mjtomlin

Rogue01 said:

This goes back to when teens would watch scrambled Cinemax or HBO late at night hoping to catch a glimpse of a boob!  Parents should be parents and monitor their children's activities, rather than Apple playing police man or second parent.  Like what Oldenboom said.  In some countries, nudity is way more normal than in the US, and we weren't born dressed.  Of course child porn, extortion, and bullying is horrible, but it seems Apple wants to block everything that they deem inappropriate.  What if it is an image of famous artwork that contains nudity?  Apple will block it claiming it might be unsafe to view, when it is a piece of art.

This a feature that parents can turn on in iMessages if they feel the need to. This is not Apple imposing their morals on you.

This is about a child having an unsupervised conversation with someone in iMessage on their iPad or iPhone who is sending them nude photos. Chances are those aren't photos of art. While you may not care that predator is grooming your child, most parents would have a problem with it.

Calamander said:

Let's talk about real world speed...

Blackmagic report 5,000 MB/s

Real life folder - 10,000 items, 4.4GB 


Manually tested this, it took 37 seconds to copy - translates to 120MB/s

That's around 40x slower than the max speed

So I am thinking in real life, the SSD speed is not the bottleneck for almost all operations, except maybe speed tests and things that work with huge volumes of data. Video,, 3D, and so on.

For the rest of us - we'll never notice if the SSD is 1,000 MB/s or 5,000 MB/s because either way the Finder is limited to 120MB/s for some reason. 

The Finder is not limited to 120MB/s. There is a lot of file system overhead in allocating space, creating nodes and error checking for thousands of items, especially if some data needs be moved around to prevent data fragmentation.  Copying a single large file would be much closer to actually testing the speed of the SSD.

However...

I do need to point out that APFS does not actually copy data until it needs to. Simply copying a file (on the same physical volume) in the Finder does not mean that data has been duplicated and rewritten in some other area of storage. The actual copy doesn't occur until one of the "files" has been modified.

So for instance you duplicate a file 5 times in the Finder. All that's initially created are new nodes that all point to the same block of data in storage. So no data has been "copied" yet. Now let's say you open the fifth copy and make changes and then go to save it... Only then is that block of data copied and saved with any modifications. That fifth node now points to this new block of data and the first 4 "copies" all still point to the original block of storage.

keithw said:

The 2023(?) ASi "Mac Pro" must either be able to reach the 166,946 GB5 GPU results either with on-chip GPU cores or by a discrete graphics card like the existing Intel Mac Pro, otherwise, why bother to even release it?

I think this is why we haven't seen the new Mac Pro yet. The new GPU design for the A16 was supposed to see a huge performance increase (>50%, mainly due to implementing hardware based ray tracing), but it had to be pulled because apparently it wasn't meeting efficiency standards*. So If I had to guess, the M3 is going to skip the A16 and be based on the A17 generation of cores, so we should see a fairly substantial performance increase in the M3 and finally get the ASi based Mac Pro, which will be the first system with M3 generation SoCs with M3 Ultra and M3 Extreme.  (Both the A17 and M3 will also use TSMC's N3 process bringing further performance and efficiency enhancements.)

*This is the issue that's going to have be addressed at some point in the future... trying to develop a single core for both mobile and desktop applications. More than likely, that new GPU would've been fine in a desktop system where thermal ceilings can be lifted with active cooling systems. I think Apple will eventually start "optimizing" actual CPU and GPU (more so) cores for their intended systems.

rezwits said:

It's really easy, if you side load, you can't use any Apple API CALLS from within your App, so if you side load it's gotta be your OWN RAW PURE CODE.

Well, side loading doesn't mean a free-for-all, Apple could still require that all apps need to be signed by Apple before they can run on iOS devices. So, Apple could create a set of "transactional" API's that developers are required to use before any app can be installed regardless of distribution origin. This would allow developers to create their own transaction system either through a third party App Store or directly from their own website. Developers would still be required to register with Apple's Developer program so that apps can be verified and signed. To make up for lost revenue, Apple could create a tiered developer subscription model or just start charging for their developer tools. This allows apps to remain to be tied to developer accounts, so developers of any nefarious apps could have their accounts and apps disabled. This would end up being a worldwide change, not just EU.

However, the point is not that it could be possible, the point is, when and where do hardware vendors no longer have the right to create the devices they want to make? What it comes down to, is crippling a "superior" business model to enable less competent competitors to play on a level field rather than doing their own leg work. It is not Apple's fault that no other company can compete with Google's Android. The problem is, the EU doesn't want more competition, they want less. They want an homogenized market where no one is allowed to innovate unless everyone can join in. (Actually, smaller companies are allowed to innovate, while larger companies are forced to stagnate.)

Has the EU proven that people are somehow forced to buy iOS devices? That a vast majority of those users don’t choose iOS because of how it currently works? Until you’ve proven both, you cannot claim that enforcing all these rules is for the benefit of the user. 

Well the bottom line is that the EU is going to enforce so many changes to iOS, it might as well be Android at that point. Apple’s business model is all about tight integration; hardware, software, and services. If they can’t continue that, I seriously doubt Apple is interested in making that type of device. Apple’s best option will eventually be to just stop selling iOS devices in the EU. Especially if the fines are going to be so damned huge.

After Apple allows side loading and has to let others use their own payment system on the App Store and has to let others have their own app stores… where’s the incentive for Apple to even bother with an App Store in that market? Where’s the incentive to support that hardware any longer than they have to in those markets? So Apple would drop the App Store off those devices, raise the price for them, and start charging for OS updates.

Or only offer a completely closed device, like the original iPhone. No App Store, no side loading. Only Apple’s software and services. Anything else, access it on the web.

Sorry, but as a hardware vendor, you should have the right to choose what features your device comes with. The consumer can then choose a device based on the features offered. If the user doesn’t like it return it or move on to something else when you go to upgrade.