Multiple Apple ID's !?....yup...that REALLY makes sense !

Hi guys !
just a ''little'' rant/frustration venting here :
a few days ago i decided i'd finally give iCloud a go & check out how well it works...
launched the app, followed the instructions & thought i might as well edit my iTunes Store Apple ID to AVOID having to deal with multiple ID's within the ''Apple universe''. since iCloud demands an email format ID, i did just that & was a bit surprised to realize i also would have to change the password which, i was instructed MUST contain an uppercase whatnot as well...
ok no problem, i edited all that in my iTunes account thinking that now all i had to do is just sign in on anything Apple with that username/password, right ?
surprise, surprise - it doesn't quite work that way & now i'm left with what i was trying to avoid AT ALL COSTS : multiple Apple ID's !?
1 - in email format + 1 ''old'' one both sharing the same password, neat huh ? well done.....
don't get me wrong, without being a blind fanatic fanboy type of user, i DO love MOST of the stuff Apple does ( both hardware as software.. ) & have great joy in using it in my daily routine BUT....i'm afraid Apple did a big boo-boo here :
why not allow to change the old ID to an email format ID & then implement it's use ''everywhere Apple'' even if for example in places such as these Apple Support Communities forum, the website would ''hide'' automagically the ''@whetever.com'' part of the ID to protect the user's privacy ?...
i was even less impressed by this implementation when i logged-in my iTunes Store account with the new ID, saw there were upgrades for 3 apps i had bought for my iPhone & when i clicked the button to get them, a msg came up stating :
Hum....interesting ! so, it states i HAVE upgrades ( why should it, if i DIDN'T buy those apps?... ) which to my poor old tired brain suggests iTunes Store DOES have an idea down there somewhere that i DID buy them - you know what i mean ? unless it's become common practice for iTunes to offer upgrades to people of things they didn't buy ?..
anyway, forgive my rant about this, it's just that in this day & age when even the simplest of forums have got this username/password nailed to perfection, IT IS beyond me that a company as obviously capable as Apple DOESN'T & if this is the best it can do well....let's say i'm less than impressed & i will definitely get rid of iCloud
to me iCloud was more of a curiosity than a need since i ''plug'' my iPhone 2 ir 3 times a day to my iMac & clicking a button to import photos/sync/whatever is WAY LESS TROUBLE than having to shuffle back & forth constantly between multiple ID's - specially since at current prices, my 2TB music library WON'T be going on the cloud anytime soon....
obviously i have sent Apple a feedback on this & would love them to sort this out - this strikes me as such a BASIC FAIL which CANNOT make for ''smooth sailling''
any ideas on the subject ?
cheers
Nuno

I have a similar problem with this as well. For example, I like to keep the "contacts" of me and my spouse updated on both of our phones. In order for this to happen, I have to sign in to "icloud" on both devices & mac with my apple ID. It would be much better if this could be shared/combined with multiple devices as an option. I don't think "icloud drive" solve's this problem.

Similar Messages

Does a QMaster Cluster really make sense for Final Cut Server?

Correct me if I'm wrong, and I often am, but my understanding of the difference between setting up a "Cluster" and just using "This Machine" is the cluster allows multiple jobs to be processed simultaneously, while an unmanaged system will only do one job at a time. However, when it does that one job, it uses all the system's processors.
Yesterday I created a cluster consisting of two Quad Core Intel systems, and started Final Cut Server cataloging about a half a TB of data. I noticed that Server submits the Proxy render jobs one at a time, and that the jobs were being submitted to only one processor core, in a rotating fashion. Is there a way to make FCServer submit jobs in "parallel," or am I better off with using just the local system for transcoding?

The default proxy transcode setting seems to be specifically tuned to work at a small scale, which makes sense if you are asking a box to host the database, serve the app, and do all the proxy transcodes. I observed the same phenomenon, so I made my own transcode setting for proxies and I chose to lower the bitrate a bit to help with file size and transfer time. The upside is the floodgates are wide open when my 32 core Xeon cluster (four 8-cores) goes to town on a proxy encoding job.
Your other observation is also right, that only one item is encoded at a time across the cluster rather than working on all of them at once across the cluster. So what you get with a fast cluster is shorter encode time, not parallel encodings that all finish at the same time.
If you have the spare machines to dedicate to cluster work, I strongly endorse setting up that way. I would not recommend Quick Clusters for Final Cut Server encoding duty. Either set up a dedicated Managed Cluster that FCSvr can use or none at all.

I can't access my library on this computer. How do I get support that I makes sense?

What am I supposed to do here? I want to be able to sync my iPod Classic but I can't get any library information. Sorry, but this is getting to be more and more BS. I hope you all enjoy discussing my problem. If anybody can help me, let me know if there is some way to do that. Thank you.

Just so you understand this correctly, this is Support - here. However, your question needs to makes sense, and for that, we (or at least I) need more information.
To add to TheGraywolf's post:
What do you mean by "Can't access your Library on this computer"? If you mean songs that you've purchased from the iTunes Store, have you authorised your computer so that songs download from the Store?
If you can't "access" the Library, do you get an error message when you try? What does it say? (Precise text please.)
Have you previously been able to access this Library?

HT4203 Does this really make sense to others...?

...that we are not able to receive text messages containing photos if using the iPhone through wifi? Like many others I'm sure, I tend to keep my cellular data plan turned off and primarily use my phone through wifi at home and work. I missed the birth announcement of my niece because of this senseless feature...

This is from the iPhone User Manual:
Messages lets you exchange text messages with other SMS and MMS devices via your cellular connection, and with other iOS devices using iMessage.
iMessage is an Apple service that lets you send unlimited messages over Wi-Fi (as well as cellular connections) to other iOS and OS X Mountain Lion users. With iMessage, you can see when other people are typing, and let them know when you’ve read their messages. iMessages are displayed on all of your iOS devices logged in to the same account, so you can start a conversation on one of your devices, and continue it on another device. iMessages are encrypted for security.
The bottom line is MMS (text messages with photos) uses your cellular service. iMessage, which uses WiFi, is used to communicate between Apple devices.
Hope this helps.

Accessing purchases made with 1 Apple ID from multiple Apple IDs

I have been sharing 1 Apple ID to make all purchases and homeshare for the household. As I now begin to add new IOS devices (IPAD, Iphones, etc.) and the kids want their own IDs for purchases and icloud syncs, is it possible to access music and app purchases made under the original id with the new id(s) so tey dont lose any of their existing stuff? Put another way, can multiple ids access purchases made under one master id?
Thanks

I happened to stop at the Apple store yesterday for a separate issue and had a discussion about iCloud. Seems like this is how iCloud works (also, there's another thread on this forum that explains it well).
Each member of the family can have their own iCloud ID, which will be used for Mail, Calendar, Contacts, Apps, Bookmarks, Media, Photos, etc. and having this content synced automatically with a Mac (computer). The iCloud IDs work in tandem with the associated Apple ID — so while you cannot have multiple Apple IDs, you can certainly have multiple iCloud IDs tagged with a certain Apple ID.
While all this makes sense from the iOS device standpoint, I'm unclear on how things will sync with a Mac computer, especially if the family uses a single iMac with multiple login IDs for various members. For instance, I currently have an iMac and iTunes content resides in my Public folder, which my wife can still access when she logs in with her login ID. I'm guessing that I'll be able to set up her iCloud ID using her login, set up my iCloud ID using my login, while both our iMac logins will retain the same Apple ID. This would take care of syncing Photos, Contacts, Calendars, etc.
Another (not sure if unique) problem I face is our Address Book — right now, we have one GIANT address book with different groups set up. Certain groups sync to her iPhone, while others to mine. Some contacts are common between both of us. I'm hoping that if she/I updates a common contact, then the change will be reflected in both our groups of contacts. I hope this makes sense — for instance, I update a contact named Joe, and he's on my group of contacts in my iPhone. Hope iCloud updates the master contact card for Joe on the iMac, which would then automatically trigger the update on my wife's group of contacts—that Joe also belongs to— leading to an update on her iOS device as well.
Apologies for the lengthy response..

So, iDisk (great with MobileMe) is closed! Ok. I got the most expensive iCloud Plan and LOVED storing files online. Is that REALLY OVER??!! (besides Numbers', Pages', and Keynote's docs sync).. Will I REALLY have to downgrade to "free" on iCloud?!!

So, iDisk (great with MobileMe) is closed! Ok. I got the most expensive iCloud Plan and LOVED storing files online. Is that REALLY OVER??!! (besides Numbers', Pages', and Keynote's docs sync).. Will I REALLY have to downgrade to "free" on iCloud and PAY for "DropBox", "Google Drive" or "Microsft's Sky Whatever.."?!!
I could not log in to this Support Community with my UPDATED Apple ID (and this is another issue I can't believe Apple just says "NO, you CAN'T!" - deleting other (old) Apple IDs we've created by mistake or a long time ago and being able to have it all on ONE SINGLE UPDATED Apple ID - ALSO saving Apple's storage servers, etc.).
Anyway, my Apple ID for better communication is [email protected] (but I really couldn't log in here - it kept saying that the e-mail is already registered, etc. I know it, I'm trying to use it here, that's all...
So, really. Of course a lot of people don't care about the iDisk issue. That's fine, we all love and hate specific apps or software.. But why has Apple just shut it down, since it was so EASY to use (as DropBox) on all our Apple devices?!! So, we really can't upload/store any kind of files anymore and that's it?!
I used iDisk when MobileMe was still alive, and it was great to have my files from work, home, any backup (whatever we want) uploaded and synced and used in our Macs, iPhones and iPads. If we have the OPTION of an iCloud Plan (the top one, for example), but we just don't like the automatick backups for the iPhones and iPads, nor the Pictures' sync function.. Why can't we just have the SAME simple and efficient/great service of the iDisk installed in each device?!
Do we really have to go back and downgrade back to the free iCloud Option (just for keeping the e-mail) and paying extra for DropBox, Google, Microsoft, any other services?! I have nothing against them - I actually have DropBox and it works great because it REMINDS me of iDisk!! But WHY NOT just keep it simple and closed with 1 company/platform/option - Apple's iOS, OSX, etc.
That's why I decided to have a Macbook Pro, an iPhone 4S and an iPad 3rd. Generation (for example, along with other products and services such as Apple TV).. I know I'm CHOOSING to stay with 1 world, that's fine. And that's why I didn't (yet) go for a Samsung phone or another tablet.. I wanna stick with 1 pattern and I have chosen Apple's..
Just can't understand such an innovative company make such decisions (such as shutting down iDisk or not letting us just DELETE Apple IDs we do NOT use anymore).. Please, just some guidance or confirmation if that's correct: No way of uploading files others than Numbers', Pages' or Keynote's!!??
Thank you very much!!
Peace.

Thank you Roger.
That's exactly what I was afraid of...
During all the time I have been a loyal customer of Apple's products and services, these have been the only 2 issues that I really can't understand (specially when we look at Apple's strategies and management)...
1) Not being able to DELETE (simply delete or deactivate) old or duplicated Apple IDs... I have 3 different Apple IDs but only one is the real Apple ID I use for everything, with all my purchases and services (such as e-mail) related to it (Why won't Apple jus let people delet, deactivate or - at least - merge Apple IDs?! That would help everyone, including Apple when we think about costs, storage, database maintenance, etc.) - Actually, even when I gave up on trying to delete other Apple IDs, I tried to have the one I really use and have organized to use my @me.com address as the Apple ID itself (as Apple asks us to do - and makes sense, of course). But never worked. Just because I created that Apple ID with a @hotmail.com account (since it asks for a valid e-mail when you create an Apple ID, it NEVER lets me now change my Apple ID to my @me.com e-mail address - I mean JUST having my @me.com e-mail address as my primary e-mail and my Apple ID (for example, having that old @hotmail.com e-mail address out of it, cleaned..)!
2) The other issue was this one, about iDisk. Of course there must be reasons for having it shut down, maybe the apps used by iPhone and iPad, along with the folder on Mac OSX, is way too complicated, expensive, full of bugs, I don't know. But if we decide to pay for 50GB of online storage, why even THINK about different options for files we use?! I have Dropbox, I've read about Google Drive and Microsoft SkyDrive, etc. But I just wanted to STICK with a single ALL-APPLE solution.. That is.. Pay the annual fee for the 50GB and just still keep any file I want on the cloud with iDisk. So, what Apple tells me is that if I have other files than iWork or PDF (and some few exceptions), I should actually downgrade to "free" iCloud and decide to PAY for another solution (organization), such as DropBox, Google Disk or Drive (I don't really know), Micrsoft's SkyDrive..
Of course there's the strategy of getting more and more people to use Pages, Numbers and Keynote (buying them for iOS and Mac OSX, as I already have and love them). But "killing" iDisk and just telling users to look for other storage solutions doesn't really sound like Apple.
I have seen so many questions here about both issues (deleting or merging Apple IDS + iDisk back since we pay for storage) that I really believe Apple should reconsider these issues or, at least, open the issue and let us know what would be the best "partner solution" for iCloud...
Thanks a lot!
All the best...
Eduardo Rocha.
[email protected]

I just bought a Mac Book Pro and the Appstore show one upgrade of iPhoto (9.2.1). I started a section with my Apple ID (the account that I have I use to iTunes) but when I try to update it says that there are upgrades available for other accounts and that

I just bought a Mac Book Pro and the Appstore show one upgrade of iPhoto (9.2.1). I started a section with my Apple ID (the account that I have I use to iTunes) but when I try to update it says that there are upgrades available for other accounts and that I have to upgrade using the account that I used to buy iPhoto. What do I have to do to upgrade iPhoto?

Dear Katty,
Thank you very much for your answer! I have 2 Apple ID, and I have tried both of them and the problem continues. I founf several peolpe with the same problem in apple communities foruns and that really seems that there is some problem. I addded the links for 2 of those discussions.
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3374419?start=0&tstart=0
https://discussions.apple.com/message/16628399#16628399
Do you have an idea of how can I solve this problem?
Thank you very much again.
Best regards,
Alfonso

GW2012 move: Does it make sense to move users to a new PO?

Moving from GW8 on OES-NW to GW2012 on OES11: Does it make sense to create new post office and move users?
We have a medium size GroupWise 8 system with a single post office holding less than 600 user accounts, 128 resources and 77 distribution lists.
Due to politics we also have a non-GroupWise external domain that contains a non-GroupWise external post office with a large number of "users".
The post office is on the primary domain.
3 secondary domains hold a GWIA and two web access agents.
I've never been real clear where the external stuff exists...
One of the web access gateways resides on an OES11 server.
The other webaccess agent and the GWIA are on OES-NW servers.
All reside in NSS volumes.
Given the lack support for NSS volumes on Linux servers by most backup applications (including mine), I've pretty much determined that it makes sense to move my GW system to EXT3 volumes.
Even if I change backup software and stick with NSS, and even though all my data is stored on SAN arrays, from what I've read on the forums and from Danita's books, it's preferable to copy your GW system files to a new NSS volume, as opposed to just re-attaching the OES-NW LUN to the new OES11 server.
Point being, whatever I do will involve copying the entire system via dbcopy and at some point, will also involve shutting down the existing domain and PO for the last phase of the copying process.
So..., I'm contemplating the following scenario:
Create a new OES11 server with EXT3 volumes sufficient for holding my GroupWise system.
Create new GroupWise 8 domain on the server.
Promote the new domain to primary and upgrade this new domain to GroupWise 2012.
Once the new domain is upgraded, create new GW2012 post office on new server/primary domain and migrate the users, resources and distribution lists to the new post office.
In the past I've had an additional post office and had migrated a about 20-25 users to that post office.
It wasn't a terrible process, and fortunately, I didn't run into any problems with the migration of those users.
When I re-consolidated my system, moving them back was also problem free
On the pro side:
No downtime of entire system
Relatively simple
Any issues in the migration process would be user-specific and would not effect the entire system.
On the con side:
Process could take far longer, since you can't move a lot of users simultaneously.
In addition, we have a small group of users with anywhere from 40,000 to 80,000 email in their account, so I'd have to factor that into haw many users I migrate at one time.
The chance of running into a stalled migration, for whatever reason, is probably much higher than running into a problem with moving the domain and PO via dbcopy.
The unknown factors for me and my level of experience:
It's been a while since I've had multiple post offices, so I don't recall what changes the users might see with regard to distribution lists, web access or external email.

Originally Posted by gathagan
Moving from GW8 on OES-NW to GW2012 on OES11: Does it make sense to create new post office and move users?
Is there any reason you think that warrants to do so?
If the system is performing normally I'd opt to stick to upgrading the current setup as is.
I'm also curious, are you intending to upgrade to 2014 after the 2012 upgrade?
Originally Posted by gathagan
The post office is on the primary domain.
3 secondary domains hold a GWIA and two web access agents.
I've never been real clear where the external stuff exists...
Ok, that setup makes the upgrade easier. As you will start the upgrade with the primary holding the PO's... the PO's can be upgraded right after or during the domain upgrade (depending on if the MTA and POA are running on the same server).
That means you don't have to think about upgraded webaccess/GWIA connectivity issues with a lower PO version.
The external stuff are simply configurations found in the existing GroupWise domain databases. Or do you mean where those connected systems actually run?
Originally Posted by gathagan
One of the web access gateways resides on an OES11 server.
The other webaccess agent and the GWIA are on OES-NW servers.
All reside in NSS volumes.
And the primary Domain and PO are also still on NetWare (version 6.5 SP8 I presume), correct?
Originally Posted by gathagan
Given the lack support for NSS volumes on Linux servers by most backup applications (including mine), I've pretty much determined that it makes sense to move my GW system to EXT3 volumes.
Which backup application is that? With GroupWise op Linux not much NSS support is needed IMO.... as long as the files get backed up properly other metadata (rights, ownerships, etc) is irrelevant.
As for EXT3 vs NSS, when dealing with OES I always choose NSS. But that's me.
Another option could be to use XFS instead of ext3. That does perform much better, but has to be noted that it is more prone to file corruption in unexpected power loss situations.
With ext3, watch out for the scheduled filesystem check cycles at boot, that is one thing I really dislike about ext3 as disabling that check completely is not recommended and it means at least once a year the system will take an extensive amount of time to complete a (re)boot due to the check running on the ext3 filesystem. That usually pops up on you when you are not counting on it and "just quickly" want to reboot the server in a patching routine or other.
Originally Posted by gathagan
Even if I change backup software and stick with NSS, and even though all my data is stored on SAN arrays, from what I've read on the forums and from Danita's books, it's preferable to copy your GW system files to a new NSS volume, as opposed to just re-attaching the OES-NW LUN to the new OES11 server.
Yes, it's always good if you can start with a clean volume when transitioning from NetWare to OES.
Depending on how long you can afford to have the system down during upgrade, you can also choose the route of moving the NetWare LUN to the new OES server. Adding a second new LUN to the OES server with the needed size and initializing it with a new NSS volume and then just simply do a volume to volume copy using the cp of rsync command. As it's on the same server that can go quite quickly within an acceptable maintenance window to complete all move/upgrade steps.
Originally Posted by gathagan
Point being, whatever I do will involve copying the entire system via dbcopy and at some point, will also involve shutting down the existing domain and PO for the last phase of the copying process.
Sure, though you don't necessarily have to use dbcopy... depending on what you are planning to do. An offline copy won't require it for example.
How much data are we talking about (in GB's)?
Originally Posted by gathagan
So..., I'm contemplating the following scenario:
Create a new OES11 server with EXT3 volumes sufficient for holding my GroupWise system.
Create new GroupWise 8 domain on the server.
Promote the new domain to primary and upgrade this new domain to GroupWise 2012.
Once the new domain is upgraded, create new GW2012 post office on new server/primary domain and migrate the users, resources and distribution lists to the new post office.
If you really want to move users.... sure. I'd again opt for upgrading the existing system.
Also, it's a good rule to have the PO's running the same GroupWise version and patchlevel before commencing user moves. Moves between PO's with a different GroupWise version can lead to issues.
Originally Posted by gathagan
In the past I've had an additional post office and had migrated a about 20-25 users to that post office.
It wasn't a terrible process, and fortunately, I didn't run into any problems with the migration of those users.
When I re-consolidated my system, moving them back was also problem free
If you would want to move users, for whatever reason, I'd opt to first upgrade to the latest version first, then move. There have been many enhancements and bugfixes made in the move procedure over these last couple of years.
Originally Posted by gathagan
On the pro side:
No downtime of entire system
Relatively simple
Any issues in the migration process would be user-specific and would not effect the entire system.
On the con side:
Process could take far longer, since you can't move a lot of users simultaneously.
In addition, we have a small group of users with anywhere from 40,000 to 80,000 email in their account, so I'd have to factor that into haw many users I migrate at one time.
The chance of running into a stalled migration, for whatever reason, is probably much higher than running into a problem with moving the domain and PO via dbcopy.
I prefer a system upgrade over moving users. The process of moving when dealing with 100+ users, requires more effort and there are always things that need attention for a portion of the users. Also things like mobile devices can require some extra attention after having moved an account for example.
True, problems during a system upgrade can potentially affect all users. That is a factor. From the many upgrades I've done that's rarely really been an issue and problems encountered during an upgrade did not cause too much delay. Just make sure you always have a good full backup handy so you can reverse the upgrade if ever needed.
Originally Posted by gathagan
The unknown factors for me and my level of experience:
It's been a while since I've had multiple post offices, so I don't recall what changes the users might see with regard to distribution lists, web access or external email.
If by this you are referring to user moves and address book visibility between PO's, that should not be different to what users are seeing now. At least, the default is that within a GroupWise system all is visible throughout the system. If you have specifically set GroupWise objects to Postoffice visibility... then that would be something to check.
Cheers,
Willem

Color Space and Bit Depth - What Makes Sense?

I'm constantly confused about which color space and bit depth to choose for various things.
Examples:
- Does it make any sense to choose sRGB and 16-bits? (I thought sRGB was 8-bit by nature, no?)
- Likewise for AdobeRGB - are the upper 8-bits empty if you use 16-bits?
- What is the relationship between Nikon AdobeWide RGB, and AdobeRGB? - if a software supports one, will it support the other?
- ProPhoto/8-bits - is there ever a reason?...
I could go on, but I think you get the idea...
Any help?
Rob

So, it does not really make sense to use ProPhoto/8 for output (or for anything else I guess(?)), even if its supported, since it is optimized for an extended gamut, and if your output device does not encompass the gamut, then you've lost something since your bits will be spread thinner in the "most important" colors.
Correct, you do not want to do prophotoRGB 8bit anything. It is very easy to get posterization with it. Coincidentally, if you print from Lightroom and let the driver manage and do not check 16-bit output, Lightroom outputs prophotoRGB 8bits to the driver. This is rather annoying as it is very easy to get posterizaed prints this way.
It seems that AdobeRGB has been optimized more for "important" colors and so if you have to scrunch down into an 8-bit jpeg, then its the best choice if supported - same would hold true for an 8-bit tif I would think (?)
Correct on both counts. If there is color management and you go 8 bits adobeRGB is a good choice. This is only really true for print targets though as adobeRGB encompasses more of a typical CMYK gamut than sRGB. For display targets such as the web you will be better off always using sRGB as 99% of displays are closer to that and so you don't gain anything. Also, 80% of web browsers is still not color managed.
On a theoretical note: I still don't understand why if image data is 12 or 14 bits and the image format uses 16 bits, why there has to be a boundary drawn around the gamut representation. But for practical purposes, maybe it doesn't really matter.
Do realitze hat the original image in 12 to 14 bits is in linear gamma as that is how the sensor reacts to light. However formats for display are always gamma corrected for efficiency, because the human eye reacts non-linearly to light and because typical displays have a gamma powerlaw response of brightness/darkness. Lightroom internally uses a 16-bit linear space. This is more bits than the 12 or 14 bits simply to avoid aliasing errors and other numeric errors. Similarly the working space is chosen larger than the gamut cameras can capture in order to have some overhead that allows for flexibility and avoids blowing out in intermediary stages of the processing pipeline. You have to choose something and so prophotoRGB, one of the widest RGB spaces out there is used. This is explained quite well here.
- Is there any reason not to standardize 8-bit tif or jpg files on AdobeRGB and leave sRGB for the rare cases when legacy support is more important than color integrity?
Actually legacy issues are rampant. Even now, color management is very spotty, even in shops oriented towards professionals. Also, arguably the largest destination for digital file output, the web, is almost not color managed. sRGB remains king unfortunately. It could be so much better if everybody used Safari or Firefox, but that clearly is not the case yet.
- And standardize 16 bit formats on the widest gamut supported by whatever you're doing with it? - ProPhoto for editing, and maybe whatever gamut is recommended by other software or hardware vendors for special purposes...
Yes, if you go 16 bits, there is no point not doing prophotoRGB.
Personally, all my web photos are presented through Flash, which supports AdobeRGB even if the browser proper does not. So I don't have legacy browsers to worry about myself.
Flash only supports non-sRGB images if you have enabled it yourself. NONE of the included flash templates in Lightroom for example enable it.
that IE was the last browser to be upgraded for colorspace support (ie9)
AFAIK (I don't do windows, so I have not tested IE9 myself), IE 9 still is not color managed. The only thing it does is when it encounters a jpeg with a ICC profile different than sRGB is translate it to sRGB and send that to the monitor without using the monitor profile. That is not color management at all. It is rather useless and completely contrary to what Microsoft themselves said many years ago well behaved browsers should do. It is also contrary to all of Windows 7 included utilities for image display. Really weird! Wide gamut displays are becoming more and more prevalent and this is backwards. Even if IE9 does this halfassed color transform, you can still not standardize on adobeRGB as it will take years for IE versions to really switch over. Many people still use IE6 and only recently has my website's access switched over to mostly IE8. Don't hold your breath for this.
Amazingly, in 2010, the only correctly color managed browser on windows is still Safari as Firefox doesn't support v4 icc monitor profiles and IE9 doesn't color manage at all except for translating between spaces to sRGB which is not very useful. Chrome can be made to color manage on windows apparently with a command line switch. On Macs the situation is better since Safari, Chrome (only correctly on 10.6) and Firefox (only with v2 ICC monitor profiles) all color manage. However, on mobile platforms, not a single browser color manages!

Does an "incomplete font" warning make sense for ttf?

Hi all,
we are getting "font incomplete" errors in the package dialog. According to the online help this "Lists fonts that have a screen font on the current computer but not a corresponding printer font."
Does that even make sense for true types? As far as I know there is no such thing as a separate screen and printer font in ttf.
To make things worse the fonts in question are Georgia and Times New Roman - both are system fonts.
Specs:
Windows 7 64 bit SP1
InDesign 7.04
I can't reproduce this on my machine but that's running 32 bit.
Should we ignore it?
Any hints appreciated - tried a forum search but didn't find very much.
Regards,
Mike

There is no real erro message but a warning in the package dialog (sorry but we are using the German version):
The report doesn't offer much more information:
SCHRIFTARTEN
(Nur Probleme anzeigen)
17 Schriftart(en) verwendet; 0 fehlend, 10 eingebettet, 2 unvollst., 0 geschützt
- Name: Georgia; Typ: OpenType TrueType, Status: unvollst.
Dateiname: n. zutr.
Vollständiger Name: Georgia
Zuerst verwendet auf Seite: 31
Geschützt: Nein
- Name: TimesNewRomanPSMT; Typ: OpenType TrueType, Status: unvollst.
Dateiname: n. zutr.
Vollständiger Name: Times New Roman
Zuerst verwendet auf Seite: 30
Geschützt: Nein
We actually don't even know where TimesNewRoman comes from - I suspect it's in one of the numerous linked pdf files. But then the dialog should state which files they come from.

Does iPhone as tethering device make sense?

Why pay to use the iPhone as a tethering device instead of just using the iPhone itself? People using iPhone to tether their iPad in particular doesn't make much sense to me since they pretty much have the same function (one just has a bigger screen).
Does it really make sense to pay another $25 a month to tether the iPad to the iPhone when you can just use the iPhone to do what you need done? I'm asking because it would be nice I guess, but can someone really make a good case for the extra money spent for this?
Message was edited by: Drew9803

Actually there is two prices for Data Service.
iPhone 3G Data Features
Enterprise Data Plan for iPhone
$45.00
N/A
Unlimited
Select
DataPro 2GB for iPhone Enterprise
$40.00
N/A
2GB
Select
DataPro 2 GB for iPhone
$25.00
N/A
2GB
Select
DataPlus 200 MB for iPhone
$15.00
N/A
200MB
Select
iPhone 3G Tethering Features
DataPro 4GB for iPhone Enterprise
$60.00
N/A
4GB
Select
DataPro 4GB for iPhone
$45.00
N/A
4GB
Current
A $15.00 Difference in Cost.....

HT204053 Can you have multiple apple ids that access one itune account??

I need to know if I can have multiple Apple Ids attached to one itunes account. Trying to set facetime up on these separate devices and it keeps failing. Any help would be appreciated. I tried to add additional emails, but I all I get is verifying and it never verifies it.

yes you can still sync all the devices on itunes using one master itunes/appleID account.
Music:
If you want to select specific playlists for your kids, DON'T enable iTunes Match on their devices, otherwise they will get ALL the playlists on their devices (learned that the hard way)
If you have wi-fi synced enabled that should still work.
Apps:
I manually select which apps they get on their devices using itunes. It only changes when they re-sync.
Don't enable AUTO downloads on their devices for Apps or Music purchases.
Since I also have young kids using these devices:
I have restrictions setup on their devices. I don't allow them to install/delete apps, nor do I allow them to make any account changes on their devices. This way their devices stay in order and get backed up to icloud. I can easily restore their devices if I needed too.
Once in a while I will disable the restrictions so I can update all their apps.
Hope this helps!

HT204053 Somehow the very first email I had years ago that I don't even remember the password for, keeps coming up as my apple ID, when I want to make any purchase on ITunes. Why won't my real ID come up, and I can't find the right solution?

Does anyone know how to eliminate a mistaken apple ID that you still use as an email
but for some reason, now when I go to make a purchase at ITunes, it brings up this email
as my apple ID instead of my actual Id and it will not take the current password I have for
this email. Somehow I believe it is confused, because years ago this was my first email, and
it had a different password way back then, that I no longer remember.
I am very sorry if this all sounds confusing, but my Mac book has been out of commission for the
past year, and I have been recently trying to work on it, and I am not suave on the computer at all, so
if my next question sounds lame, you'll know why... I wondered if that may have caused any of my
latest hitches, only because when I first purchased Mac, 4 years ago, this rogue email was the one
I signed up with everything on my Mac, but I have not been using it for the past 9 months, just my
iPhone, until that died 3 months ago, and then I got this new I phone 5 2 months ago, thinking my
problems would be..., a thing of the past,??, for at least a little while??? But NO, they have not,
However, I'm sticking to the problem at hand, I have a full functioning apple ID that works and at
some occasional times, ITunes would bring the correct ID up. And only once in a while bring the
Bogus one up. But in the last few weeks, all it asks for now is the wrong ID and my frustration has
reached its max!!' I have missed out on purchasing two apps I needed, and some music I wanted,
and I don't think I'll be able to even use ITunes at all until I can know how to make my devices realize
that my email is an email, not a apple ID, and then make it accept my real ID!!!
Without having to eliminate, or delete my email address I still use, and receive mail
at. Please forgive this lengthy explanation!!!
I was only trying to make sense, if I confused you
more, I'm very sorry... Thank you for any brave ones that tackle this, and actually have some
Solutions for me.., I thank you much indeed!! Sincerely Kim

Contact iTunes Customer Service and request assistance
Use this Link > Apple Support iTunes Store Contact

HT5538 I have multiple Apple devices and my family all share one apple ID. I know it is easy to obtain additional IDs but all devices are registered with the same Apple ID. My questions is how do I set up my devices so that we can Facetime between devic

I have multiple Apple devices using the same Apple ID for all devices. I work in the Middle East and my wife is in Russia. I would like to Facetime between my different devices. Is this possible with all devices registered with the same Apple ID. It is just easier for find my iPhone, iPad, MacBook Pro and MacBook Air and for purchasing Apps. Is this possible and how do I set it up.

Create Apple IDs for everyone individually and use that in Settings > Facetime, Settings > Messages, Settings > Game Center but keep the Apple ID used for app and content purchases in Settings > iTunes and App Stores

Hi i have the same apple id for my iPad and my mac. my iPhone has a different one. My i cloud on my mac seems to be the iCloud on my iPad, if that makes sense so its not sending my photos from my mac to the cloud. how do i change it to upload mac?

hi i have the same apple id for my iPad and my mac. my iPhone has a different one. My i cloud on my mac seems to be the iCloud on my iPad, if that makes sense so its not sending my photos from my mac to the cloud. how do i change it to upload mac pictures instead? thanks

Did you go into Settings > Store and then tap your old ID, sign out and then enter your new ID?

Multiple Apple ID's !?....yup...that REALLY makes sense !

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for