high-end offerings. It's really a matter of preference in terms of which you like more. No one offers the same level of customer service that you'll get from Apple. No other manufacturer has retail stores like Apple where you can go in with your machine and have someone (who knows about Apple products) check out your machine on the spot. Their phone support is also excellent and their user support community (where you're at now) is second to none.
So... most of us would agree that we feel Apple products are "better". But if you were to go to a typica PC forum and ask the same question, you'll find people who would argue fanatically that they're not. The reality is that there isn't that much of a difference in the hardware. You need to decide if something like the OS (which you probably don't have much experience using), design, and support are important to you.

Just switched to BOOST MOBILE..MUCH MUCH MUCH better than Verizon!

Hello everyone, I switched to Boost Mobile yesterday and so far, I couldn't be happier! Unlimited talk, text, and web for 50 bucks a month. The phone I have is the Sanyo Incognito, which is basically the same as the EnV3. In my office, my Verizon phone would give me 1 bar or less usually, sometimes no service at all. Boost gives me 2 or 3 bars! The internet is very fast as well. I recommend everyone switching to Boost when their Verizon contracts are up. It is a much better deal than force-data-plan verizon.

Ok first...Being in the woods was an example, Take yourself outside of that city per business relations, family functions, vacation, whatever you so choose to and see where Boost will take you. There is a reason Sprint, Nextel and Boost are in a "cheap" phase of there small and unbeneficial network because its there way of begging consumers to sign up because they are falling apart...check your stock markets and last quarter sales of anything Sprint related and see.
And yes Boost is way behind on technology, your new phone that came out in December does not do half of what smartphones can. And calling out the extra 120 bucks, that depends on the person! And just to pass you some more information since you love CDMA networks. Boosts first ever smart phone (which proves how far behind technology they are) is not ran on CDMA it runs on iden.
And not ever have I thought about being ripped off from Verizon network, And god forbid if you live in mobile home or walk into a hospital or a building made of anything besides wood and actually get a signal. My sister has had boost for a couple years now and I have never been able to call her were she actually answered the phone, always have to leave a message cause she is not getting signal and she calls me back an hour later. So, apologies but Boost and Verizon is not a likely comparison when all there is to use is a monthly bill that its simply cheaper. Boost is the bottom end of totem pole with Cricket. As stated before, Verizon has over 90 million customers strong, Able to handle all Million running the web, voice and text when Boost regularly has tower outages due to overload of there 5.2 million customers.
Now for highlights of Boosts up to date phone that is to be released June 20th! (let's see there up to date tech) These are direct quotes from the website!
Michael found the Flash Lite support was only practical with a WiFi connection, due to the slow data speeds found on the iDEN network connection.
It runs a generic Android 1.5 build without MOTOBLUR, which means it only had three homescreen panels to customize instead of five.
The device also runs on a slower iDEN data network (25kbps), which is why the Opera Mini browser, which is optimized better for slow connections, was included.

This new printing interface in 10.5 is SOOO MUCH BETTER!!

just used the printing interface on my new macbook pro/10.5... i'm SO GLAD the printer interface has been improved... i've been begging since 1990 (literally) to be able to change the page set-up options from within the print dialog box... it was always so inefficient to have to go back and forth between "page setup" and "print" dialog boxes...
also even microsoft gave a thumbnail in the print dialog window years ago so that we can see what it will look like... apple got it in there too... i'm so glad they are paying attention to good ideas even if they don't think of them on their own... (after all, microsoft got were it is largely from copying good ideas that other people thought of, IMHO)...
it threw me trying to find the "printer set-up", since i'm coming from 10.4... but the new implementation works fine in the "system prefs"... the auto discover seems to work fairly reliably for setting the printer model... i'm entering about 25 IP printers i use in the different buildings where i work... so it is very helpful for it to pull as much info as possible... am slowly migrating everything off my old PB 1.5G... this is such a pleasant surprise...
i've only used printing a few times so far and it is so much better!!!
thank you! thank you! thank you!

Hmmm, the script in my post is all squashed and ruined, despite my best efforts.
If you need original, please contact me at [email protected] There is also an intial version
of a DBA tool written in PHP5 on my web page, which is: http://www.mgogala.com

Please help! I should be getting much better performance! What am I doing wrong?

Hi, there!
I've recently started using After Effects CC and I am getting extremely poor performance, especially given my machine specs (or so I believe).
Everything is very slow, including the actual software interface. Even with the Live Update switched off:
- Moving components on the actual composition view is practically impossible: click, drag, wait about 15seconds, release click and it has moved somewhat in the general direction required, but not even to the place the mouse stopped.
- Scrubbing doesn't work at all, even after the render bar on the timeview is already fully green.
- Standard preview (spacebar) can never play at realtime. The only way to play footage at realtime is to use RAM preview (numpad 0), but even then it takes ages to render small parts (10seconds of footage, takes anywhere between 5 and 10 minutes).
It's enfuriating! I am so convinced that my machine should perform SO much better than this!
I have tried everything that I can think of and everything that I have found on this forum and others through out the internet. Spent the last week googling this issue and have not made much improvement!
I have even checked the raytracker_supported_cards.txt file actually included the GeForce GTX 590. It does.
Any help anyone can provide would be much appreciated, cos I am stumped. Many thanks!
The following are the specs of my pc and the settings of my After Effects (relevant settings and settings I have changed from default):
PC
Components
Comments
Case
Cooler Master HAF X
PSU
Silverstion ST1500 (1500W)
Motherboard
Asus Rampage IV Formula
CPU
Intel Core i7-3960X (6 physical /12 virtual cores) @ 3.3GHz
CPU Cooler
Noctua NH-D14 SE2011
RAM
4x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws
GPUs
2x Zotac Gefore GTX 590 3GB (4 physical GPUs with 1.5GB RAM each)
Latest drivers installed
SSD
Crucial Technology M4 256GB
Used for OS, Applications and AE cache
HD1
Seagate Barracuda 2TB SATAIII 7200RPM
HD2
Western Digital VelociRaptor HDD 10,000RPM
Monitor
Samsung SyncMaster 305T (2560x1600)
OS
Windows 7 Ultimate
All up to date
After Effects
CC
Updated to latest version 12.2.1
After Effects
Preferences Heading
Setting
Set to/
Showing
Comments
General
Allow Scripts to Write Files and Acces Network
Ticked
Don't think this has anything to do with it, but it is something I changed from the default values.
Previews
Adaptive Resolution
1/8
Show Internal Wireframes
Unticked
Zoom Quality
Faster
Color Management Quality
Faster
Previews/GPU Information
Fast Draft
Available
Texture Memory
1115MB
Maximum allowed
Ray-tracing
GPU
OpenGL version
2.1.2
Even though my GPUs (GTX590) are capable of OpenGL 4.4
OpenGL Share Model
3.0
CUDA Driver Version
6.3
CUDA Devices
4
followed by "(GeForce GTX590, GeForce GTX590, GeForce GTX590, GeForce GTX590)"
CUDA Current Usable Memory
1150MB
CUDA Maximum Usable Memory
1500MB
Display
Harware Accelerate Comosition, Layer and Footage Panels
Ticked
Media and Disk Cache
Enable Disk Cache
Ticked
Maximum Disk Cache Size
60GB
Cache Folder
C:\AEcache
Conformed Media Database Folder
C:\AEcache
Conformed Media Cache Folder
C:\AEcache
Write XMP IDs to Files Import
Ticked
Create Layer Markers from Footage XMP Metadata
Ticked
Video Preview
Output Device
None
Auto-save
Automatically Save Projects
Unticked
Memory & Multiprocessing
Installed RAM
16GB
RAM reserved for other applications
6GB
RAM shared by AE
10GB
Reduce cahce size when system is low on memory
Unticked
Render Multiple Frames Simulatenously
Ticked
Only for Render Queue, not for RAM Preview
Unticked
Installed CPUs (processor cores)
12
CPUs Reserved for other applications
6
RAM allocation per background CPU
1.5 GB
Acutal CPUs that will be used
6
Other Options
Pixel Correction
OFF
Fast Preview
Adaptive Resolution
Have played with it in Fast Draft too, but rendering was quicked on Adaptive Resolution.
This is because for A.R. it uses multiprocessing, but for Fast Draft M.P. is disable (incompatible mode, it says).
Renderer
Classic 3D
Thanks again!

Hi, Mylenium,
Thanks for your prompt reply, I'm afraid it hasn't helped. I don't see anything wrong in my device manager.
I have also gone and updated every driver, especially the motherboard chipset and the Sata Intel Rapid Storage Technology driver.
Unfortunately, this hasn't made any difference.
Any other suggestions?
Many thanks in advance!
Hugo

For the 24 inchers...how much better is the ATI over the NVIDIA?

Well, I just purchased the new 24in IMac at 3.06 ghz with its basic options....4gb ram, TB hard drive and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 video card. My friend, coincedentally bought the same one just a few days later, however its refurbished, has the (only) other video card option, I believe the ATI Radeon HD 4850. My friend has relentlessly teased me saying their IMac is "better" than mine. Now this doesn't all bother that much, however, according to the apple website, at only $50 more for the "better" ATI video card....how much better is it actually? Will the performance be that noticable in applications such as After Effects and Motion? If anybody can clear up the $50 difference and as to why that is, I'd appreciate it.

I don't know how much detail you want in the answer, but Apple has basic comparisons between the GT 130 and the 4850. Go here
http://www.apple.com/imac/features.html
and click on +View the iMac Graphics Performance Chart+ link under +Fast, faster, or fastest?+
On the plus side (for your choice), Apple seems to be working more closely with NVIDIA these days. That may (or may not) be beneficial when Snow Leopard is released.

It seems as if Pages 09 is a much better proposition than the last current pages5. How can I get hold of pages09. When I tried before I wasn't able to download it.

I have a new iMac. I am in the process of having to put together an 8 page newsletter every month with photos and texts and some tables. I am having trouble with the current Pages changing things as I work through the document. Is there a way I can get the older Pages 09 version which I read is so much better. I tried once before but my I Mac would not accept the download.

If you never had iWork '09, buy it extremely cheaply from Amazon, just make sure to update it to v4.3.
Peter

Much better 3G reception since 2.2

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for