Posts by Hannah Marsh :)

I'm just your average teenage girl. LOL. I joke. (not in a weird way) I like music (Piano, Violin and Drums), sport (Surfing, Rowing and Climbing) and academia (Architecture, Product Design and IT). Digixav is run by one of my very good friends, and I write by his request. All of my blogs are of my own opinion so please do not take offense, I'd love to hear your opinions as long as you are polite in bringing them across.

I have 122 friends on Facebook and this is why

The majority of people I know on Facebook have way over 400 friends. This is ridiculous. I know that the average person will not care about half of his/her ‘friends’ posts, comments and statuses. So why have them? Does it seem cool to have a load of people you could possibly speak to if you ever might need them? Or do you just add people for the sake of adding them?

Facebook now lets you rate your friends too. By default you have groups for your work colleagues, local friends, acquaintances and school friends and you can make even more if you desire. If these people are really your friends, is it really fair to rate them? Do any fall into the acquaintance category, and if yes, then why are they labelled as a Facebook ‘friend’? Maybe it’s just me, but this whole thing seems really messed up.

Also I think accepting people you don’t properly know is actually quite dangerous. I’m not saying that they’re going to steal your identity and spend all your money, but the more ‘friends’ you have that aren’t your friends, the more you are open to different forms of cyberbullying and online threats. About a year ago I would have never have thought of this but on my old Facebook account I saw some pretty nasty comments that really upset people. Behind a screen people are brave.

I must say that I have so far been through two different Facebook accounts. On the first I had nearly 600 friends, but on my new one I have just 122. When browsing the old one, I used to get so much random crap appearing in my news feed that I did not care about at all. Now I only see what is relevant to me and the people that I care about. Of course I accept the fact that a few people will be the exception, and will actually speak properly to every 400th person they have as a friend, but do you?

Advertisements

Mac vs. PC: The Final Battle

Since PCs and Macs hit the market, the debate has raged on over which is best. Depending upon who you’re talking to, the Mac vs. PC debate is often even hotter than politics or religion. While you have many who are die hard Microsoft PC users, another group exists that are just as dedicated to Apple’s Mac. A final group exists in the undecided computer category, with either no clue what to use or a version of Linux. I’m here to sort this out, I am not going to be biased, but I will state my opinion. If you think differently, leave a comment below.

Cost

For many users, cost is key. You want to get the absolute most for your money. In years past, PCs dominated the budget friendly market, with Macs ranging anywhere from £100 to £500 more than a comparable PC. Now this price gap has lessened significantly. However, you will notice a few key features that Macs tend to lack in order to provide a lower price: memory and hard drive space

PC = 8/10
Mac = 6/10

Memory

Most PCs have anywhere from 2GB to 8GB of RAM in laptops and desktops, while Macs usually have only 1GB to 4GB. Keep in mind that this is for standard models, not custom orders

PC= 7/10
Mac = 4/10

Hard Drive Space

Macs typically have smaller hard drives than PCs. This could be because some Mac files and applications are slightly smaller than their PC counterparts. On average, you will still see price gaps of several hundred dollars between comparable Macs and PCs. For computing on a budget, PCs win.

There are a few things to take into consideration that may actually make Macs more cost effective: stability and compatibility.

PC = 7/10
Mac = 8/10

Stability

In years past, PCs were known to crash and users would get the blue screen of death, but Microsoft has made their operating systems more reliable in recent years. On the other hand, Mac hardware and software has tended to be stable and crashes occur infrequently.

PC = 6/10
Mac = 8/10

Compatibility

Unlike with a PC, a Mac can also run Windows using a tool such as Boot Camp or Parallels. If you want to have a combination Mac and PC, a Mac is your best option.

PC = 5/10
Mac = 8/10

Availability

Macs are exclusive to Apple. This means for the most part, prices and features are the same no matter where you shop. This limits Mac availability. With the numerous Apple Stores around the world, however, it’s even easier to buy Macs and Mac accessories.  Any upgrades or repairs can only be done by an authorized Apple support centre.

PCs on the other hand, are available from a wide range of retailers and manufacturers. This means more variation, a wider price range for all budgets and repairs and upgrades available at most electronics retailers and manufacturers. It also makes it easier for the home user to perform upgrades and repairs themselves as parts are easy to find.

PC = 9/10
Mac = 7/10

Software

The final Mac vs. PC comparison comes down to software. For the most part, the two are neck and neck. Microsoft has even released Microsoft Office specifically for Mac, proving Apple and Microsoft can get along. All and all, Macs are more software compatible as PCs only support Windows friendly software. Both systems support most open-source software. Software for both systems is user friendly and easy to learn.

PC = 8/10
Mac = 8/10

Conclusion

Many people say that they want to get a Mac for things like Photo Booth and GarageBand along with the rest of Apple’s software,  however this is pointless as you can get better alternatives on Windows. If you have the money for a Mac, you have the money for a high-end Windows machine too. In the end, the choice comes down to personal preference. Due to price and availability, PCs tend to be the winner, while Macs remain the choice for the more elite or anti-Microsoft computer users. As you can tell, I’m a PC and this verdict was my idea.

PC = 50
Mac =49

Things That Should Exist: Clothes inspired by movies

Things That Should Exist is a column by James Trickey, but today it is written by Hannah Marsh. Things suggested are not always good ideas.

Hey everyone,

I know that Trickey normally writes the Things That Should Exist column, however he is suffering severely from writers block so I’m going to suggest a few things on his behalf, seeing as I have been so inactive recently.

Everyone has watched the Back To The Future trilogy, right? If you haven’t, go and watch it now and come back to this later. Carrying on, in Back To The Future Part II, Marty, pretending to be his own son, puts on a jacket and it looks absolutely ridonculous. Not only is it horrifically out of fashion, but it is miles too big for him, however seconds later it adapts to his size, keeping in exact proportions.

What I want is for all my clothes to do that, but to do other things too, like wash themselves instantly when I take them off, before proceeding to dry and iron themselves when you put them on. If we go really crazy then they could fix damages and sew on buttons as well. Ever since I was a child and I watched that film I have wanted my clothes to do that! In the real world of the 21st century, they’ve made the hoverboard and the shoes from Part II, so why can’t the jacket come next?

After reminiscing about Michael J. Fox’s clothes, I came up with another, possibly better idea. This isn’t really as suitable for guys unless they are actually fashion conscious – which we all know is impossible – but even so it’s a good idea! Every day when I take off my school uniform I ask myself what to wear. It’s a big dilemma, so what I want is to look in the mirror and for clothes to appear on the virtual image, but not on myself. That way I could say yes, no or maybe. When things get really hi-tech, I could even talk to the mirror and tell it what mood I am in and what I’m dressing for. I could change the colour of things and I could change the style of them too. But of course this amazing device would be useless if I didn’t have the clothes, so I want my mirror to be even more awesome, and it can then make the clothes on the virtual image appear. It would be really cool and increadibly useful. You could even save styles and items you like, building a database of preferences over time.

Last and by no means least, I thought of another film I absolutely love: X-Men. At one point in the first film, Professor Xavier is teaching and a girl, instead of writing her notes, is just thinking of what she wants to write and is moving her hand across the paper. I know we will never be mutants (never say never, but it’s pretty unlikely), but what if we could have a glove and a hat that, when put on, work together to translate our thoughts onto some ?sort of special paper? No more achey hands in lessons and exams. I would definitely invest in that.

Why do teenagers love BlackBerry devices?

Among teenagers, BlackBerry smartphones are all the hype at the moment, but I genuinely can’t help but ask myself why. While most people can see that RIM is on a knife edge and need to make drastic changes to survive, our demographic seems to be addicted to the Canadian QWERTY phones, with their outdated operating systems and poor user experiences. Why is this?

In my opinions BlackBerry phones (and PlayBooks) really aren’t great. People say that the BBM way of communicating is their favourite thing about the phones world, but this service ties you down to communicating with other BB users. Why not just download a cross-platform thing like WhatsApp? Then you will be able to communicate for free with people that have other phones too, such as Androids, iPhones and Windows Phones.

The performance of BlackBerry phones is often absolutely appalling, usually due to the outdated hardware, and my friends that have them are always complaining about how they crash far too regularly to be considered reliable. The camera quality is in a completely different league to other phones, and not in a good way. You cannot compare the quality with that of Nokia, HTC, Samsung and Apple cameras as it is just far too poor. The video quality is equally awful, almost embarrassing to watch once blown up to a decent size. The keys on the phone are small and hard to use at times.

Also (personal rant here) have you ever tried sharing a room with a BlackBerry user? When you’re trying to sleep at night and all you can hear is “click… click… click…” People claim that the keypad on the BlackBerry Bold doesn’t click, which for the record, is a lie. When the room is silent at night you can, and I repeat can, hear it. Now you may be thinking of a counter argument to do with the all-touch Torch and similar models due to the fact that they have software keyboards, however the touch panels are quite frankly of a severely sub-standard quality. In some of the older models the screen clicks as if it’s a button when you touch it. Resistive touch-screens do not deserve a place in this world.

BlackBerry devices are good as business phones due to the security and relative efficiency of the push email services, however as a phone for the youth, they are quite simply abysmal in my opinion. Much better alternatives are available at a wide array of price points, but BB diehards seem oblivious to this fact. I just wish that more people would think the same as me.

Why you don’t need a quad-core phone

“OMG I’ve seen this totally cool new phone, I really just have to get it!”

“Oh really? What is so good about it?”

“It’s got a quad-core processor”

“What does that mean?”

“I have no idea. However it sounds WICKED!!”

Companies trick you into thinking that you always have to have the latest thing, and the today’s society pressures you into believing all the given specifications are absolutely amazing. However, the truth is, some of it just isn’t needed. Why would you want a quad-core processor? To have a faster phone obviously. However you will never need that much power, nor will you ever use it! People say they need the power for gaming; however computers that don’t have quad-core processors have been used for gaming for so many years and are completely fine. Also why would you want to play high quality games on your phone? The screen is so small and the graphics are such poor quality that it isn’t worth it, not if you want anywhere near decent detail and picture. My phone (HTC Sensation) has a dual-core processor; and that works sensationally. I can multitask efficiently, I can play music whilst on the internet and texting and running social apps in the background. I can receive emails and play on apps at the same time. The speed is fantastic and you really couldn’t need a faster phone.

Quad-core costs a lot more money and quite frankly, it isn’t worth it. You may think it is cool to have it, however you will never use all four processors at once, and so you will never notice the fact that you have them.