rcomeau

fastasleep said:

rcomeau said:

Sorry, but these are stupid and not innovative in any way.

What the heck are you trying to hide on your dashboard screen and from whom? Your wife sitting next to you? You are in a private, closed environment. Someone not wearing shutter glasses can see the screen perfectly well, just at 50% brightness. How stupid are you going to look wearing shutter glasses over your regular (for those of us who wear glasses) to drive a car? By the way, shutter glasses are 30 years old, so hardly new. They were among the first 3D glasses (Stereopgraphics) and the method was swapping left-right news in two alternating buffers. Pretty simple to have both shutters on/off at the same time (instead of alternating) so again, nothing new.

Try reading the article again, specifically about shared screens with multiple users' content on them. Dummy content to obscure from outside observers. It's for passengers, not drivers.

Really, maybe Apple car feature rumours should be limited to features that might actually be appealing to someone. This throw all the noodles to the wall to see what sticks method hardly makes anyone excited at the prospect of an Apple car (on top of the rumour that Kia will be making them?). Not getting me excited at least.

Or they can just write about the myriad patents that have been coming out for the past five years and you can skip over the ones you're not interested in? Some of us are interested in the patents, thank you very much. What gets you excited could not be less interesting to me.

Sorry, I did not realize anyone looked at porn while driving and worry about people sitting next to you at a traffic light sticking their heads out the window and peeking at your screen? What would one want to hide? Is the battery charge state a national secret? Is that screen so expensive that you can't have two, if viewer-specific content is so important? Instead, you have to double the brightness (since your eyes are getting a 50% duty cycle of the screen) and you have to have specific shutter glasses that you cannot lose or break by sitting on them accidentally. Anyone else in the car will have a distractingly bright screen in their face unless they are to wear the glasses.

There are a million things Apple can do better than other companies, but this is not anywhere on any reasonable person's list. BTW, these forums are here exactly for al of us to comment with our opinions. None of our opinions matter to Apple, so it is really for the entertainment of us exchanging ideas and opiions.

pulseimages said:

When will I stop receiving onscreen messages telling me 3rd Party Software installed on my Mac won’t be compatible with a future version of Mac OS and to contact the developer? It’s not the customers job to remind the developer to update their software to be compatible. 

If the software you are using is still being developed and supported and you are updating it, you should almost never hear about this. If your software is out of date, then yo are getting fair warning. Otherwise you will get a legion of angry users who all of a sudden find that their software stops working after an OS upgrade. Pick the lesser of the evils.

dewme said:

Interesting piece of trivia, but in the end I believe everyone involved made the right decisions for their respective companies. I'm sorry, but I don't get excited in the least when some folks start talking about Apple getting involved in electric vehicle production. For a company like Apple that has done so well and benefitted so greatly by focusing on problems that reside at the intersection of Technology & Liberal Arts, the grunge work of manufacturing automobiles doesn't sound like a whole lot of fun. If Apple gets to the point where it's all about chasing the money they will cease to be Apple.

Some think automobiles, particularly when self-driving becomes standard, will become more of an infotainment device that happens to do so while you are moving. All that free time in traffic means a lot of eyeballs to consume media. Controlling the car means controlling the interface and iOS can be central to that.

22july2013 said:

urahara said:

Not available on Apple TV+?
The problem with those services is that there are too many. And often some movies are available only on one of them. 

Just recently I wanted to buy a movie on Apple TV+, they had it there but I had to subscribe to some SkyTicket - other provider. 

I was ready to buy it on Apple TV+.  But they did it difficult for me. Torrent rules...
They have to figure out how  to offer movies on more platforms in multiple languages. If they make it easier to get it on torrent than on official distribution channels, 

Perhaps you don't speak English well, so I won't be hard on you for your fragmented sentences. But it's hard to understand what you want. Are you complaining about the cost? Apple doesn't control the cost, because that's controlled by the content providers. Apple doesn't set the prices, either of the streaming channels or the individual movie prices on iTunes. And it looks like Skyticket is a German streaming service that has nothing to do with Apple TV+. What movie were you trying to watch on Apple TV+? If you explain your problem, there are some people who will try to help. But we can't help if you refuse to explain the problem.

I think his point is that AppleTV+ collects (aggregates) movies and TV shoes available through various channels on AppleTV. On the surface, it looks like you have access to a variety of content but find that you really have to have subscriptions to multiple services. I am frustrated that it is turning out to be the same problem we had with cable. To watch one show I like, I have to subscribe to a channel and pay for a bunch of crap I don't want. Internet streaming had the promise of being able to pay for the shows I like and only the shows I like (iTunes started well). Now one needs to have subscriptions to Netflix, Hulu, CBS All access, AppleTV+ etc, each one having one thing of value and a ton of unwanted stuff. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.