cash907censored

Oculus officially "paused" work on Mac support last May. In January Luckey made similarly pessimistic comments about the Mac, saying that support is "on the roadmap post-decent Apple hardware release, whenever that is."

Pessimistic? No, realistic. Apple doesn't put a lot of emphasis on the sort of graphics support products like the Rift require to function. That's not a cut, that's a statement of fact. My F-150 is a fantastic work and off-road vehicle, but it would get it's hat handed to it on any race track by even the slowest vehicle there. High performance graphics are not a priority to most Mac users, and so Mac's don't normally feature powerful graphics cards. Pointing this out is not an insult, and no one should take it as such. 

The phone is real but that name is too stupid to be legit. 

Disaster? That thing is hilarious. It's the most entertaining social media project I've seen in a good long while. Can we not hate on this beautiful mess simply because it's a Microsoft project?

ireland said:

Ok this Kayne guy got his 15 minutes. Can we stop talking about him now.

Now that he's tied to the Kardashians, not gonna happen. They made a career of stretching her 15 minutes of fame into an actual career of nothing. The devil made a killing in souls on that bunch, apparently. 

So what exactly is "Pro" about this model, then, besides its price tag? Sorry, but Apple Pencil support isn't enough of a differentiation to preclude Apple from calling it the Air 3. The more I learn about this thing, the less excited about it I am. Less RAM, no USB3 support etc. 

This. So much this. If I could transfer money to my friends and family as well as accept payment for goods and services via Apple Pay, I'd ditch Paypal and Square in a heartbeat. 

Curved glass on the iPhone 6 has resulted in more cracked screens than previous models. Drop one on its corner and bam, whole screen shatters. Fragility isn't exactly a feature I'm interested in. 

daven said:

Honestly I still don't get it. It is ok for Amazon to use their dominant position to drive others out of business but a small reseller can't set up a framework where the price they pay is no higher than the price offered to other resellers?

Other way around. Apple was setting the minimum price with iBooks, and no one else, including Amazon, could sell for less than that price. If the price had been fair, it wouldn't have been an issue, but the bloom fell off the rose as soon as Apple started pricing ebooks well above what they had been selling for previously. Basically, Apple and the four largest publishers colluded to control ebook prices instead of allowing the market to do so on it's own, and I'm sorry to everyone who is upset by this decision, but that is illegal. What Amazon is doing by selling ebooks at a discounted rate is no different than when Apple shook up the music world by selling individual songs for $.99 despite cries from artists and the industry that such low prices were going to kill the music business and cheat artists out of their fair share. 

Good, can we just be done with this nonsense now? Chasing a lame patent that should never have been granted in the first place has been a massive waste of both time and money, and done nothing but put Apple's lawyers in a higher tax bracket and fuel the hatred of the feverishly Apple loyal. Samsung made a shift to rounder phones with a touchscreen, big deal. That is clearly where the market was going and what customers wanted. That's how capitalism works, folks. Sony introduces the Walkman, and soon after Panasonic, Sharp, Emerson et all release their version of the Walkman. They're all smallish, battery powered with a headphone port, and they all play cassette tapes. As long as none of the companies copied the underlying tech behind each other's players, or in such cases where doing so was unavoidable they properly licensed said tech (something most other tech companies NOT named Apple usually do because they aren't OCD control freaks) then no harm no foul. That's how the world works: Chevy copies Ford, Ford copies Chevy, Coke copies Pepsi, Pepsi copies Coke, all in the name of giving customers what they want and profiting from that. 
It's time for this time, money and resources suck to end. 

pscooter63 said:

Why not sue the feckless "repair agent" instead? I mean, it's their ignorance, not Apple's.

Apple doesn't provide Touch ID parts to third party repair shops so it's not a matter of "ignorance," rather they are just using the options that are available to them. The customers are made aware that replacing a Touch ID button with a standard click button means sacrificing Touch ID and ApplePay functionality, and most were willing to do so if it meant a 50 dollar repair bill versus 250 dollars on an out of warranty 5s, 6 or 6 Plus. To brick that phone months or years after the fact without warning, to close a "vulnerability" that was already nullified by removing the Touch ID sensor in the first place, is ridiculous. If Samsung had done the same thing, everyone that's been making excuses for Apple and scoffing at those affected would be screaming bloody murder, period.