lorin schultz


lorin schultz
Last Active
  • Apple says hidden Safari setting led to flawed Consumer Reports MacBook Pro battery tests

    To those bashing Consumer Reports for what they perceive to be flawed testing:

    1. OF COURSE they disabled caching. It's a test of battery use while surfing. To make the test consistent and repeatable across multiple runs and various models, the test involves having the machines continuously load content from a fixed set of sources. There wouldn't be any point to the test if it only involved downloading the content once then storing it.

    2. The results VARIED. This wasn't a case of an artificial test that doesn't reflect real-world usage making the battery life seem worse than it would be in actual use, it was a case of sometimes the battery lasting a long time and other times running dead very quickly. Since the test was the same every time, the huge variations in results were a legitimate cause for concern, REGARDLESS of the testing method.

    3. According to APPLE, not CR, the problem is the result of a BUG, not the testing methodology per se. The testing method merely exposed it. How long would it have gone on unnoticed and unfixed if the test hadn't uncovered it? It may not have affected me or you, but obviously some people would suffer from it. This is a positive outcome.

    4. Reports from others, including participants in this forum, outlining how their real-world use of the machines has resulted in excessive battery drain, show that the problem exists outside the circumstances imposed by CR's testing. CR did NOT run a flawed test and report erroneous findings. They reported, as have others, that there are still wrinkles to be ironed out.

    5. CR didn't say it's a crappy machine. They said it's a great machine with a really big "something's not right here." They were absolutely CORRECT.

    I'm lucky that I haven't had battery problems (so far, knock wood), but others obviously have, and depending on what's causing them, maybe it's only because I haven't yet done the things that cause the problem to surface and later WILL have a problem. I welcome any information that helps lead to a cure.
  • Apple has 'great desktops' on Mac roadmap, CEO Tim Cook says

    The fact that Mr. Cook has to assure people that Mac desktops will continue is, to me, an indication of how bad the Mac development situation has become. Can anyone imagine him having to reassure people that there are new iPhones coming after three years with no updates?
    elijahgpscooter63ejirobin hubergoodbyeranchpalomineravnorodomwozwozSpamSandwichai46
  • Apple's new MacBook Pro has generated 7x more revenue than 12" MacBook at launch

    twa440 said:
    Of course there's an increase in revenue. It cost more and gives you less. Ports, battery size, lighted logo, mag safe, extension power cord and no optical audio.
    Gives me LESS? Really?

    - best display available

    - fastest storage in the world, and if you're prepared to pay for it, more of it

    - better audio

    - ports that can all be anything I want/need at any given moment rather being dedicated to a single function 

    - smaller footprint

    - lighter

    To get those things I have to give up a lighted logo and an audio interface only nine of us were using that I can easily replace with a cheap USB alternative.

    Seems like a good trade to me.
  • Apple says hidden Safari setting led to flawed Consumer Reports MacBook Pro battery tests

    3. According to APPLE, not CR, the problem is the result of a BUG, not the testing methodology per se. The testing method merely exposed it. How long would it have gone on unnoticed and unfixed if the test hadn't uncovered it? It may not have affected me or you, but obviously some people would suffer from it. This is a positive outcome.

    Actually I think Apple blamed both the methodology and the bug. See their statement:

    “We learned that when testing battery life on Mac notebooks, Consumer Reports uses a hidden Safari setting for developing web sites which turns off the browser cache. This is not a setting used by customers and does not reflect real-world usage. Their use of this developer setting also triggered an obscure and intermittent bug..."

    Note that they use the word "also triggered" the obscure bug. "Also", not "subsequently" triggered the bug. Right or wrong, they seem to be saying both conditions are responsible for the results.
    Noted. However, Apple's argument that the test doesn't reflect "real-world usage" is largely irrelevant in this context. What CR was doing wasn't "real-world" use, it was "testing." Testing requires controlling variables. Since caching is unpredictable, it was disabled. I would have disabled it too.

    Also, if the testing method were the cause of the reduced battery life, the battery life would have been short every time. It wasn't. There were huge variations. Since the testing method didn't change, it CAN'T be the source of the issue. The bug, on the other hand, according to Apple, is intermittent. That WOULD cause the results to vary.

    So absent any obfuscation caused by phrasing, intentional or accidental, simple deductive reasoning demonstrates that the outcomes were the result of the bug and not the testing method.

    If the bug is only evident when caching is defeated (which they haven't explicitly said) then maybe the battery issue wouldn't actually affect most users, and that's a valid objection. I just don't think it's fair to accuse CR of flawed testing when what they did actually makes sense.
  • Apple MacBook Pro saves man from bullet in Florida airport shooting

    Mikeymike said:
    Disembarking is how you leave a transport vessel.

    Debarking is a canine veterinary procedure.
    Was going to say something similar.
    I point of fact, correct term is "deplane".
    Are you sure? I thought "deplane" is what Herve Villechaize did on Fantasy Island.

    tallest skilk2kw
  • Apple says hidden Safari setting led to flawed Consumer Reports MacBook Pro battery tests

    Typical Consumer Reports.  They're not much different than other publications that benefit from click-bait headlines.  I would love to see the average age of their readers, because I'm guessing they're in the 55+ age bracket.  These are people who haven't figured out how to Google for product reviews.
    Yeah, I'm 55+, old enough to have been an Apple fan and user since the first MacIntosh. And to have bought AAPL when everyone else said I was crazy, and profited handsomely from it. Guess that makes me old and stupid. 
    I'm not yet 55, which must be why I've figured out how to Google for product reviews. What I've learned from those:

    1. Sometimes they're really handy.

    2. Most of the time they're written by someone with an axe to grind who denounces the item in question on the basis of a single issue.

    3. Understanding of "scientific method" is on life support on this planet. Controlling variables, consistent methodology, valid measurement methods, and repeatable results are concepts that either elude most people or are just more effort than they're willing to invest. The result is wildly conflicting reviews with some saying the product is proof of the existence of God and others saying it will cause suicide.

    4. Institutionalized testing usually -- not always -- does a better of job of providing a valid basis for comparison. Like fuel efficiency scores. Even though everyone understands that the "miles per gallon" reported isn't an accurate reflection of what a vehicle will actually get in real life, at least we know that everyone is using the same testing method so we can make useful comparisons. Whether or not a vehicle actually GETS 50 mpg like it says on the sticker doesn't matter -- we know that the same testing was used for the one that reports 10 mpg so we can conclude that the first one is probably more fuel efficient. You don't get that consistency with random reviews.
    tokyojimupscooter63roundaboutnowbeowulfschmidtrobin huber
  • Which Apple W1-equipped headphones are right for you?

    misa said:
    I think the W1 stuff will be a very short-lived product. People don't want, or even like wireless headphones/earbuds because of the short battery life, and Bluetooth is lossy and typically laggy.

    I just picked up a pair of Solo3 because they were on sale half price (wouldn't have bought them at full pop). To my pleasant surprise, Apple seems to have overcome the common complaints about Bluetooth. Maybe this W1 chip is a little miracle.

    I do audio for TV, so I'm sensitive to audio and video being out of sync. If there's any lag with these cans, it's so short as to be irrelevant. I don't notice it.

    I have no idea what the bandwidth is between the source and the cans, but I don't hear any obvious compression artifacts. Obviously I don't use them for critical listening, but I'm really sensitive to phase discrepancies and sliding filtering and I haven't noticed anything like that all with these.

    As for battery life, I don't yet know if it's great, but I do know that at least it doesn't seem to suck. I've only had them for a few days and only use them for an hour or two a day, but I'm still running on whatever charge was on them out of the box, and the indicator lights still show a strong charge. They apparently won't need to be charged very often.

    One of my complaints about Bluetooth has been the need to re-pair when changing devices. These overcome that. I paired them to my iPhone by placing them next to the unlocked phone and turning them on. Seriously. That's it. When I sat down at my computer, it ASKED if I wanted to use the speakers or my new headphones! The phone had shared the information about the new headphones with the other devices on my account so I didn't have to do anything.

    Obviously it doesn't matter to me if anyone else chooses to go wireless or not, but I thought you might be interested in knowing that the situation doesn't seem to be as bad as you may fear, at least with this particular model.
  • Is Apple getting Siri-ous in the face of Amazon's Alexa Echo?

    Sorry, but not one thing you listed is anything I'd ever see myself using. There's technology that actually improves your life and technology that's "cool". To me this seems more like the latter.

    Whew, FINALLY! It took a long time for someone to say "I have no use for that, therefore it has no value to anyone else." :)
  • Apple culture of secrecy claimed to cause Swift lead's exit, but Chris Lattner denies repo...

    igorsky said:
    [...] What are they supposed to do, exactly, to maintain their competitive edge?
    Deliver great products. That's it. If it's better than the alternatives I'll buy it. People who are willing to buy copy-cat knock-offs aren't likely to buy a genuine Apple product anyway, so I'm not sure that keeping plans out of the hands of competitors even matters. I'm not saying it doesn't, just that I wonder.

    I don't pretend to know whether it's ultimately better for Apple to be secretive or open about its plans, but I do know that more "roadmap" information would be useful to me.

    I know to a reasonable level of probability that a new iPhone will be announced in the fall. I can plan my budgeting and carrier agreements accordingly. I don't necessarily need to know the specific features in advance, but a predictable date of availability is useful.

    I don't have that same security if I want to buy a computer. Especially a mini or Pro. Are they dead? If not, are updates imminent or still a year or two away? The current versions are not what I want, so should I buy another brand or is there something coming that IS what I want, and what is the timeline? I'd like to be able to ask "Will there be a quad-core mini within 12 months?" and get a simple yes or no answer. I would think that would be a competitive ADVANTAGE, because it might prevent me from buying something else instead.

    I'm just spitballing and obviously am only talking about what's best for me, but I am leaning towards believing that Apple could be considerably more open in its communications with customers without giving away the farm.
    roundaboutnowavon b7
  • HTC's new U series phones follow Apple's iPhone 7 in eliminating headphone jacks

    4. It wasn't a mistake after all, and the market is validating this, and now the complainers realize it.
    Even as one who would prefer Apple include headphone jacks on iPhones, I do not consider Apple's decision a "mistake." They did their research (presumably) and concluded that the outcome would be a net win. They knew they'd lose some users from the militantly-opposed camp, but also knew that most people either wouldn't care or would get used to it, and that it would create opportunities in other areas, like wireless headphones.

    That another manufacturer followed suit doesn't even necessarily mean that they have the same motives as Apple, either. Maybe it's just easier and more profitable to exclude the jack, and Apple doing it gave others "permission" (or an excuse) to follow suit, even if their reasons for doing it are different (like maybe even NOT including anything else and thus being able to produce a phone that's "Even thinner than an iPhone!").

    Ultimately, none of this means that there was nothing lost to the change, or that no one suffered any ill consequences -- whether in terms of actual utility or just convenience -- or that the absence of continued objection "vindicates" the decision as having somehow been best for everyone. In my case, while I'd still prefer to have a headphone jack, it's pretty obvious that the die is cast and workarounds are required. Continuing to complain about it won't accomplish anything.

    That's not the same as charging my mind and deciding that the removal of the headphone jack was good for me.