mike eggleston

About

Username
mike eggleston
Joined
Visits
76
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
276
Badges
1
Posts
707
  • Apple in 2019: surviving iPhone challenges like the 1990s Microsoft

    A lot of the "doom-and-gloom" surrounding Apple is nothing more than social media drama deliberately created. Apple will push the boundaries of what we consider as personal computers. John Srouji is doing great work hardware-wise when it comes to Apple Ax chipset. The only thing Apple has to do is keep evolving iOS into a more robust mobile operating system and unlock more features that we know it can handle. I really look forward to a day when I can do all the work I would usually do on my PC right on my iPhone XS Max or iPad.
    I agree with iOS evolving.  It might be time to fork iOS into one for tablets, and one for phones.  Or, the ability to toggle on advanced features, like a proper file system.

    The expectation is for Apple’s A series chips to power MacOS laptops.  The alternative is for iOS to “grow up” in functionality.  In my mind, the 12.9” iPad & the A Series laptop need to run the full Office 365.

    I’d also like to see iWork become something more like Office 365.  It had promise but the effort has fizzled...  If Apple wants services revenue to grow, that would be a good place to start.  Microsoft knows business and sustainable revenue.  People will cut video & music subscriptions when money gets tight.  Business’s can’t cut the tools to let the people do their jobs.

    Apple is all about the ecosystem, but the customer lock-in isn’t as great as they hope.  Currently, their is nothing they make that is as “sticky” as MS Office.  Without that, there is nothing to prevent them from becoming the next Blackberry.

    For example, if I switched to Android devices it would be annoying, but after a month it would be business as usual.

    I’m not in the “sky is falling” crowd.  Apple remains dominant in several areas, but they can’t sit on their laurels.  The most interesting thing Apple’s been working on is medical records and devices, those have the potential to be “sticky” and helps them keep their dominance in the other areas.
    There is no need for iOS to run the full Office 365. There is almost no need for it, unless you are really attached to Word, Excel, or Powerpoint. At that point, it is now a matter of preference. Also, that desire is on Microsoft's shoulders to make it the full experience, not Apple's. I do agree that Apple should put more work into their iWork suite of tools. They are an excellent toolset that does need some serious love.

    One thing I did want to mention is Project Marzipan (I think that is how it is spelled). This alone should be a huge indicator as to where Apple is heading. It isn't that iOS and macOS are merging, but instead allowing for applications to be built on both easily. If Apple can pull this off, and I have zero doubts that they can, this will be huge. As a software developer, I can tell you that if the only thing that I have to do is some slight tweaks to a bit of code and I can migrate my application to another platform, that is a huge win; and once the apps come people will have no problems going back to the Mac.
    StrangeDaysapplesnorangesmacplusplustmaykitatitberndogradarthekatwatto_cobrabakedbananas
  • Nike teases Tuesday reveal of new iPhone-controlled self-lacing sneakers

    DAalseth said:
    Oh for crying out loud. How f****** hard is it to tie your bloody shoes.
    For a child who has disabilities, either mental or physical (or in the case of my youngest daughter, both); this could be a game changer for her. Right now, she has to have daddy or mommy tie her shoes, when all of her peers can do it themselves. For her, she would feel more independent just because she can tie her own laces.
    ctt_zhavon b7racerhomie3caladanianrepressthisSolibeowulfschmidtwatto_cobra
  • Apple pulls Fortnite from App Store for sidestepping commission fee [ux2]

    JMaille said:

    When are people going to realize this isn’t about reducing the cost to consumers, this is about getting as much money out of consumers as they possibly can.  Epic and the other companies that are protesting the “Apple Tax” aren’t trying to eliminate or even reduce the cost of being in the App Store for themselves.  What they are trying to do is force Apple, either through their own decision, through the courts, or through legislation, to change the way they charge developers for being in the App Store.  They want to do away with the competition from free apps.  They want Apple to change to an approach where any developer that wants to put an app in the App Store has to pay for it, which in turn will eliminate almost all free apps and almost all developers they may have to compete with.  Or better yet, they want to force Apple to allow, or be force to allow, alternate App Stores on every single IOS device so they can stop having to live with the privacy restrictions Apple forces on them.  Then they can get to what they really want, harvesting user data so they can make the user what they think all users should be – the product rather than the customer.

    Sorry but you are wrong. Epic did lower the price by 20% if purchased through the online payment system. For instance, 1,000 V-bucks, which is roughly equivalent to $10 in-game Fortnite currency, now costs just $7.99. 
    Do the math for a second. So, for the Apple version of that package is $9.99. Their "Epic Store" pricing is $2.00 cheaper (or 20%). They make MORE by having you go through their system than the Apple ecosystem. This is 100% so Epic can make more money, and not pay anything (or close to anything) for being on someone else's hard work and infrastructure. JMaille is absolutely correct.
    Beatsjdb8167ericthehalfbeeGabyrandominternetpersoncat52lolliverJanNLaderutterwatto_cobra
  • MacBook Pro with SD card slot, no Touch Bar coming in 2021

    This whole iteration of a report just seems like going backwards. I know that most people aren't fans of the Touch Bar, but I think it does serve a purpose and is far more useful than what people think. And for those people who lament the "loss" of their beloved function keys, are really a small number of people. Hell, I do development for a living, connecting to multiple machines via SSH and I don't use the function keys ever. The only time that I ever use it is when I am refreshing a SQL query in DBeaver. I know I am one person in a crowd of millions of people, but I just don't see Apple moving backwards. If they were going to do that, they would have done it when they revealed the M1.
    rcfaviclauyycStrangeDayswilliamlondonlongpathd_2pscooter63watto_cobra
  • Apple says Epic Games demands threaten iOS app security, privacy, quality

    wizard69 said:

    Frankly Apple is using some of he same idiotic excuses, that only the extremely gullible accept, that they use to fight right to repair.    In the end Apples motivations are planned obsolescence and getting a cut of every commercial app that runs on its devices.    It can be likened to Ford demanding 30% from every gas station when you fill up your tank.   It isn't something most Americans would feel comfortable with and frankly is against the law.   I just don't see Apple having a leg to stand on especially if one looks deep into existing law and what has traditionally been accepted business practice.
    This is an honest question, because it certainly seems like it. Did you get your talking points from Epic's hilariously bad opening statements? They used that same bullshit remark of the gas station, and it is just plainly wrong. Apple owns their store. They can have the criteria put in place for others to sell their goods at their store. If Epic somehow convinces this judge that they are in the right, it would have huge ramifications for businesses outside of technology. For instance, Target could force Walmart to allow for Target to open a mini-store and sell their competing goods, all while Walmart would have to swallow the costs. This is exactly what Epic is proposing, and all it does is benefit themselves. 
    qwerty52lolliverroundaboutnowfotoformatDogpersonwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • US official calls Cook's idea to vote on iPhone 'preposterous'

    There are definitive ways to make it such that a person can vote by a device. A few people have talked about some of the technologies that can be used to validate that the person making the request is in fact the person that can vote. Like one person said, this is already done via Apple Pay (which is the far more secure way of doing contactless payments than anything out there). It is established that the card (or person) is valid, and then they are given a a secure credential. One way of doing this is by public key/private key encryption. That way the public key (i.e. the voting servers) can read what the votes are, but they will not know who the person is. Also, the person who submitted the vote can verify that their vote is the one they actually did.

    Now, this is a very rudimentary example of what can be done, and there should be additional safeguards that are put into place plus there are other considerations that need to be dealt with (person changes device, what then?) that need to be addressed. But, all of those things are things that can be done with the will and desire to make it happen. It requires EXPERTS not POLITICIANS to come up with the solutions, and that way it is 100% fair for everybody.
    Dogperson
  • Epic CEO decries Apple's App Store 'propaganda' after 10 months of his own

    docno42 said:

    Seriously?  Rouge Amoeba, who has been a Mac developer for decades, can't be trusted with private API access?  

    Apple are a bunch of cowards hiding behind policy - that they created!  Why does everyone have to be treated the same?  Answer: they don't.  But it's far easier to treat everyone the same.  No critical thought required - just numbly point to the policy, claim your hands are tied and then conveniently ignore the fact that you made the policy that is tying your hands in the first place. 
    I only picked this part of your tirade of a comment, because it seems like it is the core of it. That said, I am not sure where to start with this. So, I will begin with where my strengths are, and that is backend programming.

    I develop APIs and backend processes for a living, and I can tell you with unequivocal certainty that having a set core of rules that all of your users of APIs have to abide by is CRITICAL to making sure that people who develop for your platform do so in the way that you intended. Those policies are the very foundation that make a secure platform that works not just for the developers but also for the users who use it. That is why they have those policies. Yes, some people want side-loading apps. That doesn't make it the correct solution. The moment a bad actor comes in and does something, who do you think the public (the same public demanding for side-loading apps) will blame? That's right, the people who made the APIs in the first place (that would be Apple).

    So while it is fun to complain about how Apple doesn't trust "respected developers" or they are "limiting my choice" or whatever nonsense you want to spew out next; the fact of the matter is that they created an environment that is secureuser-centric, and accessible as long as you are willing to play by the rules. Yes, those rules are malleable and can change; but as they are written right now, those are the rules.
    williamlondonspock1234davenwatto_cobra
  • iOS 14 leaks are proof why there should never be an encryption backdoor

    DAalseth said:
    Any back door for law enforcement, would be stolen, distributed, and exploited within weeks of it’s being introduced. 

    Honestly, I think that you are giving a lot more credit there. I don't think it would take weeks or even days: I am thinking hours. I have literally seen a computer melt because of "Code Red" and "Nimda" viruses that were able to exploit backdoors (admittedly those are Windows backdoors, but the analogy works). Smart phones are many factors more powerful than the computers were back in the early 00's, so that kind of open door would definitely be exploited much quicker.

    Edit: grammer

    wg45678dysamoriawatto_cobra
  • Coalition for App Fairness originally Epic-funded to assist in App Store legal battles

    j2fusion said:
    Is anyone surprised by this… anyone?
    I wasn't, but it's good to have proof.

    Epic hasn't responded to our emails and questions about it, and I'm not expecting them to.
    To be fair, this honestly doesn't surprise me at all. I thought that the Coalition for App Fairness was a sham to begin with. Seeing that it is definitely a sham associated with the other sham known as Sweeney; can we finally start blasting that company publicly about this very plainly obvious affront to contractional agreements?
    watto_cobrajony0
  • Akamai DNS failure crippled the Internet for two hours

    Cannot get at the VSCode extensions either.
    watto_cobra