nunzy said:

Consumer Reports hates Apple. They have been completely wrong in every single one of their reviews.

genovelle said:

avon b7 said:

I'd say the opposite is possibly true in the EU. For years Messages has been a rarely used option as far as I can tell while WhatsApp has been a must use for almost every person I know.

My wife has never ever used Messages for IM. I only know one person that still uses sms for regular messages and that's on Android.

I use WhatsApp, Telegram, Viber and Signal.

Every now and then I see waves of people appearing as new users on Telegram but I'd say WhatsApp is still the IM client that reigns supreme here. 

They are missing sooo much by using 3rd party Apps. One of the best features is that when sending to someone new, it will revert to a text automatically if the user is not on the iMessages network 

avon b7 said:

rundhvid said:

"we continue to see phenomenal demand for AirPods, and when you tally up the last four quarters, our Wearables business is now bigger than 60% of the companies in the Fortune 500."

Hats off to all employees at Dell, Samsung and the rest of the tech-industry for staying motivated and performing their duties all day long, year-after-year, when the companies they work for are being embarrassed to no end by Apple and their highly successful way of executing product-design and manufacturing. It’s not like Apple is extraterrestrial or something—they have iPhones,  Watch etc. and the corresponding Android products are not that different—it seems like a fair fight. Yet it isn’t, because there are real differences between the products which translates into distinctly different user-experiences. 
I truly cannot comprehend how executives and managers involved with strategic decisions in Apple-rivaling companies (an oxymoron, perhaps...?), are able to fully commit to their new product with true belief in the claimed performance and predicted impact on the market—without feeling a little uneasy or outright thinking “why bother?“

I am not sure where you want to go with that comment. Tim was comparing the Apple wearable business in revenue terms to Fortune 500 companies.

I don't see a connection to Samsung, Android etc.

Android wearables sell in huge numbers and are growing thanks to the Chinese manufacturers.

tmay said:

IreneW said:

AppleZulu said:

Of course, the bottom line remains: Apple leadership has said repeatedly over the years that they're not interested in making a hybrid 2-in-1, so that's the answer.  Nope.

Well, to be fair, they actually made a 2-in-1 when the iPad got a keyboard and cursor. It is just a quite crippled 2-in-1, as it lacks a few basic functions and key applications.
That being said, I agree with the original premise that using a horizontal touch screen, far away behind a keyboard, is really poor UX and bad ergonomics. However, that is not how most people use these devices, they tend to flip between the input modes (just like with an iPad).
One of my laptops at work is a cheap Asus convertible, and i have to say it works perfectly fine both as a tablet for presentations, drawing (and content consumption), and as a developer tool with third party peripherals and extra screens.

Well, to be fair, they actually made a 2-in-1 when the iPad got a keyboard and cursor. It is just a quite crippled 2-in-1, as it lacks a few basic functions and key applications.

Your statement isn't accurate and is in fact, quite disingenuous. 

Apple sells an accessory that gives some of the capability of a 2 in 1, ie, keyboard input, and touchpad cursor, though Apple does not call that a 2 in 1.


For Fuck Sake...

"One of my laptops at work is a cheap Asus convertible, and I have to say it works perfectly fine both as a tablet for presentations, drawing (and content consumption), and as a developer tool with third party peripherals and extra screens."

You just murdered your argument, since you are in fact using multiple devices anyway. Wasn't the 2 in 1 supposed to eliminate those extra devices, and still retain productivity?

Perhaps you want the 2 in 1 only when you require some mobility, or maybe some other limited role for 2 in1's...you know, like the "crippled" iPad with its accessory keyboard that people seem to go everywhere with.

9secondkox2 said:

tmay said:

longfang said:

phillyfanatic09 said:

kiltedgreen said:

9secondkox2 said:

The EU is an extortion racket. Change my mind. 

The US is a violent force destabilising peace across the world to suit its own ends. Change my mind.

Nope. You have already made it up. Perhaps you would enjoy living in Ukraine under the benevolence of Vladimir Putin.

Tell that to the countries the US has brought “freedom” to. 

Now you're just asking to be told to fuck off.

Of course, I'll let someone else tell you that.

the answer is;

All of Europe,

Most of the Pacific that was occupied by Japan.

Japan, and later, South Korea, and after many decades, Taiwan. 

There's likely more, but, you are too fucking wrapped up in your ideology to actually comprehend what "freedom" is.

It isn't hard to guess that you live in one of those BRIC countries, but you certainly are too timid to let us know which....

BTW, if you are posting here, you are taking advantage of our freedom as defined by our internet. I certainly wouldn't be able to post "Xi is a totalitarian" if I actually lived in the PRC.

Xi is in fact a totalitarian, and is directly responsible for the economic downturn that we are seeing in the PRC.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/04/10/china-xi-jinping-totalitarian-authoritarian-debate/

Yes, You Can Use the T-Word to Describe China

China is governed by a totalitarian regime. Why is that so hard to say?

Some weirdos forget that the popularity of hating on the USA for fake reasons has been over for at least a decade. 

The USA is the greatest country on the planet for many reasons (one of them being a structure that supports the rise of amazing pioneers like Apple) Perfect? No. Great? You bet. 

melgross said:

CrossPlatformFrogger said:

Will ChatGP ultimately end up being 'Sherlocked'...?

It wouldn’t surprise me in the least to find that Apple is working on their own solution with the intention of no longer needing to use ChatGPT or some other third-party. 

Apple doesn't have talent to "Sherlock" ChatGPT, if they could they'd already have their own service instead of outsourcing to get it.
What I do see Apple doing is trying to pass all this off as their own doing to the unaware masses who don't know. 

That’s ridiculous. I mean, totally ridiculous.  You really need to know something before posting nonsense. Apple has been doing this well before anyone else. They call it by its proper term; machine learning. Artificial intelligence is just a term dreamed up a time ago to sound more exciting for the masses.
.

Toroidal said:

gatorguy said:

migselv said:

mike1 said:

flagel said:

it is ludicrous for a car manufacturer to give Apple access to all its car systems, which will invariably lead to Apple becoming the gatekeeper to the entire tech stack of a car. This in addition to the branding impact. CarPlay is not the end of evolution, for example, the music app is well on CarPlay. Audi music controls are much better. 

Who said all? We’re talking about user-facing information systems. Car manufacturers have farmed out components and subsystems from day one. Brakes, batteries, transmissions, gauges, radios, generators, on and on. More to the point, putting Bose, Harmon-Kardon and many other name brand audio systems is a selling point. Why should this be any different?

Branded audio is nowhere near as involved or complicated as a complete handover of the car's entire user interface. Of course, the car companies use subcontractors for many subsystems, but they still retain control over the way they operate, look and feel in their own vehicles. For example, Harman (parent company of Harman Kardon audio) provides the basic electronics infrastructure for many car brands, but the car companies control the integration and UI aspects. 

First off Harman Kardon's parent company is Samsung and the audio systems are highly integrated in the cars infotainment systems and is often designed to look like a part of the overall "experience"

The article states: Car manufacturers Mercedes-Benz, Audi, Volvo, Polestar, and Renault told the Financial Times that they have no interest to include CarPlay Ultra support in their vehicles. The list includes manufacturers that Apple previously indicated were going to use the software. 

Funnily enough those are all Google worshipers in the sense that the all have based their systems om Android Automotive, one could easily suspect that there is a clause in the contract with Goole that states that CarPlay Ultra is not allowed (or they have made it very difficult to implement)

A vehicle cannot use BOTH Android Automotive and CarPlay Ultra at the same time, as both are infotainment OS'es. One or the other. Google wouldn't be paying an OEM using Android Automotive not to use CarPlay Ultra too. I suspect you don't understand what the two systems are. CarPlay will run happily with Android Automotive, Google doesn't restrict it.  

I think you are getting it mixed up. Android Auto is the internal system integrated by the Car OEM. AA systems often play just fine with Car Play, that runs on a phone. OEMs using AA have to build a system that works if the user does not have a phone with them. So even if an OEM offers Car Play Ultra, they also have their default system available. CPU becomes a customer option to use, a choice. The reason not to implement CPU would include plans to monetize the interface or user data, or to 'control the customer U/I experience'. Apple does plenty of the latter itself, but from a user perspective the OEM offering CPU is pure upside for the user - they can use either option.