dpkroh

The update did not immediately brick my HomePod.

I have been using the "Pro" version of iPads since they debuted in 2016.  They are slightly nice than regular iPads, but the word "Pro" has always been an exaggeration.

BirderGuy said:

The burden of proof is always on the accuser. How does someone prove a negative.  Legally they must show evidence that Apple or any other manufacturer is using conflict materials.  It’s like asking someone to prove they have never spit on the sidewalk or run a red light, or stolen something from a store.  There is not much they can do about it if Apple shows them their supply chain records.  They must show evidence that the accused as commuted the infraction. Not ask for proof they didn’t.  

You are confusing audits with trials in court.  This is a request for an audit. The entity being audited is responsible for demonstrating compliance.  Just try saying to an auditor "we have no record of that".  For entities subject to an audit, the audits are at the discretion of the auditor.  That said, there doesn't seem to be any indication that Apple is required to submit to an audit here.  It is a request.  Regardless, turning down a request for an audit, is very bad optics.  It's like saying "We have nothing to hide, but we're not going to let you look".

JinTech said:

I am legitimately curious if they have asked other phone makers the same question.

It is only rational to target the biggest company first, as that is where the largest potential violations in absolute terms are likely to be.  Also puts other companies on notice.  Most bang for the buck so to speak.   Apple doesn't need pity.  This is expected when you are the biggest in your field.  I'm sure Apple would rather be targeted like this for their success, than be ignored for being too inconsequential to be of immediate relevance.

Arghhh..... no mention of the app where Siri desperately needs to be improved - the Home App.  Right now it is terrible for voice control.  Most of the time we want to change a setting in the home we are not on our devices.  IMO that makes it the MOST important app for Siri improvements, as Siri is the most common way to interact with the Home app.

Purchase of the new smart keyboards, should enable the iPad Pro M4 to dual boot MacOS.

Once you have a keyboard and trackpad, the disingenuous dishonest PR BS from Apple, that touch devices are not suited to MacOS, no longer has any validity.

It's just pure disdain for the customer and the product in the name of nothing but naked greed.  

The 1TB models and up, with their larger RAM should enable simultaneous dual OS, in some sort of split screen or picture in picture mode.

They should also allow multiple user profiles for iPadOS as on Mac.

Then it could be justifiably called a "Pro".

Instead, it is just an egregious example of Apple Executives laughing themselves silly and taking bets on who the next fool is that will buy both a MacBook and an iPad.  

No doubt in the background they play the Nirvana Song "R8PE ME"

charlesn said:

The lack of ANC in $200, 2024 headphones seems like a really egregious omission. And when you hear the astonishing level of ANC Apple achieved with the Airpods Pro 2--which provide minimal passive noise isolation on their own--it's hard to argue that the on-ear design of the Solo 4 would render ANC pointless. 

Completely agree.  This is 2024.  Not just noise cancellation, but transparency and adaptive audio are also essential at this price point.  I use my AirPods Pro on the go, but often prefer to use my Beats Solo 3 for better audio.  I don’t want bulky, hot, over the ear headphones.  Way too bulky for on the go.  But without audio transparency and cancellation, the solo 3 are a comparative PITA.  Epic fail by Apple.  Nice to have Spatial Audio,  but for on the go headphones, no longer any excuse at this price point.  

sloth77 said:

rcfa said:

Why is this thing not dual boot macOS and iPadOS?

In particular, a 12” iPad Pro with Magic Keyboard is, in every sense, the superior hardware when compared to a MacBook Air, yet it’s forced to run the crippled iPadOS!

The kernel is the same between macOS and iPadOS, Catalyst is present to run i(Pad)OS apps under macOS, and the OS could restrict apps to Catalyst when used without MagicKeyboard to optimize for touch Ui.

 But why can we not (at least optionally) run macOS on an iPad Pro wit MagicKeyboard?

THAT is what I’m waiting for! A Mac with the ability to use pen/finger to interact where needed. For the most part, I use my current iPad Pro with keyboard and touchpad, with the occasional screen/pen interaction 

Its an interesting idea.  As macOS now runs on M1, I guess there is no major reason why they couldn't do it.

My guess is that they think it may cannibalize sales of Mac hardware

I believe this question of cannibalization was once put to Steve Jobs or perhaps Joni Ives. Their reply was if we don't cannibalize our own products somebody else will.

I owned the 2018 12.9 inch iPad Pro. That size is too big to be handheld. And if it's not going to be handled then what's the point of having a tablet.  I switched to the 2018 inch iPad Pro and have been happy with that ever since.   If the 2021 11 inch iPad Pro had feature parity with the 2021 12.9 inch I might consider an upgrade, but the 11 inch. Meh.

I strongly agree with dual boot as there are scenarios in which an iPad is advantageous and other scenarios in which a MacBook is advantageous.  Right now to have the best of both worlds you have to carry two devices.

I see no defensible excuse for Apple not to do this. If they are worried about revenue the base 12.9 inch iPad Pro already costs as much as a base MacBook Air.  Apple could sell a lot more of their obscenely expensive iPad magic keyboards if the Magic keyboard would unlock dual boot MacOS  functionality for the iPad.

I can see compromising and getting the larger 12.9 inch iPad if it would also dual boot to macOS.  And if Apple offered dual boot functionality on the 11 inch iPad Pro it would be a great alternative to the 12 inch MacBook they used to sell.

sirozha said:

How does a service with just a few shows compare to Netflix or Hulu, which have thousands of titles? 

Apple TV should have become a streaming delivery platform for content providers to use. Kind of like a cable TV provider is a delivery platform for multiple content providers. This way, content providers could concentrate on the content and let Apple handle the technical issues related to streaming. 

Instead, Apple decided to become a content provider with their own streaming service. It’s clearly a dead end approach, as people will only be willing to have a limited number of streaming services. 

sirozha said:

How does a service with just a few shows compare to Netflix or Hulu, which have thousands of titles? 

Apple TV should have become a streaming delivery platform for content providers to use. Kind of like a cable TV provider is a delivery platform for multiple content providers. This way, content providers could concentrate on the content and let Apple handle the technical issues related to streaming. 

Instead, Apple decided to become a content provider with their own streaming service. It’s clearly a dead end approach, as people will only be willing to have a limited number of streaming services. 

Actually I think quality vs quantity is exactly the right approach. Used to be at least any NetFlix Original was guaranteed to be good to great. Netflix is now so full of crap it’s barely worth the hassle of bothering with. I would much rather subscribe to 10 really good shows with no crap content, then have to wade through the cesspool of mostly never should have been made crap that has to be waded through on a Netflix. I remember when I worked in London, UK in early 2000. Premium TV meant having 3 channels.... yes... just 3 good channels vs 300 channels of time wasting, can’t find anything , keep surfing hoping to find something that doesn’t suck... TV here in North America. Less is more when quality trumps quantity.

StrangeDays said:

dpkroh said:

minor point upgrade to iOS is a good thing but you are missing the biggest iOS 13 story completely.

Until today HomePod has been stuck on version 12.4. Finally today Apple has released 13.2 for HomePod as well. It is been an absurd wait of about a month or more.

I’m not sure which is the stronger feeling. The relief that Apple has finally released iOS 13 for HomePod or the fact that it took more than a month after the general release of iOS 13 to issue the same for HomePod.

I am guessing nobody at Apple insider has a HomePod? LOL?

Absurd wait? For new functionality you didn’t have before? I’m confused, did your HomePods stop working in the interim? Mine are still performing perfectly and I’ve suffered no losses. 

Yes... the wait was absurd.  Had a HomePod when it first came out - sent it back as useless.  The very reason I decided to try HomePod again was due to the multi-user voice recognition.  Everything on Apple’s website after iOS13 was released that mentioned HomePods mentioned this feature.  No where at that time did it still say “coming soon”.

Also when I upgraded my other devices like iPhone to iOS 13 I HomePod features broke. My iPhone started telling me I had to upgrade to newer software on my HomePod - newer software that was not yer available.  So it basically “broke” things until Apple later muted this message.

This is an ECOSYSTEM not single isolated operating systems and devices.  There are features in iOS 13 and HomePod 13 that depend on both devices upgraded.  So yes it is very much absurd.  You may have slack standards, and that’s okay for you, but it doesn’t make it okay for Apple as a company.  Especially not when Apple promotes the idea of buying into an entire ecosystem that works together.