Here is everything Apple killed -- or tried to kill -- at WWDC 2020

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 43
    lkrupp said:
    lkrupp said:
    No Bootcamp or Parallells => No windows solution => No Mac (in our company...)
    And that's supposed to scare Apple?
    No, just explaining what common corporate regulations are
    IBM is all Mac now. So are al lot of corporations. In fact more and more companies are adding Macs. So what do you mean by common regulations? That's complete baloney.
    IBM is not all Mac.  That's complete baloney.  Although Macs are increasing in enterprise, it's not as if there is parity.  Not by a long shot.  What @WarrenBuffduckh is referencing is the corporate traditional reliance on Windows based software... which is easily accessed on Macs via Bootcamp and virtualization software like Parallels.  It's a pretty fair assumption that Apple has a solution to address the Windows factor.  Chances are great they're working directly with MS to make the transition as easy and seamless as possible.  Considering both companies have ARM based tech available, a workable solution seems a given in my opinion.  Granted, I could be wrong.  Not "IBM is all Mac" wrong, but...  
    elijahgavon b7cornchiprevenant
  • Reply 22 of 43
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    revenant said:
    apple definitely did not kill google translate. I am not sure I would say they are trying very hard either. right now it is 11 languages, google has over 100. it is an ok start and offline is very nice. but if they tried to kill google translate, it is merely a flesh wound, and not the monty python type. I have zero doubt they will press on with multiple updates that will unlock more languages and consistent and good translations, and am a little excited fort. but lets not call it what it isn't. 

    As time passes they'll support more languages, more hardware, etc. Expect it on Macs, Watch, Airpods and eventually Apple Glasses for real-world guiding. Then will come the usual Apple innovations like explaining slang, spatial audio for real-time translation etc.

    I hope they kill it at least on Apple devices. iKnockoffs can keep their Daddy Google.
    cornchipcat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 43
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    Rayz2016 said:
    elijahg said:
    Force touch is going away on the watch?? Bleh. I find it really useful and much quicker than hunting through menus especially on a small screen. The current implementation is a bit crap though. You have to go around force touching everything to find out what is force touchable, and then try and remember. A simple indication of some sort, maybe a subtle screen edge glow or something similar would have been a good indicator so you knew immediately that you could force touch. 

    On a different note, I am not sure about the legality of them essentially abandoning hardware in existing watches. They're actually removing functionality that has existed since the watch was purchased. That seems a bit unreasonable to me.

    They're not removing it. They're replacing it with something else. My guess is that they'll just use a long touch to get at the extra functions. Or better yet, just put three vertical dots near the field so folk can see that there's an extra function available.

    They could have added visual cues and kept force touch.
    elijahgsedicivalvole
  • Reply 24 of 43
    elijahg said:
    Force touch is going away on the watch?? Bleh. I find it really useful and much quicker than hunting through menus especially on a small screen. The current implementation is a bit crap though. You have to go around force touching everything to find out what is force touchable, and then try and remember. A simple indication of some sort, maybe a subtle screen edge glow or something similar would have been a good indicator so you knew immediately that you could force touch. 

    On a different note, I am not sure about the legality of them essentially abandoning hardware in existing watches. They're actually removing functionality that has existed since the watch was purchased. That seems a bit unreasonable to me.
    So, if Apple implements a feature that is nice, but not essential, but which relies on hardware that turns out to be somewhat unreliable, or that is impractical going forward; what should Apple do?

    Remember, we aren’t talking about a bay-soldered display controller, or some other hardware that directly affects the base functionality of the device; but rather, provides a more-convenient way of doing something that can be done without requiring said hardware.

    There is no “cause of action here. It was a nice idea for a timesaver that just didn’t work out. Happens.
    cornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 43
    I hope someone can explain Cupertino what common corporate regulations say:
    No Bootcamp or Parallells => No windows solution => No Mac
    Windows will be a available in some form under Virtualization. The only question is what form that will take.
    chasmcat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 43
    I still miss force touch on my iphone X. I feel like something was taken away from me. Selecting text is still really awkward for me to this day.

    I'm sure I'll feel the same once it's gone from my watch: I don't realize how I use it until it's gone.
    Beatsmobirdsedicivalvoleking editor the grateelijahgwatto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 43
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    I still miss force touch on my iphone X. I feel like something was taken away from me. Selecting text is still really awkward for me to this day.

    I'm sure I'll feel the same once it's gone from my watch: I don't realize how I use it until it's gone.

    The problem with long press is that it doesn't solve the "hidden menu" problem and takes an extra second to activate. In this day when everyone wants and needs speed all that lag adds up.

    Also Force Touch should have at the least been kept on the lockscreen. Expect a bunch of people to lose massive amount of battery life by accidentally tapping the camera or flashlight buttons in-pocket(seen this plenty of times).
    elijahg
  • Reply 28 of 43
    Noooo

    Stop it. It was bad enough when they removed force touch from the new phones. Now they are doing it to the watch. 

    Stop cheapening these devices and removing useful features. Switching them for more complicated longer methods that just piss me off. 

    Really annoys me. I miss force touch everyday since I moved from the X 

    I use it everyday on the Watch. Personally find it annoying and nothing but a slimming down and cheapening tactic 
    edited June 2020 Beatselijahgprismatics
  • Reply 29 of 43
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    lkrupp said:
    lkrupp said:
    No Bootcamp or Parallells => No windows solution => No Mac (in our company...)
    And that's supposed to scare Apple?
    No, just explaining what common corporate regulations are
    IBM is all Mac now. So are al lot of corporations. In fact more and more companies are adding Macs. So what do you mean by common regulations? That's complete baloney.
    IBM is not all Mac.  That's complete baloney.  Although Macs are increasing in enterprise, it's not as if there is parity.  Not by a long shot.  What @WarrenBuffduckh is referencing is the corporate traditional reliance on Windows based software... which is easily accessed on Macs via Bootcamp and virtualization software like Parallels.  It's a pretty fair assumption that Apple has a solution to address the Windows factor.  Chances are great they're working directly with MS to make the transition as easy and seamless as possible.  Considering both companies have ARM based tech available, a workable solution seems a given in my opinion.  Granted, I could be wrong.  Not "IBM is all Mac" wrong, but...  

    Didn't IBM switch to Mac because of Windows problems? I have a screenshot of the article that says they had way way more problems with Windows machines. I kept the screenshots for Apple haters who think Macs have more problems(for some odd reason they believe this.)
    chasmcat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 43
    tobiantobian Posts: 151member
    Somebody knowledgeable can disabuse me, but my first experiment on AS Mac would going to be installing Wine environment to see whether Rosetta 2 is able to translate win32 apps this way (but most likely it won't work too - for the same reason).
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 43
    cornchipcornchip Posts: 1,950member
    lkrupp said:
    lkrupp said:
    No Bootcamp or Parallells => No windows solution => No Mac (in our company...)
    And that's supposed to scare Apple?
    No, just explaining what common corporate regulations are
    IBM is all Mac now. So are al lot of corporations. In fact more and more companies are adding Macs. So what do you mean by common regulations? That's complete baloney.
    Furthermore, the coming wave of Apple chipped Macs are going to be cheaper, faster, and Vastly more secure than any other computing platform on the market. They’re going to be a fortune500 no-brainer. Apple’s current crack in the business PC dam is about bust it wide open. Only a handful of major apps left to convert, will likely happen in short order. 
    edited June 2020 Wgkruegercat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 43
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,304member
    IBM is not all Mac.  That's complete baloney.  Although Macs are increasing in enterprise, it's not as if there is parity.  Not by a long shot. 


    You're correct, but  ... indeed IBM did report that an increasing number of their workers prefer Macs and that studies of said employees showed that they were a) more productive, b) required less IT  attention or training for problems or guidance, and c) tended to close bigger deals.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 43
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,304member
    I hope someone can explain Cupertino what common corporate regulations say:
    No Bootcamp or Parallells => No windows solution => No Mac
    Not really. But perhaps that's true of your company (which, as we now know, you think of as being the same worldwide). Hopefully your IT department is a bit less Chicken Little than you.

    Maybe let your IT department know that all of MS's good apps run on present and future Macs (better than Windows, IMO), all of Google's apps run on present and will run on future Macs, and most vertical business software is actually a Filemaker port, which is ... Apple. So unless your company's world revolves around Quicken and Access, the sky hasn't yet fallen.

    Maybe also let them know that Intel Macs are still in the pipeline, that Rosetta 2 and universal binaries exist (and probably will for long after the hardware transition ends, just like last time), and thus this is not an issue they need to address anytime in the next five years. And  even five years is assuming no company ever offers Windows virtualization on Apple Macs (and Apple has already said explicitly there are virtualization paths there -- indeed Parallels already has Linux running on them).

    Besides, more corporations use mobile apps at least as much if not more than traditional desktops these days. And the vast majority of those are ... wait for it ... running on Apple Silicon.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 34 of 43
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,304member
    PS. Those of you with Apple Watches, you're correct that it's currently inconsistent. So welcome watchOS 7, which will resolve that inconsistency for good!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 43
    CloudTalkinCloudTalkin Posts: 916member
    chasm said:
    IBM is not all Mac.  That's complete baloney.  Although Macs are increasing in enterprise, it's not as if there is parity.  Not by a long shot. 


    You're correct, but  ... indeed IBM did report that an increasing number of their workers prefer Macs and that studies of said employees showed that they were a) more productive, b) required less IT  attention or training for problems or guidance, and c) tended to close bigger deals.
    The popularity, productivity, and TCO for Macs at IBM were never questioned.  Not exactly sure why you're referencing the stats using my quote.  The flat out lie that "IBM was all Mac" is what I called out.  There is no "but" to counter that.  What IBM's CIO said at the Jamf conference last year (the info you're referencing) doesn't make lkrupp's claim any closer to being true.  In fact, info from that same conference showed their distribution of laptops was still decidedly Windows - 60/30/10 for Win/Mac/Linux.  That's far from "all Mac". 
    edited July 2020 revenantelijahg
  • Reply 36 of 43
    frantisekfrantisek Posts: 756member

    Trackers and snooping

    Apple continues its battle against user tracking while promoting user privacy. In iOS 14, macOS Big Sur, and iPadOS 14 Apple made more changes in support of these values.


    Google Translate

    Many users rely on Google Translate, or other translation apps for their personal lives or work. This year, as part of a volley against Google, Apple has introduced its own translation app, allowing users to have conversations in real-time with the new Translate app.


    You can add text or have a real conversation with someone in the app face-to-face with the app translating for you as you go.

    On iPhone, iPad, and Mac there is also built-in translation for websites. Anytime you are online and faced with an article in Italian or some other language foreign to you, you are able to instantly translate it without the need for any third-party apps.


    Can someone say if in Trackers and snooping Apple did something really innovative compare to Firefox, Ghostery or other add blocking plug-ins?

    With those few supported languages Apple can hardly kill Google Translate. And even user cases are rare. How many times you came to talk to foreigner not talking English? But how often you write something and need to help with translation both ways. For me first case rarely on vacation second case nearly daily. For second case there is little help especially in environment where you have to be silent.
    Same it is rare to come to article in foreign language and for that case there were tools other then Google before. Especially on iOS where Google refused to integrate Translate into system with action extension.



    edited July 2020 watto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 43
    longfanglongfang Posts: 456member
    mike1 said:
    elijahg said:

    On a different note, I am not sure about the legality of them essentially abandoning hardware in existing watches. They're actually removing functionality that has existed since the watch was purchased. That seems a bit unreasonable to me.
    I doubt there would be any legal ramifications at all. For one, I'm sure there is something in the licensing software that you quickly agreed to that says they can change things. Second, you're not losing functionality of the watch at all. You would still have the same features and options, just a slightly different way to access them. Third, even if the above wasn't enough, you would have to show that you purchased an Apple Watch in large part because it offered Force Touch. Probably tough to convince a judge or jury (if it got that far) that you bought the Watch so you could press down extra hard on the screen.
    On top of that, in order to “remove” something, you would have to hit agree / confirm / ok the update.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 43
    longfanglongfang Posts: 456member
    lkrupp said:
    No Bootcamp or Parallells => No windows solution => No Mac (in our company...)
    And that's supposed to scare Apple?
    No, just explaining what common corporate regulations are
    Pretty sure that’s not universal, or are you suggesting all the corporations (which Apple is also one) got together and decided this.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 39 of 43
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    Beats said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    elijahg said:
    Force touch is going away on the watch?? Bleh. I find it really useful and much quicker than hunting through menus especially on a small screen. The current implementation is a bit crap though. You have to go around force touching everything to find out what is force touchable, and then try and remember. A simple indication of some sort, maybe a subtle screen edge glow or something similar would have been a good indicator so you knew immediately that you could force touch. 

    On a different note, I am not sure about the legality of them essentially abandoning hardware in existing watches. They're actually removing functionality that has existed since the watch was purchased. That seems a bit unreasonable to me.

    They're not removing it. They're replacing it with something else. My guess is that they'll just use a long touch to get at the extra functions. Or better yet, just put three vertical dots near the field so folk can see that there's an extra function available.

    They could have added visual cues and kept force touch.
    Why bother if they can add the extra function on a drop down?
    edited July 2020
  • Reply 40 of 43
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    Rayz2016 said:
    elijahg said:
    Force touch is going away on the watch?? Bleh. I find it really useful and much quicker than hunting through menus especially on a small screen. The current implementation is a bit crap though. You have to go around force touching everything to find out what is force touchable, and then try and remember. A simple indication of some sort, maybe a subtle screen edge glow or something similar would have been a good indicator so you knew immediately that you could force touch. 

    On a different note, I am not sure about the legality of them essentially abandoning hardware in existing watches. They're actually removing functionality that has existed since the watch was purchased. That seems a bit unreasonable to me.

    They're not removing it. They're replacing it with something else. My guess is that they'll just use a long touch to get at the extra functions. Or better yet, just put three vertical dots near the field so folk can see that there's an extra function available.
    They absolutely have removed it. Long-touch has replaced it in some areas like the watch face to access the edit screen but in others it is hidden behind menus, hurting the user experience. I often use the grid face to access apps but aside from the ones in the center, I don't know where the rest are located. So I Force Touch to switch to list view, and quickly scroll to the one I need. Now the option is to go to grid view, find the settings app, open settings, go down to App Layout, switch to list view, then go back to the app view. and repeat to go back. Burying things in menus is the main option here and it is a pain. Even the long-touch is obnoxious because it makes the watch feel slow and laggy.
    No, they’re not removing it. 

    You’re mistaking the function with the method to activate the function. Force Touch is not the function. Even if they remove force touch you will still be able to access the same function on the watch albeit in a different way. The problem with Force Touch is that there is no way of knowing that the function it’s hiding is there. Long Touch has the same problem, but at last there’s a better chance I’ll discover the function by accident. 

    My own particular bugbear:  until someone mentioned it here last week, I had no idea you could change your move goal on the Apple Watch without having to wait for the watch to prompt you. If there had been three dots at the side of the move summary line then I would’ve had a look.  Force Touch is bad because you don’t know it’s there. 
    edited July 2020
Sign In or Register to comment.