DIG
Active topics
  1. That's what you gotta do. In cases where the battery is so low (completely discharged below the 5% range) you'll need to leave it connected or reboot it to give it a little kick. It's happened several times with my old 4G and the new classic. Apple has it documented somewhere on their website.

    I can't view my photos with firmware 1.0.3 - just a black screen is all I get.

    Has anyone with iPods and Apple stuff noticed the arrogance of those in the official forums? They're so bloody rude - say something's wrong with Apple - oh no, it's not Apple, it must be your fault. Nah, Apple wouldn't make a shoddy product. Their stuff is the best, it's so reliable.

    Not when the batteries are blowing up and corroding it's not.
  2. I was just talking to Dan a few days ago about the wankers on those apple forums. They can be very helpful but fucking hell, why be so passionate about a company and a product when you are in no way connected with that company? It pains me.

    The new Shuffle is going great although I have stumbled across my first problem. It will only let me load 680MB of music on to it when the capacity is 967MB
  3. Originally posted by germcevoyThe new Shuffle is going great although I have stumbled across my first problem. It will only let me load 680MB of music on to it when the capacity is 967MB


    Got to the root of the problem. It turns out that the Shuffle cannot play apples own lossless file format. WTF?? I have to re-encode the song to AAC in order to transfer it to the Shuffle. Dissapointing
  4. Eh? Does Apple test anything? So it can't play it's own format?

    Do you know of the black-screen photo problem on the classic after updating to 1.0.3?
  5. Originally posted by drewhigginsEh? Does Apple test anything? So it can't play it's own format?

    Do you know of the black-screen photo problem on the classic after updating to 1.0.3?


    Imagine making and selling a player that doesn't support it's own hoghest quality format. Hilarious. the guys over at the apple support forums think this is normal to. Ha

    The new firmware seems to be hit or miss with most ipods. I've niether gained nor lost anything (I have no photos on my ipod to test). If you aren't benefiting from 1.0.3 in any other way then just switch back to 1.0.2. It's on apples website somewhere but good luck trying to find it
  6. Originally posted by germcevoy[..]

    Imagine making and selling a player that doesn't support it's own hoghest quality format. Hilarious. the guys over at the apple support forums think this is normal to. Ha

    The new firmware seems to be hit or miss with most ipods. I've niether gained nor lost anything (I have no photos on my ipod to test). If you aren't benefiting from 1.0.3 in any other way then just switch back to 1.0.2. It's on apples website somewhere but good luck trying to find it


    I can live without the photos but don't they test anything?

    Another case of "Apple Fanboys Defending", methinks. Let me write a post quickly and put them in their place.
  7. Originally posted by drewhiggins[..]

    I can live without the photos but don't they test anything?

    Another case of "Apple Fanboys Defending", methinks. Let me write a post quickly and put them in their place.


    I can't understand why apple upgrades down't work consistently with identical players.

    Please don't make me rant about fanboys. I read through a topic about the Classics sound quality. People were saying how dissapointing the sound was (and rightly so) and how changing the EQ settings made things worse. The fanboys response : 'well don't use the EQ'? I just paid 200 fucking pounds for an ipod, of course I want to use the EQ.
  8. There we go. Not as bad as the original post but still hopefully someone reads it. I won't start you on fan-boys. But they're good at defending them, I'll say.

    http://discussions.apple.com/messageview.jspa?messageID=6034025&stqc=true

    If I pay $350 for this thing I want to use the EQ. If I've got jazz music (I do, strangely enough) I want to use the Jazz setting. If I've got Shock Rock I want to use the Rock EQ. For the record, I've always found Latino EQ the best.
  9. This sounds promising:

    http://www.cnet.com.au/mobilephones/0,239025893,339284276,00.htm?ocid=nl_d_05122007_lat_l11

    Originally posted by Cnet.com.auAccording to Bloomberg News, AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson said yesterday that a 3G version of Apple's mobile phone will be available in 2008. Stephenson didn't elaborate on exactly when we'd see it -- though Jobs had said late in 2008 -- nor did he say exactly what features it would offer.

    And as for a price (currently the iPhone retails for AU$635), Stephenson said that would be up to Jobs to dictate.

    Many reviewers have criticised the iPhone's lack of 3G support, particularly since AT&T has a robust 3G network. But Jobs has defended the omission by saying that the 3G chip sets take up too much space, and thus would make the iPhone larger, and that 3G use would eat up excessive battery life.

    Stephenson didn't say whether those problems have been solved, but personally, we'd be willing to accept a fatter iPhone for the chance to browse the wireless Web at 3G speeds. And yes, we say, even with the integrated Wi-Fi.
  10. Originally posted by germcevoy[..]

    Got to the root of the problem. It turns out that the Shuffle cannot play apples own lossless file format. WTF?? I have to re-encode the song to AAC in order to transfer it to the Shuffle. Dissapointing


    I think (don't quote me, I'm definitely not a defend-Apple-at-all-costs-fanboy ) that it is because they were aiming the Shuffle mainly at a very casual market who would have no need for lossless files (mainly gym/running/biking/kids etc) and this way they could bump the figures for number of songs.

    They didn't reckon on someone like you who wanted high-qulaity music!!
  11. Originally posted by djrlewis[..]

    I think (don't quote me, I'm definitely not a defend-Apple-at-all-costs-fanboy ) that it is because they were aiming the Shuffle mainly at a very casual market who would have no need for lossless files (mainly gym/running/biking/kids etc) and this way they could bump the figures for number of songs.

    They didn't reckon on someone like you who wanted high-qulaity music!!


    Indeed. And the quoted Apple figures are using 128Kbps AAC bought from the iTunes Store. They assume if you want lossless you'll go a classic or a touch.
  12. Originally posted by djrlewis[..]

    I think (don't quote me, I'm definitely not a defend-Apple-at-all-costs-fanboy ) that it is because they were aiming the Shuffle mainly at a very casual market who would have no need for lossless files (mainly gym/running/biking/kids etc) and this way they could bump the figures for number of songs.

    They didn't reckon on someone like you who wanted high-qulaity music!!


    I understand that. All mp3 player manufactures quotes their song capacity based on 4MB per song at 128kp/s anyway. It means that if I want to listen to any U2 album material then I have to re-encode it to a lower quality format which is an absolute pain. 3.5/5 for the Shuffle so far.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.