|
Myself I have zero phone calls saved in my phone. I almost always delete them as soon as they arrive.
I don't keep old contacts either. I have a couple of old business ones saved but even if I want to call them I am going to look up the number first anyways. That is even more problematic these days as employees of businesses will use their personal phones to call with updates to service (etc.) I certainly don't want to save those.
I keep some message threads mostly because it saves me from starting a new thread with someone that I message all the time.
So searching for anything is very easy.
|
|
|
|
|
Mine just accumulate. Think your mail inbox. With my email, I have a keyboard and mouse. The phone? Just thumbs and that sucks. Seriously, I need to write an app.. nah, autumn is almost here. I'm going orienteering, burning stuff in my back yard and otherwise not giving a elephant.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
I wanted to create a control in my UWP app that showed different patterns but didn't require a lot of overhead. In particular, show a line of "little blocks" arrayed at different spacings.
The "cheapest" way I found was to use a UWP "Line" control that supports specifying a "StrokeDashArray" which draws the line with the specified pattern of "solids" and "spaces" of various sizes.
It "shows" great: a single line control that look like a series of smaller controls in the UI.
Unexpectedly, you have to hit the "colored" part of the line to register a "hit"; pointing on a space (on the same "line control") doesn't. By design?
Onwards.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
That sounds like one of my favorite stupid WPF tricks. I simulated a strip chart recorder with a scroll viewer and margin settings on a group of rectangles.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
haha funny... yea, I can see it behaving that way...
well set a Border with Transparent background (as opposed to null) as the rood child, and the dotted line as its own child.
Problem solved!
|
|
|
|
|
I had to put an "almost" transparent Rectangle (Opacity .01) "behind" the Line to get the proper hit area; fully transparent doesn't.
Setting transparency on the original "container" (a border) meant the Line didn't show either. Or on a Grid. I needed a Rectangle behind.
I may have missed another option. (UWP doesn't behave exactly like WPF)
[Later]
Yes ... missed the "set (container) background to a transparent brush". That works. Thanks!
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
modified 13-Sep-23 13:23pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I am helping my kids to refresh their high school math and ran into vector section.
now I wonder who invented/discovered this concept from beginning? Issac Newton, in the book of Principia? or Pascal?
diligent hands rule....
|
|
|
|
|
|
very useful link! thank you
diligent hands rule....
|
|
|
|
|
A History of Vector Analysis: The Evolution of the Idea of a Vectorial System (Dover Books on Mathematics) https:
This book would help.
|
|
|
|
|
thanks for the info. I bought this kindle version of book.
diligent hands rule....
|
|
|
|
|
at my time 12 midnight. i won't watch: not a Mac anything in my hardware. as a former paid up apple fanbois, twenty years ago, i do appreciate the quality/design and innovation$
what do you expect to see if you watch ?
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
I expect Apple to claim USB-C as something they invented.
|
|
|
|
|
i expect it to be renamed "teleport max."
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
|
People to start complaining that their previous generation phone has slowed down ... and Apple to shrug and say "Buy a new one"
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: and Apple to shrug and say "Buy a new one" "And here's a gizmo ($24.95) you can place on your new USB cable ($19.95 separate purchase) to improve its performance. The Apple USB cables are superior to others, so you really should only buy them to get the best out of your device. The gizmo will not work as well on non-Apple cables." - or something to that effect.
|
|
|
|
|
Like the people who buy oxygen-free copper cables for their car stereos because it conducts better!
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Andrew x64 wrote: oxygen-free copper cables for their car stereos
Or for any purpose, really...
But for a car, in particular? Cars aren't exactly the ideal listening environment to start with.
I haved a neighbor - describing himself as an audiophile - who bought gold-plated USB cables going from his PC's dedicated audio card (you don't really see these anymore) to his high-end receiver. I asked him whether the 1s were sharper and the 0s were rounder. He didn't know what to reply.
This is a guy who also had a $3,000 MP3 player and was looking at the $4,500 upgraded version. I didn't even know these devices existed, let alone a market for them...
[Edit]
I hope his hearing was better than his sight. He was colorblind, and his TV was "calibrated" (ahem) with a distinctively pink-ish tone.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: But for a car, in particular? Are you not aware of the practice of putting 3000 watt stereos into automobiles with giant, thumping subwoofers?
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Loudness != quality
My point was that a rolling car is just about the last place you want to be to listen to something if you are serious about sound quality.
And yes, I've seen cars with speakers so huge, if you place them facing the back of the car, they can help push it forward and achieve better mileage...
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't realize you were making an assertion. I thought you were saying there is no such thing.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Believe me, I've seen them. And I hear them drive by every day night.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: Loudness != quality Actually, that is wrong, from a subjective point of view
It is well known that if you set up two 100% identical systems, but adjust one to play 1 to 2 dB louder than the other, in a blind test a listening panel will not hear the loudness difference, but will describe the louder system as having a firmer bass and a more distinctive upper middle range.
The salesmen know that very well. Notice that when you are out shopping for a new stereo system, speakers or whatever, the salesman presents the more expensive alternative (i.e. the one he want to sell), he cranks up the level a little tiny bit when he tells you to listen closely for the bass clarity, or the middle and upper range quality.
Many years ago, there was a craze in the HiFi world about green felt tip pens: You could buy these super expensive pens to color the edges of your CDs to improve the sound quality. You had to use these special expensive pens: They were the exact complimentary color to the infrared laser. (Green being a complimentary color of IR????)
One of my friends, an electronics engineer, laughed wildly about this. But as a scientist, he wanted to verify that it was plain BS. So he made a setup with two CD players to the same amplifier, same speakers, and two identical copies of the same CD, except that one had its edge painted with this super-expensive green felt tip pen. When he switched between the two inputs, changing nothing else, he was slightly shocked: The green-painted copy certainly did sound firmer in the bass, and more distinct in the upper middle tones.
He knew that it was crazy, it couldn't be the case, and set out to find the explanation. As an EE guy, he had available all sorts of meters, and it didn't take him long to discover that the output from the CD player with the "green" CD was slightly more than 1 dB higher than the other one. 1 dB is not discernible as a loudness difference. He added a small resistor to the cable, to bring the signal level down to that of the other CD player. Now it impossible to distinguish about the two CDs. The subjective difference was solely caused by the very slight loudness difference, not perceived as such.
This little experience suggested an obvious verification test: He removed the level correcting resistor, but switched the CDs in the players: Now the un-green CD was in the player with the higher signal output, the green in the one with the lower signal. Now the un-green CD was the one with the firmer bass and the more distinct middle range.
So, if your car stereo really isn't that good: Crank up the volume, and it might sound a lot better.
Bonus story: When I was considering buying a Ford Transit box car (I did end up with one!), the salesman let me test drive a used Transit, for which they already had a buyer so it wasn't available: The buyer wanted it to give room for his bass speakers, that wouldn't fit into any sedan. He needed a Transit size car to fit his speakers in!
|
|
|
|
|
trønderen wrote: from a subjective point of view
And that's exactly that, subjective. Of course a system that plays louder will sound "better" than one that doesn't play as loud. But is it representative of fidelity? To make fair comparisons, you'd test two different systems at the same volume. Otherwise it's apples and oranges. I don't remember ever reading any review in a stereo magazine that didn't ensure that was the case.
And before you say I'm now contradicting myself, when I initially wrote "louder != better", I meant it's not a valid comparison if you're trying to make one.
Otherwise I have crappy speakers I could sell...
|
|
|
|