Prof_Peabody

damonf said:

Seems like this should have only been targeted at iPhone 5 or older, given that customers can currently purchase the 5s as the entry-level iPhone model.  That's kinda like buying a low-end/entry level model from a car manufacturer, open up the on-screen owner's manual, and it has a pop-up recommending you by the high-end/premium model. lol   Though maybe they are looking up the user's associated device profile and determining the age of the phone and only showing it for phones of a certain age.

I disagree. A full-screen pop-up advertisement right in the OS, is not welcome at all for anyone ever. Apple has been doing a lot of this sort of thing lately and if we don't complain about it, they will only get worse.

 The new Music app was the first of it. If you have a force-press phone, it contains an advertisement for the Apple Music service that cannot be removed and sits there day after day asking you to join up. Every time you upgrade and re-start music for the first time, it shoots an advert at you on top of the one on the force-press menu.

 Hell since iOS 8, most of the time when you open a store in an Apple OS, even if you are clicking on a link from an upgrade notification, it takes you to the promotional screen first, then you have to purposely switch *back* to the upgrades tab. It's getting a bit ridiculous if you ask me.

 If I wanted advertisements in my OS's, I would go with Google Chrome. If I pay MONEY for something, (a LOT of money in the case of Apple's products) it should be 100% advertisement free.

I don't see why people bother with this stuff.  It's not a real solution.  It's hardly any different from having the " crap" folder on the last page that everyone seems to have.  

Also, I can't think of a single week (certainly not a month), that I haven't had to reboot my phone at least once.  Add that to the multiple OS updates each year and you will be performing this nonsense at least a couple of dozen times a year.  For what?  One would have to be crazy obsessive to do this, and keep it up.  

atlapple said:

Good to see Apple is going to get rid of an universal port in favor of making most users buy yet again another dongle. Unlike getting rid of optical drives in Macs there is no real space saving benefits to getting rid of a 3.5mm jack. As far as making the thinnest phone ever that mean not only will it have to be thinner than the iPhone 6s it will also have to be thinner than the iPhone 6. This years model actually increased in thickness. 

iPhone thickness generally goes down (and sometimes up) by a few tenths of millimetres each year.  The iPhone 7 would have to be 3 full millimetres thinner however to make the claim (if Apple makes it) that "the audio jack had to be removed so they could make it thinner."  

So in that sense, almost every story on the subject you see on the web toady is incorrect since they all reference the "problem" of the audio jack in reference to being able to make the phone thinner.  Also, iPhone 7 is quite unlikely to be that thin.  It would require new battery tech or new screen tech (or both), each of which shaved a full millimetre or two off of the thickness.  

The odds of the new iPhone even being as thin as the current iPod touch, are very small.  Even if it lost a full millimetre, it would be a huge change, the biggest in five full years, and it would still be a millimetre thicker than the current iPod touch. 

anantksundaram said:

lkrupp said:

And you can bet the farm that an Apple car will not be powered by hydrocarbon based fuel.

If it uses electricity, sure, it will be. Less of it compared to an ICE, but it's impossible not to be powered by fossil fuels.

Poppycock.  Complete nonsense. 

greginprague said:

SpamSandwich said:

Well, that's it then. They're getting into the used car business.

Will they install aftermarket JVC, Kenwood, or Pioneer head units compatible with CarPlay into their entire stock?  Win Win for everyone...

If it has a stereo/radio at all it's far more likely to be integrated, provided by Apple, and not swappable at all.  The idea that you might be able to buy an "Apple Car" and go to a store just like any other car and "buy a stereo for it" is so extremely unlikely that it doesn't even bear thinking about.  

Seems like a definite misnomer to say he "earned" it.  More accurate would be just to say that "this is what he is/was paid."  

Executive salaries are typically affected by many factors, but almost none of them relate to the person's actual, material contributions to the company.  A ditch digger "earns" their wages, an executive ... not so much. 

freediverx said:

Prof_Peabody said:

it still leaves me buying a new $100 pair of headphones

No, you'd just need an adapter.

a) that ain't my style
b) when has an Apple adapter cost much less than a hundred anyway?  

They might include an adapter in the box I guess though.  

The main problem I have with Apple's direction here is that the "included in the box" headphones are likely to be lightning EarPods, and EarPods just fall out of your ears constantly.  If you use them daily they only last about six months anyway. 

These wireless earphones sound okay, but they are likely to be at least a couple of hundred dollars, and they don't seem to be "in-ear" even (the only ear buds that really, actually, stay in).  The "hook over the back of the ear" type that these seem likely to be, is generally the least popular type of ear buds out there, because again ... they generally don't fit and generally fall out a lot.  They don't usually even seal at the ear properly, so they leak sound as well.  All of the really, really low quality ear buds are these "hook over the ear" type. 

Apple's will no doubt be much better than what's currently out there, but I don't see how they can really get over these problems.  

The only current Apple branded ear buds that work well, stay in your ears well, and produce comparable output to non-Apple brands are the Apple in-ear ear buds.  To use these however, some kind of bulky adapter will be necessary.  

I can't get over seeing this as essentially a "lose-lose-lose" situation for anyone who cares even a little bit about sound quality and actually listens to their iPhone a lot.  

Otterbox cases are likely no better or worse than any others but I don't get why anyone would use cases like this in the first place. 

IMO it's a special kind of fool who purchases the latest thin, lightweight, mobile device and then wraps it in an unnecessary bulky case that makes it less thin, less lightweight and less mobile.  It's the equivalent to buying a Ferrari and wrapping the outside in cardboard so it doesn't get dinged and the seats in scratchy old canvas so the leather doesn't get stained.  The car will indeed remain pristine underneath, but it will look like garbage and be uncomfortable to drive the entire time. 

I hate these kinds of articles.  DED I presume?  AppleInsider doesn't do itself any favours by printing this kind of one-sided garbage.  A "year in review" type of article should contain the minuses as well as the plusses.  

A few that come to mind:

- the very, very late debut of the very, very expensive Apple Watch
- Apple TV being so delayed that it actually has last year's internals (for twice the price)
- the most talked about feature of the new Apple TV (skinny cable package) pulled at last second. 
- finally updating the iPad mini after three full years of languor. 
- the new $200 trackpad!  
- the new iPad that's more expensive than a laptop but half as capable.  
- Advertisements in the OS

I know others won't necessarily agree with me on all of these but the point is that there are many points of view and also pros and cons.  

These long, poorly written articles full of bitterness, that praise Apple to the heavens, while jousting against imaginary critics are tiresome, unfair, and uninteresting once you realize how biased they are.  Please stop. Someone knock that chip off Daniel's shoulder so he can write properly.