danox

Wesley_Hilliard said:

domicinator said:

I'm not sure you're much of a fan of the platform at this point -- you seem about 3/4 of the way toward it being doomed, meaning you don't believe in it anymore. Also seems like most of the Appleinsider contributing staff also isn't that into Apple anymore. Getting pretty "The Verge" around here lately, and choosing this hill to die on as far as Vision Pro feels a little weak this early on.

Being critical of poor decision making by a company is not the same thing as hating a product. Considering I wrote this piece from within Apple Vision Pro and have spent multiple hours testing the new features this week just for the fun of it, I'd say I'm still rather invested in the platform.

I'm not sure what you expect us to do, praise Apple when they're doing a poor job at something? You should try listening to the podcast sometime, I'm continuously accused of being too defensive of Apple. lol

If anything, me wanting the platform to be better should be an indicator of how much I care about it.

The only thing I’ve wanted from Apple is to make the iPhone, iPad, Vision Pro and the Mac to work seamlessly together as only a vertical computer company can do despite the crying, none of the competition can do what Apple is doing today with their OS and Apple Silicon combination. 

I do not want the OS on both the iPad and the Mac to be the same they are not the same device and at 2025 WWDC Apple took a nice step towards making that happen.

lordjohnwhorfin said:

Totally agree with @louisrossetto Disney has a lot of nerve to sue over IP when they built a business stealing other people’s creations (snow white, pinocchio, cinderella among many others) and slapping their own IP onto them because why not, when you’re stealing might as well go all the way.
Nice to see the shoe on the other sock.

How did they obtain the stolen content? Did they (Disney, Warner Bros) compensate the rightful owner/artist on staff? They compensated them, and although I may not approve of the price, they did paid for it. Beyond that, anyone who captures a photograph, creates a website or document featuring original content, or designs and creates a visual or written work is also a potential target for so-called AI companies. These companies take their photographs, creations, or any other original content they produce and regurgitate it. If their AI programs are truly brilliant, why not allow them to generate something truly original on their own without access to someone else’s work?

The sole issue I have with these large content or entertainment companies is their desire to extend copyright beyond the creator’s lifetime. I believe that the original laws, which stipulated that the creator’s lifetime plus 20 years should be sufficient, should be upheld. Anything beyond that should be placed in the public domain. The public domain essentially encompasses everything created before 1920, which should provide ample content for these so-called incompetent AI companies.

However, as is often the case, the privileged few will seek to benefit from both sides of the argument. It is crucial to recognize that AI companies and those who exploit their capabilities will attempt to copyright AI-generated content and assert their rights with a smug expression, as if the rest of us are naïve and gullible for their lack of moral compass.

Appleish said:

The Keynote was shockingly on point, gave us a Lot of new great features and design, and was 100% welcome by me (a non-developer).

I didn't know what to expect, but I was very, very happy during and afterwards.

The usual short term thinking critics, analysts, geeks are crying. Did you expect them to do anything else? Every single item that Apple has introduced since 1999 has been met with derision in the beginning, it’s like clockwork, and note the (fun) walk back begins today…..