gatorguy

lam92103 said:

Google has to be the whiniest crybaby ever. Either get with the AirTag standard or stop complaining. 

Instead they keep blaming Apple for not wanting to be a part. 

There is no "Airtag standard".  I suggest more research before commenting.
A snippet from a pertinent article that might help you and other readers better understand:

"Google has already announced that all Bluetooth tags compatible with the FindMyDevice network will support Android’s unknown tracker alerts. The iPhone does not have similar detection capabilities.

At the start of May, Google and Apple announced an industry-wide unwanted tracker alert specification. Bluetooth trackers that abide by that approach will be discoverable by Android and iOS. The two mobile platforms have committed to add support once the spec is finalized.

In the meantime they could of course launch the network service anyway but to their credit "Google is not launching the Find My Device (FMD) network “until Apple has implemented protections for iOS.” By making sure iPhone owners can find FMD-compatible trackers, this should hopefully reduce and help prevent the Google network from being used to track Apple devices without awareness from their owners. That would reflect badly on the FMD network and associated products, which is an ongoing occurrence for AirTags."

. 

jdw said:

Having read some of the last several posts I see that once again the leftists pop out and defend the tired and yawn-triggering "Trump lies!" narrative.
Sorry, but everybody lies, including you and me.

The fact is, most of our American news is "propaganda" precisely because it chooses to focus on key things about candidates the media as chosen to dislike FOR THE REASON of promoting their own thinking and values.

 The person elected to the White House has the power to make a big difference good or bad... Which of the two candidates would actively bust their fanny to help Apple?  While that's certainly not the only issue in this election, it is nevertheless a key question to answer when casting your vote this election, regardless of what your emotions or the American media tell you.  Both left and right probably have a pretty good idea of who would help Apple the most over the next 4 years.

No matter how much you might applaud the MAGA policies, and I agree with some of them, Trump disqualifies himself by the threats he is making, which are getting progressively worse.

Announcing his intent to unleash the military on the "Pelosi's" and those like them, who he believes are part of the "enemy within".  Plans for day-one retribution against those he believes have not been fair to him. His total and complete intolerance of personal criticism and obsession with revenge. Those are enough proof he is unfit to hold the office of President. He'd make an OK CEO perhaps, or a billionaire investor too, where his ability to cause harm to millions of us would be limited. Would Trump be the right person trusted to with represent and protecting all US citizens as President of the United States, whether you agree with him or not? That's a hard no from me. I just don't understand how anyone can choose to ignore the threats and his very likely follow through, no matter what good points or ideas he may have.

Perhaps you're assuming those threats are things he is lying about doing, but all the other promises he's been making lately are true? Bad assumption based on his public stances. 

braytonak said:

I have to disagree with such a favorable rating. 

Backlight banding when auto brightness is enabled? Unusable HDR over USB-C? Those two points alone should barely earn 4. 

Add in the unlabeled controls (unless the labels appear on-screen,) cheap plastic, and speakers that are most likely only good enough for notifications to really make it a pass-with-a-push. 

I know, the point is the display itself. I’ve waited almost ten years for a decent 5K. Maybe the next Studio Display will be the sweet spot. 

I have two ProArt's now, both 32" for graphics work. I would agree more with the author.

Speakers on a monitor are for users who don't care all that much about sound quality. Good enough for a few Youtube videos but not for great music. So that's not a ProArt fail IMO.

Banding with auto-dim only on a very pale background is another non-issue as far as I'm concerned. I have my monitors in the same place under the same lighting 24/7, and all of them with hoods to minimize stray light. Why would I want persistent auto-dim? My major objection is it changes my perceived color tones. That's the same reason I turn off auto-dim on my SmartTV. I would understand if the light was constantly in flux, like with my smartphone wanderings. For the limited want to dim my computer monitor. manually doing so once or twice a week as desired (or in my case never) isn't problematic. Again, not an Asus fail. 

Controls? Yes they are labeled on screen, but I will agree I'm no fan of how Asus incorporates the controls. It could be improved. Fortunately that's another feature that's rarely touched after setup. Dimming can be accomplished with a hot key.

Plastic exterior components? They're not hammers so what's the issue with a lighter build. You set it up and forget it. My current Asus monitors are solid. 

Built in KVM works for me. Both systems that use my Asus monitors are set up with two computers/one monitor, one for design and one for RIP, and we go back and forth regularly each day. Mine are set up with separate KVM's, another box to make room for. Built-in = better. 

For color accuracy and system compatibility, I could not be happier, and mine are only 4K. The value of this 5K monitor far outweighs the out-of-pocket cost. "You can buy two and still have money left over versus buying Apple's expensive Studio Display" means a whole lot more to me than whether a monitor frame is plastic. 

chasm said:

I have been buying Disney annually through the App Store precisely because of its easy cancellation policies, which I haven’t needed to use.

Remember this article from 5 days ago? 
https://appleinsider.com/articles/24/10/17/ftc-click-to-cancel-rule-makes-canceling-subscriptions-as-easy-as-starting-them

libertyandfree said:

foregoneconclusion said:

jfabula1 said:

quakerotis said:

Like so much of a bribery victim's fealty, this will amount to no investment, no jobs, but plenty of time for T**** (the convicted felon and sexual predator) to lead his boy Cook around on a leash.

At least his trying instead of giving away your earned tax dollars. Get over it dude, you’re still crying of your election lost.
Tim will worked harder for this great American tax paying company. 

Sounds like you're not aware that the GOP plans on doing a $4.5 trillion tax cut that primarily benefits corporations and the wealthy. They're going to extend the $2 trillion cut from 2017 and add another $2.5 trillion on top. Keep in mind that the $2 trillion cut from 2017 was in place during the entire Biden administration. So if you didn't like the Biden economy,  the ineffectiveness of that tax cut was part of it. 

  The new taxcuts are mostly an extension of the exisiting tax law from 2017.  The lowering of the corporate taxes brought the US from 2nd highest in the OECD to the middle of the pack and stopped the corporate inversions, which every liberal conveniently ignores.  BTW, tax receipts are at al time highs.  Seems obvious but apparently needs to be stated, that all tax cuts go mostly to those who earn more money because they also pay the highest amount taxes and at the highest tax rates (The US has a highly progressive income tax system).  This very simple 4th grade mathematics seems beyond most liberals and Democratic Congress peoples comprehension - or so they pretend.  They beleive a tax cut means people that pay zero or almost zero in income taxes need to get thousands of dollars back from the govt, tax cuts are for people that pay taxes, it's not govt welfare.  

In and of itself, I don't necessarily disagree. But you aren't acknowledging what the current administration will do to accomplish it.

More of the safety net put in place for the poorest among us, and often with the fewest opportunities to move higher in the pecking order, will be snatched away to shift to the wealthiest. Without “stealing from the poor” those tax cuts and more can't be advanced. There was a time when the budget was not only balanced, but delivered a surplus paying down the deficit. It was not so long ago either, happening in your adult lifetime. You should read how and who made it happen. Trumps method will not work to do the same. 

kamyk35 said:

Sounds like he's is trying to redefine the definitions for water resistant & water proof

It's not as though Apple marketing discourages the inference of being "waterproof".  We have them promoting "look what we found on the lake bottom and it still works!" stories on a regular basis. Marketing can be a bit weasily, so always go by the specs and legal disclaimers. 

It's already been announced that the incoming administration is planning to take a hard-nosed approach to big tech, and reportedly happy with Lina Khan's efforts so far. Perhaps with enough bended knee the worst of it can be avoided by Apple, Google, MS, and Amazon, all home-grown US corporations. IMO the ones he decides are friends will be fine, but the others need to watch out.

I don't expect an even playing field, but happy to be surprised. 

beowulfschmidt said:

Apple, being an American company, is probably going to take the position that, "We don't need to prove our innocence.  If you think we're guilty, prove it."

If DoC thinks Apple is doing the nefarious things, prove it.  It seems at least possible that Apple is indirectly responsible for some of them.  Apple's suppliers might not be as scrupulous as Apple itself, and also might also be victims of bad actors even farther down the chain.

The cases are being heard in France and Belgium, where the DRC has filed its evidence. It's not a case of prove your innocence.

sdw2001 said:

randominternetperson said:

I was going to post that this article is misleading by saying that "However, President Trump is still in control of the trust and has the ability to make decisions that affect the company."  Because, obviously, the only appropriate way a trust could be set up would be as a blind trust (like every other president used) where they explicitly relinquish control over their business/investments.

But then I fact checked this and I was a fool to give Trump any benefit of the doubt. Trump didn't set up a blind trust at all; he retains "significant influence or control over the activities of the trust."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2025/05/06/trump-organization-admits-president-still-controls-his-business-in-new-filing/

You can’t really set up a blind to trust with active businesses like that. And not every other president did that. President in the early days of the republic had one desk for business and one for the country. Literally in the same room.

Every President for 50 years not-named-Trump has put their businesses into a blind trust. Is conflict of interest not a thing if your name is Trump, but the public expects better optics from all the others? Legal and ethical are of course different standards, and doing so is not a legal requirement. IMO it should be.

Remember how Joe Biden was demonized by Trump for his son Hunter potentially making any money from Presidential connections? Donald Trump has frequently accused Hunter Biden of using his father's name and position for financial gain. Trump's campaign, for example, ran an ad stating: "The question is not why Hunter Biden used his name to get these gigs. It's why Joe Biden let him do it."  Yet here we now with a different ethical standard. Is that OK with you?

IreneW said:

Both Renault and Volvo are mentioned in the article, and both of them are flagship partners implementing Android Automotive.
So it is not a question of total control, I guess, but in what way the product is offered.

There's a good reason for that. Android Automotive does not require the manufacturer to commit to Google services. It can offer most if not all the same UX benefits of Car Play Ultra while letting the manufacturers determine the services. Android Automotive is also user-friendly for both iPhone and Android owners.  Want to use CarPlay under Android Automotive, no problem.

I don't know whether Car Play Ultra offers the same freedom, but perhaps someone here knows the facts. My sense is it does not, thus more reticence on the part of automakers to rely on Car Play Ultra integration.