 |
 |
What Digital Devices Hate You?
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Status:
Offline
|
|
OK, I'm a really geeky guy. Least I like to think of myself that way. I have a PowerBook and iMac, I do a lot of graphics work, I've done some very simple audio, I did video work in high school, I've done web design. I have a digital camera that I do lots with, and a Wacom tablet. I have my iPod and all my stuff arranged in iTunes. I've done a lot of web design and... anyway I'm not your typical idiot who bought a computer and can't figure out what the cup holder that pops out is for...
Well I just borrowed a camcorder from someone at church to work on the church's VBS promo video. It's a Panasonic Palm Cam, and trying to get this bloody thing to work with either FCE HD or iMovie 3 (I own 4 but my CD and DVD have both gone missing or were busted because I didn't store em in the right places). has been a huge hassel. Originally FCE wasn't working with it so I switched to iMovie for my first capture, then iMovie wouldn't work so I tried FCE again and it worked. Every time I hit play in iMovie it would say the camera was playing show one frame then go back to blue and say camera connected. Once I got it working with FCE (no clue what changed this time it just worked.) I got my footage so I saw like OK I'll learn how to use FCE now (Learned video editing on premier in high school it's been a few years). And I go to charge the camcorder, and I can't find out where the heck to plug this thing in!
I'd asked Owl Boy for some help over iChat and he googled for a page, and found one that said it was "On the right side by the battery." Turns out, the thing is INSIDE of where the battery goes! There's no bloody way to plug it in and have the battery in! Apparently they think you should charge it on the charger all the time.
This has me very frustrated and... blah... even Windows doesn't manage to frustrate me this much... the only other thing that has a screen and buttons that I think ever gives me this much trouble is Cell Phones, I swear those things seem to be designed by people who WANT to frustrate you... oh look everyone puts their address books in different spots, oh you need to press like fifty freaking buttons before you can even dial, and oh you accidentally ended up in some racing game!? Every time someone gives me their cell phone I hope I don't have to navigate out of something.
So... for me it's Cell phones and apparently now Camcorders (specifically this one!). What other digital devices make you go prematurely grey?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I know what you mean about that camcorder, I have the same kind of thing. The S-video out is behind the battery too, so if you want to play it on the TV with S-video it must be plugged in. Also the firewire port on the camera seems to have died, can't see to get it too hook up to any of my computers anymore. All in all, something I would never recommend to anyone
|
|
"To create a new standard takes something that's not just a little bit different. It takes something that's really new and captures people's imaginations. Macintosh meets that standard"- Bill Gates
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Minnesota
Status:
Offline
|
|
Cheap digital cameras. You know the ones, they advertise them as pocket digital cameras with something like 100 x 200 pixels resolution. That's about enough to pick out a blob in a picture and say "That's my uncle Bob."
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Status:
Offline
|
|
I've never played with cheap digital cameras. I bought my fujifilm a while ago and it's served me very well... though I honestly do wish Apple would venture into that field, they could partner with Cannon or heck even Kodak. I'm sure anyone would love to partner with em and make a ton of money. They could even put it out under the iPod branding.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
The Internet hates us all.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: College in the Land of Oz
Status:
Offline
|
|
Fax machines. We just don't get along. Sparks often fly.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Dead whale
Status:
Offline
|
|
The Spike Lee film "She Hate Me" did some freaky stuff up in my DVD box. Seen?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by RGB
Fax machines. We just don't get along. Sparks often fly.
I swear the whole concept of the fax has always never made sense to me... e-mail is sooo much better...
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Superchicken
I swear the whole concept of the fax has always never made sense to me... e-mail is sooo much better...
There are some documents that are just too long to scan and email, and in those cases a fax machine can be quite handy.
|

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Status:
Offline
|
|
Cell phones, webcams, faxes and camcorders have all been biatches for me in the past.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Administrator 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Superchicken
I swear the whole concept of the fax has always never made sense to me... e-mail is sooo much better...
Fax was introduced to the general population in the 1960's. The Internet was still ARPANET then, and only connected a handful of labs and schools. Further, fax has the pastiche of being an image of a real document, so many businesses will accept a fax of a signed document in place of the signed document itself. There is NOTHING in the digital realm that has that much acceptance. No, not PDF either, since you can get free tools that let you tinker with PDFs to the extent that only digitally signed PDFs are really secure enough for the same use. And since you'd have to scan the original document to run it through Acrobat, why not just fax it instead.
I agree, though, that an Internet-based system for moving faxes around would be far preferable to using the telephone system to do it. There's still the security issue, though.
I've found that iMovie hates us. Not the camera or the Mac you're using, but iMovie itself. It is as unintuitive as any Apple product can be.
|
|
Glenn -----
OTR/L, MOT, Tx
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Richmond,Va
Status:
Offline
|
|
Copy machines hate me. Any brand and size.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Status:
Offline
|
|
Hmm in the future I'll have to make sure iMovie supports whatever cameras I buy...
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Status:
Offline
|
|
I just stopped paying for my wired line I stopped using 14 months ago (and my DSL sniff sniff). So much for a fax machine now.
|
Get busy living or get busy dying --Stephen King
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Mac Write
I just stopped paying for my wired line I stopped using 14 months ago (and my DSL sniff sniff). So much for a fax machine now.
You doing cable? Or what?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Status:
Offline
|
|
Today my airport express hated me, but we've since made up.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Mac Write
So much for a fax machine now.
A fax machine is build into OS X if you need one. Works a treat. My old iBook is set up as a music server/internet radio station/home server/fax machine. You can even get faxes automatically printed to the printer of your choice. Or forwarded to the email address of your choice for that matter.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: SoCal
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm retarded when using Windows. But who isn't?  (Semi-kidding.)
Right now my iMac seems to hate me, because it refuses to acknowledge the existence of CD-RWs.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Superchicken
I honestly do wish Apple would venture into that field, they could partner with Cannon or heck even Kodak.
Apple's been there, done that.
They were the first to ever market a consumer digital camera; it was called the QuickTake, and it was over ten years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_QuickTake
Partnered with Kodak and Fuji, as you wish.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status:
Offline
|
|
We used to have a QuickTake at the newspaper I worked for. 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ghporter
Fax was introduced to the general population in the 1960's. The Internet was still ARPANET then, and only connected a handful of labs and schools. Further, fax has the pastiche of being an image of a real document, so many businesses will accept a fax of a signed document in place of the signed document itself. There is NOTHING in the digital realm that has that much acceptance. No, not PDF either, since you can get free tools that let you tinker with PDFs to the extent that only digitally signed PDFs are really secure enough for the same use. And since you'd have to scan the original document to run it through Acrobat, why not just fax it instead.
I agree, though, that an Internet-based system for moving faxes around would be far preferable to using the telephone system to do it. There's still the security issue, though.
I've found that iMovie hates us. Not the camera or the Mac you're using, but iMovie itself. It is as unintuitive as any Apple product can be.
Aside from wishing I could do 'destrucitve' editing now and again, I find iMovie quite easy to use and has been flawless with my Canon miniDV cam.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Administrator 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Sage
I'm retarded when using Windows. But who isn't?  (Semi-kidding.)
Right now my iMac seems to hate me, because it refuses to acknowledge the existence of CD-RWs.
Are you talking about your iMac no longer seeing CD-RWs that it saw before, or not seeing blanks? I don't think OS X "gets" CD-RWs at all... You can burn them like CD-Rs, but not use them like floppies, the way you can on a Windows or Linux machine. This issue has stumped the heck out of me.
(And it's the Windows OS that's retarded, not most users. Ok, not several users.  I've used Windows since version 1.0, and there are still things that I just don't get.)
|
|
Glenn -----
OTR/L, MOT, Tx
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Zimphire
We used to have a QuickTake at the newspaper I worked for.
It was the first digital camera I ever used way back in a graphics class in high school.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status:
Offline
|
|
I remember scanning in cans of soup for ads in the newspaper. 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
well I just went camping and took pictures of an elk attacking me. Come to find out I didn't push the button down enough for some of them. There is a "half way point" so you push the button down half way to final focus...doesn't actually take the picture. I know this is common feature of cameras to have multiple functions (and the function is different depending on model which is even more stupid) depending on how hard you push the button but its always stupid to me. Imagine if to focus your gun scope it was dependent on how hard you pushed the trigger.
I also hate PC laptops where the usb ports are too close together to fit more than one device at the same time.
|
|
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." -George Washington
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Status:
Offline
|
|
How can I use the built in fax machine without a phone line to hook it up to????....exactly I can't hence why I can never get a fax machine PERIOD unless I want to pay $30/month fee to use it (my cellphone has a fax machine though, but need a place to send the fax to for printing (aka a fax machine).
|
Get busy living or get busy dying --Stephen King
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
cheap anythings hate me. cheap cameras, phones, TVs, computers.
And anything with the name DELL on the front.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: boston
Status:
Offline
|
|
I can't do typewriters, but yet then again they are hardly considered digital anymore.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Dead whale
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Germany, ivory tow
Status:
Offline
|
|
I hate my alarm clock when it rings in the morning...
|
Macintosh Quadra 950, Powermac 6100, iBook dual USB, Powerbook 667 DVI, Powerbook 867 DVI, MacBook Pro early 2011
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hyrule
Status:
Offline
|
|
Cordless phones. While cellphones are regarded as poorly designed, I think cordless phones take the cake for this one -- they're huge, ugly, heavy, and weigh a ton usually, which puzzles me because compared to a cellphone they get SHITTY battery life.
The menu system on most is crappy, the screens suck, the caller ID isn't right sometimes, and many have "rubber buttons" that the printing on the keys gets worn out really easy, plus some have outrageous antennas. I mean seriously, a startac is engineering from the distant future compared to most of the crap on the market.
I agree about cellphones, but our motorola clamshells are great for that, 'cept that the new ones now have a 3rd button on the side that makes it where you can end up changing your phone's volume while in your pocket o_O -- the SINGLE WORST cellphone UI I've used was on a samsung..
I really hate answering machines too.. viva la voicemail, network things tend to suck too.
What else.. let's see.. I'm sure I'll think of something later 
|
|
Aloha
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Mac Write
How can I use the built in fax machine without a phone line to hook it up to????....exactly I can't
If you really need fax capabilities you can always get an online service. No phone line required.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Printers. By God, I will destroy them all.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Westside Island
Status:
Offline
|
|
My PC knows that I like my Powerbook much more than it, so it always misbehaves. I'm thinking of getting rid of it and getting some leftover G5 that you can find at a good price.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Belgium
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Link
Cordless phones. While cellphones are regarded as poorly designed, I think cordless phones take the cake for this one -- they're huge, ugly, heavy, and weigh a ton usually, which puzzles me because compared to a cellphone they get SHITTY battery life.
The menu system on most is crappy, the screens suck, the caller ID isn't right sometimes, and many have "rubber buttons" that the printing on the keys gets worn out really easy, plus some have outrageous antennas. I mean seriously, a startac is engineering from the distant future compared to most of the crap on the market.
I agree about cellphones, but our motorola clamshells are great for that, 'cept that the new ones now have a 3rd button on the side that makes it where you can end up changing your phone's volume while in your pocket o_O -- the SINGLE WORST cellphone UI I've used was on a samsung..
I really hate answering machines too.. viva la voicemail, network things tend to suck too.
What else.. let's see.. I'm sure I'll think of something later
Our cordless phone weighs like 65grams, is tiny, looks pretty nice. The menu system is pretty logical and the caller ID is always correct (if that one is incorrect: blame your telco). And the thing easily gets more than a week of battery life. Oh and it has plastic buttons  It's a Siemens Gigaset, can't remember the exact type. But yeah I get what you are saying, a lot of old cordless phones are crap. The newer ones really don't have those problems anymore.
I agree with Cipher on the printers. They NEVER work flawlessly.
|

iMac 20" C2D 2.16 | Acer Aspire One | Flickr
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
My cheap alarm clock. The Durabrand company (Walmart) has figured a way to multiplex 20 functions in just 6 switches. I just learnt how to set up the alarm, after 3 months of owning it!
My Philips TV. Not even the Symphonic brand (Walmart) had the "great" idea of placing the volume and channel buttons on the top, printed with invisible ink.
My VCR. I lost the remote. I know, my fault.
I think I get along with every other piece of technology in my apartment 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: NYC
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Cipher13
Printers. By God, I will destroy them all.
Didn't think of that, but i'd have to agree with you there. Printers are the single biggest cause of problems on the network i help maintain. They just seem to be the most poorly-designed devices anywhere near a computer. Luckily my personal printer has been alright, but I don't know anyone who doesn't have some kind of printer horror story.
|
"I start fires!"
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Status:
Offline
|
|
agreed on Printers... they're OK once you get em going but getting em to the point where they work is a bugger... and then fixing them if the heads get dirty or something... I've just stopped using mine that I bought years ago and am gona go buy a new Canon 3 in 1 some day.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Edmonton, AB
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Link
Cordless phones. While cellphones are regarded as poorly designed, I think cordless phones take the cake for this one -- they're huge, ugly, heavy, and weigh a ton usually, which puzzles me because compared to a cellphone they get SHITTY battery life.
The menu system on most is crappy, the screens suck, the caller ID isn't right sometimes, and many have "rubber buttons" that the printing on the keys gets worn out really easy, plus some have outrageous antennas. I mean seriously, a startac is engineering from the distant future compared to most of the crap on the market.
I agree about cellphones, but our motorola clamshells are great for that, 'cept that the new ones now have a 3rd button on the side that makes it where you can end up changing your phone's volume while in your pocket o_O -- the SINGLE WORST cellphone UI I've used was on a samsung..
I really hate answering machines too.. viva la voicemail, network things tend to suck too.
What else.. let's see.. I'm sure I'll think of something later
cordless phones are pretty bad, I agree with you there, but they are a hell of a lot cheaper than cellphones.
Originally Posted by ghporter
Are you talking about your iMac no longer seeing CD-RWs that it saw before, or not seeing blanks? I don't think OS X "gets" CD-RWs at all... You can burn them like CD-Rs, but not use them like floppies, the way you can on a Windows or Linux machine. This issue has stumped the heck out of me.
(And it's the Windows OS that's retarded, not most users. Ok, not several users.  I've used Windows since version 1.0, and there are still things that I just don't get.)
osx can do the floppy thing if you make a disc image on the cd, it allows you to access a cd much the same way as a hard drive.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
Inkjet printer paper feed mechanisms, they all seem to want to pull in the whole stack of paper in the tray, so i have to put the paper in a sheet at a time!!! Grrr.
|

Look after my manor, or I will bum you, literally, to death.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
In Russia, Digital Devices ha..., uhm, wait...
-t
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: SoCal
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ghporter
Are you talking about your iMac no longer seeing CD-RWs that it saw before, or not seeing blanks? I don't think OS X "gets" CD-RWs at all... You can burn them like CD-Rs, but not use them like floppies, the way you can on a Windows or Linux machine. This issue has stumped the heck out of me.
Oh, so that's a known issue? Wow, I thought the whole point of CD-RWs was to use them like floppies… Hrm…
And to answer your question, both: It no longer sees CD-RWs it used to see, and it doesn't even see blank CD-RWs anymore (I created a thread about it, but no one responded  ).
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hyrule
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by ajprice
Inkjet printer paper feed mechanisms, they all seem to want to pull in the whole stack of paper in the tray, so i have to put the paper in a sheet at a time!!! Grrr.
Yar! That's how I had my first and last expensive lexmark -- had a Z53 for a few months, one day it decided to eat the ENTIRE paper tray worth of paper.. as a MacNN review once said "it has a violent paper feeder", I couldn't agree more.
Thankfully I had a store warranty on that sucker, swapped it for an HP but wanted a canon (they didn't have any with decent specs at the time), oh well 
|
|
Aloha
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
 |
Forum Rules
|
 |
 |
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|