- Last Active
WhatsApp vulnerability left iOS open to spyware attack
Google Assistant response speed getting improved by on-device processingGoogle Home Hub (with Google Assistant) is multi-user and instantly recognise the user voice and switch to that user profile. E.g. a family of six can ask “hey google who am I?” And the Google Home Hub can instantly response “You name is whoeverasking”.
It can play your music library, YouTube Recommanded, Spotify, Google Photos of the user asking, instantly, at the volume you commanded, and control the lighting, turning on/off fans and aircond as setup from Google Home app, all by voice.
Google Home also sync setting changes from Apple HomeKit for wherever changes, but not vice versa. That’s Apple HomeKit’s problem.
Editorial: Will Apple's 1990's 'Golden Age' collapse repeat itself?My home was everything Apple until a few days ago.
I remember the day to turn myself to Apple's Mac because I believed that Microsoft Windows was intolerable when Steve Balmer punished us for not upgrading hardware and made Windows running slower for every update.
The story is repeating. It's impossible and unaffordable for me to replace every Apple devices every 2-3 years. It's also a blind-faith to put premium prices buying lagged-behind technologies just because of "security", "safety" and "privacy". The turning point came a few days ago.
I bought a Google Home Hub, and it immediately gave me and my family surprises.
1. Installation in 5 minutes.
2. Just by saying "hey Google" or "OK Google", every one in the family can command the Google Home Hub to do something and relate them with our individual Google Accounts, all in one Google Home Hub device. Unlike iPad and iPhone, we can only have one Apple ID in use per device. Google Home Hub recognises individual voices instantly.
3. With just voice, I can ask for the weather, set alarm, set timer, change volume, change brightness, play music of my choice or randomly picked up, play YouTube.
4. With the Google Home app and Google Assistant app on my iPhone / iPad, I can do much more, much much more than Apple Siri.
Before the intrusion of Google Home Hub, about $150- $220, and it was already 2 year old on the market, I thought that I could be still an Apple fan for another few years. Now, I know that I might be an escaped planet from Apple the solar system, or at least travelling in a twin-star system including Google.
Apple, do you know what's wrong with you?
Apple project lead Ted Kremenek discusses Swift 5 & how it is used internallyIreneW said:beowulfschmidt said:IreneW said:ivanh said:SWIFT is 30 years behind dBase IV in application development. We need application generator, not coding.
That bit the article mentions about the ABI stands out. Having not used Swift, I won't comment on the specifics, but I will comment on the general case. Maintaining compatibility of interface between applications and modules built with different versions of a compiler is almost an absolute must. Effectively cutting a new application off from old modules is a really dumb idea. Lack of compatibility means that any modules I want to reference must also be recompiled, even if they're working fine. This rebuild brings with it risk, since the new compiler might have changes that change the way the code works, or removes a feature used by the old code (these aren't issues most of the time, but I've seen them both, especially with some C compilers), which means the old module has to be reworked to work around the compiler issue.
Not to mention the fact that the older build might still be required by still other modules, which means maintaining multiple versions, with potentially multiple versions of the source as well. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. No thanks.
Now, that doesn't mean the interface shouldn't evolve and improve, by any means. Maintaining compatibility isn't that tough for a well designed compiler, and can be implemented in a number of ways. As interfaces evolve, perhaps include the backwards compatibility for old builds in every newly built application. Obviously this means including code might not ever be used. Or perhaps a compiler switch that says "include compatibility for version X.X modules." Better still if that detection were built into the compiler, so that when an older module is referenced, the needed compatibility is automatically included.
Lack of compatibility for modules built with older versions of the compiler (unless it's something like a security issue) just creates more, in most cases unnecessary, work for developers, including Apple's own developers.
My comment were about the "application generator", a concept that is usable for a very small subset of the SW running in CPUs today. I have tried different generations, including the really expensive model--based engineering tools and the latest AI/ML magic. Code is still king.
Previous Qs: I don’t see Swift be able to run on Android phones in near future. Xcode should have AI-enhanced coding assistant to ease backward- and forward-compatibility while keeping the devices secure. If Swift 5 gets obese from a fat Swift 4, and the products run even slower, it’ll be ugly.
Compared: Samsung's Galaxy S10 range vs. Apple's iPhone XS and iPhone XR