Some better than iCal application

I would like to work with some more sophisticated than iCal application, because I need not just to-do and meetings lists, but long-lasting processes with deadlines, overlapping, etc. It would be even better if with that application I could create timelines, gant charts, function plans, etc. Could you suggest me anything? Thanks in advance!

It sounds like you might need more of a Project type application than an iCal type app. You could check out Merlin or Concept Draw Project for gantt charts, timelines, task lists with resources, etc...

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.

In what way Exchange Server 2013 archiving is better than the other 3rd party application ?

Hi All,
Can anyone here please share some thoughts and comments regarding of which feature of Exchange Server 2013 archiving is better than the 3rd Party application like Symantec Enterprise Vault ?
Any comments and suggestion would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
/* Server Support Specialist */

It's free.
Ed Crowley MVP "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems."
yes, as long as we are using the Exchange Server 2013 Enterprise Edition.
/* Server Support Specialist */

Is 1.3 Bios really better than 1.52B?? Neo2 Board and Some Observations!

Hi All... I read this post on the forums and it got me thinking and i did some fiddling and made some observations..
This is whith regard to the 1.3Bios being better than the 1.52B Bios.. because it would let you run in turbo mode...
Ok i've spent the last 60mins testing and i came up with the following..
1.3BIOS
With the 1.3Bios.. no matter what memory timings u set... it does'nt show in CPU-Z and it does'nt make a difference in the memory bandwith scores...
For example my ram was rated at 2.5-3-3-8 .. i changed it to 2.5-2-3-8 .. it did'nt change and my scores remained the same..
Going from Slow to Fast to Turbo.. did'nt incrase my scores.. actually.. donno how.. but i got a decrease in scores..
The only thing that was noticable was that MSI core-center overclocks the CPU a lil more than what is set in BIOS..
1.52B BIOS
With the 1.52B Bios... u can change the memory timings and it does show in CPU-Z and it makes a massive difference with Sisoft sandra.. 250mbps more..
What u set in the bios .. u get with the 1.52B.. Corecenter does'nt mess around and overclock it more..
Going from Slow to Turbo did give me an increase in scores.. slightly..
Im now running Ultra-Turbo.. and i get a sisoft bandwith score of 5250Mbps at 3.21G..
CONCLUSION
So infact i think the 1.52B is better than the 1.3 . I don't have a Radeon so i donno how these bios's work with the cards cause i've read about some problems... I'm getting one soon so 'ill post some info about that in a fortnight..
I personally think this board is great.. atleast the one i have.. never had a problem.. had it for 3 months.. i have a revision 1.. no DOT sticker.. and just the Neo2-S version... I've used Spectec 333 on this board too (dual) had no problems..
Wish i had some DDR-500 so i could test whether this board can do 1:1 above 250...whether it has a 1:1 limitation above 285 like some other boards.. that is my only doubt.. anywayz.. i hope atleast some of u are sailing as smoothly with this board as i have..
Get some nice ram .. this Twinmos Dual channel kit DDR400 with the Twinmos chips are really great.. and i recommend it..

Quote
Originally posted by DeReD
1.3BIOS
With the 1.3Bios.. no matter what memory timings u set... it does'nt show in CPU-Z and it does'nt make a difference in the memory bandwith scores...
For example my ram was rated at 2.5-3-3-8 .. i changed it to 2.5-2-3-8 .. it did'nt change and my scores remained the same..
Going from Slow to Fast to Turbo.. did'nt incrase my scores.. actually.. donno how.. but i got a decrease in scores..
That´s wrong. RAM-Settings are displayed fine. Turbo does make a BIG difference in scores. About 15% more performance. In Games and in benchmarks like 3dmark and sandra, too.

My iPad is hacked. Since a few weeks, every time i try to install a new app there is an phishing attempt. Forcing me to put in some "security questions". Is there any way to clean my iPad and to protect it better than vanilla ios?

My iPad is hacked. Since a few weeks, every time i try to install a new app there is an phishing attempt. Forcing me to put in some "security questions". Is there any way to clean my iPad and to protect it better than vanilla ios?

Thanks fore the hint. Are you shure it´s from apple?
This popup is not a normal behavior and I can´t see if it comes from apple.
The is no hint on apple.com that its save and a wanted behavior.
Is it true that I have to put in 8 strings everytime I update an app?
my ID + PW
and question 1 - 3 + PW?

May you please provide some information for Cisco 1600 AP is better than Juniper AP ?

Hello all,
May you please provide some information for Cisco 1600 AP is better than Juniper AP ?
I would like to know some comparison test between Cisco 1600 AP with Juniper AP.
Thanks very much !
Crows

you cannot compare like this you need to compare it with model by model just compare the data sheet of both .But remeber cisco has larger portfolio and is ranked better then juniper in Gartner report 2013 you can you that in reference.
********Do rate helpful posts*************

Is Intel better than Power PC?

Hi
Is Intel better than Power PC?
The reason I ask this is that Iv been transferring data from my old 350 G4 to my new Mac Book Via Fire wire (G4 in target mode) and Iv had some crashes with the Finder. This pretty much never happened with my old Mac. Force quitting does not save me like it use to if an app crashed. It just goes into a spin and stays there, thinking. Reminds me of Windows XP.
Any Ideas. Thoughts. Etc.
MacBook Mac OS X (10.4.7) 1G Ram

Daimon,
I would say it's a subjective answer based on use. Be glad that you have a machine that supports target mode. My B&W is a nightmare for transfers. The only irritating crashes I've had are the same as with any of my machines (Safari), which is probably due to a plugin.
I have had the experience of force quitting not quitting an application. A kill -9 doing the same thing. It looks like force quitting does quit the problem applications (processor usage drops back down), but they stay active in the dock. A restart functioned normally for me and that went away. The only applications this happens with were popcorn 2 and toast 7.1. Both of those are PPC apps that just made the intel transition and basically device drivers..so I would almost expect them to have been problematic. Everything else has been basically fine.
As to what's better. Security wise, there might be some concern about the Out-of-order execution distribution system of the PPC vs x86. PPC could be considered slightly more secure as it is difficult to gain data from the stack w/o being able to accurately predict the position. However, this is trivial first and is probably remedied a lot by the dual core setup....and it requires a level of access that Mac OS X doesn't just give up to anyone. When you get to performance...to me it's night and day.
I like to put a lot of my video content on my machine in a highly compressed state. It makes it convenient to watch movies or a series and you don't need to have a loud optical drive spinning around. If I was to use something like Handbrake or Instant Handbrake: http://handbrake.m0k.org/ to encode to h.264 on a G5 it would take long enough that I would have to go do something else. On the dual core chips it's almost unbelievable. It's not that the 950 chipset does hardware h.264 encoding (I know some ATI 1xxx cards have this capability, but the only intel data http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/gma950/ I've seen indicate MPEG-2 playback is the highest video optimization ), it's that SSE(1,2,3) on a dual core processor with an application designed for multiple cores/processors (not the same physically, but application wise it's close enough), flies. We're talking something going from 7 fps to 48 fps (better than real time).
There is definitely a Wow factor to these machines. Maybe you just need to try something like that to find it.
I think the instability is due to transitional software. Another thing you may want to consider is that many included applications and parts of Mac OS X aren't pushing the chips anywhere near the limit. Many things just use 100 of 200% . Wait a while and more things will be introduced or updated that make your new machine fly.
I haven't had a finder crash that I recall. Nor a beach ball I couldn't get out of. If it is just limited to the dock (as it appears to be for me), then it's a minor issue. There have been comments about the Rosetta process translated quitting (IIRC), and I will add that twice I have experienced a situation where PPC apps bounced w/o launching. A restart fixed that.
Windows isn't that bad. Even on a core duo (not a centrino duo Tiger is still easier to stabilize/ 'more stable'.
I think a lot of the issues you are having are just growing pains and transfer of apps or files that, while they may have been updated to 'universal binary', aren't designed for the chips in these machines from the ground up.
Give it some time and try some of the things that make these machines better, because subjectively...I think these machines are better.
Another idea...running PPC apps takes a LOT of memory for speed (otherwise you're paging like a maniac) so either up your machines memory or run one PPC app at a time.
Good Luck,
-j

How XI is better than BAPI method

Dear all,
How XI technology is better than BAPI method, with the help of BAPI we can connect Non SAP system with SAP then why XI is better and in what respect.
Thanks,
RP

> Hi,
> Can you connect BAPI with some DB system without XI?
>
> Cheers,
> Jag
Of course you can.
Just develop a Java/.NET application that will call RFCs through JCo/.NET Connector and DB's through any driver you want.
Regards,
Henrique.

Is Flatfile any better than SQL ?

Hey,
I've heard that flatfile databases have a better response than SQL ones.
However, I know SQL is much more easy to change and modify.
So, is there a good reason to go with flatfile, or just go with SQL, since computers are fast enough nowadays ?
thanks,
Dennis

well it depends on what u want to do.....RDBMS's have been developed after millions of dollars worth research and time...they have sophisticated indexing and algorithms to improve performance,security and easy backup and recovery
flat files are of course easier to learn,but the drawback is u have to write the algorithm/logic for searching,sorting etc..i have heard from some places that some websites use such a mechanism for ex smyle and prevlayer that make use of object persisitence and store data in flat files...but most of the time these will be simple applications with few updates and a lot of lookups
ultimately it comes down to cost and area of usage...big complex applications are better off using RDBMS while flat files are better where the application is simple and less complex...
hope this helps,
ravi

JAVA(Ajax + (SVG or XAML)) is better than JAVA(Swing or SWT)?

A new startup claims it has invented a process to create reusable Ajax GUI Classes that are better than Java/Swing classes.
http://cbsdf.com/misc_docs/why-gui-api.htm
http://cbsdf.com/misc_docs/gui-api-brief.htm
It has published the innovative process and many examples on the web site and challenging the software community to prove it wrong.
Any takers?
It claims the process is very simple any Java developer with some JavaScript experience can validate the process.
Imagine the implications if they are right, and if it costs less to create a graphics intensive online application than the cost of creating a comparable Java/Swing application?

Crosspost: http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=716694&messageID=4140147

Is the iPhone 5 better than the Samsung Galaxy S4/Lumia 1020?

Is the iPhone 5 better than the Samsung Galaxy S4/Lumia 1020?

Like almost everything in this world is a matter of choice, but, if it is to logically make a choice here are a few criteria you should consider before picking up a smartphone:
Do you really need it? - if not, the money will stay better in your account;
Set up the budget and consider the fact that smartphones get upgrades faster than computers and laptops, will you be able to upgrade?
Which operating system are you familiar with?
What are your needs and expectations from the smartphone?
What type of person you are (email/chat/SMS/Social Media-man aka. communications, multimedia, productivity, gamer, etc.) this will help you chose the appropriate hardware and check out what are your options regarding the existing applications for your needs;
Are you always on the run or work in an office? - this will help you decide from the battery life point of view;
If you own a tablet you might just need a simple smartphone.
Samsung does not really innovate in terms of functionality and usability, they only copy what others do and make it their own way. Android is not a mature operating system, yet. I like some of its features, of course, but I can rely on it when it comes to productivity as I'm a person who sends 100's of emails per day and need to easily manage the messages.
You can have the best hardware in the world but that's useless if you operating system is bad at managing those resources, you will not be able to exploit the device to the fullest and you might cry over the money you've spent :-) Nevertheless Samsung has a large market share, makes good phones, but not quite smart, they are rather... intelligent, a smartphone is smart from the day you buy it, you don't have to put it in training mode :-)
As about Lumia, I don't have much to say, it's what iPhone had at the iPhone 4 version minus the 40MP camera and the operating system. If I want a good camera then I buy a camera, a Canon or Nikon :-) Yes, the Krait CPU, so what? That CPU is managed by a Wi*dows OS and that should say everything. I'm not against Micr*soft, they had/have their part in technology progress, but I'm more into stable operating systems, I'd chose Android over Wi*dows, yet Nokia were always great at hardware and batery life. Bad choice for Nokia, look at their sales and you will understand.
That's just my two cents, but iPhone is the choice of millions when they chose their first smartphone: is user friendly, solid, great hardware specs, lovely screen, wonderful support, high-level security, multimedia at its best, a design that catches the eye, looks and feels great in your hand, it's light, you have millions of verified apps in the store and a nice community to tell you all these :-)

LabVIEW better than VB?

HI,
Our customer requested that a motion system should be constructed with VB and Omron hardware. Fortunately they accepted LabVIEW and NI-hardware due to the fact we said this would result in a shorter delivery time (because I have not used VB for large apps before). They are considering re-writing the application in VB after delivery, so that the in-house programmer can further develop the system.
The system is quite complex - it involves 10-axis of motion to control and parallel software loops. The question I am asked again and again - "Why is LabVIEW better than VB for this?". Unfortunately after much investigation this seems hard to summarise. I have read all the previous posts but there does not seem to be any argument to convince that LabVIEW is the better solution here. I'm looking for a sentence or two that goes some way to convincing people LabVIEW is the better solution - any ideas?
Martin
Certified LabVIEW Architect

Martin.D wrote:
> HI,<br><br>Our customer requested that a motion system should be
> constructed with VB and Omron hardware. Fortunately they accepted
> LabVIEW and NI-hardware due to the fact we said this would result in
> a shorter delivery time (because I have not used VB for large apps before).
> They are considering re-writing the application in VB after delivery,
> so that the in-house programmer can further develop the system.
> The system is quite complex - it involves 10-axis of motion to control
> and parallel software loops. The question I am asked again and again -
> "Why is LabVIEW better than VB for this?". Unfortunately after much
> investigation this seems hard to summarise. I have read all the previous
> posts but there does not seem to be any argument to convince that LabVIEW
> is the better solution here. I'm looking for a sentence or two that goes
> some way to convincing people LabVIEW is the better solution - any ideas?
Mostly it depends with what you are familiar with. I couldn't write
almost any real app in Visual Basic and deliver it in a reasonable time.
There are people who claim they can do anything in Visual Basic in a
short time, but for me I simply miss the overview over what methods do
what and when in VB.
Why do they want to consider to rewrite the whole app? That is a major
undertaking and really only justified if they are not happy with what
they have now and consider redoing it anyhow, and/or don't feel you
would be available in the future for timely maintenance work. as such it
seems more a management and communication problem to me than what
software really is better.
Rolf Kalbermatter
Rolf Kalbermatter
CIT Engineering Netherlands
a division of Test & Measurement Solutions

Why is hyper-v better than virtualbox?

We have 4-5 people in a software development environment with access to 4 servers, each with 2 quad-core or dual-core cpu's (core-based, before nehalem), and 8gb or 16gb RAM, so I think we have a good amount of power for virtualization. Total, we have a
team foundation server, oracle server, web server, 2 virtualization servers, and multiple workstations, some virtualized, some not.
When we started virtualizing about a year ago, for whatever reason, and although everyone has an MSDN sub, we started using VirtualBox instead of Hyper-V. I'm no expert (and that's why I'm here) but I think they operate at different levels of interaction
with the hardware, and that VirtualBox is a bad idea for this environment.
Can someone give some good reasons why we should be using Hyper-V? Also is it possible to convert the virtual machines?
And then I would like to know if it's okay to also be virtualizing our web server and oracle server, etc. We have only been virtualizing workstations. I think we really need to make good use of virtualization if we are going to be doing it at all.
Advice welcome also for virtualization best practices, backups, management, infrastructure design, etc. I would like to start with a domain controller, and maybe a Lync server so we can share desktops, etc. Thanks for all input!

In my opinion Hyper-V is only better if your using Hyper-V to host servers, like Microsoft SharePoint, Active Directory, Sql Server, or even MySql to provide resources.
If you intend to be using Virtualizatio to develop software, like Working with SharePoint from a developer standpoint, building asp.net web applications, or even doing C++, desktop applications, or Android, Php etc, if you are going to be physically on the
VM using it as your environment to write code and design, then Oracle VirtualBox is better than Hyper-V.
With hyper-v your limited to using The Connect console, or Remote Desktop Protocol to see the virtual machine. The RDP console leaves much to be desired. It only gives you the option to use all of your monitors or one, it won't do 2 if you have
3. I like to use my third monitor to keep my email open, and pdf documentation, or word documents and use the other two monitors for my VM so I can see multiple code windows in Visual Studio at the same time (VS2010). Oracle handles multi monitors
so much better. And if I want to surface an adroid phone through USB to my VM, oracle is the only way to go there, or maybe VMWare, but VirtualBox is free.
However, Hyper-V is now native to Windows 8 desktop version and windows 8 server version. And most companies dealing with microsoft products use Hyper-V for their VM's, so from a multi developer environment, it makes sense for us to use Hyper-V with
windows 8 because all of our servers run on Hyper-V. If we need to troubleshoot something we can grab a copy of the latest server VM backup and spin it up locally on Hyper-V with windows 8 without having to do any conversions.
But from a developer standpoint it is really hard for me to leave VirtualBox. If RDP could work my 2 of my monitors and not all 3 or 4 of them I would have no complaints. Third part RDP sofware isn't any better, it could never compare to the
deep integration and speed of windows RDP. My main issue is, if RDP can do all of my monitors why can't it do just 2 of them, seems like a big thing to leave out in my opinion, it's so frustrating. It's such an awesome part of windows with such
a huge annoying handicap. I've actually thought about just having another computer for my third monitor, like a tablet or something on a stand. Sure you can SPAN a monitor in Windows so it acts like one monitor and I can tell RDP to go full screen
but it has a width limit and then I need extra software on the VM to handle the big resolution like 2 screens instead of one.
My Blog: http://www.thesug.org/Blogs/ryan_mann1/default.aspx Website: Under Construction

Everyone told me final cut is better than Premiere... why is nothing simple

Final cut pro users, please help!
I've just spent a fortune on a brand new mac and final cut Pro 7 on the recommendation of countless people. After reading a lot of forums and web pages and many hours of wasted time I've installed Windows XP on my Mac and my old copy of adobe premiere 2.0 - this actually works!
Maybe I'm just new and don't understand it yet, but here are my main problems.
1. Even after installing codecs that now (Eventually!) run all the MPEG and AVI files in Quick time, once the video goes into FCP it cannot render it. Every piece of advice on the internet about using AVI says "Convert them to MOV files separately and then import them". But why?!? why can't I just get a codec that will handle the files in FCP? Why must I spend hours converting my whole library so that I can even start editing?
2. Once converted to MP4 (Outside of FCP) I still find I have to manually render everything... everytime I cut up video in the timeline or add filters or transitions I have to re-render those clips. In Premiere it automatically renders any changes you make so you can watch back the changes straight away. Is there a way to set this up on FCP so it renders each time I make an edit?
All this amounts to is that using FCP takes WAY longer to do anything than with Premiere. Can anyone tell me how to fix the problems? I've been an expert PC user for 10+ years, but I'm stumped by the Mac, please help!
Thanks!

If you have lots and lots of different codecs to deal with, and you want to edit them all in their current state without converting, then get the application that does that for you. FCP is NOT that application. It, like Avid, is designed to work with specific codecs in real time. FCP has a long list, but nothing you listed is on it. What you see in the EASY SETUPS is what you need to have.
Adobe Premiere, Sony Vegas, Edius...those are designed to deal with multiple codecs in their native form. But they too might have some issues because, simply put, not every codec is designed to be editable.
Saying that "FCP is better than Premeire," that has to be qualified. Better at WHAT? Because Premiere is better when it comes to certain workflows, and FCP is better at others. Then Avid comes along and it the best thing for even other workflows. For your specific needs, no, FCP is not better. Premiere is.
It's like saying a hammer is better than a screwdriver. Well, if you have to put a nail into wood, yes it is. But then if you have a screw, a hammer is not the best thing, and will make a mess of things.
Shane

Are the screens on white iMac 20" better than those on new 24"?

I have read so much about the troubles with the 20" and 24" Aluminum iMac screens that I'm afraid to buy one now, and was thinking of buying a refurb'd white (plastic) iMac from Apple. Is the screen tech in the white version better than that in the 24" Alum? I have an old 2.0 white iMac and have never had any trouble with the screen at all.

Pier Rodelon wrote:
Thanks for these pix. I have two more questions,
1) Previous poster suggests that specs for the white iMac screens were lower
than specs for ALU iMac screens--is this true and in what particulars?
Other than viewing angle and brightness, Apple doesn't publish any meaningful
screen specs.
The ALU screens are a little brighter -- entirely too bright -- and they don't have
sufficient adjustment range to reduce the brightness for comfortable viewing with
normal home lighting levels.
The 20" ALU viewing angle specs are much poorer than the white 20" or any of
the 24" models. In practice, the difference is easily noticable even to the most
casual observer.
2) Does the 24" white iMac have the same screen that the 20" white iMac has?
All 24" iMacs have expensive S-IPS LCD panels. That's the same basic technology
and from the same manufacturer as the Apple Cinema Displays. (As discussed
previously, some (many?) 24" ALUs have/had problems with uneven backlighting.)
Some white 20" units use exactly the same S-IPS panel as 20" Cinema Displays;
some others came with an excellent-quality S-PVA display. I believe all 20" iMacs,
at least as far back as the G5 PPC, used similarly high-quality (gorgeous!) panels.
The 20" ALU iMacs all have much lower-quality TN panels (from various sources).
The 17" white Intel iMacs also use the lower-quality TN panels.
To see what display you currently have, cut-n-paste the following command line
into Terminal.app -- then look it up in the panel database at tftcentral.co.uk:
ioreg -lw0 | grep IODisplayEDID | sed "/\[^<\]*</s///" | xxd -p -r | strings -6
I don't know if the 24" white iMac refurb would be a better choice than the 20"
white (or the 20/24" ALU).
IMO, there's no contest in 20" size -- the white iMac displays are vastly superior.
If you're lucky enough to get a good display, the ALU 24" is very attractive; OTOH,
I have no performance complaints with my white 2.16 GHz Core 2 Duo -- and it
was $600 less than my 24" ALU reject.
Looby

Some better than iCal application

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for