sdbryan

oberpongo said:

These statements from VW CEO are very similar to what the CEOs of Nokia, Blackberry and Microsoft said about the iPhone when it was unveiled in 2007. time will tell if VW will be as forgotten as Nokia and Blackberry. 

It almost seems like he must be aware of the history of similar comments and is just trolling us to watch the reaction.

I wouldn’t say that the alternate payment system issue is simple and unimportant. But the crucial issue here has be alluded to a few times: Does this legislation require Apple, Google, et al to design their OS so that their devices will run unsigned code? Currently all the apps available in the app stores only run on your device because it has been cryptographically signed using the secret key that only the platform owner has.

One commenter certainly presented a quote that implies this while another said the former was incorrect about the content of the legislation. If true this would be armageddon for the app ecosystem. Even with platform owners wielding their authority to reject or later disable undetected malicious code/behavior the system is not perfect. But remove that mechanism and you invite chaos. There are just too many bad actors out there to just “depend on the kindness of strangers”

sabos said:

Did Apple learn nothing from the Google “glass-hole” debacle? The issue with these isn’t technical, it’s social. The backlash against people wearing cameras on their faces in public spaces was a genuine phenomenon ...

Did you read the article? It claimed the product would have a lidar sensor but not a camera.

maciekskontakt said:

sflocal said:

So if I build my own phone and my own os, and sell it as a single product, I would be barred from loading my own apps on it?

F**k you politicians.  

I see no scenario where Apple would ever let this happen.  If passed, it will be forever tied up in the courts.  The iPhone has plenty of competition.  There is zero point to this.

This is no different than Microsoft in the end of ''90. Start using brain. It was bad that time and it is bad now. You people are so blind that you blame Microsoft and then 20 years later it is okay for another large corporation to try and monopolize market. Are you born fairly recently with last year brainwash problem or you did not put enough study to know prior cases like this one and ruling on them?

This case is most definitely different from the Microsoft case from the 90’s. The unquestionable difference has been described above but you might have a reading comprehension problem. Microsoft licensed its OS to many different computer hardware companies (essentially all except Apple). When they saw a threat to their dominance from the emergence of the internet and specifically the Netscape browser, Microsoft used its monopoly power for supply of the MS Windows OS licenses to force their licensees to surpress Netscape and guarantee that Internet Explorer would be the default browser. It did lead to the demise of Netscape as planned. Since I am an old fart, I watched it as it happened and don’t fall for your flawed whataboutism.

This would be great news for musicians who use an iPad Pro and bluetooth foot pedal to replace paper sheet music. There are already quite a few converts but a screen that is just a bit larger could produce many more converts. People who complain that adding another iPad size indicates a lack of focus just fail to understand there are potentially large markets for a larger tablet used in ways they failed to imagine.

Thank you Crowley, Marvin, and Muthuk_vanalingam for clarifying the technical aspect of this issue. I carelessly assumed Apple was using the narrow meaning of “hash” with which I am familiar. But Apple is bringing a huge amount of processing to every picture stored on every iPhone (if the picture is uploaded to iCloud) in order to produce this more durable hash value. I am beginning to see why so many find this offensive.

Previously my response was that if a person was opposed to this sort of mass surveillance just turn off iCloud Photos. I suppose it is illogical but before I found the idea of performing a simple hash on every photo seemed innocuous. But the level of scrutiny and implicit assumption that every photo on every iPhone is guilty unless proven ‘innocent’ just seems obscene. I don’t want a piece of code like that in the OS of a device I chose to buy and use.

janiceandrusty said:

A couple things that are revealing with Carl's investments.

1. Upside with Apple isn't there. He sold all his stock. He is also a billionaire who wrote books on how to make money, not loose it.
...

OK, I was going to let it go after the first two times (in an earlier posting) but not again. The word is LOSE, not loose. They are two completely different words and the one you mean to use is spelt with just one O, unless you really meant that he intended to set that money loose, rather than to simply lose it. My apology in advance for the rant, many if not most people make this mistake so it seems inherently unfair to single out anyone. Now I will go back to my location under the bridge.

bdkennedy said:

I was able to snag one at my Apple Store last night. It is not a low end iPhone. As a matter of fact, it makes the iPhone 6 look low end.

This is a classic design Apple shouldn't abandon and the sales numbers prove it.

Yes, the description in the article of the iPhone SE as "low end" is nonsense. It is lower priced (not low price) but you still get current generation tech and compatibility. There is room for improvement in the screen and camera (from what I have read) and having purchased the 64GB model I would have preferred to buy 128GB if it were available. I waited out two years of larger phones and was about to cave when the rumors turned favorable. I am glad I waited.