lorin schultz

About

Username
lorin schultz
Joined
Visits
150
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
2,660
Badges
1
Posts
2,771

Reactions

1.4KLike0Dislike232Informative

  • The AMD Radeon VII doesn't work on the Mac at launch, but will soon

    lorin schultzlorin schultz
    lkrupp said:
    And, lo and behold, the critics just got into trashing Apple for the T2 Macs having issues with audio interfaces in another article and this hardware manufacturer releases a product that doesn’t work with macOS because there’s no driver yet. But I’ll bet those same critics will blame Apple for the “issue”, right? Oh, the irony.
    I gotta ask: Do you sit at your computer with appleinsider.com open, hitting refresh over and over to make sure you're the first to reply to every new article, giving you the chance to "predict" how evildoers from the dark side will respond to the article?

    Serious question. It happens SOOOO often it can't possibly be coincidence.

    By the way, your supposed "condemnation" of those who perceive issues differently than you, and you itemizing the things they'll surely say, manages to spread more negativity in a single post than most entire threads. I mention this not to attack you -- you should obviously feel free to do whatever you think best -- but because I can't imagine that's really your intent. Maybe knowing how others perceive your "defence" of Apple will inform your future posts.
    muthuk_vanalingam

  • Apple crime blotter: Roger Stone's iCloud, a Siri school shooting threat, and Find My iPho...

    lorin schultzlorin schultz
    I'll be the first to admit if I'm mistaken on some of the details, but from where I'm sitting, no, I'm not. Perhaps you are the one who needs to be educated on the facts of the case. From CNET: "On February 16, 2016, US Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym ordered Apple to create that software for the FBI. Apple refused, with Cook arguing that the order went too far and would threaten the security of all iPhone users. Bypassing the iPhone's password meant creating a "back door" in its iOS mobile software that could then be used to access every other iPhone, he said. The two sides battled over the following weeks in legal filings and public comments. The fight ended with a whimper on March 21 -- the day before a slated court hearing -- when the FBI found a third party to unlock the phone. It turned out the government didn't need Apple's help after all." https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-vs-fbi-one-year-later-still-stuck-in-limbo/ Whether you feel their refusal to comply with a court order in this case is justified is your own affair, but the facts speak for themselves.
    The order discussed in the article you quoted was to unlock the phone. It was not related to iCloud.

    There were two requests in the San Bernardino case:
    1. Provide data stored in iCloud. Apple complied.
    2. Write software that bypasses the encryption on the phone itself. Apple objected.

    In the Stone case, there was only one request:
    1. Provide data stored in iCloud. Apple complied.
    Since there was no #2 in the Stone case, there was nothing for Apple to resist.


    The difference between the two requests is really significant, because the second one would have forced a company to write software (an over-reach in itself) that would compromise the security of every single iPhone on the planet. The first request in the San Bernardino case was reasonable and Apple did not object. The second request, the one you're talking about, went way too far.

    So as to your assertion that Apple gave preferential treatment to Mueller in the Stone investigation, it did not. Apple provided exactly the same information in the San Bernardino case it did in the Stone case.
    MplsP

  • Apple rumored to sell Apple TV 4K, HomePod at cost

    lorin schultzlorin schultz
    StrangeDays said:
    backstab said:
    "Why is HomePod so much more expensive than these other speakers you can talk to? Well, HomePod, I actually have reason to believe, Apple actually sells it at a loss," Gruber says.

     Speaking non sequiturs. First sign of an idiot.
    You must be new, son. Gruber is one of the best, most astute, and accurate Apple pundits and observers. There’s a reason he is quoted by the rumor sites.
    That wasn't the point. Gruber made a comment that doesn't make any sense. "Why is the HomePod so expensive? Because it sells at a loss." As backstab said, it's a non sequitur.
    IreneW

  • Apple rumored to sell Apple TV 4K, HomePod at cost

    lorin schultzlorin schultz
    If the TV sells at cost that may explain why Apple hasn't bothered to finish the software for it!
    MplsP

  • Apple agrees to bend to Russian law and store user data on local servers

    lorin schultzlorin schultz
    flydog said:
    It's all about money, money, money, and money.
    Apple is a business, business, business, and a  business. 
    So what? Apple turns down opportunities for more money every single day with every product and service idea it chooses not to produce. Apple chooses to reduce sales of certain products by using environment-friendly manufacturing processes that drive up the prices of its goods. Corporations are just as capable of making decisions about how and where they make their money as are individuals.

    As an audio engineer I don't get to dictate the content of the material I work on. However, when presented with a project that paid well but violated my core values, I simply refused to work on it. I may not be able to prevent others from doing bad things, but I can sure as hell refuse to help them do it. Apple has the same option.

    (For the record, I'm not saying Apple is right or wrong. There isn't enough information in just this one article to form that opinion. I'm just saying "because money" isn't always a good enough argument for any particular action.)
    muthuk_vanalingamAndy.Hardwake