rob53

tht said:

Nice to see!

Just keep making incremental updates and options. Hopefully upgradeable SSDs will be available for all of the other Macs in the future.

They won't be unless Apple makes a total change in the enclosures. You can open a current MBP and iMac but the iMac is not that easy. We'll see if Apple goes back to an easy to open front or rear case for the iMacs but I don't see them changing from soldered RAM and SSD on some of the MacBooks or changing back to a screwed on case. Most CPUs are also soldered to keep the height of the motherboard as thin as possible. Adding a CPU socket doubles the height of the CPU.

This brings up the question of why Apple is still using Intel CPUs when AMD CPUs are at a minimum comparable in terms of speed and cost. They're both x86 and both can run macOS so why is Apple sticking with Intel?

When BootCamp was released it gave both Mac and linux users the ability to run on the fastest non-customized PC available and that was a Mac. Running Windows or linux virtualized is slower than running it natively on the x86 platform. I know we ran BootCamp and Fusion to be able to run some stupid windows server clients forced on us by the business department. Beyond that it wasn't necessary. We did run specialized Windows-based hardware because the manufacturer refused to create the software for Macs. Today is totally different from ten to twenty years ago. Most business systems, whether they are Windows or linux based, can be accessed through web browsers or dedicated apps on every platform. This reduces the need for direct Windows capability (BootCamp) significantly. I still run Fusion to support Windows users so I can see exactly what they are seeing. This support is winding down so my only other reason for keeping Fusion capability is for those CAD systems who also refuse to upgrade their software to something current that would be more easily ported to macOS. I'm talking about several marine design CAD systems that look like they're still using DOS and Windows 3 code. This will continue to be a problem for Windows users who use code from forty years ago.

As for migrating to another new Apple platform, been there, done that. I survived then and am looking forward to doing it again. Intel has be extremely slow in upgrading and enhancing their computing platform while Apple has produced major leaps in processing power since the iPhone/iPad were introduced. With control over most of the components they use in all their products they have the unique opportunity and ability to cram as many CPU and GPU cores along with specialized hardware as they want to on their SOCs. I know many people are concerned about GPU capability and Apple's mobile GPUs aren't anywhere near desktop GPUs (yes, current desktop CPUs are also faster but Apple is much closer to the possibility of building a desktop A-series CPU that could rival the best Intel and AMD have to offer than they are competing against NVIDIA and AMD). I continue to hear that many applications still only use single core computing and don't take advantage of multiple cores. These developers need to change because I believe there is an upper limit to single core CPU speed while multiple core CPUs can be created into the thousands and with proper software can run applications extremely fast. GPUs also use multiple cores running into the multiple thousands and I don't see any reason why Apple couldn't design desktop ARM-based separate CPUs and GPUs with tons of cores that would ultimately compare favorably with Intel, ARM and NVIDIA. An ARM-based Mac will have some growing pains but not as much as the move to Intel caused. Isn't Apple's entire software library capable of running on Intel and A-series devices already? (I'm giving people a chance to yell at my post with this comment.) I'm ready to get an ARM-based Mac, especially a laptop, even one with a touchscreen.

Few things.

1. $229 is why people aren't automating their homes. $100 here, $100 there adds up very quickly. Why does this lock cost so much when it's barebones?
2. The video didn't mention anything about using the keyed lock on the outside. I presume opening the house with the key still works (yes/no?). If it does, does the opening of the lock from the outside (also inside) change the status of the lock within HomeKit?
3. The dead bolt isn't much of a dead bolt. It locks wimpy. Most dead bolts are solid, this isn't. Of course, most people understand a house door lock only keeps non-criminals out. A good kick and the door jam breaks apart.
4. The dead bolt is connected to the lock using a magnet. How easy would it be to use another, stronger magnet to defeat the lock?

If I were designing the lock for a new door, I would bore the lock hole most of the way through inserting a steel disk to slow down outside access to the lock. I'd keep the inside lock handle to allow people easy egress. I would not include any kind of keyed lock from the outside, requiring access from the lock app. Of course, a better locking mechanism would include three bolts; top, bottom and door jam. With a proper door jam, which isn't installed on all but a few houses, this lock and latching mechanism might actually stop the majority of thieves. I'd pay >$200 for this type of electronic lock.

sflocal said:

So this is the 3rd-party Acrobat software, and has nothing to do with the built-in PDF reader in MacOS right?

While I always install it for Windows, I haven’t had to install it for MacOS for like... ever.  The built in PDF functions work perfectly for me!

There are specially written PDF files that require Adobe products to read. It sucks because Preview either can’t open them properly or print them. They use proprietary features that aren’t part of any PDF standard specification.