rob53

For those of you wondering whether you can get a non-Apple replacement storage card, check out the kickstarter site https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/polysoftservices/studio-drive/posts/4247624 that has been building storage cards for the M1 Mac Studio. They are already working on storage cards for the M4 Mac mini. 

Just FYI, it’s not affecting only iPhones, it’s affecting other manufacture's phones so I doubt it has anything to do with the cellular Apple Watch issue. 

spheric said:

Fidonet127 said:

tlinn said:

I will forever be grateful to the Europeans for forcing Apple to adopt USB-C. But the idea that Apple shouldn't be compensated for developing a platform that allows thousands of developers to make a living, or that the "fair" amount of compensation should be decided by developers seems ridiculous to me. Apple is not a charity, nor do they exist to be the world's R&D department. Much of what the Europeans are doing feels like protectionism.

That said, there are plenty of examples where Apple disadvantages its own customers and stifles innovation—like forcing all browsers to use the same engine. This is where government action should focus. 

There is no evidence that EU forced Apple to go USB-C as Apple was already heading there. Yes they put it into law, but the market was already forcing Apple to go USB-C. Due to timing, EU got the credit. 

These statements are so telling: you all think the EU is all about Apple. Fact is, the EU doesn’t give a SHIT about Apple: the USB-C standardisation was about getting EVERYBODY to unify their charging. Apple was already headed there because they aren’t stupid and knew it was coming (and they probably talk regularly with the Commission), having sat out the horrific micro-USB suggestion. 

The EU rightfully gets the credit for kicking everybody into supporting a single standard — they’d already been working with various manufacturers for a decade before Apple finally switched their iPhones, as well. 

Why does everybody have to unify their charging standard? Europe has all kinds of electrical "standards" so why don't they adopt America's standard? There's no way America will adopt any non-American electrical standard. This is the EU having a double standard. They want to keep their standard and force others to adopt theirs even if it's inferior to others. How many electronic products are actually developed by the EU? Not anywhere near the number developed in the USA yet the EU continues to force American companies to do the stupid things the EU demands they do. 

Does anyone know how much Apple charges for CarPlay? I'm sure most car manufacturers want the cheapest costing parts in their vehicles so I assume most use some form of free/cheap Android system with the least amount of programming necessary. I have an aftermarket Alpine deck which didn't cost that much (~$500 a few years ago) but that cost is probably 3x more than the vehicle manufacturer wants to pay. My deck connects to the OBD connecter providing a limited amount of vehicle information. It could easily provide much more information without much more programming costs. Of course, the vehicle manufacturers don't want customers having free access to engine codes to see what's wrong, they want to force the customers to get their car serviced. It's the same with CarPlay. CarPlay could easily be enhanced (where is this upgrade???) to provide access to everything in the vehicle without it costing very much but of course these car manufacturers don't want Apple to have anything to do with monitoring vehicles, primarily because they don't want Apple's products to show limitations and failures in the vehicles. I've seen custom-built EVs include way more features that monitor everything in the car, not just the few things ICE manufacturers want the customer to see so it can be done if they want to. Tesla displays everything about the car on a screen, why can't other manufacturers do the same thing? CarPlay is only one feature in a vehicle but car manufacturers are stuck in the Henry Ford era where everything is built the same way with no additional features.

clexman said:

You should just go ahead and delete this opinion piece. The phone was accessed and no encryption debate happened.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fbi-says-it-has-gained-access-trump-shooting-suspects-phone-2024-07-15/

jdw said:

Not sure why the dialog about this matters now that the news media is reporting it has been accessed (i.e., "unlocked, with contents visible")...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/15/trump-rally-shooting-suspect-phone-fbi

How that was done is not clear, but obviously, the found a way.  Could be Msuberly was correct. Using the dead man's body to unlock it might work.

Neither one mentions the brand of the phone, which is the main issue brought up in this article. The Guardian's article says an iPhone (not in this case) was hacked in Australia by Azimuth Security. It wouldn't surprise me if they simply have the Cellebrite system of a hacked version of it. I do believe the FBI has purchased the Cellebrite system, which I believe is a criminal act on the part of our government. If they did purchase this system, I would like to see the procurement paperwork because Israel is still on at least the DOE sensitive country list requiring special procurement processes. For those of you who don't know this, Israel is one of the major countries who constantly hack USA systems. Look it up. I still believe the shooter's phone was not one from Apple, especially since they already got into it. Of course, an iPhone using just a 4 digit PIN isn't that difficult to break into.