citpeks

About

Username
citpeks
Joined
Visits
309
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
957
Badges
1
Posts
246

Reactions

455Like81Informative

  • Next iPad may look more like an iPad Pro with Magic Keyboard support

    citpekscitpeks
    Before anyone screams "fake!" and says it's impossible to obtain such schematics, do know that Apple openly publishes these drawings as part of their Accessory Design Guidelines for Apple Devices.

    It is the bible that case manufacturers use to design their products, with dimensions, sensor locations, warnings, etc.

    These drawings in particular are too small to determine whether they're authentic, just recycled from the first iPP 11" and passed off as new, or faked, but like the recently revealed "Air" booklet, do generally fit the pattern of Apple's documentation.

    Once any new devices are revealed, and R13 of the guide is published, the score can be tallied.
    h4y3sthtJapheymuthuk_vanalingamGeorgeBMacwatto_cobra

  • AirPods Max won't support Apple Music lossless over Lightning, HomePod also left out

    citpekscitpeks
    dysamoria said:
    I’m surprised Lightning doesn’t carry digital audio. I wonder why I thought it did.
    It does.  The Lightning to 3.5mm dongle is actually a DAC (and a good one, as well as one of the cheapest things Apple sells(!)), so it's receiving digital output from the port.  The constraint is either in the maximum bitrate it, or the APP's DAC supports.

    Either Apple is being disingenuous with its statements, or there is some sloppy reporting occurring.  Maybe both.
    cgWerksgregoriusmdysamoriabyronldoozydozencaladanian

  • macOS Sonoma beta review: Few major updates, but very welcome

    citpekscitpeks
    Xed said:
    I'm glad that Apple has finally put this into Settings, but I wish there was an entire Settings section for default apps.


    IIRC, Apple moved the default mail and browser app settings from System Preferences to inside Mail and Safari's prefs in Leopard, forcing the user to launch those apps at least once anyway, even if they had no intention to ever use them.  Didn't make any more sense then, or now.  And still not intuitive in iOS either, so some sort of unified listing would be helpful.

    iOS' settings panels have long since become unwieldy and sort of a mess, and while I recognize the desire to harmonize things, pushing that model onto the Mac was a step backward.
    williamlondonforgot usernameappleinsideruserAlex1Ndarkvader

  • Allegations of discrimination spawn investigation into Apple Card credit lines

    citpekscitpeks
    larryjw said:
    The issue I raised to myself as I was requesting the Apple Card:

    First, don't know the information credit agencies get. I'm pretty sure they don't get any tax information, or have any idea of our net worth. I'm not sure they have access to investment accounts. 

    In any case, except for a few special accounts, my wife and I have joint accounts. 

    So, when credit worthiness is determined, they are determining that decision based on our joint financial interests. I got the Apple Card. 

    Now, if my wife requests the Apple Card, they cannot determine her credit worthiness independent from the determination of our credit worthiness when I signed up, otherwise they would be, in some sense, doubling the estimate of our credit worthiness. 

    Because the Apple Card account is not issued to spouses jointly, it makes sense that the first to get the Apple Card, gets the max, while the second spouse might get denied or a minimal limit. 

    The solution for Apple-GS is to tie both cards together into one account by default. 
    There is a lot of misinformation in this thread.

    First off, in general, lenders look at a variety of factors in determining a borrower's creditworthiness.  Income is one, as are assets.

    A person's credit score is another. it is an individual score, covering every reported creditor you've ever had in your financial life. Another person only factors in when you both appear on a joint credit account (like when you co-sign for someone), but that is simply another entry in the list. A person's score is still predominantly their own.

    Contrary to popular belief, your credit score has nothing at all to do with income or assets. It is strictly a measure of your ability to responsibly borrow money. The only accounts it looks at are credit accounts. Whether you pay your bills, and pay them on time is one of the biggest factors in the scoring algorithm. It also factors in credit utilization % -- how much of your credit lines are you using?

    A person who makes little income, but pays off their bills, on time, is going to have a higher score than one who makes high incomes, but uses most of their credit line, or doesn't pay their bills on time. The credit score does not judge whether your income gives you the ability to pay your bills; it only evaluates how you act when paying them (or not).

    Credit scores fluctuate naturally as a person goes about the business of living and borrowing money, whether acquiring new lines or credit, closing old ones, and simply making use of existing lines.

    While a mortgage lender does take into account all of the factors, and more, such as a stable employment history, a credit card lender does not go that far. A person's credit score, and stated income and occupation is about as far as it goes most of the time.

    If a lender wishes to independently verify your income with the IRS, they must do so with your permission. They may also ask to you to provide confirmation, in the form of pay stubs, but again, that is only with your permission. But most of the time, they do not, and while they are required by law to ask, the information you provide is voluntary (but legally obligated to be truthful).

    I'd have to dig out an old tri-merge to confirm, but I don't think gender is even part of a credit report, and even if it was, it was never considered as part of the work we did. DHH's wife may not have received as high of a line as he believes she should, but that is probably a result her history run through the models used, not overt discrimination based on gender.

    Just because the dude is a successful businessman who can afford to spend six figures annually as a privateer P2 driver in the WEC doesn't mean his wife will automatically be afforded the same credit line, at least as far as the banks are concerned.
    roundaboutnowsteven n.cat52randominternetpersonentropysjdb8167sarthos

  • ARM deal nears closure with Nvidia mulling $40B purchase from SoftBank

    citpekscitpeks
    tmay said:
    I don't imagine that Apple has concerns one way or the other. Apple is likely at a point where they have in house capability and have licensed necessary IP to create their own proprietary ISA, while also large enough to create the design and validation tools needed to fab at TMSC, or whomever.

    I would prefer that ARM reside in Japan or the UK, and not Taiwan, simply for National Security reasons.

    Most, if not all, of ARM's value lies in its IP, and the ability to collect license fees for that technology.  If one's goal was simply the technology itself, that is readily available by becoming a licensee.

    While there is the risk that Nvidia could try to put the screws to ARM's licensees, including Apple, only a fool would spend $40B to do so, and undermine that investment by threatening the customers, and the business.

    For its part, Apple has long had a top-level architecture license, and has already been designing its own silicon for years, a fact that seems to have escaped at least one person here.

    It worst comes to the worst, it can take Apple Silicon to the next level, and go fully proprietary.  It would be a PITA, but since it has the dev tools, and owns the whole widget, would not be as arduous a task as it would be for others.

    The fact that Apple was given a first look, and said "no, thanks" indicates that the company feels confident in its position.
    killroyJWSCgregoriusmlollivertmaywilliamlondonStrangeDaysmuthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra

  • Rumor: iPhone 15 USB-C cable limited to USB 2.0 speeds, has no MFi

    citpekscitpeks
    clexman said:
    Name one computing device that comes with the fastest USB-C cable. No phone, tablet, laptop or desktop does. It’s always separate or with a peripheral. 

    This is a charging cable for the >99.9% of iPhone users that make all data transfers wirelessly. 

    The minority that transfer data over a wire from their iPhone can buy a specialty cable for that. 

    Stories like this reveal those who have an understanding of how USB works -- in both a technical and practical sense -- and how most don't.  Often, that includes the writer of the piece.  But they do serve well to whip up fervor about how Apple is greedy/cheap/evil, etc., and be good click generators.

    Despite how Type-C has been positioned as the Wonder Connector of Tomorrow, it does not require implementation of the latest and greatest data transmission protocol.  As a connector type, it accommodates any, and everything, so to speak.  One could certainly argue that USB 3.x should have been made the minimum baseline, and I'd agree, but that's not how the USB IF chose to proceed.

    Apple would still fully spec compliant, should it choose to ship iPhones with ports limited to USB 2, as well as with cables limited to USB 2 baseline data speeds.  In practice that is the most common type of cable on the market, fully spec compliant, and suits the needs of the masses for a charging cable, the only type they'll ever desire or need.  In this respect, the company would not be an outlier if/when it does so, according to these rumors.

    MFi is a certification program, not a "chip" per se, and should Apple choose to utilize some sort of method to ID cables, it already has the tools available in the spec, via the Authentication standard, that provides to the ability identify and authorize cables based on their e-markers (which, BTW are required by spec for cables to carry >60W).  It wouldn't need to roll its own chips to enable that functionality.

    As for the EU, the official that was blowing smoke in response to the rumours about limited charging or data speeds doesn't even know his own law, which was written to harmonize charging standards, and ensure compatibility.  It does not address data protocols, and with respect to power delivery, only requires the implementation of Type-C and the PD protocol, which aside from headroom capacity, counts adaptability as it other primary benefit.  It does not address performance, nor specify any sort of minimum or maximum power level, which given the nature of the protocol, and breadth of different devices, would be impossible to begin with.  Hollow threats with no basis to back them up.
    Alex1Neightzerowatto_cobramuthuk_vanalingamdewmeFileMakerFellerjas99pscooter63

  • Apple's iPhone 11, iPhone 11 Pro rely on Intel LTE modems

    citpekscitpeks
    A Qualcomm modem won't be able to overcome mediocre antenna performance if Apple doesn't get that part right with future phones.

    Or has everyone forgotten about the iPhone 4, where a user's grip had adverse effects and elicited Jobs' infamous quote?

    It's clear that a good many are too young, and have never had to wrestle with a TV antenna to get a clear picture.

    With RF systems, the tuner isn't the only part of the equation.
    llamaGeorgeBMacAppleExposed

  • Apple patched an iOS lock screen bypass without crediting its discovery

    citpekscitpeks
    Correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't been following this closely, but from what has been written here, this is how I read it:

    1) Researcher discovers (another) bug, but as a means of protest and to draw attention, opts not to report new bug to Apple through the proper channels, and exposes it in a YouTube video instead.  The "gives away" part, whether a direct quote or not, suggests researcher is wiling to forego the compensation, if not the credit, for the new discovery.

    2) Apple fixes bug, without acknowledgement, or compensation.

    3) Researcher now bemoaning the lack of credit/compensation, for a bug that wasn't reported, or formally submitted through established channels, just YouTube.

    4) This is a researcher who has gone through the procedure before, and has been acknowledged, and compensated by Apple for that discovery, of another lock screen bug.  He may have his issues with the system, but he cannot claim to not know how it works.

    This, of course, doesn't preclude the possibility that Apple may have discovered the bug on its own, treated it as an internal patch, however unlikely that might be.  There's also the possibility that is was indirectly mitigated as a side effect from patches made for other purposes.  I'm not aware of the expected disclosure requirements of bugs found internally, or how closely they are enforced, but CVEs apply to publicly known vulnerabilities.  Does a YouTube video formally qualify?

    All I know is that ignoring, and making it a point to flout the system, however messed up you may think it is, might not be the best way to achieve the desired outcome, or effect change.

    Such tactics are cheap, and pander to the lowest common denominator, and/or those incapable of applying critical thinking.
    hucom2000MplsPmike1macplusplusgenovellemuthuk_vanalingam

  • New Bluetooth flaws could let an attacker steal wireless communications

    citpekscitpeks
    chasm said:
    Oh noes, someone might be able to listen in on my music stream!

    (Yes I know there are other potential intercepts such as keystrokes, but again, the attacker has to be within Bluetooth range, so the risk on this gathering any useful data seems really, really low)

    Your profound love of Michael Bolton might be your own little secret, but BT can, and is used to identify, and track your movements inside places like stores, how often you visit, and if correlated with data from other sources like cell carriers, which stores you visit.

    Personally, I find that more than a little creepy, and the real-life manifestation of the trackers and data mining that occurs online.

    Here's some reading to get started:




    muthuk_vanalingamAlex1Ngatorguywatto_cobra

  • Steve Jobs unveiled the first iPhone 17 years ago today

    citpekscitpeks
    I miss going to MacWorld Expo.

    Trade shows are passé, blah blah blah, Apple Stores give us more exposure, etc., but they can't replace the experience of the massive Apple booth, exposure to real Apple managers and developers (not the hipster retail droid experience in the Stores), and all the vendors who make up the Apple ecosystem on one show floor.

    The period stretching from Power Computing's "Fight Back for Mac!" campaign to the iPhone introduction spans the lows of a rudderless company to one at the height of its powers and capability.

    Apple is secure now, but it's not the same hungry, risk taking company it was.  Maturity, success, and massive growth alone can dilute, if not erode the core values of a company.  Many of its employees now probably never know Apple as anything but a success, which results in a different company and world view.

    Jobs was a noted admirer of Sony, and it will be interesting to see if Apple follows the same path to a faded, if not moribund, brand in the future.  Or similarly worse, that of HP or IBM, which have turned from innovators into servicers.
    christopher126philboogiehammeroftruthradarthekatocelotwreakgordycolinnguraharatokyojimubloggerblog