mdriftmeyer

kddpop said:

Im confused. 
I have been sending audio from iTunes to multiple targets for a long time. 
Am misunderstanding what’s been added?

My Bluetooth Wonderboom SE pair are now recognized by macOS and can be used as my new speakers. That's just an obvious benefit of Airplay 2. No Airport device necessary, just a Bluetooth signal strong enough to connect and hold the connection.

Mike Wuerthele said:

mdriftmeyer said:

As a NeXT/Apple alum you folks are blatantly ignorant of the meaning of Fat Binary. Fat binaries were the binaries of NeXTSTEP/Openstep that were built binaries of the OS to run natively on different hardware architectures instruction sets.

 Apple continues working on shoring up the custom ARM based CPUs of its own design and still licenses the IP in order to produce them has nothing to do with leaving macOS to fend for itself on ARM based only instruction sets.

More importantly, the effort to create OS X even with decades of x86/PPC/Moto/SPARC expertise took 5 years to get a limped version out the door, and that was already with a platform native on x86. The Rosetta was a compatibility layer on top of it.

 The logical solution moving forward is for Apple to license IP from AMD to have them build custom ASIC designs of SoC APUs and use their discrete CPUs/GPUs with the upcoming Thunderbolt licensing [now royalty free] to have a custom Thunderbolt controller designed by Apple on their boards, that are compatible with AMD's x86 chipsets, thus freeing Apple from relying solely on Intel.

Before you throw stones, you'd better look at your history, and see what else the term was also applied to.

I'm aware of your definition, and the usage you cite. However, there are more.

The term FAT binary is actually patented by NeXT now owned by Apple. That term, is the only use we should ever discuss.

As a NeXT/Apple alum you folks are blatantly ignorant of the meaning of Fat Binary. Fat binaries were the binaries of NeXTSTEP/Openstep that were built binaries of the OS to run natively on different hardware architectures instruction sets.

 Apple continues working on shoring up the custom ARM based CPUs of its own design and still licenses the IP in order to produce them has nothing to do with leaving macOS to fend for itself on ARM based only instruction sets.

More importantly, the effort to create OS X even with decades of x86/PPC/Moto/SPARC expertise took 5 years to get a limped version out the door, and that was already with a platform native on x86. The Rosetta was a compatibility layer on top of it.

 The logical solution moving forward is for Apple to license IP from AMD to have them build custom ASIC designs of SoC APUs and use their discrete CPUs/GPUs with the upcoming Thunderbolt licensing [now royalty free] to have a custom Thunderbolt controller designed by Apple on their boards, that are compatible with AMD's x86 chipsets, thus freeing Apple from relying solely on Intel.

I won't touch Pixelmator Pro. I've not used Pixelmator once since buying Affinity Photo and Designer.

10K PDF: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AAPL/5706396208x0xS320193-17-70/320193/filing.pdf

If you think the past 3 years YoY of that Other Products revenues isn't making a dent due to Beats you are too dense to discuss business.

Page 73.