How do I delete photographs from an iPad?

On 2012-11-04 09:04:27 -0800, tony cooper said:


You lost me at "camera roll". Is that anything like a pecan encrusted
sweet roll? I was also lost at "iOS". What's the "i"?

"Camera Rill" is just the cutesy Apple name for the photo file on the
iPad. iPad users will know what it is, or should be.

iOS is just Apple's OS for its "i" mobile devices such as iPad, iPhone,
& iPod Touch.


Really, don't bother answering. As a Windows user, the knowledge that
I'm sure you could impart would be wasted on me.

It seems I lost you at iOS. ;-)

What I'm really getting at is that a folder/file system can work
perfectly well for someone. If this works for Eric, then why should
we care about other differences?

I'm kinda lost in the babble and subject changes of this thread, but I
have the idea that Eric works with Windows and a folder/file system
and is able to function to his satisfaction with that. nospam is
throwing up a bull**** claim that Eric is limited because he "can't"
have an image in more than one folder.

The contention that the folder/file system is "more work" is invalid
if the user is functioning to his satisfaction with it. In this case,
the user (Eric) has not complained about having to do "more work".

Eric's problems with an iPad or iPhone or whatever it is are a
separate issue.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 12:04:27 -0500, tony cooper
wrote:

On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 23:52:31 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2012-11-03 22:14:23 -0700, tony cooper said:

On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 22:26:43 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2012-11-03 21:33:00 -0700, Eric Stevens said:

On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 21:27:18 -0700, nospam
wrote:

In article , tony cooper
wrote:

The folder/file system is much the same. It's up to you to title and
set up folders that aid you in future searches.

no it isn't, because you can't have a photo in more than one folder.

Why not?

I think the confusion and talking at cross purposes is getting way too
heavy to fully understand what each party is talking about.

The discussion has drifted to which system is better: a folder/file
hierarchy or a keyword system. It's no longer, in this part of the
thread, about anything to do with the OS.

Obviously, the "better" system is the one the user is comfortable with
and has the available software to use. There's no argument that a
keyword system for the retrieval of an image of a particular subject
is a good way to go. However, nospam has taken the position that a
user of a folder/file hierarchy "can't" store an image in more than
one folder.

This is patently untrue. Any number of duplicates of the image can be
placed in any number of folders. For retrieval purposes, it doesn't
make a difference if an image is a duplicate.

If the image is to be edited, it's better to retrieve a single image
in the keyword system because in a folder/file hierarchy the
duplicates would not be edited. However, that wasn't brought
up...only that you "can't have a photo in more than one folder".

Really, though, it's not a common practice to go through old images
and re-editing a bunch of them.

It's just another area where nospam is so insistent that what he
favors is the only viable choice that he ignores the ability of others
to work with their own system quite successfully.

Not being a user of Apple, I can't really fully grok your following
comments, but I assume that one can set up a folder/file system on a
Mac that is identical to what would be done on a PC. You might not
want to, but you could. The fair comparison to Eric's comments is
considering that a folder/file hierarchy is used regardless of the
machine's OS.

Oh! stranger from the strange land of Florida, all there is to "grok"
is, files and folders can, and are dealt with in a similar manner on
OSX (Macs) and Win(x) machines, other than a few semantic terms, such
as "journalling", "indexing", "directory", "folder", etc. which only
confuse those expecting them to mean something else. Fortunately
"files" seem to be the same thing on both platforms, but I am sure
somebody is going to tell me that I am wrong.

iOS is not OSX and that was what I detailed below.

You lost me at "camera roll". Is that anything like a pecan encrusted
sweet roll? I was also lost at "iOS". What's the "i"?

Really, don't bother answering. As a Windows user, the knowledge that
I'm sure you could impart would be wasted on me.

What I'm really getting at is that a folder/file system can work
perfectly well for someone. If this works for Eric, then why should
we care about other differences?

I'm kinda lost in the babble and subject changes of this thread, but I
have the idea that Eric works with Windows and a folder/file system
and is able to function to his satisfaction with that. nospam is
throwing up a bull**** claim that Eric is limited because he "can't"
have an image in more than one folder.

Just to confuse the issue: I am now in the midst (like 3% of the way)
of the laborious task of extending key words to all the important
images so that I can have a better chance of finding _all_ of each of
the various sets of duplicate files I have of some of my images.

The contention that the folder/file system is "more work" is invalid
if the user is functioning to his satisfaction with it. In this case,
the user (Eric) has not complained about having to do "more work".

Eric's problems with an iPad or iPhone or whatever it is are a
separate issue.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 07:43:48 -0600, nospam
wrote:

In article , tony cooper
wrote:

The folder/file system is much the same. It's up to you to title and
set up folders that aid you in future searches.

no it isn't, because you can't have a photo in more than one folder.

Why not?

I think the confusion and talking at cross purposes is getting way too
heavy to fully understand what each party is talking about.

The discussion has drifted to which system is better: a folder/file
hierarchy or a keyword system. It's no longer, in this part of the
thread, about anything to do with the OS.

Obviously, the "better" system is the one the user is comfortable with
and has the available software to use. There's no argument that a
keyword system for the retrieval of an image of a particular subject
is a good way to go. However, nospam has taken the position that a
user of a folder/file hierarchy "can't" store an image in more than
one folder.

This is patently untrue.

it's *very* true and anyone claiming otherwise is ignorant of file
systems and computers.

Nonsense! My Cromemco C3 of 1979 allowed the one file to appear in
numerous separate directories. As soon as it was opened via one of the
directories it was locked against opening in any other directory. This
was not the 'short-cut' method used by Microsoft. It was but the one
file with multiple points of access.

Any number of duplicates of the image can be
placed in any number of folders.

duplicates *proves* my point. the mere fact you have to duplicate it
proves you can't have a photo in more than one folder.

This argument is about sloppy definitions. 'A photo' is an image coded
in - whatever - format and is typically encapsulated in a file
structure of one kind or another. There can be copies of the file all
over the file system, each encapsulating the same photo. This means
that as Tony says you can have multiple copies of the photo while as
nospam says you can only do this by having multiple (copies?) of the
file. Nospam is correct but it is the same image in each case.

For retrieval purposes, it doesn't
make a difference if an image is a duplicate.

yes it can, if they're not kept in sync.

That's another problem but it doesn't affect the original question.

--- snip ---
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 07:43:45 -0600, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

The folder/file system is much the same. It's up to you to title and
set up folders that aid you in future searches.

no it isn't, because you can't have a photo in more than one folder.

Why not?

because file systems don't support it.

I've responded separately about the Cromix operating system on my old
Cromemco C3 which way back in 1979 did support having a file in more
than one directory.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 07:43:45 -0600, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

The folder/file system is much the same. It's up to you to title and
set up folders that aid you in future searches.

no it isn't, because you can't have a photo in more than one folder.

Why not?

because file systems don't support it.

I've responded separately about the Cromix operating system on my old
Cromemco C3 which way back in 1979 did support having a file in more
than one directory.
--

Both NTFS and MacOS support "hard links", that is to say more than
one name (possibly in different directories) for the same bag of
bytes on disk. I don't know about the ipad, but it's certainly a
common feature on Unix/Linux systems that dates back decades and MS
put it in NTFS to claim some (minimal) Posix support.
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On Sunday, 4 November 2012 13:43:51 UTC, nospam wrote:
In article ,

DanP wrote:



Who told you Linux does not run Photoshop and Lightroom?



adobe.



photoshop and lightroom are mac and windows only. period.



http://wiki.winehq.org/AdobePhotoshop



sure, they can be made to work, sort of.



from the above link:

Photoshop 5 through CS2 and CS4 install and work pretty well on wine.

Photoshop CS3 has some issues but most things work.



'pretty well' ? 'most things work' ?? what about cs5 and cs6?

CS6 runs except for Mini Bridge
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6dWEqDUsIM

hilarious. do you really tolerate that crap?


I have not used Photoshop or Ligtroom ever in my life. I have used Windows for the last 20 years. I gave Ubuntu a try in August after Windows crashed my laptop twice this year.


i like this one:

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10085?

Adobe Bridge CS2 complains that it can't start due to licensing

restrictions (affects photoshop)



not being able to start is a bit of a show stopper.

There is a solution to it if you scroll down that page. If you must use some Windows software do a dual boot, no need to run Windows all the time.

I still own 2 Windows licenses that are not in use. Are you trying to convince me I need Windows?


Have you ever had any kind of experience with Linux? Or was it Google who told you that nonsense?



yes. linux is a great server os, and it's a horrible desktop os.

Some people do serious work with it. Like half of Google employees http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goobuntu
And there are free to pick the OS they want.

There is no Linux OS. There is Linux kernel in a variety of distributions with many interchangeable interfaces and repositories. Saying Gentoo with Ratpoison is horrible does not mean Linux is horrible.


DanP

On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 17:58:02 -0500, tony cooper
wrote:

On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 10:59:11 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 12:04:27 -0500, tony cooper
wrote:

On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 23:52:31 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2012-11-03 22:14:23 -0700, tony cooper said:

On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 22:26:43 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2012-11-03 21:33:00 -0700, Eric Stevens said:

On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 21:27:18 -0700, nospam
wrote:

In article , tony cooper
wrote:

The folder/file system is much the same. It's up to you to title and
set up folders that aid you in future searches.

no it isn't, because you can't have a photo in more than one folder.

Why not?

I think the confusion and talking at cross purposes is getting way too
heavy to fully understand what each party is talking about.

The discussion has drifted to which system is better: a folder/file
hierarchy or a keyword system. It's no longer, in this part of the
thread, about anything to do with the OS.

Obviously, the "better" system is the one the user is comfortable with
and has the available software to use. There's no argument that a
keyword system for the retrieval of an image of a particular subject
is a good way to go. However, nospam has taken the position that a
user of a folder/file hierarchy "can't" store an image in more than
one folder.

This is patently untrue. Any number of duplicates of the image can be
placed in any number of folders. For retrieval purposes, it doesn't
make a difference if an image is a duplicate.

If the image is to be edited, it's better to retrieve a single image
in the keyword system because in a folder/file hierarchy the
duplicates would not be edited. However, that wasn't brought
up...only that you "can't have a photo in more than one folder".

Really, though, it's not a common practice to go through old images
and re-editing a bunch of them.

It's just another area where nospam is so insistent that what he
favors is the only viable choice that he ignores the ability of others
to work with their own system quite successfully.

Not being a user of Apple, I can't really fully grok your following
comments, but I assume that one can set up a folder/file system on a
Mac that is identical to what would be done on a PC. You might not
want to, but you could. The fair comparison to Eric's comments is
considering that a folder/file hierarchy is used regardless of the
machine's OS.

Oh! stranger from the strange land of Florida, all there is to "grok"
is, files and folders can, and are dealt with in a similar manner on
OSX (Macs) and Win(x) machines, other than a few semantic terms, such
as "journalling", "indexing", "directory", "folder", etc. which only
confuse those expecting them to mean something else. Fortunately
"files" seem to be the same thing on both platforms, but I am sure
somebody is going to tell me that I am wrong.

iOS is not OSX and that was what I detailed below.

You lost me at "camera roll". Is that anything like a pecan encrusted
sweet roll? I was also lost at "iOS". What's the "i"?

Really, don't bother answering. As a Windows user, the knowledge that
I'm sure you could impart would be wasted on me.

What I'm really getting at is that a folder/file system can work
perfectly well for someone. If this works for Eric, then why should
we care about other differences?

I'm kinda lost in the babble and subject changes of this thread, but I
have the idea that Eric works with Windows and a folder/file system
and is able to function to his satisfaction with that. nospam is
throwing up a bull**** claim that Eric is limited because he "can't"
have an image in more than one folder.

Just to confuse the issue: I am now in the midst (like 3% of the way)
of the laborious task of extending key words to all the important
images so that I can have a better chance of finding _all_ of each of
the various sets of duplicate files I have of some of my images.

Just out of curiosity, what program do you use to assign and fetch by
keywords?

I'm assigning key words with Nikon NX2. Although I haven't tried it
yet, I'm hoping to use Paint Shop Pro to index them.

I feel for you with the extra cost in NZ for the programs that we use
in the US.

So do I. :-(
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 4 Nov 2012 22:42:50 GMT, (Ted Nolan tednolan)
wrote:

In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 07:43:45 -0600, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

The folder/file system is much the same. It's up to you to title and
set up folders that aid you in future searches.

no it isn't, because you can't have a photo in more than one folder.

Why not?

because file systems don't support it.

I've responded separately about the Cromix operating system on my old
Cromemco C3 which way back in 1979 did support having a file in more
than one directory.
--

Both NTFS and MacOS support "hard links", that is to say more than
one name (possibly in different directories) for the same bag of
bytes on disk. I don't know about the ipad, but it's certainly a
common feature on Unix/Linux systems that dates back decades and MS
put it in NTFS to claim some (minimal) Posix support.

In the Cromemco system the name of the file did not change, only the
path to the link.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article ,
DanP wrote:

CS6 runs except for Mini Bridge
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6dWEqDUsIM

except for mini bridge?

so in other words, it only partly works, just like i said.

what else doesn't work? let's see:

http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManage...iId=25607&iTes
tingId=71636
Photoshop fails to start with an error 1 (reinstall)

http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManage...iId=25607&iTes
tingId=70673
To start it, I had to emulate a window 1024x768 in winecfg - and give
it about 6 tries. The first 5 hung up with:

you have a different definition of 'runs' than most people.

In article 2012110408152154536-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

I can right click, copy to:, and direct that copy to another folder.

that's a *duplicate*.

So what?

the what is that it's now two different files, with each of them in a
different folder.

it's *not* one file in two folders.

two different things.