bb-15

About

Username
bb-15
Joined
Visits
74
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
588
Badges
1
Posts
281
  • Mac Pro still poorly supported by Apple Store Genius Bar months after launch


    MacPro said:
    MacPro said:
    Before I retired and closed my business, all our Apple equipment was purchased through the Apple Business division, not the local store.  If something went wrong we had a hotline.  

    One day I recall, an Apple 30" monitor died in the middle of production for an ESPN show we were editing at around 4 p.m. and I called the business support line.  We received a replacement at 8 a.m. the next morning before work began along with special packing for the dead one and Apple collected that the next day.  

    Has Apple closed its business division?  Do professional clients now carry a Mac Pro to their local store?  Really?
    The business division has minimum purchase limits, and they aren't small.

    If you're under the threshold, you're buying at Apple Retail or online.
    So, what are those limits these days?  Just curious.  I would have thought the vast majority of those purchasing a new Mac Pro would be in that category.
    There are a few thresholds on purchase volumes by number or by dollar, but the lowest one is $25K.
    This is from Apple;

    Get AppleCare for Enterprise now.

    AppleCare for Enterprise is available in volume-based price tiers starting at 1000 and 5000 covered devices. Contact Apple, an Apple Authorized Reseller, or an Authorized Carrier Partner to receive a quote for AppleCare for Enterprise.”

    So you are saying that the minimum cost for AppleCare for Enterprise is $25,000. 

    It’s important to know this. If I spent ~$15,000 on a MacPro set up, I would want the best AppleCare support & would not be using my nearest AppleStore to support that computer. 

    viclauyyc
  • iPhone exploits in hacked websites went unnoticed for years

    lkrupp said:
    gatorguy said:
    kkqd1337 said:
    crosslad said:
    I’d be more impressed by Google if they concentrated on fixing their own security issues instead of Apple’s. 
    Now THIS is a valid comment. 

    As an iPhone user I am very pleased that Google is helping to improve my iPhone. But I can't understand why Google can't improve the balance of an their open platform with a safer/more secure platform. Windows 10 is much better in this regard these days.
    Google improves their platform security every month with regular pushed updates to devices they sell, and on rare occasion more often than that. EOM's (who they don't control) get those same security updates supplied to them in advance of the the Google device rollout. Did you think they don't, and if so based on what?

    If you do any current reading you'd come away with the realization that Google Android today is not Google Android of 10 years ago. Now they're generally seen as close to if not equally as secure as iOS by most security professionals I see offering honest comment. 

    BTW the very latest Win10 update bonkered one of my RIP stations (but not the other??) so no I'm not particular happy with them these days. 

    So anyway users of any computer operating system should be thankful for the efforts of Google's Project Zero team. Without them no one's platform of choice would be as secure as it is, nor would the OS providers be as driven to push out patches. 
    What you conveniently leave out, of course, is the fact that many Android device manufacturers other than Google itself rarely if ever push updates out to their customers.It’s usually months and months before a few manufacturers issue updates. And as you have stated elsewhere the Pixel is a tiny blip on the smartphone radar screen. Many Android devices never get an update during their lifespan and are therefore vulnerable to all the security flaws discovered. Apple, on the other hand, all but forces iOS users to update their devices on a regular basis. Some scream bloody murder about being annoyed by Apple’s persistent notices to update. So the Google emperor has no clothes when it comes to touting security updates and patches. In the real world Android is the leaky security risk, not Apple.  
    Adding to that; from Ars Technica;
    (apologies about the original post size of the font. It was copy & paste from the Ars website. 2nd edit; I fixed it on my Mac. Much easier than using an iPad.)

    “Google Play apps with 1.5 million downloads drained batteries and slowed devices

    Stealthy new click-fraud technique displayed ads that were invisible to users.

    DAN GOODIN -  8/29/2019, 3:00 AM”

    “Google Play app with 100 million downloads executed secret payloads

    The sad, impractical truth about Android app security in 2019.

    DAN GOODIN -  8/27/2019, 12:15 PM”

    85 Google Play apps with 8 million downloads forced fullscreen ads on users

    Banished apps used clever tricks to avoid detection and removal.

    DAN GOODIN -  8/19/2019, 1:05 PM”


    mdriftmeyer
  • iPhone loyalty rates down to 8-year low, survey claims

    jdw said:
    The continued presence of the "notch" coupled with what consumers perceive as the biggest bang for the buck is no doubt driving this.
    I don’t think the notch is that big a deal, but price is.  

    Also, IPhone have been better at security but Cellebrite can crack both iPhones and Android. (Bad guys can buy them on eBay)

    Apple has the better App Store, but the gap has narrowed.

    I think people look at what’s available and conclude Android is the better value.  Personally, I don’t use Apple services to a great extent so migrating isn’t that big a deal.  I’m fine with my 6s until it dies and don’t see a reason to buy ultra premium.

    I, like most people, will look at what givens the most bang for the buck.  Apple is pushing things like AR and the camera, which aren’t that important.  Security, build quality are things I care about...
    Agree & I’d add that many people don’t care about the privacy of there personal information anymore.
    20 years ago, the idea of letting a company look at all your mail, calendar appointments, trips using a map to target you for junk ads would be considered nuts. 
    But today millions are fine if Google or Amazon do it.
    Millions are even fine with a company using a microphone/speaker listening in on personal conversations throughout their house! Again for targeted ads. 

    * One of Apple’s big features is privacy. But their hardware cost has to pay for that.
    - A lot of people say; ‘screw privacy! I can get this Android phone $300 cheaper.’ ‘I can get these $50 speakers to put all over my house which answer my questions & allow me to buy things from Amazon.’
    - When features are “good enough” for the average user, price is the deciding factor.  
    mike54pscooter63russwwatto_cobra
  • Microsoft surpasses Apple, retakes crown of world's most valuable company

    lkrupp said:

    viclauyyc said:


    Can Apple buy itself and go private?

    apple sure don’t need outside investors to fund ny project like many company. 
    Absolutely not, no way. Apple is way too expensive to buy itself out and go private.
    For many, Apple's biggest attraction has been its horde of cash...   They do have a nice operating profit.  But that's at far more risk from competition or a manufacturing/design error than a Microsoft.  (MS screws up all the time but all they have to do publish another update -- but Apple has a "--Gate" with every new release and nobody knows if or when one of them is going to stick.)

    Product wise Apple has always had all over Microsoft.  But Microsoft has always had a better business model.
    I’ll clarify what the MS business model is; it is to get a monopoly in a major segment of personal computing and exploit that monopoly. 
    Bill Gates spoke about a natural PC OS monopoly in the 80s and MS has it on the desktop with Windows. That led to the MS Office monopoly and now that supports subscriptions to Office.
    The financial analysts understand this. They know that MS has desktop monopolies in big companies (including the ones they work for) and in government.
    - Now to Microsoft’s screw ups. They are sometimes terrible. Here are just a few of them. 

    https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/10/microsoft-suspends-distribution-of-latest-windows-10-update-over-data-loss-bug/

    https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/11/microsoft-explains-one-azure-authentication-outage-as-another-one-happens/ ;

    * But very important; many companies and governments are locked into MS products no matter how bad the products can be. For the enterprise, overall, Mac OS or Linux are not replacements for Windows and the MS ecosystem. 
    - MS may sometimes release junk but companies/government are dependent on MS products. 
    That = monopoly and that = a steady stream of $.

    ** The appeal of Apple’s products is not understood by most financial analysts. Add to that the horde of uninformed Apple haters who don’t have a clue of the preferences of Apple product buyers which keeps the theme of much of tech journalism; spreading ignorance about Apple and its customers. 
    - A US financial network, CNBC, will often have talking heads who claim that Apple is doomed because everyone is going to switch to cheap Android phones and watches. This has a 10 year old level of understanding of Apple tech and its customers but it doesn’t matter.
    Ignorance makes money with views of tech journalist articles/videos and with the shorting of Apple stock.  
    tmaycgWerksmike54
  • Bogus hot takes about low iPhone X demand being repeated about iPhone XS

    D_CMills said:
    It is amazing that these people are able to keep their jobs year after year.
    It would be amazing if all tech journalism/analysis was based on honestly reviewing facts.
    With Apple a lot of tech journalists/analysts specialize in FUD.
    And trashing Apple has a large audience of fans of competing ecosystems who dislike Apple.
    Apple bashing makes money.
    For years the Macalope / Macworld column has been tracking journalists/analysts who bash Apple.
    StrangeDayswatto_cobra