Willis
Oct 10, 06:26 PM
argh... enough with the speculation. these guys are shooting blanks.
serogers1970
Mar 24, 06:12 PM
Wish I had gotten a few shares of stock then!!
UGH! Don't remind me...
I had 22 shares at $19. Ex-wife decided we should sell them since it was stagnant for so long.
It has since doubled and gotten to the $300-whatever that it is today.
$15k or so lost... No wonder she's an ex!!
UGH! Don't remind me...
I had 22 shares at $19. Ex-wife decided we should sell them since it was stagnant for so long.
It has since doubled and gotten to the $300-whatever that it is today.
$15k or so lost... No wonder she's an ex!!
Clive At Five
Oct 3, 02:24 PM
This will be the last "really impressive" processor upgrade for 2+ years into the future. Remaining improvements will be in features, communications, integration, sooftware, etc.
I disagree. While the "MHz War" is likely drawing to a close, the "Multicore War" is just starting. Within the next 2 years, I'd be willing to bet just about anything that we'll be seeing single CPUs with 4 cores (for sure), 8 cores, and the beginning rumblings of 16 core CPUs. If you ask me, the past 4 years have yeilded very little progress in terms of CPU speed. A 3.0 GHz Pentium 4 is comparable to a 2.0 GHz Yonah... and now that we've ventured into Multicore Land, I guarantee that there will be huge processor speed increases.
OSX wil be updaed to 10.5 of course as this is the central theme of 1-07. Related to this we will see updates of iApps to take advantage of new features and increased integration.
I don't think Leopard will be out yet. I don't have any reason to back that up, I just don't think that Apple is in a huge rush to get it out. I'm pretty sure they'll want to polish it down to the last detail in lieu of Vista coming out. The better Leopard looks when compared to Vista, the more praise Apple will get for it. You have no idea how many people I've talked to are planning on waiting 6-12 months after its release before buying Vista. Those months are Apple's big chance to convert a lot of PC users while they bask in the sunlight of a job well done. They're not going to release a rush-job.
-Clive
I disagree. While the "MHz War" is likely drawing to a close, the "Multicore War" is just starting. Within the next 2 years, I'd be willing to bet just about anything that we'll be seeing single CPUs with 4 cores (for sure), 8 cores, and the beginning rumblings of 16 core CPUs. If you ask me, the past 4 years have yeilded very little progress in terms of CPU speed. A 3.0 GHz Pentium 4 is comparable to a 2.0 GHz Yonah... and now that we've ventured into Multicore Land, I guarantee that there will be huge processor speed increases.
OSX wil be updaed to 10.5 of course as this is the central theme of 1-07. Related to this we will see updates of iApps to take advantage of new features and increased integration.
I don't think Leopard will be out yet. I don't have any reason to back that up, I just don't think that Apple is in a huge rush to get it out. I'm pretty sure they'll want to polish it down to the last detail in lieu of Vista coming out. The better Leopard looks when compared to Vista, the more praise Apple will get for it. You have no idea how many people I've talked to are planning on waiting 6-12 months after its release before buying Vista. Those months are Apple's big chance to convert a lot of PC users while they bask in the sunlight of a job well done. They're not going to release a rush-job.
-Clive
firestarter
Apr 26, 11:21 AM
Like this: 283005
%IMG_DESC_5%
%IMG_DESC_6%
%IMG_DESC_7%
%IMG_DESC_8%
%IMG_DESC_9%
%IMG_DESC_10%
%IMG_DESC_11%
%IMG_DESC_12%
%IMG_DESC_13%
%IMG_DESC_14%
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
SchneiderMan
Apr 11, 12:25 AM
Purchased Witnes. So far it works flawlessly! Gives me a little piece of mind when I'm not at home.
http://www.orbicule.com/images/Banner_Witness1.png
http://www.orbicule.com/images/Banner_Witness1.png
arn
Apr 27, 03:19 AM
fwiw, here's some data from this news thread: http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/26/android-jumps-past-ios-in-overall-u-s-smartphone-usage/
The top rated posts:
Macman1993
13 hours ago at 12:07 pm
Some will be bothered about IOS not being the most dominant. I personally don't care, I just want the best mobile OS.
Rating: 15 Positives / 2 Negatives
brendu
13 hours ago at 12:12 pm
One interesting thing to note. Apple held 25% of recent acquirers with 2 phone models. The iPhone 4 and iPhone 3GS. They are also on only 2 carriers, and have only been with Verizon for part of the time leading up to the march survey. Android however is on dozens of handsets and all four US carriers. I would say apple is doing amazingly well when you consider those specifics. I am not worried about iOS not having a larger chunk of the market, I am blown away that it has 25%.
Rating: 12 Positives / 0 Negatives
komodrone
13 hours ago at 12:39 pm
"...in total penetration" THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID. yeah I signed up for an account just to post this.
Rating: 10 Positives / 0 Negatives
Eddyisgreat
13 hours ago at 12:15 pm
If the iPhone were buy one get two free as well then I bet those numbers would be different :D
Rating: 9 Positives / 1 Negatives
VanMac
13 hours ago at 12:09 pm
Competition is good :) Keeps Apple on their toes Don't need another MS Monopoly.......
Rating: 12 Positives / 4 Negatives
Slix
13 hours ago at 12:14 pm
iPhones are still better.
Rating: 12 Positives / 5 Negatives
supmango
13 hours ago at 12:12 pm
I really hope that Apple sees trends like this and realizes it's time to change their game plan. No more once a year phones. Time to kick the innovation level up a few notches. Time for over the air OS updates, over the air app installs, wireless syncing and everything else Android has offered for some time now.
iOS does over the air app installs. Other than that, yes I agree that Apple needs to do those things. Oh, and I use Android because it's the only option on my carrier (its the least repulsive option anyway). But it sucks, and doesn't seem to be getting any better. I think the only reason it is seeing growth like it is is because of cheap hardware, and, as in my case, being the only real option on certain networks.
Rating: 6 Positives / 0 Negatives
Millah
2 hours ago at 11:13 pm
inevitable as android devices are available everywhere and in every price segment. remember, half of all American workers earn $505 or less per week.
The funny thing is, almost every single Android owner I know are people who could care less about "smartphones," really don't know much about technology, and only bought one because it was very cheap or free when they upgraded, and they were told that it could "run apps like the iPhone." These are people who had cheap free phones before they upgraded. And realistically, the majority of people are like that. But when we compare the industry profit percentages, it paints a much different picture. Which goes to show that market share is irrelevant especially in the cell phone business where cheap free phones are dominant. Its going to be interesting when Apple tries to go after this segment. I'm sure they'll come up with something clever.
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
Michael Scrip
12 hours ago at 01:13 pm
Deceptive Report... Let's not forget, Apple iOS encompasses more then just iPhones. If you included the iPad and iPod Touch which both run Apple iOS then Apple's market share is still ahead of Android.
It's not *that" deceptive... they did include "US smartphone usage" in the headline. Here's why... Apple's smartphone is called "the iPhone" And then you've got "Android" which is a tons of phones from many manufacturers. When comparing smartphone numbers... it's the iPhone vs. many Android phones. You're right... if you wanna have a platform battle... iOS vs Android... you'd have to include iPods and iPads. But this is a comparison of phones...
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
righttime
13 hours ago at 12:27 pm
Wow. A platform that is available on all four major carriers and has dozens of phones, passed the iPhone (which *just* became available on its second carrier) in overall usage. So I guess Google should be patting themselves on the back for this historic achievement.
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
There isn't a huge amount of activity, but take it for what it's worth. Also, I think this was before we fixed the IE issue. It should work in IE now.
arn
The top rated posts:
Macman1993
13 hours ago at 12:07 pm
Some will be bothered about IOS not being the most dominant. I personally don't care, I just want the best mobile OS.
Rating: 15 Positives / 2 Negatives
brendu
13 hours ago at 12:12 pm
One interesting thing to note. Apple held 25% of recent acquirers with 2 phone models. The iPhone 4 and iPhone 3GS. They are also on only 2 carriers, and have only been with Verizon for part of the time leading up to the march survey. Android however is on dozens of handsets and all four US carriers. I would say apple is doing amazingly well when you consider those specifics. I am not worried about iOS not having a larger chunk of the market, I am blown away that it has 25%.
Rating: 12 Positives / 0 Negatives
komodrone
13 hours ago at 12:39 pm
"...in total penetration" THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID. yeah I signed up for an account just to post this.
Rating: 10 Positives / 0 Negatives
Eddyisgreat
13 hours ago at 12:15 pm
If the iPhone were buy one get two free as well then I bet those numbers would be different :D
Rating: 9 Positives / 1 Negatives
VanMac
13 hours ago at 12:09 pm
Competition is good :) Keeps Apple on their toes Don't need another MS Monopoly.......
Rating: 12 Positives / 4 Negatives
Slix
13 hours ago at 12:14 pm
iPhones are still better.
Rating: 12 Positives / 5 Negatives
supmango
13 hours ago at 12:12 pm
I really hope that Apple sees trends like this and realizes it's time to change their game plan. No more once a year phones. Time to kick the innovation level up a few notches. Time for over the air OS updates, over the air app installs, wireless syncing and everything else Android has offered for some time now.
iOS does over the air app installs. Other than that, yes I agree that Apple needs to do those things. Oh, and I use Android because it's the only option on my carrier (its the least repulsive option anyway). But it sucks, and doesn't seem to be getting any better. I think the only reason it is seeing growth like it is is because of cheap hardware, and, as in my case, being the only real option on certain networks.
Rating: 6 Positives / 0 Negatives
Millah
2 hours ago at 11:13 pm
inevitable as android devices are available everywhere and in every price segment. remember, half of all American workers earn $505 or less per week.
The funny thing is, almost every single Android owner I know are people who could care less about "smartphones," really don't know much about technology, and only bought one because it was very cheap or free when they upgraded, and they were told that it could "run apps like the iPhone." These are people who had cheap free phones before they upgraded. And realistically, the majority of people are like that. But when we compare the industry profit percentages, it paints a much different picture. Which goes to show that market share is irrelevant especially in the cell phone business where cheap free phones are dominant. Its going to be interesting when Apple tries to go after this segment. I'm sure they'll come up with something clever.
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
Michael Scrip
12 hours ago at 01:13 pm
Deceptive Report... Let's not forget, Apple iOS encompasses more then just iPhones. If you included the iPad and iPod Touch which both run Apple iOS then Apple's market share is still ahead of Android.
It's not *that" deceptive... they did include "US smartphone usage" in the headline. Here's why... Apple's smartphone is called "the iPhone" And then you've got "Android" which is a tons of phones from many manufacturers. When comparing smartphone numbers... it's the iPhone vs. many Android phones. You're right... if you wanna have a platform battle... iOS vs Android... you'd have to include iPods and iPads. But this is a comparison of phones...
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
righttime
13 hours ago at 12:27 pm
Wow. A platform that is available on all four major carriers and has dozens of phones, passed the iPhone (which *just* became available on its second carrier) in overall usage. So I guess Google should be patting themselves on the back for this historic achievement.
Rating: 5 Positives / 0 Negatives
There isn't a huge amount of activity, but take it for what it's worth. Also, I think this was before we fixed the IE issue. It should work in IE now.
arn
nebulos
May 3, 10:21 PM
gross
Ommid
Apr 25, 11:55 AM
Looks good, I've been holding out since my first-gen iPhone.
...hopefully we'll see a Summer or Fall release? :)
Wow! You're patient!
...hopefully we'll see a Summer or Fall release? :)
Wow! You're patient!
MikhailT
Apr 6, 11:47 PM
@Evoken, we haven't seen the full features list yet for Lion. That's going to be announced at WWDC.
The rest here isn't directed to you, just my opinion of what Lion is supposed to be.
If we consider Lion to be an improvement/refinements to Snow Leopard, it's already an impressive update, just like Snow Leopard was to Leopard. The slight changes in the UI are noticeable over Snow Leopard. The animations, the buttons, scrollbars gives Lion a refresh of the current interface.
The Mac App Store isn't a feature for Lion, it has nothing to do with Lion. It's just another Mac App that's bundled with Lion just like Mail/iChat.
Full Screen Mode is just an interface API which are useful for some people on the Airs and laptops. Some people only use one app for a few hours, and the full screen mode can be useful for them.
Auto-save is a big feature because it changes the way the applications save the files for you in the background. You no longer have to worry about saving in case of a crash and you can now just close/quit the app and return from the same state with auto-resume feature, basically the same way apps work in the background on the iOS platform. Imagine the ability to work on a big project in Numbers or Keynote and you just want to close it for now. Come back in an hour, open them again and you're back to where you started an hour ago. No open last file required. It's just a refinement of the "Close App, Open App, Open Last File Used" process.
Combine Auto-save, auto-resume and Versions, you have a new way of handling files in applications.
Everybody should set their expectations low for Lion, consider it a refinement of the front end for Leopard while Snow Leopard was a refinement of the backend.
Apple isn't about new stuff, they're about refining the same stuff in a different way. That's what they have done with iPhone, iPad and soon, Lion. iPhone wasn't the first device with a touchscreen, it was just refined by integrating both software and hardware in a way that it provide a much better interface. Innovations does not mean that it's for brand new ideas/products only, it can also mean an idea/product that's used in a different way.
The rest here isn't directed to you, just my opinion of what Lion is supposed to be.
If we consider Lion to be an improvement/refinements to Snow Leopard, it's already an impressive update, just like Snow Leopard was to Leopard. The slight changes in the UI are noticeable over Snow Leopard. The animations, the buttons, scrollbars gives Lion a refresh of the current interface.
The Mac App Store isn't a feature for Lion, it has nothing to do with Lion. It's just another Mac App that's bundled with Lion just like Mail/iChat.
Full Screen Mode is just an interface API which are useful for some people on the Airs and laptops. Some people only use one app for a few hours, and the full screen mode can be useful for them.
Auto-save is a big feature because it changes the way the applications save the files for you in the background. You no longer have to worry about saving in case of a crash and you can now just close/quit the app and return from the same state with auto-resume feature, basically the same way apps work in the background on the iOS platform. Imagine the ability to work on a big project in Numbers or Keynote and you just want to close it for now. Come back in an hour, open them again and you're back to where you started an hour ago. No open last file required. It's just a refinement of the "Close App, Open App, Open Last File Used" process.
Combine Auto-save, auto-resume and Versions, you have a new way of handling files in applications.
Everybody should set their expectations low for Lion, consider it a refinement of the front end for Leopard while Snow Leopard was a refinement of the backend.
Apple isn't about new stuff, they're about refining the same stuff in a different way. That's what they have done with iPhone, iPad and soon, Lion. iPhone wasn't the first device with a touchscreen, it was just refined by integrating both software and hardware in a way that it provide a much better interface. Innovations does not mean that it's for brand new ideas/products only, it can also mean an idea/product that's used in a different way.
toke lahti
Jan 15, 04:03 PM
These I'm missing:
1) No blu-ray
2) No eSata (with bootable + s.m.a.r.t.)
3) No hdcp+hdmi
4) Not breaking 8bit barrier with screens (16bit dvi, hdmi, udi or display port)
5) No 17" mbp with led backlight
6) No acd with hdcp/16bit dvi/hdmi/udi/display port
oh well, I was waiting for these also a year ago...
MBA seems to be quite cool, but display resolution is so low.
It has less hardware than MB, but higher price...
They crippled TM to work with APextreme + usb-drives and reason seems to sell TimeCapsules.
Btw, upgrading TC from 500GB to 1TB costs $200, upgrading MP's harddrive from 500GB to 1TB costs $300. Well, maybe MP's drives are not "server grade"...
1) No blu-ray
2) No eSata (with bootable + s.m.a.r.t.)
3) No hdcp+hdmi
4) Not breaking 8bit barrier with screens (16bit dvi, hdmi, udi or display port)
5) No 17" mbp with led backlight
6) No acd with hdcp/16bit dvi/hdmi/udi/display port
oh well, I was waiting for these also a year ago...
MBA seems to be quite cool, but display resolution is so low.
It has less hardware than MB, but higher price...
They crippled TM to work with APextreme + usb-drives and reason seems to sell TimeCapsules.
Btw, upgrading TC from 500GB to 1TB costs $200, upgrading MP's harddrive from 500GB to 1TB costs $300. Well, maybe MP's drives are not "server grade"...
arn
Apr 21, 10:32 PM
I agree. And there should be some kind of count of "thanks" for each member. And it can give us different "levels" based on our thankfulness. Kind of like how we achieve different statices based on our post count.
"Thanks" might work in a pure support form. But for news discussion, it makes little sense.
arn
"Thanks" might work in a pure support form. But for news discussion, it makes little sense.
arn
JTR7
Oct 23, 03:43 PM
I think you both...
That was directed more at True... But, thanks for the enlightenment.
Obviously, you can understand the confusion.
That was directed more at True... But, thanks for the enlightenment.
Obviously, you can understand the confusion.
JohnnyQuest
Mar 17, 01:03 AM
The fact that you feel good about yourself after doing this, to the point where you come on here to gloat, speaks volumes about your character.
Pretty grotesque.
Pretty grotesque.
Ugg
Apr 15, 07:06 PM
What is Gay History? History, while interesting, has always struck me as unimportant in educating Children for essential workforce skills. Leave history for Colleges or elective courses.
Wow! I don't think I've ever seen a more freaky Orwellian comment on this forum. Is the only point of education to create little drones for the military-industrial complex?
People who have made history have just been people and gay or straight have never come into it. What does it matter? A stand alone class in college on "gay studies" I would have no problem with. The requirement in public schools to teach gay history is bit absurd.
Those who are gay and feel as if they've been wronged, I feel for them and effort to make it right, but the level of suffering by gay is nothing compared to what black people or women have endured over the centuries. It bothers me a little when gay suffrage is pitted against something like slavery. Just not the same, IMO.
Unless I'm mistaken, gay people can be black, they can also be women, they can also have been slaves. I'm sure there were plenty of gay Chinese who suffered under the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act) Gosh! There might even have been gay slave owners! Or even gay industrialists!
Why is it so wrong to bring the subject up? The entire point of the law is to include it in the relevant subject matter, not to make it an independent class.
You've always been reasonably level headed about such issues, so I can only assume that you were in a hurry and didn't read the article. Please correct me if I'm wrong...
Wow! I don't think I've ever seen a more freaky Orwellian comment on this forum. Is the only point of education to create little drones for the military-industrial complex?
People who have made history have just been people and gay or straight have never come into it. What does it matter? A stand alone class in college on "gay studies" I would have no problem with. The requirement in public schools to teach gay history is bit absurd.
Those who are gay and feel as if they've been wronged, I feel for them and effort to make it right, but the level of suffering by gay is nothing compared to what black people or women have endured over the centuries. It bothers me a little when gay suffrage is pitted against something like slavery. Just not the same, IMO.
Unless I'm mistaken, gay people can be black, they can also be women, they can also have been slaves. I'm sure there were plenty of gay Chinese who suffered under the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act) Gosh! There might even have been gay slave owners! Or even gay industrialists!
Why is it so wrong to bring the subject up? The entire point of the law is to include it in the relevant subject matter, not to make it an independent class.
You've always been reasonably level headed about such issues, so I can only assume that you were in a hurry and didn't read the article. Please correct me if I'm wrong...
reflex
Nov 16, 03:59 PM
Maybe AMDs for the low end lines and Core 2 Duo for the high end? What about a Mac Mini with dual AMD X2 for less than $400 with ATI graphic? :D
Sort of what I was thinking. A Turion x2 or maybe an upcoming dual core Sempron (the current one runs pretty cool). Might put the mini back at a $499 starting price.
Sort of what I was thinking. A Turion x2 or maybe an upcoming dual core Sempron (the current one runs pretty cool). Might put the mini back at a $499 starting price.
Chundles
Sep 12, 03:02 AM
I believe that an airport extreme, or 802.11g is plenty fast to stream High-def Video
It's not. You need wireless USB for that. 802.11g would need a sizeable buffer and then it's not technically streaming.
It's not. You need wireless USB for that. 802.11g would need a sizeable buffer and then it's not technically streaming.
jazz9
Apr 10, 10:37 PM
Street Kings
I think my favorite thing about this movie is it's soundtrack... prob in top 10
http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/2485/streetkingsbluray.jpg
I think my favorite thing about this movie is it's soundtrack... prob in top 10
http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/2485/streetkingsbluray.jpg
mrw00tastic
Apr 25, 12:43 PM
If that is a guy holding that phone he needs to cut those nails...Damn hippy!
KnightWRX
Apr 28, 09:42 AM
So, please don't take everything I typed and generalize it, because it's not for everyone.
I do understand where Dejo, Balamw and the others are coming from though. And frankly, they are probably better suited to help you than I am. I don't have a lot of experience with Objective-C and Cocoa, not like they do, having mostly come into it recently.
Back to the code, here is a photo of my connections (ignore canceBigtimer). What you say is true I don't know how NSTimer works entirely , just some parts, I realize that and it is one of the reason I postpone my timer for a future update (need to study it).
I have two timers, because, like I said.. I don't have full knowledge of timers. I know now that 1 timer is enough, even if I use two timers and start them at the same time, the log only shows 1 loop and the countdown in separate labels show e.g. 59 in one and 58 in another and so on.
Ok, how about we work on making 1 timer work then ? The code you posted is very complicated and I don't think it has to be this complicated. Going 1 timer would simplify this.
I see your Start Button is associated to 3 actions. Is this really what you want ? Let's simplify this. As an exercise, make 1 method, call it startTimer (like I did) and have only that action associated with your start button. From there, you can call the other methods yourself as needed.
Once you have modified the code in this way, post again what you have in full, what it is doing and what you think it should be doing. We'll go from there.
You mention my two global variables, It makes sense that the timer does not stop because the variables are outside the method that creates the timer. is that whats going on?
No, the variables are "fine" where they are. They would be better positionned in the @interface block and declared as instance variables, but implementation scope globals work too.
What you need to do however is reset those if you want your timer to start back at 0. Somewhere in your "stop/reset" code, there needs to be an initialization of those back to 0 :
seconds = 0;
minutes = 0;
If your Cancel button is what should reset it, then this should be right now in newActionTimer. But ideally, we'll get rid of that function when you simplify the code down to 1 timer.
Look at my NSLog outputs in my screenshot earlier. There's 3 methods there. updateLabel, cancelTimer, startTimer. This should have given you a big indication of how not complicated you should have made this.
If you want 3 buttons, start, reset, stop, you'd technically need 4 methods, as follows :
-(IBAction) startTimer: (id) sender;
-(IBAction) stopTimer: (id) sender;
-(IBAction) resetTimer: (id) sender;
-(void) updateLabel;
One to update the label as needed, one to start the timer, one to stop it and one to reset it.
Also, NSTimer is not your timer. The timer is what you are creating with ATimerViewController. You need to grasp this. NSTimer simply calls methods, in this case, it should be update label. That's about all it should be doing. Both the stop and reset methods should release the NSTimer object instance. startTimer should always create a new one. However, reset should be the one to set back seconds/minutes to 0.
I do understand where Dejo, Balamw and the others are coming from though. And frankly, they are probably better suited to help you than I am. I don't have a lot of experience with Objective-C and Cocoa, not like they do, having mostly come into it recently.
Back to the code, here is a photo of my connections (ignore canceBigtimer). What you say is true I don't know how NSTimer works entirely , just some parts, I realize that and it is one of the reason I postpone my timer for a future update (need to study it).
I have two timers, because, like I said.. I don't have full knowledge of timers. I know now that 1 timer is enough, even if I use two timers and start them at the same time, the log only shows 1 loop and the countdown in separate labels show e.g. 59 in one and 58 in another and so on.
Ok, how about we work on making 1 timer work then ? The code you posted is very complicated and I don't think it has to be this complicated. Going 1 timer would simplify this.
I see your Start Button is associated to 3 actions. Is this really what you want ? Let's simplify this. As an exercise, make 1 method, call it startTimer (like I did) and have only that action associated with your start button. From there, you can call the other methods yourself as needed.
Once you have modified the code in this way, post again what you have in full, what it is doing and what you think it should be doing. We'll go from there.
You mention my two global variables, It makes sense that the timer does not stop because the variables are outside the method that creates the timer. is that whats going on?
No, the variables are "fine" where they are. They would be better positionned in the @interface block and declared as instance variables, but implementation scope globals work too.
What you need to do however is reset those if you want your timer to start back at 0. Somewhere in your "stop/reset" code, there needs to be an initialization of those back to 0 :
seconds = 0;
minutes = 0;
If your Cancel button is what should reset it, then this should be right now in newActionTimer. But ideally, we'll get rid of that function when you simplify the code down to 1 timer.
Look at my NSLog outputs in my screenshot earlier. There's 3 methods there. updateLabel, cancelTimer, startTimer. This should have given you a big indication of how not complicated you should have made this.
If you want 3 buttons, start, reset, stop, you'd technically need 4 methods, as follows :
-(IBAction) startTimer: (id) sender;
-(IBAction) stopTimer: (id) sender;
-(IBAction) resetTimer: (id) sender;
-(void) updateLabel;
One to update the label as needed, one to start the timer, one to stop it and one to reset it.
Also, NSTimer is not your timer. The timer is what you are creating with ATimerViewController. You need to grasp this. NSTimer simply calls methods, in this case, it should be update label. That's about all it should be doing. Both the stop and reset methods should release the NSTimer object instance. startTimer should always create a new one. However, reset should be the one to set back seconds/minutes to 0.
dejo
Apr 25, 03:39 PM
I declared timer as an instance method:
- (IBAction) cancelTime: (id) sender;
- (void) cancelIt:(NSTimer*) timer;
@end
No, you didn't. You declared cancelTime: and cancelIt: as instance methods, one of which happens to have a timer parameter.
As such, I'm not sure you have a proper grasp of the fundamental concepts of Objective-C programming so I would suggest you step away from the real coding and go (re)learn those before you come back to this issue.
- (IBAction) cancelTime: (id) sender;
- (void) cancelIt:(NSTimer*) timer;
@end
No, you didn't. You declared cancelTime: and cancelIt: as instance methods, one of which happens to have a timer parameter.
As such, I'm not sure you have a proper grasp of the fundamental concepts of Objective-C programming so I would suggest you step away from the real coding and go (re)learn those before you come back to this issue.
Defender2010
Sep 29, 08:10 AM
Do u think if Steve decides to sell his house he can just hit a restore button to clean it up for the new owners? Then, when he moves on to the next one he can just restore from backup and nothing from before is lost!
Silly joke I know, but I had to post it!
Silly joke I know, but I had to post it!
chrmjenkins
Dec 13, 07:51 PM
And if you're wrong and it's announced in January? ;)
I don't see that happening. It's just not how Apple works.
I don't see that happening. It's just not how Apple works.
GadgetGav
May 2, 02:26 PM
Isn't it interesting how a seemingly intentional act (active user tracking) changes to a "bug" once it's existence is published in the news media? :D
How do you know it's "intentional" and not a "bug"..??
How do you know it's "intentional" and not a "bug"..??
Leeartlee
Apr 25, 11:49 AM
Yeah, it's just a big enough change that a new case would have to be bought :rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment