anantksundaram

Sorry. But, tough. Apple can't take any chances with all the thieves out there. The stakes are too high. 

If you sign an agreement, you stick to it. Period. Otherwise there's no point in having such a thing as an agreement, is there?

Something about this story does not ring true. It says "... [the] Saudis gained access to the watch using Khashoggi's fingerprints and deleted certain files on the device.."

Huh?! How do I gain access to the Watch using TouchID? 

And, is it possible to record on the Watch (even using an app)? Then transfer it to the phone? And upload automatically to iCloud? How would he have known the wifi password for the Saudi consulate? And how would people have access to his iCloud account?
---
(Add: I've answered some my own questions. Yes, it is possible, it turns out. One can set the Watch to unlock when the iPhone is unlocked; there are third-party apps such as "Just Press Record" that store locally on the Watch, then transfer to the iOS divide and/or cloud; his friends or associates could have known his iCloud login I suppose; it's possible that he did use wifi with some type of public login. Wow. Just WOW.)

hagar said:

Thanks for pointing me to Joanna Stern's article on iPhone and AI in WSJ. I think she's spot on. The position of Apple on privacy is not a desirable one. If I look at my Android friends that are amazed by the AI delivered to their phone by Google & friends that analyse their data, I can't help but wonder how Apple will ever deliver something similar? 
Nobody seems to care that Apple protects their privacy (it's a multinational too!) and Google not. They just want useful information delivered to them when they need it.

You don't have the first clue about what 'privacy' means. It is not about your browsing habits or cute little A.I. solutions that Androiders might think is the Next Big Thing.

It is about the security of your financial and tax transactions; it's about protecting your health data; it's about protecting against stalkers; it's about protecting family communications; it's about protecting legal communications; it's about protecting corporate communications; its about protecting corporate IP and business practices; it's about payment systems; its protecting against hackers and spyware and malware and phishing. I I could go on. 

This is also the reason that Android will never be the Next Big Thing in those arenas. 

I've been a huge skeptic of AR/VR.

But this thing could be bloody brilliant.

I have at least half a dozen colleagues at work who say that the quality of the Surface is atrocious. They’ve had to send theirs in (or get a replacement device) multiple times.

crowley said:

aderutter said:

Good news, it was obvious that the EU were on a money grab and trying to retroactively change the law to do so imho.
I’m not saying Apple and Ireland will ultimately win even though I do not believe for a minute Apple broke the law.
I do believe the EU will more than ever given recent economic events do anything they can get to as much as they can from anywhere they can.

This has been gone over many times, there is no retroactive changing of the law, the law came into force in 1992 (I believe it was Maastricht) and Ireland should have adjusted its tax relationship with Apple at the time.  Just because it has taken a number of years for the case to be brought doesn't mean the law has been changed in any way.  It is Ireland that is accused of breaking EU law, not Apple; Apple was merely the beneficiary.  Also, the EU will not "get" anything much from this -  if Apple and Ireland loses the case then the money held in escrow is payable to the tax authorities in Ireland, not the EU.

Again, this has been covered many times.  Please stop spreading misinformation.

You're the one spreading misinformation, I am afraid. If the money gets credited to Ireland, that is money in the bank for the EU since they will have to send a smaller annual check to the country (Ireland is a net recipient of EU largesse). 

Despite being a pioneer, AppleTV is now a massive underachiever. They’ve been pretty convincingly overtaken by Roku. If it weren’t for my photos and my music, I’d pretty much jettison both mine. The remote is an insufferable joke. 

Faster processors and Arcade and Jennifer Anniston and such ain’t going to cut it. 

I am for a thorough investigation of ties — especially any less-than-savory ties — between US tech and China, but this sounds like a grandstanding exercise and a fishing expedition.

Why was Apple the only US tech company called? Moreover, to put Apple on the same platform as TikTok, a silly, 13-year olds’ social-site-du-jour is insulting. Sounds to me like the Congressional equivalent of a cheap click-bait.

dewme said:

Pretty amazing for a 1.0 product ... but the price is going to scare away a lot of regular folks. 

The price will come down rapidly. In a few years, it may cost not much more than what the highest-end iPhone costs today.

Initially, it'll be pitched to developers, high-end gamers, corporations, universities, etc., and Apple will probably sell no more than a few hundred thousand. In five years' time, the company could be selling many tens of millions. Also, the fact that it seems to be thoroughly integrated with the iPhone, the iPad and the Mac will make the entire ecosystem of apps available right from the get-go makes it all the more attractive.

loopless said:

I have been deposed and have endured a 10 hour deposition. It’s a nightmare for even the best prepared. You are questioned relentlessly by the opposing counsel. I can understand how people crack under the pressure of interrogation.

I’ve done those too. You get trained. The only three good answers are ‘Yes’, ‘No’, and ‘I don’t recall’ (as much of the third one as possible, as long as there is any doubt as to the facts you can recall). Never venture an explanation or clarification unless asked. Never speculate. Less is more.