avon b7

Soli said:

avon b7 said:

Soli said:

avon b7 said:

The Touchbar in itself wasn't a mistake but making it the only option (at a speculated $300 increase) on pricing definitely was.

How much should it be for a very custom OLED display powered by Apple designed silicon running its own version of OS X built from a stripped down version of watchOS that  also contains a Secure Element and Secure Enclave for Touch ID and Apple Pay?

Try $0.

Make a 15" non-TouchBar version. Not everyone needs ANY of that but the Matebook X Pro also manages a 5-second cold boot to login with secure enclave.

All that technology costs nothing. Got it. Well, at least you're showing your true colors today.

OK. I will try a second time:

"The Touchbar in itself wasn't a mistake but making it the only option (at a speculated $300 increase) on pricing definitely was."

That means I don't care if it cost 1,000€. My problem with the current lineup is that if you want a 15" model you have to swallow the cost - whatever it may be.

The problem is not how much it costs or how much it is worth. The problem is that if you don't need it, you still have to pay for it. 

"This worldwide Apple program does not extend the standard warranty coverage of your MacBook or MacBook Pro"

Strange. They are saying that some machines may have an issue (the cause of which isn't described), provide no run of serial numbers that could limit the issue to certain keyboard batches, leave the last word on repair with Apple service reps but then refuse to cover it out of warranty.

On first reading it looks like a tacit admission of a design problem but the user will have to live with it once out of warranty or pay for repair.

nunzy said:

This will change the wireless charging paradigm!

Apple is never the first, but when they finally released the product, it is always the best. This will be nothing like those crappy wireless chargers that Android people have tried to use in the past.

"Crappy"? Why?

Are you implying they were bad or didn't work even though Apple is basing it's solution off the same standard?

Apple users would have lapped up that 'crappy' tech if they had been able to. The problem was that iPhones didn't have any, and in that situation, 'crappy' is better than none but even without this Apple solution, users of new iPhones are still using that crappy tech on iPhones! It isn't limited to Android users.

volcan said:

avon b7 said:
Never say never. It wasn't long ago that carriers were forced to share infrastructure.

Orange is currently installing Fibre in my street but will have to open it up to its competitors. State bodies along with the carriers themselves negotiate the terms but they have no option but to accept the situation.

Because Orange does not own the street. See how that works. Orange has a choice. They could decide not to build out the fibre, but perhaps they find it acceptable to play by the government rules. Same thing with Apple and its customers. The customer can decide not to purchase an iPhone but most decide it is acceptable and perhaps even advantageous to play by Apple's rules.

This is not correct. Orange and all the other top tier carriers in Spain require a licence to operate. They have a legal requirement to provide coverage. If this requirement did not exist, fibre would never break out of the cities where it was profitable and a nationalised industry would be necessary (something the carriers obviously do not want) to reach less profitable areas. Communications is not a luxury, it is a 'general interest' infrastructure and is why there are still phone boxes (much less, though) out on the streets.

Of course, you can't roll out fibre to 60 million people in one foul swoop, so for obvious reasons, the most densely populated areas were covered first with smaller towns coming later. There have also been knock on advantages. They are not digging up streets (as happened in Barcelona for example) but taking advantage of existing sewage systems. Also, copper is being phased out completely so the existing overhead lines will disappear.

It also doesn't make sense for each operator to take its infrastructure to the front door of each potential customer. That's why, in my street, Orange is handling all the street work but I will be able to choose from any operator for the actual service.

bestkeptsecret said:

AppleInsider said:

"The Court declared the mere fact that an iPhone or iPad had been repaired by someone other than Apple did not, and could not, result in the consumer guarantees ceasing to apply, or the consumer's right to a remedy being extinguished."

That sounds like some silly shit to me. Get it broken fixed by some third party and expect Apple to clean the ensuing mess.

As has been mentioned above. The phones left the repair shops in working order. It wasn't until later that problems appeared with an update. Apple itself created the mess then made it worse by refusing to deal with a problem. If you operate in a country with right to repair laws, you should take that into account before setting up shop in that country.