mike_galloway

mark fearing said:

I don't think the UK can kill this deal. It's just an opinion (I mean one countries opinion). Since so many other territories have already said it's OK. Not sure what happens next but the EU has not weighed in yet and in the U.S. it's not clear it will be pushed against. 

The law of unintended consequences -  not putting a charger in every product is likely to increase the number of cheap and maybe poor quality products. Although other companies substandard products are not really Apples problem.

randominternetperson said:

sirdir said:

mike1 said:

rundhvid said:

Apple says this supports up to 96kHz, and means users "can enjoy high-fidelity, full-resolution audio."

—except ’s own Hi-Res Lossless in 192 kHz 👀🤭

Soooo???? You're saying they therefore shouldn't have improved it all then?

Probably that you can't call something 'full resolution' if you yourself deliver a much higher resolution. 

The average human can detect sound in the 20Hz to 20 kHZ.  96kHz is way outside the range of human hearing.

kurtvdpoel said:

It is physically impossible to insert a plug in a socket and touch the life metal parts, not even with a penny. Plug and socket are constructed that way.  Both have to follow strict standards. If both are constructed as imposed by those standards, nothing could happen to the girl. 

That’s not to say Alexa should have such a challenge.  That’s not acceptable behaviour for a smart speaker. But the little girl was never in danger. Not even when she had done what Alex instructed her to do. 

winstoner71 said:

emig647 said:

I really don’t understand this, especially when Bethesda was $7.5B. 

Just going to leave this here: https://medium.com/halting-problem/zyngas-offices-now-worth-more-than-zynga-the-company-47a704d48249

Because everyone has a phone. There isn’t one person out there who doesn’t have at least 1 game on their phone, be it if they play it or not. Mobile gaming is a huge deal, more so than any other platform. 

kiltedgreen said:

MacQuadra840av said:

macgui said:

Clearly most of you aren't familiar with high-end headphones. They can range from 2-10x the cost of these Apple headphones, easy.

It's comical the way some idiots pick one feature of these headphones then compare their little POS headsets and claim some kind of victory.

And suggesting that these have to be binned when the battery dies? Idiocy. Replacing batteries in AirPods isn't really very practical, and comparing that to replacing the batteries in the Max is again another exercise in stupidity.

These are pricey for the casual listener. Not all that pricey when compared to a litany of high-end headphones, if these live up to the claims. 

Clearly you are not familiar with Apple's marketing.  These are a far cry from being high-end headphones.  They are just excessively overpriced cans.  You don't have to be so insulting to people in your comment.  No professional recording studio or person would buy these.  They will buy the high-end headphones from reputable companies in the industry that know audio very well.  Apple is not that company.  Apple is known for mediocre audio quality in their products.  Apple does not even allow you to adjust tone quality in any of their speaker products.  These are heavily marketed as BLUETOOTH headphones to use with your iPhone for playing back heavily compressed audio files.  Something a professional audio person would never listen to.  Yes, Apple charges an extra $35 for an audio cable, but again, that is not what Apple wants you to do.  These are just overpriced ugly headphones that no one will be buying, except for a few fools that think anything with an Apple logo is somehow magical.

I’m familiar with Apple’s marketing - I bought the original Macintosh at release and have spent plenty on their products over the years and currently have 4 of their products.

I wasn’t trying to insult anyone, I was just surprised that people were so surprised at the price. I agree, no professional studio or audio engineer would buy these and Apple is clearly not aiming their marketing for these headphones at those people as can be seen from their web site.

You will find that Naim Audio’s NAC 552 pre-amplifier, costing £21,000 doesn’t allow you to adjust the “tone quality” either and such controls are very rare to find on a loudspeaker anyway. As for the mention of Bluetooth, again, Apple are not aiming these are audio engineers, they are being aimed at Apple’s usual audience (Pro Apps notwithstanding).

I think they look very attractive, much more so than the endless lumps of unimaginative black plastic that pass for the design of most headphones. To say they are overpriced is unwise when you have not even heard them; you may be right, but they combine a number of features which for a lot of people will be very appealing. If no one is buying them then I’m not sure why the shipping times are already lengthening unless it’s all the fools, in which case Apple will happily take their money!

mayfly said:

mike_galloway said:

mayfly said:

saarek said:

Appleish said:

From the country that instituted Brexit against popular opinion and had an unelected leader that was only in office for a few weeks, who destroyed hundreds of billions of pounds from their economy.

Either you’re a revisionist or you simple don’t understand how referendums work.

The vote for Brexit was clear, the majority of the population of the United Kingdom voted for it to happen (17.4M to leave vs 16.1M to remain).

Yes, Scotland and, to a lesser degree Northern Ireland, voted to remain. However even nearly 40% of the Scots voted to leave which is a fact that the SNP never recognises as they pretend that all of Scotland voted to remain in the EU.

Was it the right decision? Well, I don’t think we will truly know that for at least another 10 years. None of the  prophetic doom and gloom scenarios ever got close to materialising and the country was always going to be worse off during the initial divorce stage.

Either way the result of the decision is largely irrelevant, what is relevant is that a democratic vote was taken and was then acted upon (albeit poorly).

This is how democracy dies. The "democratic vote" was driven by anti-immigrant and racist factions with big megaphones stoking the fires of fear and loathing in the population to the extent that they vote against their own interests.

Democracy is not about right or wrong - it’s what the majority vote for, no matter how stupid they may be.

The first Common Market referendum and EEC membership referendum was in 1975 , to gauge support for the country's continued membership of the European Communities (EC) 

Yes - 17,378,581 Votes (67.23%) - No - 8,470,073 Votes (32.77%)

So that time (1975) the people voted to stay in then in 2016 another lot of people voted out. I could argue the first lot were manipulated and deceived by fear mongering (the disaster that would occur if the UK left), but that would be unfair.

Unfortunately this is democracy, other systems have been tried with not really any better results.

This is NOT democracy. This is subversion of democracy in favor of extremism, nationalism and racism. And it's the the next stop on the road to authoritarianism. Which is the next stop on the road to tyranny. Which is the final stop before the end of the road: tyranny.

mayfly said:

saarek said:

Appleish said:

From the country that instituted Brexit against popular opinion and had an unelected leader that was only in office for a few weeks, who destroyed hundreds of billions of pounds from their economy.

Either you’re a revisionist or you simple don’t understand how referendums work.

The vote for Brexit was clear, the majority of the population of the United Kingdom voted for it to happen (17.4M to leave vs 16.1M to remain).

Yes, Scotland and, to a lesser degree Northern Ireland, voted to remain. However even nearly 40% of the Scots voted to leave which is a fact that the SNP never recognises as they pretend that all of Scotland voted to remain in the EU.

Was it the right decision? Well, I don’t think we will truly know that for at least another 10 years. None of the  prophetic doom and gloom scenarios ever got close to materialising and the country was always going to be worse off during the initial divorce stage.

Either way the result of the decision is largely irrelevant, what is relevant is that a democratic vote was taken and was then acted upon (albeit poorly).

This is how democracy dies. The "democratic vote" was driven by anti-immigrant and racist factions with big megaphones stoking the fires of fear and loathing in the population to the extent that they vote against their own interests.

Democracy is not about right or wrong - it’s what the majority vote for, no matter how stupid they may be.

The first Common Market referendum and EEC membership referendum was in 1975 , to gauge support for the country's continued membership of the European Communities (EC) 

Yes - 17,378,581 Votes (67.23%) - No - 8,470,073 Votes (32.77%)

So that time (1975) the people voted to stay in then in 2016 another lot of people voted out. I could argue the first lot were manipulated and deceived by fear mongering (the disaster that would occur if the UK left), but that would be unfair.

Unfortunately this is democracy, other systems have been tried with not really any better results.

mayfly said:

tenthousandthings said:

Apple Pay and Apple Pay Later are different entities from the Apple Card.

“Apple Pay Later is offered by Apple Financing LLC, a subsidiary of Apple Inc., which is responsible for credit assessment and lending.”

“Goldman Sachs is the issuer of the Mastercard payment credential used to complete Apple Pay Later purchases.”

You are borrowing money from Apple Financing when you get a loan via Apple Pay Later, not Goldman Sachs. It’s the same “Mastercard Installments” bank credential that Apple uses when you buy Apple products and pay over time using the Apple Card. Those loans at 0% also come from Apple Financing, not Goldman Sachs. 

That so? Here's what Apple says about that:

Mastercard and Goldman Sachs

Apple Pay Later is enabled through the Mastercard Installments program, so merchants that accept Apple Pay do not need to do anything to implement Apple Pay Later for their customers. When a merchant accepts Apple Pay, Apple Pay Later will be an option for their customers during checkout online and in apps on iPhone and iPad. Goldman Sachs is the issuer of the Mastercard payment credential used to complete Apple Pay Later purchases.
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/03/apple-introduces-apple-pay-later/#:~:text=Mastercard%20and%20Goldman%20Sachs&text=When%20a%20merchant%20accepts%20Apple,complete%20Apple%20Pay%20Later%20purchases.

As an Apple customer from 2005 the few repairs I have had (apart from 2 iPhone batteries 5 years old) - all have been out of warranty and free.