How do I delete photographs from an iPad?

On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 20:29:31 -0700, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

There is only one Apple Store named as such in New Zealand and it is
an on-line store. See http://store.apple.com/nz

If you wander through that site you will come across of 'Apple
Authorised Resellers'. Not one of them is called 'Apple Store' but
they are all Apple stores in that they sell Apples.

in other words, not an official apple store. that explains why there
were no geniuses there and why you didn't get very good service.

..snip..

you said you went to 'the local apple store'. was it an official apple
store or not?

It was an Apple Authorised Retailer. There are no Apple unauthorised
retailers in this country.

apple authorized does not mean an official apple store. it means they
are just authorized to sell apple products.

as i said before, that is a mixed bag. some of those stores can be very
good, but others not so much.

I've got no complaints about the store I deal with.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 20:29:22 -0700, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

my point is that users want to work with documents, photos, etc., not
trying to remember which file is in which folder or what the actual
file name was or whether it's on the internal drive or the external
drive, and if the latter, which external drive, etc.

that's something a computer can do far more efficiently.

in other words, if you want photos of niagara falls you took a couple
of years ago, you tap a few keys and boom, you are looking at those
photos. the computer can find them much faster than a human ever could.

I would have quick look in 'My Photos/Places/Niagra'. It's not perfect
but it works.

only if you put them there. what if they fall into more than one
category? what if not only is it niagara, but spouse or other family
member? what if you want only waterfall photos?

you have to remember which files are where. it quickly gets out of hand.

it's much easier when the computer figures it out.

Even when, as you say, "the computer figures it out" I have to figure
it out first.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 08:05:30 +0000, David Taylor
wrote:

On 02/11/2012 22:11, Eric Stevens wrote:
[]
Assuming there is nothing wrong with my machine, and I am aware of
nothing to suggest there is, the problem appears to be in the way the
64 bit system handles 32 bit files. Is there anyone else out there
running 64 bit Windows 7 in conjunction with a third generation 64GB
iPad running iOS6? If there is anyone who meets that specification, do
you notice any idiosyncrasies such as the ones I've been describing?

--- snip ---

Eric,

When I connect my iOS 6.0.1 iPad to my Win-7/64 PC I get an AutoPLay
dialogue from Windows Explorer. I select "Open device to view files"
using Windows Explorer", and I get an icon for the iPad with a device
icon a level down. Inside that is a directory DCIM, and then another
with a coded name containing (in my case) JPEG and PNG images, and even
a .MOV file. At that level, you can multi-select files to delete.

Do the JPEG file names make sense to you? Are the images in the ikons
etc clear to you?

I hope that helps.

There is too much dross in this thread for me to follow every entry, and
I did get a private message from WD which I could not open to reply to
(but please don't send private mails).
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

my point is that users want to work with documents, photos, etc., not
trying to remember which file is in which folder or what the actual
file name was or whether it's on the internal drive or the external
drive, and if the latter, which external drive, etc.

that's something a computer can do far more efficiently.

in other words, if you want photos of niagara falls you took a couple
of years ago, you tap a few keys and boom, you are looking at those
photos. the computer can find them much faster than a human ever could.

I would have quick look in 'My Photos/Places/Niagra'. It's not perfect
but it works.

only if you put them there. what if they fall into more than one
category? what if not only is it niagara, but spouse or other family
member? what if you want only waterfall photos?

you have to remember which files are where. it quickly gets out of hand.

it's much easier when the computer figures it out.

Depends. I have umpteen thousands of images in my disc drives. Picasa
is my general first use simple quick editor of choice and used to be
able to see all my images. After an upgrade to the latest version it
started "running" like swimming in treacle. I discovered that the
clever lads at Google had implemented face recognition and it had
decided to scan my entire photo library to find and classify faces.

I don't know how long I'd have had to leave it alone to accomplish
that task, because it's obviously hugely longer than I've ever had the
patience to let it go for. So I had to stop it seeing all my files,
and turned the face recognition off. Because it isn't always easier to
let the computer figure it out.

--
Chris Malcolm

On 03/11/2012 09:27, Eric Stevens wrote:
[]
Do the JPEG file names make sense to you? Are the images in the ikons
etc clear to you?

By intent, I don't use thumbnails, so I just get a generic JPEG image
icon. I can't recall the file names now - I /think/ they were the same
as on the camera, but as the directories were organised day-by-day, and
as the camera-roll was a separate directory, it was obvious which
directories to empty. The iPad then needed a reboot to remove those
now-empty directories.
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

In article , Chris Malcolm
wrote:

Depends. I have umpteen thousands of images in my disc drives. Picasa
is my general first use simple quick editor of choice and used to be
able to see all my images. After an upgrade to the latest version it
started "running" like swimming in treacle. I discovered that the
clever lads at Google had implemented face recognition and it had
decided to scan my entire photo library to find and classify faces.

I don't know how long I'd have had to leave it alone to accomplish
that task, because it's obviously hugely longer than I've ever had the
patience to let it go for. So I had to stop it seeing all my files,
and turned the face recognition off. Because it isn't always easier to
let the computer figure it out.

picasa's face recognition is slower than iphoto, but either way, it's
something you do once.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

you have to remember which files are where. it quickly gets out of hand.

it's much easier when the computer figures it out.

Even when, as you say, "the computer figures it out" I have to figure
it out first.

no you don't.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

as i said before, that is a mixed bag. some of those stores can be very
good, but others not so much.

I've got no complaints about the store I deal with.

except for the young geeks who resort to google

| A system is needed,
| and how on Earth, or even how in our Galaxy, can somebody else
| decide how best to arrange them? For some vacations
| I have over a thousand photo files, in some cases multiple files
| for one picture. How is somebody at Apple or anywhere else supposed
| to be able to keep them arranged properly?
|
| Could you explain?
|

I think the idea is that it sort of works from the point
of view of someone who is disorganized, which is a lot
of people. But it works less well when the search involves
meaning and not just data. A computer is good for tracking
files saved on a particular date. It's not so good at finding
the shot you took at your favorite picnic that had an
interesting color in the sunset.

The woman I live with travels a lot, takes
hundreds of photos each time, creates folders for them,
then backs those up to a second partition and CDs. But
for a lot of people, the ability to find where those pictures
are seems almost magical. So any kind of search ability
is a great convenience.

Microsoft expanded search capability starting with XP.
They've also expanded the "virtual folders" idea. (Funny term.
It's a symbolic access point for what was already a symbolic
access point, neither of which was ever "virtually" anything
but symbolic.
The result of their efforts is that the indexing service runs
a lot, wearing down the disk unnecessarily, while the search
function is not nearly as good as it was in Win98, despite
that Win98 didn't need to index. (Agent Ransack is now one
of the first things I install on all Windows PCs I work with.)

I read recently that Facebook is now trying to guess the
relevance of posts from friends and arranging them on one's
page accordingly.

I know someone who works on phone operating systems. I
think he worked, or works, on Android. He told me he looks
forward to the day when he can turn on his phone and it
will tell him what to do. (!)

There seems to be an unspoken ideal there based on laziness:
The ultimate technological luxury would be that which guesses
our needs and desires, then fulfills them automatically. To me
that sounds rather like being a paraplegic, but for some people
it's a mouth-watering fantasy.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

I think the idea is that it sort of works from the point
of view of someone who is disorganized, which is a lot
of people.

it has nothing whatsoever to do with disorganization. in fact, it has
everything to do with *organization(.

But it works less well when the search involves
meaning and not just data. A computer is good for tracking
files saved on a particular date. It's not so good at finding
the shot you took at your favorite picnic that had an
interesting color in the sunset.

it can be.

Microsoft expanded search capability starting with XP.
They've also expanded the "virtual folders" idea. (Funny term.
It's a symbolic access point for what was already a symbolic
access point, neither of which was ever "virtually" anything
but symbolic.

it's much more than a symbolic access point.

The result of their efforts is that the indexing service runs
a lot, wearing down the disk unnecessarily, while the search
function is not nearly as good as it was in Win98, despite
that Win98 didn't need to index. (Agent Ransack is now one
of the first things I install on all Windows PCs I work with.)

indexing does not wear down the hard drive. where do you come up with
stuff?