- Last Active
jurassic said:macxpress said:BatteryGate!!!!
Uhhh... No "WhateverGate" is needed with MUCH LESS than 1 in 1,000,000 occurrences (only 2 out of the tens of millions of new iPhones sold so far).
it might be even less than that. i've seen other reports that note that both of the folks reporting these 'swollen batteries' are Asian. Asian (mainly chinese) resellers swiping parts out of iPhones and even iPads to resell is not uncommon. so much so that Apple had to reconfigure how they provide service on iPhones and the newest iPads that come in not turning on since a major reason for the no power is missing logic boards or non Apple batteries. non resellers have been unfortunately caught in the same system since Apple can't be selective in how they apply the new rules or it would look racist (even though its not their fault that the folks pulling the stunts are 99% Asian. so its possible that these phones were opened by someone trying to see what they might be able to swipe but they couldn't put the phones back together properly because they don't have the right glues etc. and they know that 'swollen batteries' is something that Apple won't dispute or mess with so it should be an easy way to get a replacement device
dewme said:Depending on the malady that your Mac is suffering from, you may want to enable the Guest Account on your Mac so you aren't requiring (or allowing) the Apple Genius to log into your Mac using your account. I would never allow anyone to access my Mac when its logged in with my credentials unless I am sitting right beside the person and monitoring everything they are doing.
but a second empty admin account is a good idea. it's actually a common troubleshooting step for issues that could be software based
jkichline said:I’m not a lawyer, but if I’m following this correctly...
Apple purchases the rights to existing but abandoned trademarks using a subsidiary which Apple always does to avoid rumors and paying way too much for these things.
So when Apple found out that there was another trademark that was filed, they attempted to buy it, but the company foolishly said no instead of entertaining the request. Apple didn’t have to buy it since they already had the trademark, but they tried.
So a foolish company that used a term that doesn’t provide marketing value could have sold it to Apple but instead got outclassed by a company steeped in copyright law and is now grasping for scraps.
my understanding of what the article is saying is a tad different. my read is that this android developer found out that the trademark was about to expire and was going to make a play for it. probably figured they could get it cheap because it hadn't been used for a while and was all but abandoned. there might even be a mechanism in the trademark processes to apply for an existing but about to expire trademark before the expiration. if the current owner doesn't re-up then the new application is processed before anyone should have found out it's available. but before it was fully expired, Apple via this shell company, bought the rights from the legit owners. and probably legitimized the purchase by filling some kind of use documentation. so now Mr Android App is screwed.
as for using subsidiaries and shells, Apple does that as much to keep their plans a secret as to avoid being taken for a ride on value so I'm not shocked about that move. in fact I think Apple may have been screwed over by Cisco over the iPhone trademark in part because they didn't use a fake name. course that one didn't work out so well for Cisco since the Trademark Office etc agreed that they jumped in at the last minute with a claim they were about to use the trademark again just to keep it away from Apple. In the end they were allowed use the mark for the office phone or whatever it was they claimed they were about to create and Apple got cell phone use of the name (sort of like Apple getting Apple for computers etc but they couldn't start a record company cause Apple Records)
AppleZulu said:It took a week after the kid's mom notified Apple about the thing for Apple to respond to the issue publicly.It took a week after Apple responded publicly to the thing for Congress to respond by writing Apple a letter asking why it took them a week to respond.
I'm just saying.
Congress knew about the issue for a week, publicly knew, and did nothing.
"Once Aadhaar is accessed, presumably through a dedicated app, its own security and encryption protocols take over, effectively locking out manufacturer safeguards" this right here, if true, is why Apple won't do it. Like Steve, Tim is highly against trusting Apple users data, privacy etc to third parties, especially government connected ones
viclauyyc said:If there is any truth in the story.
Why she plugged in the MagSafe so close to her face? Unless she has really really short arms.
Unless she was in a pure oxygen room. How can the MagSafe made a spark 59 ignite the oxygen. Not to mention the oxygen from the mask is rather small amount. Unless she stayed in Michael Jackson’s oxygen bed.
The oxygen tank did not explode, or she will be killed.
and then yes there is the issue of how that spark caused a fire that burned her face but didn’t blow up the tank etc
I have issues with Apple News that goes even more basic than whether they are politically bias.
First the UI blows. Especially the magazine side.
Second, they say that their machine learning figures out what each of us wants to read about. Yeah right. I continue to get the same crap that I scroll right past and nothing like the topics I saved or anything like what I have liked.
third. What if I don’t want them curating what I read about. What if I want to add my own sources etc. there should be an option but there isn’t