anonymouse

ITGUYINSD said:

apple4thewin said:

Not Spotify again whining 

You mean not Apple playing dictator again?  taking away access to functions that were allowed, and for no good reason, is just Apple being a bully.  
Could the fact that Spotify has more subscribers than Apple Music have something to do with it?

It didn't work properly and there's an API for doing this a different way that does work properly. Spotify is just too cheap and lazy to update their software to do it the right way. So, yes, this is definitely Spotify whining and much ado about nothing.

But, I guess you missed all this,

Consequently, Spotify has reportedly asked Apple to allow it to control the volume when using Spotify Connect to send music to HomePods. However, Apple has said that it requires Spotify's app to add integration with HomePods. 

In 2019, Spotify complained to the EU that Apple was denying it access to the HomePod. Spotify has also refused Apple's help in adding AirPlay 2 support, which as recently as 2023 it still says is coming. 

This is what happens when you spoil a child, they think they are entitled to everything, now, with no effort on their part, and throw a tantrum when they don't get it.

Japhey said:

gatorguy said:

It does not seem like a very Apple-y product, but that's not unexpected either. It's a first gen, and according to reports was intended for developers anyway. Three years out they may have something. At the moment it seems like it was pushed out to the retail market before it's fully hatched, and I'm not sure why altho I could guess there's some other nearly-finished products from potential competitors coming before the year is out. 

No doubt some regular users here will rush to buy a Vision Pro anyway; after all, it's from Apple. By the time it's fully developed in gen 3 I would expect it to be half to a third of the current price. That's when it may capture my interest.  Or not.

Not fully hatched? 

It seems like they put a lot of love and energy into addressing all the shortcomings other AR headset suffer from. So I’m just curious as to what you need to see for it to be considered “fully hatched ”?

Dude, it's gatorguy, what did you expect? If he said he loved it, we'd all need to press him to get a brain MRI, stat, to find the tumor.

Actually, I prefer these scripted, pre-recorded presentations to the old live events. I think they are able to present a lot more information more clearly and concisely than doing a live event allows. You also avoid wasting time with glitches that have nothing to do with the product or presentation. (Like Craig Federighi's "failed" Face ID demo, which only "failed" because the feature was working as designed and had been disabled because of stage hands handling it and looking at the screen before the demo.) The demos and presentations are also better and more compelling since they don't have the restriction of doing it on a stage in front of a live audience but can be more creative with it.

If one were attending in person, a live event would be more exciting, but how many of us actually ever have the opportunity to attend in person? And, frankly, even the live events were scripted and rehearsed, and the only person who was ever going to go off-script was Steve Jobs, so we aren't really missing anything in that regard. (I was at the WWDC right after Jobs returned to Apple, and I wouldn't have missed the Q&A session he did there for the world (the one where he talked about taking the Newton out back and putting a bullet in it's head, among other topics) but those days are, sadly, long behind us.)

There is some irony, though, that the Steve Jobs Theater was designed and built to host live events and they stopped doing them almost immediately after it was "opened".

Scot1 said:

I’m not a lawyer, of course, but what’s the difference between getting a court ordered warrant to enter someone’s home or workplace if they are under investigation for bad acts against the population or the government and doing the same thing to investigate same on someone’s phone?  

How do you find a balance between keeping people safe and respecting the rights of the individual?

I thought that’s what the courts were supposed to do and so having a back channel to go into someone’s phone under the authority of the courts isn’t such a bad idea is it? I mean the whole premises if you’re not doing something wrong…

Well, for one thing it's not (typically) done in secret accompanied by gag orders. Also, this would essentially be the equivalent of a court issuing a blanket warrant to search anyone, anywhere for anything, including areas outside its jurisdiction, which is not the way a democracy/free society is supposed to function.

Yes, it's a bad idea because its incompatible with secure E2EE. A backdoor is also a guarantee that a foreign power or criminals will compromise the back door.

You find the balance by respecting privacy and not trampling the rights of 99.9999% of the people to catch the other 0.0001% who are doing something wrong.

I'll leave you with John Gruber's take, which I agree with completely, for you to ponder [emphasis mine]:

The bottom line is that the UK government is proceeding like a tyrannical authoritarian state. That’s not hyperbole. And the breathtaking scope of their order — being able to secretly snoop, without notice that they even have the capability, not only on their own citizens but every Apple user in the entire world — suggests a delusional belief that the British Empire still stands. It’s simultaneously infuriatingly offensive, mathematically ignorant (regarding the nature of end-to-end encryption), dangerous (as proven by the recent Salt Typhoon attack China successfully waged to eavesdrop on non-E2EE communications in the United States), and laughably naive regarding the UK’s actual power and standing in the world.

This just further exposes the extortion racket that the DMA is. The calculus is now, "How much can we get without it costing us more?"

phillyfanatic09 said:

DAalseth said:

Stabitha_Christie said:

Xed said:

CheeseFreeze said:

beowulfschmidt said:

Apple could also just pull out of the UK entirely, fire all their UK employees, and stop buying UK goods and services.  I know they won't, but feck all fascist governments.

By that logic, they need to pull out of the USA immediately. 

Because Apple is in the US that means they should prop up fascism and a police state?

Not directed at you personally, but people need to learn what fascism is. Fascism is a type of authoritarianism but not authoritarianism is fascism. 

Fascism is a far-right system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

The U.K. is capitalist, and we can certainly argue that this would be a stringent movement control the rest of the definition doesn't fit at all. There U.K. isn't governed by the far-right, it isn't a dictatorship, there isn't violent suppression of opposition and the list goes on. So, yeah, not fascism at all 

“Agreed, the UK isn’t there. The US however…”

While what Trump is doing is disturbing, illegal and authoritarian, he is not a fascist. 

Experts on fascism — i.e., people who have studied fascism extensively and know exactly what it is and isn't — disagree with you. Here's one who changed his mind on the issue to declare that Trump is a fascist.

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-paxton-trump-fascist-1560652

The other unintended consequence of repealing Section 230 is that it will actually affect the right more than the left, and in ways exactly opposite of how the right thinks repealing it will change things. It's well documented that the the vast majority of misinformation, including outright brazen lies, originates from the right. If suddenly the posting of this material becomes actionable, with companies like FB sharing in liability, they'll have no choice but to apply draconian moderation to this stuff, whereas now they have the cover of Section 230 to treat it with a light hand because it's not their problem. Some companies/sites might close their forums, but companies like FB and the company formerly known as Twitter have their entire business model built around user generated content, so they can't just shut it off, but now they may be on the hook.

I've never really understood why Trump, et al. think Section 230 is somehow muzzling them when in fact Section 230 is what has allowed them to post malicious nonsense and get away with it.

Also, changes to the law requiring companies to allow all content will be unconstitutional since that would infringe the First Amendment rights of the site operators.

Are we really certain that Apple didn't covertly engineer this coup? 

9secondkox2 said:

Dang. Looks awesome. Especially dig the Aston Martin example. 

Was looking at an X5, but may have to go for one of these bad boys instead.

If you were looking at an X5, I'm not sure an AM is in your price range.

Xed said:

anonymouse said:

One show not mentioned in the article that is absolutely worth watching is "Shrinking". Given that it's only at two seasons so far, you could potentially watch the entire available series in a weekend.

I may have to give that another go. I watched the pilot episode but it didn't hook me.

I've never made it through the first episode of "Severance" — I always fall asleep in the middle of it and wake up somewhere in episode 2.