or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by charlituna

There is little Apple can do. It's not their IP so not theirs to control
okay so they are now detecting ad blockers and telling folks to pay or turn them off. fine. if the price is reasonable then many folks will pay. if its not or the content just isn't that grand they will walk away.
its not production issues. if there were production issues Best Buy wouldn't have them because Apple always priorities their own channel over 3rd party. its more likely that they are going to business customers before the shelf. A local business like a graphics shop, advertising agency, film house etc that wants iPad Pros and accessories is a guaranteed sale. Why wouldn't they give them some special treatment when the device has been fine tuned to try to match their needs...
apple has never hidden how the feature works. nor the fact that you can turn off cell data access for any app you want. most of the stories I've heard are people who say that their teen, who is addicted to Netflix, has shitty wifi signal in the bedroom on the far side of the house. so they kind of set up themselves for this issue by not research the new iOS and actually fixing their wifi issues. It's not hard, $99 and 30 minutes gets you an airport express set up to be a...
From what I understand almost very store short of perhaps the Flagships has moved to remote break rooms and locker bays and doesn't have to bother with bag checks cause there's little to no way someone could actually drop something into a bag to walk out with it without being caught by a dozen cameras. So basically this is moot. As for the staff members that were at the front of the lawsuit, who knows if they even work there anymore.
What I don't get is why are they limiting it to one device. I mean what needs be done other than validating that someone is a subscriber. then access works on all apps that need one to be a subscriber. right? So it sounds like it's a server side issue not a device issue. If they want to limit it for testing purposes it seems like testing an area and all possible connections is more logical. Otherwise you could run into issues when you expand the device list and the system...
jailbreaking might be excepted from the DMCA but I doubt that means doing it without someone's permission. Which is what this is all about.  many of the hacks and threats that have been found in the wild require the device to be jailbroken. Thus why they were looking for a way to do it without user permission, or at least knowledge permission. I'm sure I could find a way to trick someone into saying yes when it should be no with some carefully crafted social engineering
 They do that because something wasn't working properly. In a case like that it's fine, necessary even. But if things are working as they should there is no point in closing them just to close them. 
 Actually he is correct. Provided that the apps are coded properly (which is a huge if), force quitting them doesn't actually do any good. Or at least not the abundance of good that folks that promote force quitting want you to think.  We have seen more than one example of poorly coded apps that don't shut down properly, don't release their memory properly and even don't honor user backgroup refresh settings correctly (hello Facebook)
something about this study feels off to me. I don't know if it's the number of test subjects, the method of testing etc. But I'm not taking this single study as fact
New Posts  All Forums: