Andrew Kimery
Forum Replies Created
-
[Bill Davis] “From their published recall limitations – (machines shipped during 3 specific months ONLY) seems to me that was a specific batch of cards in the life cycle of a product sold since Dec 2013.
Not a particularly strong case, IMO, for in arguing that the machine has “known problems.”
Seems to me they temporarily got a bad batch of parts – and recalled the problem machines to fix it.”
The melt downs vs the bad renders I think are separate problems. I remember a number of Resolve users reporting that if that they booted their nMPs into Windows and ran Resolve they didn’t get the same problem as if they were running Resolve under OS X. IMO this points to a driver/software/firmware issue on the OS X side.
[Darren Roark] “Every MacBook Pro I’ve had since 2006 the GPU has fried at least once. My two cheese graters both had the GPU die, the trashcan is the only one I haven’t been able to kill. I have been having freezing issues since installing Sierra however.
“GPU centric-problems seem to be common issues with Macs. Three of the five Mac’s I’ve owned over the last decade have had GPU related problems.
-
[Mel Matsuoka] “So my question is: Seeing that it is technically possible for me to complete their requested revisions in FCP7 on Yosemite without having to convert everything, would it be unfair to charge the client for the time and effort involved in converting these projects to Premiere instead, even it benefits them (and me) in the future?”
If you can do the changes in FCP 7 that’s all you should bill the client for, IMO. Billing them for transferring the projects from FCP 7 to PPro is billing them for unneeded work that they didn’t request. It does sound like a great time to try and sell them on the pros of transferring the projects from FCP 7 to PPro though.
-
[Michael Gissing] “If they have indeed developed a new material to use then that should be patentable. “
Patents extend beyond just creating of new materials though. Apple’s patent takes existing material (bleached paper that contains at least 60% post consumer material) and says it has figured out a way to build a bag that is significantly stronger than other bags made of the same material. If Apple has developed a new/novel, non-obviously method of constructing these bas (not just something obviously like just making the bag out of thicker material and/or putting enforcement in obviously areas) I think it should be patentable.
For an extreme example, if I developed a new and unique weaving method that allowed me to make bullet proof vests out of single ply toilet paper I should be able to patent my process, right? I shouldn’t be able to patent toilet paper, or bullet proof vests or even bullet proof made out of toilet paper, but I should be able to patent the novel/new, non-obvious process that I created.
I have no idea of Apple’s patent should be valid or not (I don’t know enough about the patent, the patenting process or bags bleached bags made out of at least 60% post consumer waste), but conceptually I have no problem with someone building a better mousetrap and wanting to put a patent on it.
[Michael Gissing] “I remember my father, who developed microwave technology, saying that patenting was often a waste of time as it stifled co-operative development in the electronics world and chewed up heaps of development time doing the applications.”
From a developers perspective I agree with your dad. From the stand point of a business owner who has to generate sufficient revenue in order to pay the salaries of the developers on staff I agree with the need for patents and other laws protecting IP (and the business owner and developer could certainly be one in the same person). The system isn’t perfect, and it could certainly use overall (though no more overall from Disney) but I think it’s needed because some people are power hungry, greedy dicks that want to horde everything for themselves at all cost and that spoils any sort of altruism the rest of us want to put forth. Even IP laws, which were supposed to be used as shields for the little guys, too often get turned into swords by the big guys.
-
[Michael Gissing] “A bag development is hardly a new invention or even an original bit of innovation. Not sure about the glass because it might actually be a whole new chemical or physical process.”
Other companies make ‘hardened glass’ but Gorilla Glass is the name for Corning’s version. So Corning has a patent on it’s own process, not on hardened glass in general. Even Apple has a patent for it’s own brand of hardened glass, but it continues to use Corning’s product.
[Michael Gissing] “This is just a heavy duty bag.”
I’m in no way a bag expert, but sounds like it’s a heavy duty bag made out of materials that, prior to this, weren’t strong enough to be used in a heavy duty bag. If Apple’s bag is indeed stronger than other bags “…formed of white solid bleached sulfate paper with at least 60% post-consumer content” thanks to its unique construction why shouldn’t that be patentable?
-
[Bill Davis] ”
I was just pointing out another famous retailer for whom the very same attention to the packaging has resulted in legions of gift givers (and recipients) for whom the packaging color and style ITSELF has long been a powerful and effective brand ambassador.
“Nothing says “I love you” like more post consumer waste. 😉
I think Apples product packaging already gets there. A plain white bag… not so much, IMO. From what I gather the bag is just going to be a bag except that Apple’s figured out a way to structurally re-enforce it so that it can carry more weight than other bleached white bags composed of similar amounts of recycled material.
[Oliver Peters] “However, I do think it’s stupid that this is something that can be patented.
“Corning has a patent for making glass stronger (Gorilla Glass), so why shouldn’t Apple get a patent for making bags made from “white solid bleached sulphate paper with at least 60% post-consumer content” stronger? Sure, it’s not as sexy as Gorilla Glass, but if it’s a unique solution to the problem that no one else has thought of yet then why not?
-
[Mark Smith] “Is the Apple Solar farm in Az going to suck up all solar energy in a given area and hurt agriculture like it was feared to do in North Carolina?”
From what I’ve read Apple is getting it’s power from the main power grid and the solar farm’s energy is going into the grid to offset the amount of power Apple will be using.
-
There’s more than two stories out there, but like I said, it’s not as interesting as iPhone rumors so it doesn’t get nearly the coverage (for the better part of 15 years Macrumors has been a primary haunt for me and even the most mundane news about Apple generates multipage discussions over there).
For many years Apple got dinged by a ‘green report’ that Greenpeace puts out annually about clean energy in the cloud computing sector and I think they took the criticism to heart. They’ve been investing in/building out solar for years, especially at their data centers. I think the first big move was building huge solar farms to power a brand new (well, then brand new) data center in North Carolina (Apple also has solar farms in CA and NV). So when Apple took over the former GT Advanced Technologies plant in AZ and planned to turn it into a data center it only made sense that it would be solar powered (GTAT made synthetic sapphire, which Apple uses for iPhones and Watches, but they had a pretty public falling out with Apple, at least public by Apple vender standards, and filed for bankruptcy). IIRC Yahoo and Google are the next ‘greenest’ companies on Greenpeace’s list after Apple took over the #1 spot.
-
Looks like Apple’s got this one…. in the bag.
-
[Brandon Davids] “While I may concede ignorance on the MTS files and their metadata, if Adobe was designed to work with the metadata then why would it let me import ten thousand MTS for over a year and work just fine, no problems without any of the supporting files?”
PPro, like FCP 7, gives users a lot of flexibility which means it also gives users a lot of rope with which to hang themselves. Just because it has been working fine doesn’t mean it’s a proper/supported workflow.[Brandon Davids] “Also, why would the programmers allow there to be an import process that didn’t work, or work differently than another import method without informing the user etc.?”
I’ve been using PPro for about three years and once I found out that bringing in media via the Media Browser was the ‘proper’ way to do things I too wondered why File->Import and drag n’ drop were still allowed (or at least didn’t pop up a warning or something).
[Brandon Davids] “He blamed my computer and said it was a permission issue where I was allowed to access video but not audio, again it makes no sense.”
Lots of computer errors make no sense. They are incredibly complex systems and user action or piece of code in part of the system can have unintended consequences that breaks an entirely different part of the system. For many people rebooting the machine is first or second in line when it comes to trouble shooting but I bet 99.9% of users (myself included) couldn’t tell you how exactly rebooting should fix the whatever problem is going on. We just hope it will.
-
Huh. The info has been out there for a while, but maybe this is the first time specifics have been released? The rumor mill for solar panels is probably a bit less active than for iPhones. 😉
“Apple says the data center facility in Arizona will be powered completely by clean energy, including new solar plants developed with local utility Salt River Project.”
https://gigaom.com/2015/02/02/apple-to-build-2b-solar-powered-command-center-data-center-at-arizona-factory-site/“Apple has made plans to sell off extra solar energy produced at facilities in Arizona and other states, according to reports.”
https://ktar.com/story/1115942/apple-making-plans-to-sell-off-extra-solar-energy-from-arizona-plant-others/