JBSlough

MplsP said:

stompy said:

darkpaw said:

I don't get why we'd ever need MagSafe on a desktop computer? For a laptop, great; someone comes along and treads on the cable, it pulls it out without breaking the port on the laptop or pulling the laptop to the floor, and the laptop continues running on battery power.

Apple describes the M1 iMac magnetic power connector as "A power connector that easily attaches via magnets", where (retired) MacBook MagSafe was an easily disconnected magnetic power connection. I get that it's easy to conflate the two, most people did when Apple introduced the 2021 iMac; adding to that, Apple has never said "Hey, this isn't MagSafe".

The day the iMac went on sale, reviewer Jason Snell compared the new iMac power cord to the old: "In practical terms, the force required to yank the magnetic power cable off the iMac is the same force required to yank the current iMac’s plastic power plug out of its socket."

Unless we're going to start referring to non-magnetic designs as "FrictionSafe", we should agree to only call products MagSafe that Apple calls MagSafe.

So what’s the point of using magnets, then, especially for a desktop. How often do you plug/unplug a desktop’s power cord? Was the cord for the imac really that difficult or an issue in any way? Nope. Magnets are just a more expensive (and resource intensive) way of doing the same thing. 

lkrupp said:

I hitched a ride on Apple’s bandwagon in 1982 with an Apple ][+ and have never looked back. There’s something about the company even today that I find fascinating. Now that Apple is a trillion dollar company it has its problems and foibles but at the core it’s still the company it was in the early days. In my now 38 years on the bandwagon I have been treated well by Apple in both purchases and repairs. They fixed my late 2013 27”  iMac when the spring assembly holding the head up broke, long out of warranty, at no charge, with apologies. They fixed my water cooled G5, also at no charge. And they replaced my Power Mac 8100 immediately when the power supply failed, no questions asked. 

flydog said:

rcfa said:

A pity, with these specs a iPad Pro with MagicKeyboard would have been sufficient; was hoping one might just do an install on either the iPad or an USB SSD and use the iPad for development...

The purpose is to test Mac apps, which generally are used with screens twice the size of an iPad.  Testing Mac apps on an iPad makes very little sense. 

I think too, that the iPad Pros probably don’t have enough RAM. 

ArchStanton said:

Japhey said:

entropys said:

At least there is no auto play video in this article.

How are you accessing the site? Web? I use the AI app on iPhone or iPad and I’ve never had auto play videos. I would definitely find them annoying if I did though. 

It is. AI and other sites have to pay for the site so it is understandable some ads must be run. But some sites fill every corner with ads and videos and makes the site not very usable. I don't think that's AI but its web access usually does have a video playing. 

tylersdad said:

killroy said:

tylersdad said:

killroy said:

tylersdad said:

rob53 said:

22july2013 said:

Exciting times. I've been arguing for this for years and that's why so many people hate me on this forum.

So you believe a developer has every right in the world to post their apps for free on the Apple App Store? Give me one legitimate reason why Apple should be required to host these apps for free. Apple doesn't charge for free apps but could start doing that if they wanted to. Apple could also start charging developers to even put their apps on the Apple App Store and if these stupid laws pass, I'm all for Apple doing that. There's no way anyone could force Apple to host things on their servers for free. It would be like me hosting your email server on my hardware, which I maintain, for free. Get a grip, I'd never do that and I doubt any company would do that. This shows how stupid these laws are.

Of course, if you want to have your own payment system, then be prepared for Apple to start charging you a hosting fee for every download and install of that app. That's only fair isn't it?

No. As a developer, I feel I should not be limited to Apple's way of distributing apps to my users. 

It's as simple as that. I won't use their infrastructure and they won't get any money from me (other than my developers subscription). 

You well pay for use of their server. And you well be kicked off if your app has malware.

Why would I use their server? My customers are able to download apps from my website and install them. 

We are talking about iOS app store. Not the Mac app store.

What difference does that make? An app is an app. An iPhone or an iPad is just another type of computer. 

hammeroftruth said:

So, the market wants to revert back to the “AOL” method of billing, where you need to contact them directly to cancel and jump thru many hoops before it’s done. 

Yeah I can see how customers want that choice.