- Last Active
seanismorris said:I see a cracked screen...
How is it possible all the parts listed are actually damaged?
Did it get hit by lightning? It sounds like Apple didn’t have the parts or experience to make the repairs.
Is the damage Apple’s fault? Obviously not. But the Apple Store should be able to send it somewhere to get fixed, and not for $5000+.
This story is embarrassing for Apple...strells said:No link to the video in question?
rcfa said:When I read “loud” and “booming” I’m disheartened, might as well describe it as Ghettoblaster.
What I was hoping to read is detailed imaging, powerful, effortless, clean, well controlled sound with depth and proper imaging.
There is notably nothing written about combining two or more into a stereo or surround setup, neither anything about using the built-in Bluetooth to hook up computers, phones, video projectors, etc. which are capable of using BT speakers or hands free devices.
Disappointing, not just that these capabilities are lacking, but also that similarly lacking is a roadmap of features to be added by future software updates.
It sounds alright for its size. VERY heavy on the highs, and the crossover frequency for woofer seems problematic as well. Bass is good for a 4" woofer, but will sound shallow to people who are used to more robust offerings. This feels like it was EQ'd by Beats. Mids get completely drowned when there's a lot going on. Listening to one of the fuller parts of Zero 7 - Home i literally winced because it sounded so bad. I'm not doing the review for this, but i figure i'd let you guys know what i think so far.
I think it's the sound king of the smart speakers, but that's not exactly a prestigious title.
randominternetperson said:jSnively said:haitiansonny said:I've been an AppleInsider reader since 2005. I've found the articles posted informative, arguments clearly posed, and an insight and fairness not expected of a website that focuses primarily about the goings on of Apple, Inc. I follow certain topics and one among them is how/if Apple keeps to its' integrity or ethical behavior. Looking at the Editorial article about the initial App rejection: 1) Did Apple impliciitly/explicitly point to the article about jailbreaking? 2) App approval can be known to be far from a transparent process. During the approval process did anyone reach out to Apple? 2a) If they did, what did they say? (-Knowing that I believe there were no instances when Apple would not give any reason at all). I would like to know Apple extent of behavior concerning putting pressure on developers and other entities. The article pointing to 'App Rejection Due to an Article' stated that plainly.
2) Of course. Things lined up in such a way that it made sense for us to publish.
2a) Not going to say. I will say that if we had no publication power we'd still be stuck in limbo.
At the end of the day, this cost us money and time. Most app developers don't have a website they can publish on to get things moving, and that's something worth highlighting. We're happy with the turnaround speed.
tallest skil said:
Correct; the classification difference between Title I and Title II (requiring broadcast licenses). Equality of bits is fully capable of being enforced without BL regulation over ISPs.[...]
The FTC does what it can where it can, but it doesn't have the power to address all of the concerns. The way that it defines and enforces 'unfairness', for example, would still allow telecommunication companies to create fast and slow lanes, as well as selectively block services so long as they are counter-balanced with other 'benefits'. That is not equality of bits. The FTC is not equipped to govern a 'fair' internet. They are more than happy to tell you that they are, because that means more potential funding and expanded powers for them, but it's not the truth. It's a mess. Governing everything under Title II by far makes the most sense.tallest skil said:
The problem, unfortunately, is that “legal pressure” is the equivalent of the honor system these days. Honored, of course, for everyone but “you and yours” (meaning a given government/governmental body and its current band of financial supporters/lobbyists). It’s ironic, but what we really need is civilian authoritarianism over government operation.[...]