AppleInsider podcast talks new iPads, Samsung, and Apple's end to 32-bit apps
This week on the AppleInsider podcast, Victor and Mikey talk about the new iPads, the Samsung Galaxy S8 launch and what happened to Apple's stock price, and the impending iOS switch to only 64-bit apps that could break apps you may rely on.
AppleInsider editors Mikey Campbell and Victor Marks discuss:
Listen to the embedded SoundCloud feed below:
Show note links:
Feedback and comments are always appreciated. Please contact the AppleInsider podcast at [email protected] and follow us on Twitter @appleinsider, plus Facebook and Instagram.
Those interested in sponsoring the show can reach out to us at [email protected].
AppleInsider editors Mikey Campbell and Victor Marks discuss:
- The new iPad: who's it for, how's it perform
- Inside the iPad: very similar to iPad Air (the first one)
- The Samsung Galaxy S8 launched, and Apple's stock price went up
- Apple ending support for 32-bit apps - coming soon
- How to identify your 32-bit apps that will break
- ApplePay news from Australia, Taiwan, and Italy
Listen to the embedded SoundCloud feed below:
Show note links:
- First impressions of Apple's 2017 9.7-inch A9-powered iPad
- Teardown finds Apple's new iPad largely similar to first-gen iPad Air
- Apple investors shrug off Samsung Galaxy S8 event, send stock upward
- Apple seemingly ends support for 32-bit devices with iOS 10.3.2
- How to identify all the 32-bit apps installed on your iPhone running iOS 10.3
- ACCC denies Australian banks to collectively bargain, boycott over Apple Pay
Feedback and comments are always appreciated. Please contact the AppleInsider podcast at [email protected] and follow us on Twitter @appleinsider, plus Facebook and Instagram.
Those interested in sponsoring the show can reach out to us at [email protected].
Comments
Would I like to make more people happy? Yes.
Is editing out every filler vocalization (um, er, ah) practical? Not without a more advanced AI.
(I've practiced to eliminate most of mine from my speech, but "so" is my guilty filler word.)
We're happy to get listener email and address topics listeners bring up.
What was difficult this episode was continued background noise interruption, which meant we did several takes of some segments and then had to creatively edit out others where we hadn't done enough extra takes, and I wasn't going to release it with background noise if I could help it.
That you didn't hear that shows I was right to put in the effort.
elijahg said:
Comments aren't the only measure of interest in an article. We get listener email that we sometimes read from on the podcast, too.
What format would you change it to, instead of covering the past week's articles with additional commentary?
But I would like to ask Mikey something less to smack and all the other unnecessary noises. This episode was not a pleasure to listen.
Here's my understanding based on my limited understanding of Australian consumer law I studied at university.
- Consumer law and competition is mostly regulated in Australia by the Competition and Consumer Act 2010
- The ACCC ('a' triple-c) is the 'policeman' of this Act and will enforce it in the courts
- The banks collectively negotiating or boycotting a company using their market power to the detriment of consumers is shaky legal ground and could be in violation of competition law
- The banks were seeking a ruling that would provide statutory protection from court action for conduct that might otherwise raise concerns under the competition provisions of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010
- The ACCC said they were not going to grant this because the benefits to consumers do not outweigh the costs
To sum up the confusion between the podcast presenters. The banks can refuse to negotiate individually of course - but if evidence arises that the banks are not acting in an arms-length relationship and are working together to boycott, they will not have statutory protection from action from the ACCC - and there is a chance they could face action (large fines, etc).