dewme
About
- Username
- dewme
- Joined
- Visits
- 932
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 15,803
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 6,118
Reactions
-
Apple releases AirPods Pro 2 first-day firmware update
Look further down on the Software Update page and you will see iOS 16 offered as an upgrade. Apple no longer assumes you want to upgrade from iOS 15 to iOS 16 and will keep you up to date on the latest iOS 15 version by default. You have to choose iOS 16.iqatedo said:Received these moments ago and an alert popped up that an update to iOS 16 was required for full functionality to be enabled. My iPhone Xs Max is telling me that with iOS 15.7 I am up to date. Interested in experiences others have had of 16.
-
24 years after original iMac, there's still big demand for floppies
I'm not going to get into the numerous beneficial reasons why it's done ... but if you use an un-archive utility on a modern word processing document file, for example .docx (Word) or .pages (Pages) document "file" and tell the utility to extract the file contents as if it's a zip archive, you'll see that the word processing "document" is actually a compressed archive package (or structured storage) that includes an entire file system with xml content, binary content, cross references, indices, and metadata pertaining to the "document." It's rather impressive. Believe it or not, at least with some word processors (and other apps like spreadsheets), the specification of the structured storage format is based on an open standard and/or very well documented, which makes importing and exporting content between applications much easier.zoetmb said:Back in the day, apps were efficient and wrote small files. Early word processor documents were only slightly larger than the number of characters in the document.Overhead in today’s files is enormous. I can’t believe anyone can accomplish anything today with a 140K floppy or 800K 3.5” drive.I’ve still got some Apple ][ software and OS discs. Many years ago, someone gave me an Apple ][c, but I couldn’t get the drive working.For all the taxes we pay and for the size of the military budget, it’s absurd that they still have such old equipment and software in use. I suppose the government is still running a lot of MS-DOS as well.
My OMG frame of reference for where storage was "back then" to where it is today is the realization that my first PC's entire storage capacity (hard disk) would only be adequate to store 2-4 music files. Imagine a 25-30 lb computer set up as a "media server" - for playing 3 songs. I hope you like those 3 songs a lot.
-
These features are not in the initial release of iOS 16
Unless something changed while I wasn’t watching, there has never been a “standard” software development life cycle (SDLC) model nor a “standard“ definition for the release criteria that every independent software vendor (ISV) including Apple must adhere to.StrangeDays said:
It's not bullshit. I work in this field every day, and some guy on the web claiming it's not a "beta" because a feature he wanted was pushed to a point release is ignorant nonsense. Don't misunderstand me, that's not an insult or me being a dick -- it's just stating what it is...nonsense. We move features in releases all the time.macgui said:
That's a bullshit response and you know it. Mischaracterizing what you quoted is bush league. That isn't what happened and has nothing to do with defining/differentiating alpha and beta releases. There was no reason to be a dick about it but that's the path you chose.StrangeDays said:...just because you want it now.
Stomping feet on the floor when not getting what you want when you want does not somehow mean Apple/Cook are big meanies.
I know there's a lot of entitlement from people who want what they want, when they want it, but that's irrelevant. And it doesn't somehow invalidate the process of software development as claimed.There are several models that are generally followed because they’ve been used with reportedly higher levels of success by industry leaders like Microsoft or academia-industry alliances like the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at CMU just to name a couple of the longer lived ones.Of course none of these organizations have any authority over any ISV on the planet, regardless of whether or not the organization paying for the work done by an ISV stipulates that a certain model must be followed. Even then, it’s more of a guideline and the actual nuances and details of the processes, like release criteria, are defined, tailored, and negotiated to meet the overall objectives of the product or system being built.The bottom line is that any ISV can define the specific criteria for pre-alpha, beta, release candidate, gold master, etc., however they want. A lot of ISVs do use similar terminology for convenience and clarity, but to say that removing a feature from a beta release regresses it to an alpha stage has no universal applicability. It’s only true when an ISV defines it as such within the scope of their organization, and chances are very high that they break their own self-imposed rules on many occasions.At the end of the day, it’s just a moniker and the only thing that matters is the quality and stability of the delivered product at a given point in time, whatever tag it carries.
-
Elon Musk says he talked with Apple about satellite communication
Sadly, I think you are correct. It's more of a very low bandwidth telemetry link than a "communication feature." What Apple has done is more equivalent to commercial satellite asset tracking devices. When you look at the size of those dedicated-function devices it becomes even more apparent that Apple's implementation in an already feature laden smartphone is very impressive.RudeBoyRudy said:
you mean how many dumb people exist? LOLdewme said:I hope iPhone 14 buyers fully understand the very limited scope of the phone's satellite capability. Apple was very clear about it during the announcement, but you know how these things can sometimes turn out.
99% of people at this moment think the iPhone 14 is also a satellite phone.
But yeah, it'll be just a few days post iPhone 14 release until someone starts complaining that they can't get their Tiktok video or selfies uploaded when they are completely outside the range of any cellular coverage.
-
Apple's features graveyard: Once heavily marketed, now gone
chadbag said:
OpenDoc was brilliant. The idea behind it should make a comeback. The Objc runtime would make it a lot easier to implement (no worries, I.sm talk ng the runtime, which Swift also supports).timmillea said:The most lamented loss to many was the fantastically powerful and versatile ClarisWorks/AppleWorks integrated suite. Nothing has ever come along even to match it. Worse was the cancellation of the decades-ahead its time, OpenDoc project, which took the interoperability of the ClarisWorks suite to its logical limit - instead of apps with docs, docs were the first class citizen and all apps provided containers within them all at OS level. It was genius. Steve Jobs cancelled it, along with the Newton, because they were not his ideas.
If anyone could produce an updated version of ClarisWorks, I would buy it instantly.
I we t to the very first OpenDoc Parts Hut at Apple and the tech was groundbreaking in terms of the paradigm. You no longer even had a "doc". You had your data, which could be opened anywhere that Parts were supported.There were and still are variations on the same compound document, document-centric, binary integration, etc., theme in existence. Microsoft's OLE/ActiveX, COM/DCOM, and Visual Studio Extensibility (VSX/VSIX) architecture all follow a similar theme for both business logic, user interface logic, and even comms. There are also industry verticals like UnifiedPOS/OPOS for retail automation and the work of the FDT Group and FieldComm Group that provide a very similar interoperability architecture for interoperable factory automation applications. Some of these frameworks also provide a markup based integration model to over come some of the UI conformity issues that tend to plague binary integration models.Having worked with a number of these binary integration technologies at a design and architectural level the main impediment that I've always encountered, regardless of how well architected the underlying integration and interoperability models were conceived, was the difficulty in making applications composed of various binaries from multiple vendors look like the apps were developed by a single development group with a coherent vision for the user interface and user experience. While the architecture is impressive it's difficult to enforce a uniform level of commonality if multiple vendors are separately building parts of what becomes the composite application, regardless of how many guidelines you put in place. This concern may have been lessened if a single vendor like ClarisWorks built all of the parts.I suspect from some of Steve Jobs comments about OpenDoc that he didn't want to relinquish total and absolute control over every aspect of the UI as presented to customers. He'd rather focus primarily on what the user saw and experienced even if whatever it took to make it work, the man behind the curtain stuff, was less architecturally "pure" or even somewhat hackish. I don't believe it was a not-invented-here (NIH) situation.At least in the Microsoft world, a lot of these earlier binary integration approaches turned out to present very difficult security challenges later on, both at a system level and a user level. Lots of breakage and pain for end users trying to get things to work as everyone started to clamp down on security. A lot of technology of that era was built with victory being declared when everything "worked" with little to no concerned for whether it would survive rapidly arriving security onslaughts. This is true of software, firmware, and microcode (e.g., Spectre) that traces its roots back to that era.I think a lot of the modern efforts around interoperability tend to take more of a hybrid approach with a sizable amount of the UI logic being markup based and JIT compiling intermediate formatted code to work on the underlying hardware specific runtime. I don't know the particulars of ClarisWorks and its use of OpenDoc, but I can easily imagine that bringing it forward to today's environmental challenges would not be a trivial thing to do or even result in something that is markedly different or better than current frameworks that have been adapted to meet current concerns.Sometimes things die or go extinct because they cannot survive in the current environment.
