coolfactor

mikethemartian said:

I used to enjoy when Steve Jobs would give presentations “live without a net”.

Steve had backup plans, not to mention very thorough practice sessions. Once, a Mac had froze and he had to switch to a backup one, joking about it with grace.

(Aside: When will AppleInsider fix this broken forum software? Daily headaches)

Apple is a platform provider first. Hardware platforms. Software platforms. Apple's real opportunity is to embrace the fuller market, not try to compete with it. They could spin Apple Intelligence as a "platform of AI solutions"... a secure, private gateway to 3rd-party solutions. Trying to compete head-on seems destined to fail at the current rate of advancements. Ride the coattails, Apple. Think Different.

brianus said:

Good. It has always annoyed me that macOS switched to 11.0 after 10.15.. not only did it seem totally random, it makes it hard to remember which number follows which (I had to look up what the last 10.x release was). If they had switched to 11.0 after 10.10 that would have made much more sense. 10.8 (8th revision of Mac OS X), 10.9 (9th), 10.10 (10th), 11.0 (11th), 12.0 (12th), etc.

Worse, doing it in 2020, when iOS was hitting version 14, made it seem like macOS was “younger” than iOS, and in any event it’s hard to recall which iOS goes with which macOS based on number alone. 

This is kinda like how they name cars. “The new 2026 Ford Ginecticazoink…”. Given all their OSes are on a yearly cycle and have been for like a decade or more, this makes a lot of sense.

Mac OS X was not "Mac OS Ex", but rather Roman Numeral 10 .... "ten".

Once they switched to just "macOS", dropping the "X", it was time to advance the numbering, too.

Makes perfect sense.

I'm not so sure about the year-based numbering.... feels like a dated approach. However, some alignment of version numbers --across-- their operating systems would definitely be good thing. If they do go with dated, they should bump the release ahead to January instead of September/October. They'd miss out on the Christmas season marketing, though... so a tug-of-war.

I hope iPhone prices go up "because of tariffs". Don't give in to the pressure, Tim. Don't give him
another win.

About this... (corrections in bold)

Apple's software correctly transcribes brands such as H&M by using an ampersand rather than the word "and," and the transcription engine correctly renders the ampersand in XHTML.

The transcription engine is not doing anything wrong. The ampersand needs to be encoded. Unless the author meant that the ampersand is being *displayed* in its encoded form?

And for those wondering why the author wrote XHTML specifically, it's because of the strictness needed when sending encoded messages. It's not just HTML, but the much more strict XHTML, which is HTML encoded as an XML document.

I normally defend Apple for having minor bugs, but this one is inexcusable and should have been caught with very basic and routine test cases.