Re: "Don't be evil" my eye!

[Rod Lavington]

And as a disclaimer,  I use a MacBook Pro, a Google Nexus One, a Newton 2100
and as of Wednesday an iPad.  I have worked at most Apple resellers in Perth
around the turn of the century :)  I joined WAMUG when I was the store
manager at RA in Nedlands, when a huge email thread bashing the store
appeared on the wamug mailing liat, and I headed off to the next meeting to
smooth things over.

I too, am an Apple fanatic :D

Seeya

Rod :)
On Jul 11, 2011 2:27 PM, "Rod Lavington"  wrote:
> You win Carlo.
>
> Cheers
>
> Rod :)
> On Jul 11, 2011 2:19 PM, "cm"  wrote:
>> Hi Rod,
>>
>> I have no reason to doubt what Andy Rubin said on that occasion -- in
> particular the "crappy experiences", but a platform cannot be both open
and
> closed at the same time. Part of the so-called freedom of open software is
> that users and companies can take the software in whatever direction they
> choose. Google is not ready for that to happen so for the present at least
> the software is not open.
>>
>> When you say Apple fanatics what do you mean exactly? Do mean that all
> users of Apple products are deluded in some fashion into believing that
they
> are using quality software? It's strange that Apple's competitors seem to
be
> fanatics as well as the phone and table offerings are mostly following
> behind Apple's lead as fast as their production teams can copy them. Have
a
> look at smartphones before the iPhone and have a look at smartphones now.
> You can do the same for tablets -- which weren't even a popular category
of
> product before the iPad.
>>
>> As for WebOS, when you say "over all the mobile platforms", I hope you
> mean over all your mobile platforms as I am quite happy with iOS.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Carlo
>>
>> On 2011-07-11, at 13:52, Rod Lavington wrote:
>>
>>> So this quote from the second article:
>>>
>>> "Android boss Andy Rubin says Honeycomb is not ready for phones. If
> Google were to open it up to the world at large, it could end up on
> smartphones and users might end up with some crappy experiences."
>>>
>>> does not suggest that Google are keeping Honeycomb closed shop for a
> reason, other than not keeping it open? So, Apple fanatics believe
> everything that comes out of Cupertino as gospel, yet don't believe the
head
> of Google's Android division.
>>>
>>> Anyhoo, the issue is more about the security of social networks, not
> about one particular platform's misgivings :)
>>>
>>> Personally, I would use WebOS over all the mobile platforms in a
> heartbeat. Alas, its not available in Australia (yet)
>>>
>>> Seeya
>>>
>>> Rod
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:24 PM, cm  wrote:
>>> Hi Rod,
>>>
>>> I agree that Google does needs to do something as the Android platform
> fragmentation and security is woeful. I just think that many Android
> supporters don't see the contradiction when they complain that Apple is
> keeping the iPhone closed and that it should be open like Android, when
the
> reality is that Google is now trying to imitate the success of the iPhone
by
> taking more control. The second article is purely factual about the
closing
> of the Honeycomb source code and makes no value judgements. The first
> article is more interesting in that there are a number of levers that
Google
> uses to keep control of the platform that most Android users are not even
> aware of.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Carlo
>>>
>>> On 2011-07-11, at 13:09, Rod Lavington wrote:
>>>
 Hi Carlo,

 Have to take issue with the second article. Anyone that has followed
> Android through its many versions will understand why Google don't want to
> open up Honeycomb. Ice Cream Sandwich is on target to be released later on
> this year, that will reunite both the phone and tablet OS versions of
> Android (Gingerbread and Honeycomb). I'd say Google let a handful of top
> manufacturer's release Honeycomb tablets to keep Android out there, but
will
> let everyone use Ice Cream Sandwich when available later on this year. And
> considering the woeful fragmentation over the different Android models, I
> can understand why Google wants to put the brakes on a bit!

 I think HP with WebOS has the right mix of user interaction with code
> (through the Homebrewers) and keeping the rest of the code strictly HP
only.
> No need for jailbreaking, and you can root the phone and unroot through
the
> developers menu. Too bad nobody uses them ;)

 Cheers

 Rod!



 On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM, cm  wrote:
 Hi Reg,

 I think your son is wise to question. I am not sure of the connection
> between left wing and Android, but maybe your son would like to look at
> these articles about the control that Google exerts over the Android
> platform while loudly claiming that it is free and open.


>
http://www.asbigo.com/motorola/skyhook-filings-detail-googles-tight-control-of-android-platform/

 http://www.businessinsider.com/google-honeycomb-open-2011-3

 Cheers,
 Carl

Re: "Don't be evil" my eye!

[cm]

LOL. That's generous of you Rod. :-D

Cheers,
Carlo

On 2011-07-11, at 14:27, Rod Lavington wrote:

> You win Carlo.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Rod :)
> On Jul 11, 2011 2:19 PM, "cm"  wrote:
> > Hi Rod,
> > 
> > I have no reason to doubt what Andy Rubin said on that occasion -- in 
> > particular the "crappy experiences", but a platform cannot be both open and 
> > closed at the same time. Part of the so-called freedom of open software is 
> > that users and companies can take the software in whatever direction they 
> > choose. Google is not ready for that to happen so for the present at least 
> > the software is not open.
> > 
> > When you say Apple fanatics what do you mean exactly? Do mean that all 
> > users of Apple products are deluded in some fashion into believing that 
> > they are using quality software? It's strange that Apple's competitors seem 
> > to be fanatics as well as the phone and table offerings are mostly 
> > following behind Apple's lead as fast as their production teams can copy 
> > them. Have a look at smartphones before the iPhone and have a look at 
> > smartphones now. You can do the same for tablets -- which weren't even a 
> > popular category of product before the iPad.
> > 
> > As for WebOS, when you say "over all the mobile platforms", I hope you mean 
> > over all your mobile platforms as I am quite happy with iOS.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Carlo
> > 
> > On 2011-07-11, at 13:52, Rod Lavington wrote:
> > 
> >> So this quote from the second article:
> >> 
> >> "Android boss Andy Rubin says Honeycomb is not ready for phones. If Google 
> >> were to open it up to the world at large, it could end up on smartphones 
> >> and users might end up with some crappy experiences."
> >> 
> >> does not suggest that Google are keeping Honeycomb closed shop for a 
> >> reason, other than not keeping it open? So, Apple fanatics believe 
> >> everything that comes out of Cupertino as gospel, yet don't believe the 
> >> head of Google's Android division.
> >> 
> >> Anyhoo, the issue is more about the security of social networks, not about 
> >> one particular platform's misgivings :)
> >> 
> >> Personally, I would use WebOS over all the mobile platforms in a 
> >> heartbeat. Alas, its not available in Australia (yet)
> >> 
> >> Seeya
> >> 
> >> Rod
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:24 PM, cm  wrote:
> >> Hi Rod,
> >> 
> >> I agree that Google does needs to do something as the Android platform 
> >> fragmentation and security is woeful. I just think that many Android 
> >> supporters don't see the contradiction when they complain that Apple is 
> >> keeping the iPhone closed and that it should be open like Android, when 
> >> the reality is that Google is now trying to imitate the success of the 
> >> iPhone by taking more control. The second article is purely factual about 
> >> the closing of the Honeycomb source code and makes no value judgements. 
> >> The first article is more interesting in that there are a number of levers 
> >> that Google uses to keep control of the platform that most Android users 
> >> are not even aware of.
> >> 
> >> Cheers,
> >> Carlo
> >> 
> >> On 2011-07-11, at 13:09, Rod Lavington wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Hi Carlo,
> >>> 
> >>> Have to take issue with the second article. Anyone that has followed 
> >>> Android through its many versions will understand why Google don't want 
> >>> to open up Honeycomb. Ice Cream Sandwich is on target to be released 
> >>> later on this year, that will reunite both the phone and tablet OS 
> >>> versions of Android (Gingerbread and Honeycomb). I'd say Google let a 
> >>> handful of top manufacturer's release Honeycomb tablets to keep Android 
> >>> out there, but will let everyone use Ice Cream Sandwich when available 
> >>> later on this year. And considering the woeful fragmentation over the 
> >>> different Android models, I can understand why Google wants to put the 
> >>> brakes on a bit!
> >>> 
> >>> I think HP with WebOS has the right mix of user interaction with code 
> >>> (through the Homebrewers) and keeping the rest of the code strictly HP 
> >>> only. No need for jailbreaking, and you can root the phone and unroot 
> >>> through the developers menu. Too bad nobody uses them ;)
> >>> 
> >>> Cheers
> >>> 
> >>> Rod!
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM, cm  wrote:
> >>> Hi Reg,
> >>> 
> >>> I think your son is wise to question. I am not sure of the connection 
> >>> between left wing and Android, but maybe your son would like to look at 
> >>> these articles about the control that Google exerts over the Android 
> >>> platform while loudly claiming that it is free and open.
> >>> 
> >>> http://www.asbigo.com/motorola/skyhook-filings-detail-googles-tight-control-of-android-platform/
> >>> 
> >>> http://www.businessinsider.com/google-honeycomb-open-2011-3
> >>> 
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Carlo
> >>> 
> >>> On 2011-07-11, at 12:25, Reg Whitely wrote:
> >>> 
>  Hi Paul
>  
>  Reg Whitely
>  

Re: "Don't be evil" my eye!

[Rod Lavington]

You win Carlo.

Cheers

Rod :)
 On Jul 11, 2011 2:19 PM, "cm"  wrote:
> Hi Rod,
>
> I have no reason to doubt what Andy Rubin said on that occasion -- in
particular the "crappy experiences", but a platform cannot be both open and
closed at the same time. Part of the so-called freedom of open software is
that users and companies can take the software in whatever direction they
choose. Google is not ready for that to happen so for the present at least
the software is not open.
>
> When you say Apple fanatics what do you mean exactly? Do mean that all
users of Apple products are deluded in some fashion into believing that they
are using quality software? It's strange that Apple's competitors seem to be
fanatics as well as the phone and table offerings are mostly following
behind Apple's lead as fast as their production teams can copy them. Have a
look at smartphones before the iPhone and have a look at smartphones now.
You can do the same for tablets -- which weren't even a popular category of
product before the iPad.
>
> As for WebOS, when you say "over all the mobile platforms", I hope you
mean over all your mobile platforms as I am quite happy with iOS.
>
> Cheers,
> Carlo
>
> On 2011-07-11, at 13:52, Rod Lavington wrote:
>
>> So this quote from the second article:
>>
>> "Android boss Andy Rubin says Honeycomb is not ready for phones. If
Google were to open it up to the world at large, it could end up on
smartphones and users might end up with some crappy experiences."
>>
>> does not suggest that Google are keeping Honeycomb closed shop for a
reason, other than not keeping it open? So, Apple fanatics believe
everything that comes out of Cupertino as gospel, yet don't believe the head
of Google's Android division.
>>
>> Anyhoo, the issue is more about the security of social networks, not
about one particular platform's misgivings :)
>>
>> Personally, I would use WebOS over all the mobile platforms in a
heartbeat. Alas, its not available in Australia (yet)
>>
>> Seeya
>>
>> Rod
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:24 PM, cm  wrote:
>> Hi Rod,
>>
>> I agree that Google does needs to do something as the Android platform
fragmentation and security is woeful. I just think that many Android
supporters don't see the contradiction when they complain that Apple is
keeping the iPhone closed and that it should be open like Android, when the
reality is that Google is now trying to imitate the success of the iPhone by
taking more control. The second article is purely factual about the closing
of the Honeycomb source code and makes no value judgements. The first
article is more interesting in that there are a number of levers that Google
uses to keep control of the platform that most Android users are not even
aware of.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Carlo
>>
>> On 2011-07-11, at 13:09, Rod Lavington wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Carlo,
>>>
>>> Have to take issue with the second article. Anyone that has followed
Android through its many versions will understand why Google don't want to
open up Honeycomb. Ice Cream Sandwich is on target to be released later on
this year, that will reunite both the phone and tablet OS versions of
Android (Gingerbread and Honeycomb). I'd say Google let a handful of top
manufacturer's release Honeycomb tablets to keep Android out there, but will
let everyone use Ice Cream Sandwich when available later on this year. And
considering the woeful fragmentation over the different Android models, I
can understand why Google wants to put the brakes on a bit!
>>>
>>> I think HP with WebOS has the right mix of user interaction with code
(through the Homebrewers) and keeping the rest of the code strictly HP only.
No need for jailbreaking, and you can root the phone and unroot through the
developers menu. Too bad nobody uses them ;)
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Rod!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM, cm  wrote:
>>> Hi Reg,
>>>
>>> I think your son is wise to question. I am not sure of the connection
between left wing and Android, but maybe your son would like to look at
these articles about the control that Google exerts over the Android
platform while loudly claiming that it is free and open.
>>>
>>>
http://www.asbigo.com/motorola/skyhook-filings-detail-googles-tight-control-of-android-platform/
>>>
>>> http://www.businessinsider.com/google-honeycomb-open-2011-3
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Carlo
>>>
>>> On 2011-07-11, at 12:25, Reg Whitely wrote:
>>>
 Hi Paul

 Reg Whitely

 Home: 08 9921 7272
 Mob: 04 8899 7313
 Email: rwhit...@internode.on.net



 On 11/07/2011, at 12:03 pm, Paul K wrote:

> I do understand that you did not intend to incite fear, just healthy
> skepticism. A good thing. But I draw your attention to Reg's response:
>
> "My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and
> I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but
in doing
> so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk."
>
> I'm happy to be corr

Re: "Don't be evil" my eye!

[cm]

Hi Rod,

I have no reason to doubt what Andy Rubin said on that occasion -- in 
particular the "crappy experiences", but a platform cannot be both open and 
closed at the same time. Part of the so-called freedom of open software is that 
users and companies can take the software in whatever direction they choose. 
Google is not ready for that to happen so for the present at least the software 
is not open.

When you say Apple fanatics what do you mean exactly? Do mean that all users of 
Apple products are deluded in some fashion into believing that they are using 
quality software? It's strange that Apple's competitors seem to be fanatics as 
well as the phone and table offerings are mostly following behind Apple's lead 
as fast as their production teams can copy them. Have a look at smartphones 
before the iPhone and have a look at smartphones now. You can do the same for 
tablets -- which weren't even a popular category of product before the iPad.

As for WebOS, when you say "over all the mobile platforms", I hope you mean 
over all your mobile platforms as I am quite happy with iOS.

Cheers,
Carlo

On 2011-07-11, at 13:52, Rod Lavington wrote:

> So this quote from the second article:
> 
> "Android boss Andy Rubin says Honeycomb is not ready for phones. If Google 
> were to open it up to the world at large, it could end up on smartphones and 
> users might end up with some crappy experiences."
> 
> does not suggest that Google are keeping Honeycomb closed shop for a reason, 
> other than not keeping it open?  So, Apple fanatics believe everything that 
> comes out of Cupertino as gospel, yet don't believe the head of Google's 
> Android division.
> 
> Anyhoo, the issue is more about the security of social networks, not about 
> one particular platform's misgivings :)
> 
> Personally, I would use WebOS over all the mobile platforms in a heartbeat.  
> Alas, its not available in Australia (yet)
> 
> Seeya
> 
> Rod
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:24 PM, cm  wrote:
> Hi Rod,
> 
> I agree that Google does needs to do something as the Android platform 
> fragmentation and security is woeful. I just think that many Android 
> supporters don't see the contradiction when they complain that Apple is 
> keeping the iPhone closed and that it should be open like Android, when the 
> reality is that Google is now trying to imitate the success of the iPhone by 
> taking more control. The second article is purely factual about the closing 
> of the Honeycomb source code and makes no value judgements. The first article 
> is more interesting in that there are a number of levers that Google uses to 
> keep control of the platform that most Android users are not even aware of.
> 
> Cheers,
> Carlo
> 
> On 2011-07-11, at 13:09, Rod Lavington wrote:
> 
>> Hi Carlo,
>> 
>> Have to take issue with the second article.  Anyone that has followed 
>> Android through its many versions will understand why Google don't want to 
>> open up Honeycomb.  Ice Cream Sandwich is on target to be released later on 
>> this year, that will reunite both the phone and tablet OS versions of 
>> Android (Gingerbread and Honeycomb).  I'd say Google let a handful of top 
>> manufacturer's release Honeycomb tablets to keep Android out there, but will 
>> let everyone use Ice Cream Sandwich when available later on this year.  And 
>> considering the woeful fragmentation over the different Android models, I 
>> can understand why Google wants to put the brakes on a bit!
>> 
>> I think HP with WebOS has the right mix of user interaction with code 
>> (through the Homebrewers) and keeping the rest of the code strictly HP only. 
>>  No need for jailbreaking, and you can root the phone and unroot through the 
>> developers menu.  Too bad nobody uses them ;)
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Rod!
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM, cm  wrote:
>> Hi Reg,
>> 
>> I think your son is wise to question. I am not sure of the connection 
>> between left wing and Android, but maybe your son would like to look at 
>> these articles about the control that Google exerts over the Android 
>> platform while loudly claiming that it is free and open.
>> 
>> http://www.asbigo.com/motorola/skyhook-filings-detail-googles-tight-control-of-android-platform/
>> 
>> http://www.businessinsider.com/google-honeycomb-open-2011-3
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Carlo
>> 
>> On 2011-07-11, at 12:25, Reg Whitely wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Paul
>>> 
>>> Reg Whitely
>>> 
>>> Home: 08 9921 7272
>>> Mob: 04 8899 7313
>>> Email: rwhit...@internode.on.net
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 11/07/2011, at 12:03 pm, Paul K wrote:
>>> 
 I do understand that you did not intend to incite fear, just healthy
 skepticism. A good thing. But I draw your attention to Reg's response:
 
 "My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and
 I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in 
 doing
 so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk."
 
 I'm happy to be corre

Re: "Don't be evil" my eye!

[Rod Lavington]

So this quote from the second article:

"Android boss Andy Rubin says Honeycomb is not ready for phones. If Google
were to open it up to the world at large, it could end up on smartphones and
users might end up with some crappy experiences."

does not suggest that Google are keeping Honeycomb closed shop for a reason,
other than not keeping it open?  So, Apple fanatics believe everything that
comes out of Cupertino as gospel, yet don't believe the head of Google's
Android division.

Anyhoo, the issue is more about the security of social networks, not about
one particular platform's misgivings :)

Personally, I would use WebOS over all the mobile platforms in a heartbeat.
 Alas, its not available in Australia (yet)

Seeya

Rod


On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:24 PM, cm  wrote:

> Hi Rod,
>
> I agree that Google does needs to do something as the Android platform
> fragmentation and security is woeful. I just think that many Android
> supporters don't see the contradiction when they complain that Apple is
> keeping the iPhone closed and that it should be open like Android, when the
> reality is that Google is now trying to imitate the success of the iPhone by
> taking more control. The second article is purely factual about the closing
> of the Honeycomb source code and makes no value judgements. The first
> article is more interesting in that there are a number of levers that Google
> uses to keep control of the platform that most Android users are not even
> aware of.
>
> Cheers,
> Carlo
>
> On 2011-07-11, at 13:09, Rod Lavington wrote:
>
> Hi Carlo,
>
> Have to take issue with the second article.  Anyone that has followed
> Android through its many versions will understand why Google don't want to
> open up Honeycomb.  Ice Cream Sandwich is on target to be released later on
> this year, that will reunite both the phone and tablet OS versions of
> Android (Gingerbread and Honeycomb).  I'd say Google let a handful of top
> manufacturer's release Honeycomb tablets to keep Android out there, but will
> let everyone use Ice Cream Sandwich when available later on this year.  And
> considering the woeful fragmentation over the different Android models, I
> can understand why Google wants to put the brakes on a bit!
>
> I think HP with WebOS has the right mix of user interaction with code
> (through the Homebrewers) and keeping the rest of the code strictly HP only.
>  No need for jailbreaking, and you can root the phone and unroot through the
> developers menu.  Too bad nobody uses them ;)
>
> Cheers
>
> Rod!
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM, cm  wrote:
>
>> Hi Reg,
>>
>> I think your son is wise to question. I am not sure of the connection
>> between left wing and Android, but maybe your son would like to look at
>> these articles about the control that Google exerts over the Android
>> platform while loudly claiming that it is free and open.
>>
>>
>> http://www.asbigo.com/motorola/skyhook-filings-detail-googles-tight-control-of-android-platform/
>>
>> http://www.businessinsider.com/google-honeycomb-open-2011-3
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Carlo
>>
>> On 2011-07-11, at 12:25, Reg Whitely wrote:
>>
>> Hi Paul
>>
>>  *
>> Reg Whitely
>> *
>> *
>>
>> Home: 08 9921 7272
>> Mob: 04 8899 7313
>> Email: rwhit...@internode.on.net
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> On 11/07/2011, at 12:03 pm, Paul K wrote:
>>
>> I do understand that you did not intend to incite fear, just healthy
>> skepticism. A good thing. But I draw your attention to Reg's response:
>>
>> "My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and
>> I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in
>> doing
>> so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk."
>>
>> I'm happy to be corrected by both Reg and you, however to me Reg
>> sounds a bit spooked.
>>
>>
>> Damien is a clever young man and is quite left wing when it comes to
>> multinationals and security 'terrorists'. Where possible he would use
>> android and linux!
>>
>> I'm sure he will read the fine print. I brought him into the discussion
>> only because he has invited me to join Google+, and I'm not keen on it. I am
>> on Facebook and took a lot of time screwing down its security to protect me
>> and my family and friends as much as possible.
>>
>> I dislike Twitter and have no association with it, and a brief early foray
>> into Myspace still presents me with spurious young ladies wishing to make my
>> acquaintance - not!.
>>
>> Ronni's research came at just the right time for me to reassess this
>> situation.
>>
>> This animated growth model of Facebook security is worth viewing. Note it
>> is current only to 2010:
>>
>> http://mattmckeon.com/facebook-privacy/
>>
>> Reg
>>
>>
>>
>> If so, IMHO I believe that to be unwarranted.
>> As I said earlier if the end user perceives benefit as weighed against
>> the risk then a good thing has happened.
>> If it came across as a jab I apologise, it was only intended as a nudge
>> :-)
>> Maybe what I could have said is; yes skepticism is a healthy thi

Re: "Don't be evil" my eye!

[cm]

Hi Rod,

I agree that Google does needs to do something as the Android platform 
fragmentation and security is woeful. I just think that many Android supporters 
don't see the contradiction when they complain that Apple is keeping the iPhone 
closed and that it should be open like Android, when the reality is that Google 
is now trying to imitate the success of the iPhone by taking more control. The 
second article is purely factual about the closing of the Honeycomb source code 
and makes no value judgements. The first article is more interesting in that 
there are a number of levers that Google uses to keep control of the platform 
that most Android users are not even aware of.

Cheers,
Carlo

On 2011-07-11, at 13:09, Rod Lavington wrote:

> Hi Carlo,
> 
> Have to take issue with the second article.  Anyone that has followed Android 
> through its many versions will understand why Google don't want to open up 
> Honeycomb.  Ice Cream Sandwich is on target to be released later on this 
> year, that will reunite both the phone and tablet OS versions of Android 
> (Gingerbread and Honeycomb).  I'd say Google let a handful of top 
> manufacturer's release Honeycomb tablets to keep Android out there, but will 
> let everyone use Ice Cream Sandwich when available later on this year.  And 
> considering the woeful fragmentation over the different Android models, I can 
> understand why Google wants to put the brakes on a bit!
> 
> I think HP with WebOS has the right mix of user interaction with code 
> (through the Homebrewers) and keeping the rest of the code strictly HP only.  
> No need for jailbreaking, and you can root the phone and unroot through the 
> developers menu.  Too bad nobody uses them ;)
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Rod!
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM, cm  wrote:
> Hi Reg,
> 
> I think your son is wise to question. I am not sure of the connection between 
> left wing and Android, but maybe your son would like to look at these 
> articles about the control that Google exerts over the Android platform while 
> loudly claiming that it is free and open.
> 
> http://www.asbigo.com/motorola/skyhook-filings-detail-googles-tight-control-of-android-platform/
> 
> http://www.businessinsider.com/google-honeycomb-open-2011-3
> 
> Cheers,
> Carlo
> 
> On 2011-07-11, at 12:25, Reg Whitely wrote:
> 
>> Hi Paul
>> 
>> Reg Whitely
>> 
>> Home: 08 9921 7272
>> Mob: 04 8899 7313
>> Email: rwhit...@internode.on.net
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 11/07/2011, at 12:03 pm, Paul K wrote:
>> 
>>> I do understand that you did not intend to incite fear, just healthy
>>> skepticism. A good thing. But I draw your attention to Reg's response:
>>> 
>>> "My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and
>>> I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in 
>>> doing
>>> so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk."
>>> 
>>> I'm happy to be corrected by both Reg and you, however to me Reg
>>> sounds a bit spooked.
>> 
>> Damien is a clever young man and is quite left wing when it comes to 
>> multinationals and security 'terrorists'. Where possible he would use 
>> android and linux!
>>  
>> I'm sure he will read the fine print. I brought him into the discussion only 
>> because he has invited me to join Google+, and I'm not keen on it. I am on 
>> Facebook and took a lot of time screwing down its security to protect me and 
>> my family and friends as much as possible. 
>> 
>> I dislike Twitter and have no association with it, and a brief early foray 
>> into Myspace still presents me with spurious young ladies wishing to make my 
>> acquaintance - not!. 
>> 
>> Ronni's research came at just the right time for me to reassess this 
>> situation.
>> 
>> This animated growth model of Facebook security is worth viewing. Note it is 
>> current only to 2010:
>> 
>> http://mattmckeon.com/facebook-privacy/
>> 
>> Reg
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> If so, IMHO I believe that to be unwarranted.
>>> As I said earlier if the end user perceives benefit as weighed against
>>> the risk then a good thing has happened.
>>> If it came across as a jab I apologise, it was only intended as a nudge :-)
>>> Maybe what I could have said is; yes skepticism is a healthy thing but
>>> you did not speculate much about the potential benefits just the
>>> potential risks.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>> Paul
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
>>> Archives - 
>>> Guidelines - 
>>> Unsubscribe - 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
>> Archives - 
>> Guidelines - 
>> Unsubscribe - 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
>

Re: "Don't be evil" my eye! (was: Google+ Invites)

[Rod Lavington]

Hi Carlo,

Have to take issue with the second article.  Anyone that has followed
Android through its many versions will understand why Google don't want to
open up Honeycomb.  Ice Cream Sandwich is on target to be released later on
this year, that will reunite both the phone and tablet OS versions of
Android (Gingerbread and Honeycomb).  I'd say Google let a handful of top
manufacturer's release Honeycomb tablets to keep Android out there, but will
let everyone use Ice Cream Sandwich when available later on this year.  And
considering the woeful fragmentation over the different Android models, I
can understand why Google wants to put the brakes on a bit!

I think HP with WebOS has the right mix of user interaction with code
(through the Homebrewers) and keeping the rest of the code strictly HP only.
 No need for jailbreaking, and you can root the phone and unroot through the
developers menu.  Too bad nobody uses them ;)

Cheers

Rod!



On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM, cm  wrote:

> Hi Reg,
>
> I think your son is wise to question. I am not sure of the connection
> between left wing and Android, but maybe your son would like to look at
> these articles about the control that Google exerts over the Android
> platform while loudly claiming that it is free and open.
>
>
> http://www.asbigo.com/motorola/skyhook-filings-detail-googles-tight-control-of-android-platform/
>
> http://www.businessinsider.com/google-honeycomb-open-2011-3
>
> Cheers,
> Carlo
>
> On 2011-07-11, at 12:25, Reg Whitely wrote:
>
> Hi Paul
>
> *
> Reg Whitely
> *
> *
>
> Home: 08 9921 7272
> Mob: 04 8899 7313
> Email: rwhit...@internode.on.net
>
> *
>
>
> On 11/07/2011, at 12:03 pm, Paul K wrote:
>
> I do understand that you did not intend to incite fear, just healthy
> skepticism. A good thing. But I draw your attention to Reg's response:
>
> "My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and
> I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in
> doing
> so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk."
>
> I'm happy to be corrected by both Reg and you, however to me Reg
> sounds a bit spooked.
>
>
> Damien is a clever young man and is quite left wing when it comes to
> multinationals and security 'terrorists'. Where possible he would use
> android and linux!
>
> I'm sure he will read the fine print. I brought him into the discussion
> only because he has invited me to join Google+, and I'm not keen on it. I am
> on Facebook and took a lot of time screwing down its security to protect me
> and my family and friends as much as possible.
>
> I dislike Twitter and have no association with it, and a brief early foray
> into Myspace still presents me with spurious young ladies wishing to make my
> acquaintance - not!.
>
> Ronni's research came at just the right time for me to reassess this
> situation.
>
> This animated growth model of Facebook security is worth viewing. Note it
> is current only to 2010:
>
> http://mattmckeon.com/facebook-privacy/
>
> Reg
>
>
>
> If so, IMHO I believe that to be unwarranted.
> As I said earlier if the end user perceives benefit as weighed against
> the risk then a good thing has happened.
> If it came across as a jab I apologise, it was only intended as a nudge :-)
> Maybe what I could have said is; yes skepticism is a healthy thing but
> you did not speculate much about the potential benefits just the
> potential risks.
>
>
> Regards
> Paul
>
>
>
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
>  >
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
>  >
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
>



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[Glenn Nicholas]

Google gets a perpetual, irrevocable licence to your content on Google+.

Facebook also gets rights to content you upload to Facebook ...
"For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos
and videos ("IP content"), you specifically give us the following
permission, subject to yourprivacy 
and application
settings : you grant us a
non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license
to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook ("IP
License"). "

You can kind-of take back what you have given to Facebook ...but there is a
catch:
"This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless
your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it."

Seems social media is a bit like Hotel Calfornia: you can check out anytime,
but you might not really leave.

Glenn Nicholas




On 11 July 2011 10:29, Ronda Brown  wrote:

>
> Hello Paul,
>
> If you are having a ‘jab’ at me for asking WAMUG members to check before
> they sign-up for Google+ , I’m very disappointed.
>
> Look at the times members have downloaded and installed something without
> finding out all the details first, and then we (the members who give support
> on WAMUG) try to sort out for them.
>
> That is why we try to inform members to “read the fine print”, do some
> research before ‘jumping in feet first’ (for lack of a better term).
> I’m not ‘inciting fear’ into people, I’m just trying to get them to be
> aware of what they are signing up for or installing, so they don’t make an
> ‘error of judgement’ and then have to pay the consequences.
>
> All I’m trying to do is alert WAMUG Members to “Read the Fine Print BEFORE
> You Sign Up”.
>
> Paul, have you read the "Google Terms of Service”?
> I have!
> This section in particular:
>
> /Begin Quote:
>
> “By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a
> perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license
> to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly
> display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or
> through, the Services.”
>
> “You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such
> Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom
> Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to
> use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.”
>
> “You understand that Google, in performing the required technical steps to
> provide the Services to our users, may (a) transmit or distribute your
> Content over various public networks and in various media; and (b) make such
> changes to your Content as are necessary to conform and adapt that Content
> to the technical requirements of connecting networks, devices, services or
> media. You agree that this license shall permit Google to take these
> actions.”
>
> /End Quote:
>
> 
>
> Regards,
> Ronni
>
>
> On 11/07/2011, at 8:01 AM, Paul K wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Yes, scepticism is a healthy thing.
> >
> > Fear however clouds our judgement.
> >
> > Many sites out there, not just social networking ones, require
> information from their members to function meaningfully.
> > So if Google+ requires information as a cost to the user it must offer a
> benefit as a reward.
> > It is up to the individual user to assess if the deal is a good one for
> them.
> > I am still yet to see any "risk" in this and I fear there is unfounded
> fears being whipped up here. I am not saying 'join Google+'. I am saying be
> realistic. You take a bigger risk eating chicken from a bayne marie but you
> do it, no?
> > Sure FB has had some bad things happen, but do you hear Today Tonight
> shouting about the benefits from their rooftop? Or Ronni for that matter?
> >
> > You need to remember that no social situation is without risk; 'don't
> mention war or politics at the dinner table'. The risk is that you will show
> your opinion leaving you open to opposing views. Big woop. If you don't like
> that kind of heat why would you consciously ask to be allowed in the
> kitchen? A: for the benefits of an open conversation with other people.
> > You weigh the "risk(?)" and make the choice.
> >
> > Sorry but I'm a bit hung up on that word "risk". To me it comes across as
> hyperbole.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
>
>



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

"Don't be evil" my eye! (was: Google+ Invites)

[cm]

Hi Reg,

I think your son is wise to question. I am not sure of the connection between 
left wing and Android, but maybe your son would like to look at these articles 
about the control that Google exerts over the Android platform while loudly 
claiming that it is free and open.

http://www.asbigo.com/motorola/skyhook-filings-detail-googles-tight-control-of-android-platform/

http://www.businessinsider.com/google-honeycomb-open-2011-3

Cheers,
Carlo

On 2011-07-11, at 12:25, Reg Whitely wrote:

> Hi Paul
> 
> Reg Whitely
> 
> Home: 08 9921 7272
> Mob: 04 8899 7313
> Email: rwhit...@internode.on.net
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/07/2011, at 12:03 pm, Paul K wrote:
> 
>> I do understand that you did not intend to incite fear, just healthy
>> skepticism. A good thing. But I draw your attention to Reg's response:
>> 
>> "My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and
>> I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in doing
>> so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk."
>> 
>> I'm happy to be corrected by both Reg and you, however to me Reg
>> sounds a bit spooked.
> 
> Damien is a clever young man and is quite left wing when it comes to 
> multinationals and security 'terrorists'. Where possible he would use android 
> and linux!
>  
> I'm sure he will read the fine print. I brought him into the discussion only 
> because he has invited me to join Google+, and I'm not keen on it. I am on 
> Facebook and took a lot of time screwing down its security to protect me and 
> my family and friends as much as possible. 
> 
> I dislike Twitter and have no association with it, and a brief early foray 
> into Myspace still presents me with spurious young ladies wishing to make my 
> acquaintance - not!. 
> 
> Ronni's research came at just the right time for me to reassess this 
> situation.
> 
> This animated growth model of Facebook security is worth viewing. Note it is 
> current only to 2010:
> 
> http://mattmckeon.com/facebook-privacy/
> 
> Reg
> 
> 
> 
>> If so, IMHO I believe that to be unwarranted.
>> As I said earlier if the end user perceives benefit as weighed against
>> the risk then a good thing has happened.
>> If it came across as a jab I apologise, it was only intended as a nudge :-)
>> Maybe what I could have said is; yes skepticism is a healthy thing but
>> you did not speculate much about the potential benefits just the
>> potential risks.
>> 
>> 
>> Regards
>> Paul
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
>> Archives - 
>> Guidelines - 
>> Unsubscribe - 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 




-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[Rod Lavington]

I'm of the opinion you put online the things you are quite willing for the
rest of the world to see or read.   All those social networks are fine if
you keep that in mind.hence I have hardly any pictures on my facebook
page anymore, and rarely post anything of real interest except for silly
jokes and happy birthdays :)

For me, Google+ is fantastic for Sparks.  I haven't tried Hangout yet, but
now that Skype has gone paid for multiple video chat participants, Hangout
does have an advantage.

Seeya

Rod!


On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Reg Whitely wrote:

> Hi Paul
>
> *
> Reg Whitely
> *
> *
>
> Home: 08 9921 7272
> Mob: 04 8899 7313
> Email: rwhit...@internode.on.net
>
> *
>
>
> On 11/07/2011, at 12:03 pm, Paul K wrote:
>
> I do understand that you did not intend to incite fear, just healthy
> skepticism. A good thing. But I draw your attention to Reg's response:
>
> "My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and
> I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in
> doing
> so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk."
>
> I'm happy to be corrected by both Reg and you, however to me Reg
> sounds a bit spooked.
>
>
> Damien is a clever young man and is quite left wing when it comes to
> multinationals and security 'terrorists'. Where possible he would use
> android and linux!
>
> I'm sure he will read the fine print. I brought him into the discussion
> only because he has invited me to join Google+, and I'm not keen on it. I am
> on Facebook and took a lot of time screwing down its security to protect me
> and my family and friends as much as possible.
>
> I dislike Twitter and have no association with it, and a brief early foray
> into Myspace still presents me with spurious young ladies wishing to make my
> acquaintance - not!.
>
> Ronni's research came at just the right time for me to reassess this
> situation.
>
> This animated growth model of Facebook security is worth viewing. Note it
> is current only to 2010:
>
> http://mattmckeon.com/facebook-privacy/
>
> Reg
>
>
>
> If so, IMHO I believe that to be unwarranted.
> As I said earlier if the end user perceives benefit as weighed against
> the risk then a good thing has happened.
> If it came across as a jab I apologise, it was only intended as a nudge :-)
> Maybe what I could have said is; yes skepticism is a healthy thing but
> you did not speculate much about the potential benefits just the
> potential risks.
>
>
> Regards
> Paul
>
>
>
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
>  >
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
>
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
>



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[Reg Whitely]

Hi Paul

Reg Whitely

Home: 08 9921 7272
Mob: 04 8899 7313
Email: rwhit...@internode.on.net



On 11/07/2011, at 12:03 pm, Paul K wrote:

> I do understand that you did not intend to incite fear, just healthy
> skepticism. A good thing. But I draw your attention to Reg's response:
> 
> "My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and
> I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in doing
> so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk."
> 
> I'm happy to be corrected by both Reg and you, however to me Reg
> sounds a bit spooked.

Damien is a clever young man and is quite left wing when it comes to 
multinationals and security 'terrorists'. Where possible he would use android 
and linux!
 
I'm sure he will read the fine print. I brought him into the discussion only 
because he has invited me to join Google+, and I'm not keen on it. I am on 
Facebook and took a lot of time screwing down its security to protect me and my 
family and friends as much as possible. 

I dislike Twitter and have no association with it, and a brief early foray into 
Myspace still presents me with spurious young ladies wishing to make my 
acquaintance - not!. 

Ronni's research came at just the right time for me to reassess this situation.

This animated growth model of Facebook security is worth viewing. Note it is 
current only to 2010:

http://mattmckeon.com/facebook-privacy/

Reg



> If so, IMHO I believe that to be unwarranted.
> As I said earlier if the end user perceives benefit as weighed against
> the risk then a good thing has happened.
> If it came across as a jab I apologise, it was only intended as a nudge :-)
> Maybe what I could have said is; yes skepticism is a healthy thing but
> you did not speculate much about the potential benefits just the
> potential risks.
> 
> 
> Regards
> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
> 




-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[Paul K]

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Ronda Brown  wrote:
>
> I’m not ‘inciting fear’ into people, I’m just trying to get them to be aware 
> of what they are signing up for or installing, so they don’t make an ‘error 
> of judgement’ and then have to pay the consequences.
>

Hi Ronni,

I do understand that you did not intend to incite fear, just healthy
skepticism. A good thing. But I draw your attention to Reg's response:

"My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and
I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in doing
so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk."

I'm happy to be corrected by both Reg and you, however to me Reg
sounds a bit spooked.
If so, IMHO I believe that to be unwarranted.
As I said earlier if the end user perceives benefit as weighed against
the risk then a good thing has happened.
If it came across as a jab I apologise, it was only intended as a nudge :-)
Maybe what I could have said is; yes skepticism is a healthy thing but
you did not speculate much about the potential benefits just the
potential risks.


Regards
Paul



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[David Nicholas]

Hello Ronni and others interested in this thorny subject

I am interested in Google+ because I am researching these kinds of sites for 
some club websites I manage.  In particular, I am being pressured to give links 
to Facebook and Twitter accounts.  I have done so on one of the sites.

Thank you for drawing our attention to that section in the Terms of Service.  I 
can read.  So I can see what it says.  Yuk.

David

On 11/07/2011, at 10:29 AM, Ronda Brown wrote:

> 
> Hello Paul,
> 
> If you are having a ‘jab’ at me for asking WAMUG members to check before they 
> sign-up for Google+ , I’m very disappointed.
> 
> Look at the times members have downloaded and installed something without 
> finding out all the details first, and then we (the members who give support 
> on WAMUG) try to sort out for them.
> 
> That is why we try to inform members to “read the fine print”, do some 
> research before ‘jumping in feet first’ (for lack of a better term).
> I’m not ‘inciting fear’ into people, I’m just trying to get them to be aware 
> of what they are signing up for or installing, so they don’t make an ‘error 
> of judgement’ and then have to pay the consequences.
> 
> All I’m trying to do is alert WAMUG Members to “Read the Fine Print BEFORE 
> You Sign Up”.
> 
> Paul, have you read the "Google Terms of Service”?
> I have!   
> This section in particular:
> 
> /Begin Quote:
> 
> “By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a 
> perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to 
> reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly 
> display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or 
> through, the Services.”
> 
> “You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content 
> available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google 
> has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such 
> Content in connection with the provision of those services.”
> 
> “You understand that Google, in performing the required technical steps to 
> provide the Services to our users, may (a) transmit or distribute your 
> Content over various public networks and in various media; and (b) make such 
> changes to your Content as are necessary to conform and adapt that Content to 
> the technical requirements of connecting networks, devices, services or 
> media. You agree that this license shall permit Google to take these actions.”
> 
> /End Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Ronni
> 
> 
> On 11/07/2011, at 8:01 AM, Paul K wrote:
> 
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> Yes, scepticism is a healthy thing. 
>> 
>> Fear however clouds our judgement.
>> 
>> Many sites out there, not just social networking ones, require information 
>> from their members to function meaningfully.
>> So if Google+ requires information as a cost to the user it must offer a 
>> benefit as a reward.
>> It is up to the individual user to assess if the deal is a good one for them.
>> I am still yet to see any "risk" in this and I fear there is unfounded fears 
>> being whipped up here. I am not saying 'join Google+'. I am saying be 
>> realistic. You take a bigger risk eating chicken from a bayne marie but you 
>> do it, no?
>> Sure FB has had some bad things happen, but do you hear Today Tonight 
>> shouting about the benefits from their rooftop? Or Ronni for that matter?
>> 
>> You need to remember that no social situation is without risk; 'don't 
>> mention war or politics at the dinner table'. The risk is that you will show 
>> your opinion leaving you open to opposing views. Big woop. If you don't like 
>> that kind of heat why would you consciously ask to be allowed in the 
>> kitchen? A: for the benefits of an open conversation with other people.
>> You weigh the "risk(?)" and make the choice.
>> 
>> Sorry but I'm a bit hung up on that word "risk". To me it comes across as 
>> hyperbole.
>> 
>> Cheers
>> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
> 




-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Rotating text in Preview & excel analysis pak

[Chris Burton]

Hi Ronni, Philippe and others

Just thought I would let you know how I went with the Analysis ToolPak with 
excel.

Microsoft has indeed dis-continued the use of the above add-in but does has 
Solver, for 2011 Excel.

I have downloaded and installed the alternative for the ToolPak, StatPlus:mac 
2009 and it seems to be pretty good. Easy to use, with tutorials on different 
stats to use, and how to use them with your data in Excel. 

This is an LE (light) version and they ask you to upgrade to the Pro version, 
which does has a lot more options and stats procedures.

I will give a reasonable go over the coming months.

Best regards

Chris

Christopher L.K. Burton
Director
Western Whale Research
PO Box 1076
Dunsborough WA 6281
Mobile: 0419 199 120
Email: c...@it.net.au 

On 03/07/2011, at 3:44 PM, Chris Burton wrote:

> 
> Hi Ronni and Philippe
> 
> Thanks very much for your very helpful advice and links. I will get to and 
> check them out, and let you know how it goes.
> 
> Philippe yes I found similar sites that say Microsoft expects us to use an LE 
> version of StatPlus: Mac. Im not sure about it but will use at the last 
> resort after I look at Ronni's suggestions.
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> On 03/07/2011, at 12:30 PM, Ronda Brown wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Hi Chris,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Solver was added to Office for Mac 2011 in the Service Pack 1 update. You 
>> can download and install Office for Mac 2011’s Service Pack 1 by clicking on 
>> the link below:
>> 
>> 
>> After you install Service Pack 1, follow these steps to start Solver:
>>  • Start Excel.
>>  • Click Tools, and then select Add-Ins.
>>  • Click to select the check box for Solver.Xlam.
>>  • Click OK.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Solver for Excel for Mac 2011
>> http://www.solver.com/mac/
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Ronni
>> 
>> On 03/07/2011, at 10:00 AM, Chris Burton wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi Ronni
>>> 
>>> Thanks very much for your reply and link. I had another good look at the 
>>> installation disk and found the customise section and included the VBA 
>>> install.
>>> 
>>> However there is no sign of the Analysis ToolPak. 
>>> When I reopened Excel I have a small window appear, saying 'Cannot find the 
>>> Analysis ToolPak'. Please run the ValuePack Setup to install the Analysis 
>>> ToolPak.
>>> 
>>> There is no ValuePak Setup on my mac or on the install DVD? Do I need to 
>>> download this?
>>> 
>>> Kindest regards and many thanks Ronni
>>> 
>>> Chris
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 02/07/2011, at 2:02 PM, Ronda Brown wrote:
>>> 
 
 On 02/07/2011, at 1:30 PM, Chris Burton  wrote:
 
> Also had another shock today while trying to do some basic stats in the 
> new Excel 2011 but couldnt do anything as this version does not support 
> the Analysis ToolPak, and add in normally supplied with previous 
> versions. 
> 
> Apparently Microsoft are not doing this any longer so I have to  revert 
> to 3rd party software!!
 
 Hi Chris,
 
 Did you perform a standard installation or custom installation of Mac 
 Office?
 
 Microsoft returned the Analysis Toolpak add-in that it removed from Excel 
 2008.
 Microsoft says that the new version of Excel supports the add-in the same 
 way Excel 2008 did, and that the add-in’s basic functions work in Excel 
 2011
 
 Have a read here:
 2011 without UDFs?
 
 
 Sent from Ronni's iPad
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
>> Archives - 
>> Guidelines - 
>> Unsubscribe - 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
> 




-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[Ronda Brown]

Hello Paul,

If you are having a ‘jab’ at me for asking WAMUG members to check before they 
sign-up for Google+ , I’m very disappointed.

Look at the times members have downloaded and installed something without 
finding out all the details first, and then we (the members who give support on 
WAMUG) try to sort out for them.

That is why we try to inform members to “read the fine print”, do some research 
before ‘jumping in feet first’ (for lack of a better term).
I’m not ‘inciting fear’ into people, I’m just trying to get them to be aware of 
what they are signing up for or installing, so they don’t make an ‘error of 
judgement’ and then have to pay the consequences.

All I’m trying to do is alert WAMUG Members to “Read the Fine Print BEFORE You 
Sign Up”.

Paul, have you read the "Google Terms of Service”?
I have!   
This section in particular:

/Begin Quote:

“By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, 
irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, 
adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and 
distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the 
Services.”

“You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content 
available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has 
relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content 
in connection with the provision of those services.”

“You understand that Google, in performing the required technical steps to 
provide the Services to our users, may (a) transmit or distribute your Content 
over various public networks and in various media; and (b) make such changes to 
your Content as are necessary to conform and adapt that Content to the 
technical requirements of connecting networks, devices, services or media. You 
agree that this license shall permit Google to take these actions.”

/End Quote:



Regards,
Ronni


On 11/07/2011, at 8:01 AM, Paul K wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> Yes, scepticism is a healthy thing. 
> 
> Fear however clouds our judgement.
> 
> Many sites out there, not just social networking ones, require information 
> from their members to function meaningfully.
> So if Google+ requires information as a cost to the user it must offer a 
> benefit as a reward.
> It is up to the individual user to assess if the deal is a good one for them.
> I am still yet to see any "risk" in this and I fear there is unfounded fears 
> being whipped up here. I am not saying 'join Google+'. I am saying be 
> realistic. You take a bigger risk eating chicken from a bayne marie but you 
> do it, no?
> Sure FB has had some bad things happen, but do you hear Today Tonight 
> shouting about the benefits from their rooftop? Or Ronni for that matter?
> 
> You need to remember that no social situation is without risk; 'don't mention 
> war or politics at the dinner table'. The risk is that you will show your 
> opinion leaving you open to opposing views. Big woop. If you don't like that 
> kind of heat why would you consciously ask to be allowed in the kitchen? A: 
> for the benefits of an open conversation with other people.
> You weigh the "risk(?)" and make the choice.
> 
> Sorry but I'm a bit hung up on that word "risk". To me it comes across as 
> hyperbole.
> 
> Cheers
> Paul





-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: .MDH file...any clues?

[Eugene]

Hi Mike,

further to this, if you have access to a PC you can download and run the 
application from here, it is free.


Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 
<>
On 11/07/2011, at 9:28 AM, Mike Murray wrote:

> 
> Hi muggers
> 
> We've downloaded some files from an obscure UK university lecturer who refers 
> to them as databases. They may be quite old (early 2000s). 
> 
> The file extension is .mdh. I can open with Textedit and can see that there 
> is text in there (mixed up with the usual characters that describe some sort 
> of formatting) but can't make sense of  the layout. Filemaker Pro will also 
> open it but just arrays all the characters across 21 fields for 2000 records, 
> with no logic.
> 
> Anyone know what will open a .mdh file? Google is silent (although there is 
> an obscure reference to a Hindi Word Processor...)
> 
> Cheers
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mike Murray and Lesley Silvester
> TimeTrackers
> East Fremantle
> Western Australia
> 
> Tel 08 9339 8078
> Fax 08 9339 0519
> 
> British and Australian genealogical and historical research, 
> education, publishing and film-making
> 
> www.timetrackers.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
> 

Re: .MDH file...any clues?

[Eugene]

Hi Mike,

a little research reveals the following. It appears to be a specialist Word 
Processing document but should open up in a basic text editor - as you said 
with additional formatting characters. I don't think it is a database, perhaps 
just a table of data.

Ask the person to sent it again as an exported text file to save you cleaning 
it up. Otherwise there are some text scrubbing utilities that are available to 
clean up the rubbish.

___
The MDH file type is primarily associated with 'Madhyam' by Balendu Sharma 
Dadhich. Files created in Madhyam have '.mdh'  extension. However, they can be 
opened in Notepad or any other word processor very easily and modified. 
___
Madhyam
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Madhyam is a Devanagari word processor that complies with the Inscript 
Devanagari Text Input Standard authenticated by the Government of India, the 
Unicode Consortium and Bureau of Indian Standards. It allows typing text in 
Indian languages, i.e. Hindi, Marathi, Sanskrit, Nepali and Konkani.
Developed by Balendu Sharma Dadhich, it can be used for creating, opening, 
saving and modifying text files and taking print-outs. The software also allows 
sending email and surfing Hindi websites. Apart from Inscript (sometimes called 
'Phonetic') keyboard, it also supports traditional Remington keyboard layout.
The latest version of Madhyam does not support Unicode and RTF like full 
formatting, but future versions of Madhyam might support them. The software has 
been created with the sole purpose of promoting use of Hindi and other Indian 
languages in the world of computing.
Also notable is the OpenOffice Hindi project, which aims on translating the 
open source suite into Hindi.
___

  Regards,
  Eugene
  


-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 
<>
On 11/07/2011, at 9:28 AM, Mike Murray wrote:

> 
> Hi muggers
> 
> We've downloaded some files from an obscure UK university lecturer who refers 
> to them as databases. They may be quite old (early 2000s). 
> 
> The file extension is .mdh. I can open with Textedit and can see that there 
> is text in there (mixed up with the usual characters that describe some sort 
> of formatting) but can't make sense of  the layout. Filemaker Pro will also 
> open it but just arrays all the characters across 21 fields for 2000 records, 
> with no logic.
> 
> Anyone know what will open a .mdh file? Google is silent (although there is 
> an obscure reference to a Hindi Word Processor...)
> 
> Cheers
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mike Murray and Lesley Silvester
> TimeTrackers
> East Fremantle
> Western Australia
> 
> Tel 08 9339 8078
> Fax 08 9339 0519
> 
> British and Australian genealogical and historical research, 
> education, publishing and film-making
> 
> www.timetrackers.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
> 

Re: .MDH file...any clues?

[Rob Davies]

Hindi Word Processor File

http://filext.com/file-extension/MDH

Cheers!
`RobD...


On 11Jul2011, at 9:28 am, Mike Murray wrote:

> 
> Hi muggers
> 
> We've downloaded some files from an obscure UK university lecturer who refers 
> to them as databases. They may be quite old (early 2000s). 
> 
> The file extension is .mdh. I can open with Textedit and can see that there 
> is text in there (mixed up with the usual characters that describe some sort 
> of formatting) but can't make sense of  the layout. Filemaker Pro will also 
> open it but just arrays all the characters across 21 fields for 2000 records, 
> with no logic.
> 
> Anyone know what will open a .mdh file? Google is silent (although there is 
> an obscure reference to a Hindi Word Processor...)
> 
> Cheers
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mike Murray and Lesley Silvester
> TimeTrackers
> East Fremantle
> Western Australia
> 
> Tel 08 9339 8078
> Fax 08 9339 0519
> 
> British and Australian genealogical and historical research, 
> education, publishing and film-making
> 
> www.timetrackers.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 
> 




-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

.MDH file...any clues?

[Mike Murray]

Hi muggers

We've downloaded some files from an obscure UK university lecturer who refers 
to them as databases. They may be quite old (early 2000s). 

The file extension is .mdh. I can open with Textedit and can see that there is 
text in there (mixed up with the usual characters that describe some sort of 
formatting) but can't make sense of  the layout. Filemaker Pro will also open 
it but just arrays all the characters across 21 fields for 2000 records, with 
no logic.

Anyone know what will open a .mdh file? Google is silent (although there is an 
obscure reference to a Hindi Word Processor...)

Cheers
Mike




Mike Murray and Lesley Silvester
TimeTrackers
East Fremantle
Western Australia

Tel 08 9339 8078
Fax 08 9339 0519

British and Australian genealogical and historical research, 
education, publishing and film-making

www.timetrackers.com.au





-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Telstra starts censoring the internet

[Paul K]

So if I agree with Matt's "Ridiculous" viewpoint is that bad? ;)

The irony in this threat is quite galling.
I cannot imagine the kind of complaints it may have 'contracted'.
That is because I likely have a very different viewpoint.
Different viewpoint, not bad viewpoint. Or offensive, or in contravention of
any group guidelines?
Just sensibilities?



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[Paul K]

Hi All,

Yes, scepticism is a healthy thing.

Fear however clouds our judgement.

Many sites out there, not just social networking ones, require information
from their members to function meaningfully.
So if Google+ requires information as a cost to the user it must offer a
benefit as a reward.
It is up to the individual user to assess if the deal is a good one for
them.
I am still yet to see any "risk" in this and I fear there is unfounded fears
being whipped up here. I am not saying 'join Google+'. I am saying be
realistic. You take a bigger risk eating chicken from a bayne marie but you
do it, no?
Sure FB has had some bad things happen, but do you hear Today Tonight
shouting about the benefits from their rooftop? Or Ronni for that matter?

You need to remember that no social situation is without risk; 'don't
mention war or politics at the dinner table'. The risk is that you will show
your opinion leaving you open to opposing views. Big woop. If you don't like
that kind of heat why would you consciously ask to be allowed in the
kitchen? A: for the benefits of an open conversation with other people.
You weigh the "risk(?)" and make the choice.

Sorry but I'm a bit hung up on that word "risk". To me it comes across as
hyperbole.

Cheers
Paul



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[Ronda Brown]

Hi Reg,

Please do forward this advice to your son.

Kind Regards,
Ronni

Sent from Ronni's iPad

On 10/07/2011, at 9:16 PM, Reg Whitely  wrote:

> Thanks Ronni for this alert. My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, 
> and I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in 
> doing so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk . There's enough 
> of a security risk using Facebook fully locked down to warrant intelligent 
> scepticism of this latest process, as it currently seems to be intent on 
> skimming WAMUG members' personal details via the vagaries of others'.
> 
> I shall forward your advice to him, if I have your permission.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Reg
> 
> Reg Whitely
> 
> Home: 08 9921 7272
> Mob: 04 8899 7313
> Email: rwhit...@internode.on.net
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/07/2011, at 7:34 pm, Ronda Brown wrote:
> 
>> Hi David and other WAMUGers signing up for Google+,
>> 
>> I’m just hoping people know what they are getting into here.
>> Just be aware that your “Profile” is NOT private. You cannot have a 
>> ‘Private’ Profile.
>> 
>> "If you have a Google Profile and you have it set to private, you aren’t 
>> using the service correctly apparently. 
>> Google doesn’t want your stinkin’ profile on its servers if you won’t share 
>> with others. 
>> In fact, Google is going so far as to say if you don’t want to share your 
>> profile, delete it. 
>> 
>> If you don’t delete it and won’t share, Google will delete it for you on 
>> August 1. 
>> In a nutshell if you use a Google profile its share or go home.
>> 
>> “You’ll notice that none of the social networks have subscription options. 
>> Nobody says “pay me $100/yr and I’ll keep all your data private and you can 
>> have an ad-free experience.” 
>> 
>> This is because your data is worth more to Google, Facebook, and Twitter 
>> than you can justify paying for it: they don’t want $100 from you when they 
>> can earn $500 or $1,000 targeting advertising to you as you use their sites. 
>> "
>> 
>> You’re telling Google who you know, what you listen to, and what you’re 
>> interested in.
>>  It’s a massive advertiser’s honeypot.”
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Ronni
>> 
>> On 10/07/2011, at 7:08 PM, David Nicholas wrote:
>> 
>>> Kyle
>>> 
>>> Yes, I'd like to try it.
>>> 
>>> David Nicholas
>>> 0401 011 212
>>> 
>>> On 10/07/2011, at 6:22 PM, Kyle Kreusch wrote:
>>> 
 Last time I'm going to ask today, you want an invite e-mail me.
 --
 Regards Kyle
 -
 Kyle Kreusch: This E-Mail Was Dictated Using One OF Nuance Communications, 
 Dictate Products
 -
 User Next, Apple and Macintosh User Group: Website | Facebook | Twitter
 -
 
 
 
 On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Maria Obiageli Chukwu-Ike 
  wrote:
 I'm in! Thanks Kyle
 
 
 On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Kyle Kreusch  wrote:
 Hi All WAMUG
 
 Invites are currently open again for Google+ if you would like one please 
 e-mail me your Gmail address to  sorry no Google Apps 
 customers with your full name and e-mail address.
 
 You may not be able to get in straight away but registrations have been 
 opened the last two days between 1 and 5 AM, You are also welcome to 
 respond to this e-mail on list if you would prefer.
 
 --
 Regards Kyle
 -
 Kyle Kreusch: This E-Mail Was Dictated Using One OF Nuance Communications, 
 Dictate Products
 -
 User Next, Apple and Macintosh User Group: Website | Facebook | Twitter
 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
>> Archives - 
>> Guidelines - 
>> Unsubscribe - 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[Reg Whitely]

Thanks Ronni for this alert. My son is keen to try it an good luck to him, and 
I need to point out he has no association with WAMUG whatsoever, but in doing 
so perhaps he's putting the rest of his family at risk . There's enough of a 
security risk using Facebook fully locked down to warrant intelligent 
scepticism of this latest process, as it currently seems to be intent on 
skimming WAMUG members' personal details via the vagaries of others'.

I shall forward your advice to him, if I have your permission.

Regards

Reg

Reg Whitely

Home: 08 9921 7272
Mob: 04 8899 7313
Email: rwhit...@internode.on.net



On 10/07/2011, at 7:34 pm, Ronda Brown wrote:

> Hi David and other WAMUGers signing up for Google+,
> 
> I’m just hoping people know what they are getting into here.
> Just be aware that your “Profile” is NOT private. You cannot have a ‘Private’ 
> Profile.
> 
> "If you have a Google Profile and you have it set to private, you aren’t 
> using the service correctly apparently. 
> Google doesn’t want your stinkin’ profile on its servers if you won’t share 
> with others. 
> In fact, Google is going so far as to say if you don’t want to share your 
> profile, delete it. 
> 
> If you don’t delete it and won’t share, Google will delete it for you on 
> August 1. 
> In a nutshell if you use a Google profile its share or go home.
> 
> “You’ll notice that none of the social networks have subscription options. 
> Nobody says “pay me $100/yr and I’ll keep all your data private and you can 
> have an ad-free experience.” 
> 
> This is because your data is worth more to Google, Facebook, and Twitter than 
> you can justify paying for it: they don’t want $100 from you when they can 
> earn $500 or $1,000 targeting advertising to you as you use their sites. "
> 
> You’re telling Google who you know, what you listen to, and what you’re 
> interested in.
>  It’s a massive advertiser’s honeypot.”
> 
> Cheers,
> Ronni
> 
> On 10/07/2011, at 7:08 PM, David Nicholas wrote:
> 
>> Kyle
>> 
>> Yes, I'd like to try it.
>> 
>> David Nicholas
>> 0401 011 212
>> 
>> On 10/07/2011, at 6:22 PM, Kyle Kreusch wrote:
>> 
>>> Last time I'm going to ask today, you want an invite e-mail me.
>>> --
>>> Regards Kyle
>>> -
>>> Kyle Kreusch: This E-Mail Was Dictated Using One OF Nuance Communications, 
>>> Dictate Products
>>> -
>>> User Next, Apple and Macintosh User Group: Website | Facebook | Twitter
>>> -
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Maria Obiageli Chukwu-Ike 
>>>  wrote:
>>> I'm in! Thanks Kyle
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Kyle Kreusch  wrote:
>>> Hi All WAMUG
>>> 
>>> Invites are currently open again for Google+ if you would like one please 
>>> e-mail me your Gmail address to  sorry no Google Apps 
>>> customers with your full name and e-mail address.
>>> 
>>> You may not be able to get in straight away but registrations have been 
>>> opened the last two days between 1 and 5 AM, You are also welcome to 
>>> respond to this e-mail on list if you would prefer.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Regards Kyle
>>> -
>>> Kyle Kreusch: This E-Mail Was Dictated Using One OF Nuance Communications, 
>>> Dictate Products
>>> -
>>> User Next, Apple and Macintosh User Group: Website | Facebook | Twitter
>>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 




-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: final cut pro

[Daniel Kerr]

Hi Rob

Thanks for that. Yes, was aware of the alternatives and had mentioned those
to others.
They're happy to stay with FCS2 at the moment as well

Kind regards
Daniel


On 10/7/11 9:06 PM, "Rob Davies"  wrote:

> 
> Morning Daniel,
> 
> AVID is offering %60 of Media Composer for FCP customers.
> Pro level application compatibility not an issue.
> Expensive Plug-Ins, but it is a pro app.
> 
> Premier from Adobe as another Alternative.
> It does now function within OS X very well, although Graphics Acceleration is
> Nvidia based which for some within Mac community an issue.
> Does allow all versions of FCP to be imported and utilised. FCP X will not
> revisit old projects.
> Adobe now offering a %50 rebate, for FCS users.
> I have found Adobe Enterprise License tedious, but they are a Pro-App?
> 
> I do not use Premier Pro, but have worked at installations whom do. Improved
> with 5.5.
> I personally use FCS 2 with Apple products and many plug-ins , and lots of
> Clips collected footage and projects. Massive Database!
> This being a main reason for not upgrading to FCP X, as with community
> Apple Shake in this collection also.
> 
> But I have been moving to AVID over past year or so as Apple did hint at not
> continuing  FCS2.
> As Matthew so eloquently put PRO-SUMER is market base.
> Recently Apple has not been so loyal to those which have supported company,
> but we endure.
> 
> I suppose one reason for going to Intel, allowing users to instal and run
> alternatives to those Apple has rejected.
> 
> Premier Pro seems to be best all in one solution, 64bit so extremely fast with
> lots of ram, After Effects excellent program.
> 
> I would suggest any body looking at alternatives to download trial versions
> first, investigate total upgrade.
> Especially with Avid... many plug-ins, and software packages to make complete
> studio.
> Beware of ongoing upgrade costs with all software packages, especially AVID
> plug-ins some have annuities?
> 
> Cheers!
> `RobD..
> 
> On 09Jul2011, at 10:49 pm, Daniel Kerr wrote:
>> 
>> LOL... Have to pay that one. That was quite good ;)
>> Hehehe.
>> 
>> But yes, I've got a few clients that looked at it and decided there was no
>> way at the moment they would consider using that in their businesses.
>> It was just too much missing that they couldn't rely on, especially if
>> sharing files with others working for them.
>> 
>> Maybe after a few more "tweaks" it might be a "Pro" Pro Application again :)
>> 
>> Kind regards
>> Daniel
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 9/7/11 10:42 PM, "Matthew Healey"  wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Apple redefined "Pro" a while ago. It used to mean "Use this if your job and
>>> livelihood relies on this product". Now it means "Use this if your really
>>> passionate about make great home movies".
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 08/07/2011, at 10:52 AM, cm wrote:
>>> 
 
 Hi James and Mike,
 
 Here is an interesting update on the Final Cut Pro affair. Apple may be
 considering resuming sales of FCP 7 to studio customers but at the same
 time
 they seem to be working furiously to the add the missing features to FCP X
 
 http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/07/07/apple_looking_into_re_offerin
 g_
 final_cut_pro_7_volume_licenses_after_fcp_x_backlash.html
 
 Cheers,
 Carlo
 
 On 2011-07-07, at 13:44, Mike Murray wrote:
 
> 
> Hi James
> 
> I agree with Carlo's analysis.
> 
> I'm exploring FCP X (and Motion and Compressor) and finding that it's
> excellent, intuitive and powerful so far, with plenty of upside
> promised/rumoured. I'm creating camera archives of all my digital DV tapes
> through its archiving procedure which is just a little flaky (sometimes
> the
> process 'hangs' at the last clip on the tape; sometimes it doesn't). The
> archives are 'skimmable' through FCP X which opens up a whole new world of
> video that I'd forgotten I had.
> 
> I think it's going to be a great product, but I agree that the big film/TV
> producers have been left high and dry and are shouting loudly. The
> 'support'
> discussion groups are ringing with shrill comments about the end of
> civilisation as they know it...
> 
> But the products worth trying out...you can still run earlier versions of
> Final Cut (Pro and Express), although the installation will move your old
> Final Cut Pro to a new folder. You'll need to keep these old versions,
> especially if you need to rework projects. FCP X won't open existing Final
> Cut projects, but will open .mov files (and many others), so you can
> always
> export a Final Cut project as a .mov file and open it with FCP X.
> 
> Cheers
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 07/07/2011, at 10:13 AM, cm wrote:
> 
>> Hi James,
>> 
>> I have tried the latest version of Final Cut Pro X and it is very
>> polished,
>> functional and intuitive. For a

Re: final cut pro

[Rob Davies]

Morning Daniel,

AVID is offering %60 of Media Composer for FCP customers.
Pro level application compatibility not an issue. 
Expensive Plug-Ins, but it is a pro app.

Premier from Adobe as another Alternative. 
It does now function within OS X very well, although Graphics Acceleration is 
Nvidia based which for some within Mac community an issue.
Does allow all versions of FCP to be imported and utilised. FCP X will not 
revisit old projects.
Adobe now offering a %50 rebate, for FCS users.
I have found Adobe Enterprise License tedious, but they are a Pro-App?

I do not use Premier Pro, but have worked at installations whom do. Improved 
with 5.5.
I personally use FCS 2 with Apple products and many plug-ins , and lots of 
Clips collected footage and projects. Massive Database!
This being a main reason for not upgrading to FCP X, as with community 
Apple Shake in this collection also.

But I have been moving to AVID over past year or so as Apple did hint at not 
continuing  FCS2.
As Matthew so eloquently put PRO-SUMER is market base. 
Recently Apple has not been so loyal to those which have supported company, but 
we endure.

I suppose one reason for going to Intel, allowing users to instal and run 
alternatives to those Apple has rejected.

Premier Pro seems to be best all in one solution, 64bit so extremely fast with 
lots of ram, After Effects excellent program.

I would suggest any body looking at alternatives to download trial versions 
first, investigate total upgrade.
Especially with Avid... many plug-ins, and software packages to make complete 
studio.
Beware of ongoing upgrade costs with all software packages, especially AVID 
plug-ins some have annuities?

Cheers!
`RobD..

On 09Jul2011, at 10:49 pm, Daniel Kerr wrote:
> 
> LOL... Have to pay that one. That was quite good ;)
> Hehehe.
> 
> But yes, I've got a few clients that looked at it and decided there was no
> way at the moment they would consider using that in their businesses.
> It was just too much missing that they couldn't rely on, especially if
> sharing files with others working for them.
> 
> Maybe after a few more "tweaks" it might be a "Pro" Pro Application again :)
> 
> Kind regards
> Daniel
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/7/11 10:42 PM, "Matthew Healey"  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Apple redefined "Pro" a while ago. It used to mean "Use this if your job and
>> livelihood relies on this product". Now it means "Use this if your really
>> passionate about make great home movies".
>> 
>> 
>> On 08/07/2011, at 10:52 AM, cm wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi James and Mike,
>>> 
>>> Here is an interesting update on the Final Cut Pro affair. Apple may be
>>> considering resuming sales of FCP 7 to studio customers but at the same time
>>> they seem to be working furiously to the add the missing features to FCP X
>>> 
>>> http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/07/07/apple_looking_into_re_offering_
>>> final_cut_pro_7_volume_licenses_after_fcp_x_backlash.html
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Carlo
>>> 
>>> On 2011-07-07, at 13:44, Mike Murray wrote:
>>> 
 
 Hi James
 
 I agree with Carlo's analysis.
 
 I'm exploring FCP X (and Motion and Compressor) and finding that it's
 excellent, intuitive and powerful so far, with plenty of upside
 promised/rumoured. I'm creating camera archives of all my digital DV tapes
 through its archiving procedure which is just a little flaky (sometimes the
 process 'hangs' at the last clip on the tape; sometimes it doesn't). The
 archives are 'skimmable' through FCP X which opens up a whole new world of
 video that I'd forgotten I had.
 
 I think it's going to be a great product, but I agree that the big film/TV
 producers have been left high and dry and are shouting loudly. The 
 'support'
 discussion groups are ringing with shrill comments about the end of
 civilisation as they know it...
 
 But the products worth trying out...you can still run earlier versions of
 Final Cut (Pro and Express), although the installation will move your old
 Final Cut Pro to a new folder. You'll need to keep these old versions,
 especially if you need to rework projects. FCP X won't open existing Final
 Cut projects, but will open .mov files (and many others), so you can always
 export a Final Cut project as a .mov file and open it with FCP X.
 
 Cheers
 Mike
 
 
 
 
 On 07/07/2011, at 10:13 AM, cm wrote:
 
> Hi James,
> 
> I have tried the latest version of Final Cut Pro X and it is very 
> polished,
> functional and intuitive. For a, so-called, prosumer product it is
> excellent. The complaints are coming from professional studios who have
> lost some of the features that they had in Final Cut Pro 7 Studio, the
> previous version of the product. The previous version of FCP has been
> declared end-of-life. The main problems are that FCP X will not import
> projects from the old version, does not have 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[Kyle Kreusch]

Hi All

All invite requests will be entered in the morning. is getting an early
night as he has nearly been up for 24 hours+

--
Regards Kyle
-
Kyle Kreusch: This E-Mail Was Dictated Using One OF Nuance
Communications, Dictate Products
-
*User Next*, *Apple and Macintosh User Group*: Website|
Facebook  |
Twitter
-



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Telstra starts censoring the internet

[Paul K]

No need to apologise :)



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[Ronda Brown]

Hi David and other WAMUGers signing up for Google+,

I’m just hoping people know what they are getting into here.
Just be aware that your “Profile” is NOT private. You cannot have a ‘Private’ 
Profile.

"If you have a Google Profile and you have it set to private, you aren’t using 
the service correctly apparently. 
Google doesn’t want your stinkin’ profile on its servers if you won’t share 
with others. 
In fact, Google is going so far as to say if you don’t want to share your 
profile, delete it. 

If you don’t delete it and won’t share, Google will delete it for you on August 
1. 
In a nutshell if you use a Google profile its share or go home.

“You’ll notice that none of the social networks have subscription options. 
Nobody says “pay me $100/yr and I’ll keep all your data private and you can 
have an ad-free experience.” 

This is because your data is worth more to Google, Facebook, and Twitter than 
you can justify paying for it: they don’t want $100 from you when they can earn 
$500 or $1,000 targeting advertising to you as you use their sites. "

You’re telling Google who you know, what you listen to, and what you’re 
interested in.
 It’s a massive advertiser’s honeypot.”

Cheers,
Ronni

On 10/07/2011, at 7:08 PM, David Nicholas wrote:

> Kyle
> 
> Yes, I'd like to try it.
> 
> David Nicholas
> 0401 011 212
> 
> On 10/07/2011, at 6:22 PM, Kyle Kreusch wrote:
> 
>> Last time I'm going to ask today, you want an invite e-mail me.
>> --
>> Regards Kyle
>> -
>> Kyle Kreusch: This E-Mail Was Dictated Using One OF Nuance Communications, 
>> Dictate Products
>> -
>> User Next, Apple and Macintosh User Group: Website | Facebook | Twitter
>> -
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Maria Obiageli Chukwu-Ike 
>>  wrote:
>> I'm in! Thanks Kyle
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Kyle Kreusch  wrote:
>> Hi All WAMUG
>> 
>> Invites are currently open again for Google+ if you would like one please 
>> e-mail me your Gmail address to  sorry no Google Apps 
>> customers with your full name and e-mail address.
>> 
>> You may not be able to get in straight away but registrations have been 
>> opened the last two days between 1 and 5 AM, You are also welcome to respond 
>> to this e-mail on list if you would prefer.
>> 
>> --
>> Regards Kyle
>> -
>> Kyle Kreusch: This E-Mail Was Dictated Using One OF Nuance Communications, 
>> Dictate Products
>> -
>> User Next, Apple and Macintosh User Group: Website | Facebook | Twitter
>> 





-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[David Nicholas]

Kyle

Yes, I'd like to try it.

David Nicholas
0401 011 212

On 10/07/2011, at 6:22 PM, Kyle Kreusch wrote:

> Last time I'm going to ask today, you want an invite e-mail me.
> --
> Regards Kyle
> -
> Kyle Kreusch: This E-Mail Was Dictated Using One OF Nuance Communications, 
> Dictate Products
> -
> User Next, Apple and Macintosh User Group: Website | Facebook | Twitter
> -
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Maria Obiageli Chukwu-Ike 
>  wrote:
> I'm in! Thanks Kyle
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Kyle Kreusch  wrote:
> Hi All WAMUG
> 
> Invites are currently open again for Google+ if you would like one please 
> e-mail me your Gmail address to  sorry no Google Apps 
> customers with your full name and e-mail address.
> 
> You may not be able to get in straight away but registrations have been 
> opened the last two days between 1 and 5 AM, You are also welcome to respond 
> to this e-mail on list if you would prefer.
> 
> --
> Regards Kyle
> -
> Kyle Kreusch: This E-Mail Was Dictated Using One OF Nuance Communications, 
> Dictate Products
> -
> User Next, Apple and Macintosh User Group: Website | Facebook | Twitter
> -
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cheers!
> 




-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Google+ Invites [First 15]

[Kyle Kreusch]

Last time I'm going to ask today, you want an invite e-mail me.
--
Regards Kyle
-
Kyle Kreusch: This E-Mail Was Dictated Using One OF Nuance
Communications, Dictate Products
-
*User Next*, *Apple and Macintosh User Group*: Website|
Facebook  |
Twitter
-



On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Maria Obiageli Chukwu-Ike <
obydea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm in! Thanks Kyle
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Kyle Kreusch wrote:
>
>> Hi All WAMUG
>>
>> Invites are currently open again for Google+ if you would like one please
>> e-mail me your Gmail address to  sorry no Google Apps
>> customers with your full name and e-mail address.
>>
>> You may not be able to get in straight away but registrations have been
>> opened the last two days between 1 and 5 AM, You are also welcome to respond
>> to this e-mail on list if you would prefer.
>>
>> --
>> Regards Kyle
>>
>> -
>> Kyle Kreusch: This E-Mail Was Dictated Using One OF Nuance
>> Communications, Dictate Products
>>
>> -
>> *User Next*, *Apple and Macintosh User Group*: Website|
>> Facebook  | 
>> Twitter
>>
>> -
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers!
>



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Linked In Mailout apology

[Ken Jackson]

It's very big business Chris, but smaller now!
I just cancelled my involvement,

Regards,

Ken

Sent from my iPad

On 29/06/2011, at 11:44 AM, Chris Burton  wrote:

> Hi Ken
> 
> No worries mate, I appreciate your concern.
> 
> I did notice in the business section of today's west and article on LinkedIn, 
> and I assume it is the same system you are referring to. Looks like very big 
> business, especially for those who want everyone else to know about thier own 
> business
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> Christopher L.K. Burton
> Director
> Western Whale Research
> PO Box 1076
> Dunsborough WA 6281
> Mobile: 0419 199 120
> Email: c...@it.net.au 
> 
> On 29/06/2011, at 11:27 AM, Ken Jackson wrote:
> 
>> My sincere apologies to anyone who received a Linked In request from me.
>> 
>> It went out to my whole address book & WAMUG!! 
>> Without my knowledge & I don't yet know why or how.
>> 
>> I will be contacting Linked In to find out how it came about.
>> 
>> I am very pissed off!
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Ken
>> 
>> Ken Jackson
>> 
>> k...@littleriverstudios.com.au
>> 
>> kenjackson7...@gmail.com
>> 
>> T 08 9376 1680
>> M 0409 770 747
>> Skype kennyj1098
>> 
>> www.littleriverstudios.com.au
>> 
>> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Perth-Australia/Little-River-Studios/129893967035394
>>
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Linked In Mailout apology

[Ken Jackson]

See Ronnies reply Eugene, as usual she nailed it,

Regards,

Ken

Sent from my iPad

On 29/06/2011, at 11:50 AM, Eugene  wrote:

> Hi Ken,
> 
> just out of curiosity I would also like to know how these 'LinkedIn request' 
> are generated and become almost viral as I have received a few request. If 
> they give you feedback could you forward it on as a warning to others.
> 
> I'm sure that this type of spam does more damage to LinkedIn then they 
> realise as I will never become a member for fear of subjecting my friends to 
> this unwarranted spam.
> 
>   Regards,
>   Eugene
>   <(null) 4.tiff>
> 
> On 29/06/2011, at 11:27 AM, Ken Jackson wrote:
> 
>> My sincere apologies to anyone who received a Linked In request from me.
>> 
>> It went out to my whole address book & WAMUG!! 
>> Without my knowledge & I don't yet know why or how.
>> 
>> I will be contacting Linked In to find out how it came about.
>> 
>> I am very pissed off!
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Ken
>> 
>> Ken Jackson
>> 
>> k...@littleriverstudios.com.au
>> 
>> kenjackson7...@gmail.com
>> 
>> T 08 9376 1680
>> M 0409 770 747
>> Skype kennyj1098
>> 
>> www.littleriverstudios.com.au
>> 
>> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Perth-Australia/Little-River-Studios/129893967035394
>>
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Linked In Mailout apology

[Ken Jackson]

Carlo! Windows indeed!
I Mac 27, Snow Leopard,  annoying stuff this mailout!

Regards,

Ken

Sent from my iPad

On 29/06/2011, at 11:40 AM, cm  wrote:

> Hi Ken,
> 
> No problem about the Linked In request. I was just wondering, were the 
> requests sent from a Mac or a Windows computer?
> 
> Cheers,
> Carlo
> 
> On 2011-06-29, at 11:27, Ken Jackson wrote:
> 
>> My sincere apologies to anyone who received a Linked In request from me.
>> 
>> It went out to my whole address book & WAMUG!! 
>> Without my knowledge & I don't yet know why or how.
>> 
>> I will be contacting Linked In to find out how it came about.
>> 
>> I am very pissed off!
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Ken
>> 
>> Ken Jackson
>> 
>> k...@littleriverstudios.com.au
>> 
>> kenjackson7...@gmail.com
>> 
>> T 08 9376 1680
>> M 0409 770 747
>> Skype kennyj1098
>> 
>> www.littleriverstudios.com.au
>> 
>> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Perth-Australia/Little-River-Studios/129893967035394
>>
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe - 

Re: Linked In Mailout apology

[Ken Jackson]

Thanks to all on this great list.
I have cancelled my involvement with Linked In!
I don't need companies that screw you by stealth, even if they are technically 
correct.

Regards to all,


Ken

Sent from my iPad

On 29/06/2011, at 12:55 PM, Daniel Kerr  wrote:
 
> Yes - LinkedIn and "OptOut" of all your security and free mailing list for 
> all!
> 
> Sorry couldn't resist. Lol. 
> A bad joke I know - probably the no sleep I've had :)
> (and you know you can't tell me off Ronni - I'll just refer you back to your 
> emails lol)
> 
> Kind regards
> Daniel
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> ---
> Daniel Kerr
> MacWizardry
> 
> Phone: 0414 795 960
> Email:  dan...@macwizardry.com.au
> Web:
> 
> 
> **For Everything Macintosh**
> 
> On 29/06/2011, at 12:37 PM, cm  wrote:
> 
>> Don't feel bad, Ken. It seems that you are the victim of a deliberate 
>> deception by Linked In.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Carlo
>> 
>> On 2011-06-29, at 12:28, Eugene wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Ronni,
>>> 
>>> that explains it. 
>>> 
>>> To me it seems a common mistake occurring on LinkedIn judging by those 
>>> links. 
>>> 
>>> Perhaps LinkedIn has something to answer for, as their opt in options are 
>>> not clear for all users. They should have a dialogue box pre-warning the 
>>> user that an auto mailing invitation will be sent to all the people in 
>>> their address-book and that they need to individually cancel each request 
>>> sent so that reminder notices are sent.
>>> 
>>> Again, I will be happy to avoid this company and all its dealings.
>>> 
>>>   Regards,
>>>   Eugene
>>>   <(null) 4.tiff>
>>> 
>>> On 29/06/2011, at 11:56 AM, Ronda Brown wrote:
>>> 
 Hi Ken,
 
 Your apology is accepted. 
 This might explain how it happened though.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A google search will find a heap more links ;-)
 
 Cheers,
 Ronni
 
 On 29/06/2011, at 11:27 AM, Ken Jackson wrote:
 
> My sincere apologies to anyone who received a Linked In request from me.
> 
> It went out to my whole address book & WAMUG!! 
> Without my knowledge & I don't yet know why or how.
> 
> I will be contacting Linked In to find out how it came about.
> 
> I am very pissed off!
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ken
> 
> Ken Jackson
> 
> k...@littleriverstudios.com.au
> 
> kenjackson7...@gmail.com
> 
> T 08 9376 1680
> M 0409 770 747
> Skype kennyj1098
> 
> www.littleriverstudios.com.au
> 
> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Perth-Australia/Little-River-Studios/129893967035394
> 
> 
 
 
 
 
 
 -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
 Archives - 
 Guidelines - 
 Unsubscribe - 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
>>> Archives - 
>>> Guidelines - 
>>> Unsubscribe - 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
>> Archives - 
>> Guidelines - 
>> Unsubscribe - 
> 
> 
> 
> -- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
> Archives - 
> Guidelines - 
> Unsubscribe - 



-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - 
Guidelines - 
Unsubscribe -