charlesn

But wait!!! It was less than three months ago, on January 3rd, when AI ran a headline article about iPad Pro sales being so weak that Apple was shutting down and redeploying production lines for its display! The sky is falling! https://appleinsider.com/articles/25/01/03/weak-ipad-pro-sales-prompt-oled-supplier-to-switch-to-making-more-iphone-screens

And here we are, just 82 days later, and now the story is that the iPad Pro is and has been the best-selling model for years, including last year. So which one of your polar opposite reports would you like AI readers to believe? Or should it be "none of the above?" It would also be informative, when discussing "sales," to know if we're talking about dollar amount or units sold. It would not be all that surprising if Pro models led in dollar amount of sales, considering their much higher selling prices. But if Pro models were grabbing 42% of unit sales, I would find that surprising given their high cost. 

Gosh, I'd be happy to do a remedial math course with the AI staff to help with future articles. At 5.5mm, the Air/Slim would be one-third slimmer than the 8.25mm iPhone Pro Max. I know half as thick sounds way more awesome but it just doesn't happen to be true. Half as thick would be 4.13mm. Also: the Pro Max, with its pro camera system is a poor phone for comparison. Compared to the iPhone Plus, a phone much closer in its feature set, the Slim would be just 29% thinner -- and you'll have to give up one camera lens, battery life and fast 5G while paying a higher price to get 2mm worth of additional thinness. Makes sense, though--just look at all the non-stop comments you read from people who want to trade battery life for a thinner, more expensive phone. /s

saarek said:

charlesn said:

winstoner71 said:

So only to the USB-C “updated” Max and not to the lightning Max even though they have the same hardware, chip, etc? 

As an owner of the original APM, I was wondering the same and--at least so far--it doesn't appear the gen 1 APM will get the update. With the 2nd gen APM, you'll be able to play lossless music from any source that outputs lossless digital to a USB-C port (like an iPhone) simply by using the USB-C to USB-C cable that comes with the headphones. It would seem that if the gen 1 APM were to get the same update, it should support lossless using a USB-C to Lightning cable. Both gens accept only a digital signal at the input, with the only difference being USB-C vs Ligntning input, which shouldn't make a difference--Lightning can support the bandwidth needed for lossless audio. Same is true for the expensive 3.5mm to USB-C or Lightning cables. Both cables convert analog to digital, with the only difference being that the USB-C version is lossless and the Lightning version is not--but again, the connector should not make a difference. 

If anyone has a technical explanation for why the difference in connectors should matter--when the internal hardware of both APMs is supposedly identical--please post!

They don’t want to release the cable for Lightning seeing as it’s now dead. As far as I can tell there is absolutely no reason, apart from financial, as to why it cannot be done.

I can understand why Apple might not want to make a new 3.5mm to Lightning cable since sales of that cable would be VERY limited. However, if it provided the firmware update to the APM gen 1, then--in theory--any of the USB-C to Lightning cables already on the market would make lossless audio possible from an iPhone or any source with a USB-C output that's lossless digital. Of course, Apple may want to reserve lossless playback exclusively for APM gen 2 just because, which wouldn't be the first time Apple has screwed over buyers of a gen 1 product. I can't really complain since I've owned my pair since APM dropped over 4 years ago, but buyers of the APM 1 as recently as summer of last year when it was still the only one on sale might feel differently about not getting the firmware update. 

winstoner71 said:

So only to the USB-C “updated” Max and not to the lightning Max even though they have the same hardware, chip, etc? 

As an owner of the original APM, I was wondering the same and--at least so far--it doesn't appear the gen 1 APM will get the update. With the 2nd gen APM, you'll be able to play lossless music from any source that outputs lossless digital to a USB-C port (like an iPhone) simply by using the USB-C to USB-C cable that comes with the headphones. It would seem that if the gen 1 APM were to get the same update, it should support lossless using a USB-C to Lightning cable. Both gens accept only a digital signal at the input, with the only difference being USB-C vs Ligntning input, which shouldn't make a difference--Lightning can support the bandwidth needed for lossless audio. Same is true for the expensive 3.5mm to USB-C or Lightning cables. Both cables convert analog to digital, with the only difference being that the USB-C version is lossless and the Lightning version is not--but again, the connector should not make a difference. 

If anyone has a technical explanation for why the difference in connectors should matter--when the internal hardware of both APMs is supposedly identical--please post!

tiredskills said:

Shame that they're so rough on the eyes when using an Apple device.  An e-bookstore without an e-ink reader is a losing proposition.

Yes! This quote from the article jumped out at me: 

Apple Books on any Apple device are vastly more a pleasure to read than on any current Kindle hardware.

Sorry, but reading on any backlit LED screen is no pleasure at all, it's very tiring for my eyes and kabillions of e-ink reader owners would agree. If you're among the many who are fine reading on an iPad, I'm not here to say you're wrong, just that it doesn't work for a very large audience of book readers. This is another case where I'd prefer to give my business to Apple rather than to Amazon, but Apple Books seems like a half-hearted effort with no real interest in competing: much smaller selection, often higher prices and no e-ink reader options.