macplusplus

AppleInsider said:

For an example of fast-turnaround app creation using its software, Freitag says the company worked with a European hospital to make COVID-19 patient software in a single day. "They had a decision tree map drawn on paper for triage of Covid patients," he says. "[They would walk] into some central room in ICU and [go] through a decision tree to determine next steps."

That is true and what makes that true is Filemaker's flexibility which allows you to implement most of the program logic in the structure (schema).

Or one can write a shitload of Filemaker scripts to get the same result, as many newcomers do to prove how good coders they are.

cornchip said:

Hopefully it also fixes the sharing bug. Don’t know about anyone else, but I couldn’t share anything from any app. About 95% of the time an app would Just freeze whenever the share button was tapped.

Most probably an app that provides an extension to the Share sheet is faulty. Remove all the apps one by one until you see the Share sheet is working again.

rattlhed said:

I will be very curious to see reviews on the quality of the cameras.  The specs are crazy, but can a super small sensor really deliver a good quality 100 megapixel image?  Also, how good can 10x optical zoom be in that small of a lens?  If they were able to achieve excellent picture quality with those specs, then Apple has some serious competition to deal with.

It is physically 12 MP. 108 MP is a logical hoax.

ericthehalfbee said:

macplusplus said:

AppleInsider said:

Security firm Kaspersky says that in 2019 the Shlayer Trojan infected one in ten Mac users,

No it doesn't say that.

It says "one in ten of our Mac security solutions encountered this malware at least once".

https://securelist.com/shlayer-for-macos/95724/

If their "Mac security solutions" are installed on 1/100,000 of total active Macs, the one tenth of that makes 1/1,000,000 of total active Macs.

While I get what you're trying to say, your math is wrong.

If 1 in 1,000 people surveyed had the malware then you'd have 1,000 out of 1,000,000 and so on. As long as the 1,000 is a representative sample of all users, then you can extrapolate the entire infection rate from that sample.

What you're implying is that only users of Kaspersky products are seeing this malware.

That said, the title is incorrect. It implies that 10% of the entire Mac user base has an infected computer, when Kaspersky is saying that 10% of users will see this attack show up. There's a big difference between an attempted attack (extremely common) and a successful installation of malware (far less common).

Yes I mean exactly that.

The point is, one can't extrapolate the entire infection rate from that very very specific and and tiny sample made of Kaspersky Mac users. Kaspersky or any anti-virus tool is not a common utility on the Mac platform. When you buy a new Mac no one will suggest to buy an anti-virus alongside, as it is common in the PC world. If there exist some Mac user base who take Kaspersky into serious they must have very serious reasons to do so: either they belong to some corporation/institution under continuous targeted attacks, or they are that kind of users who don't have afraid of frequently visiting the dark fringes of the Internet such as unregulated porn sites or piracy sites. Those are not representative samples of the totality of active Mac users, neither are Windows switchers who install those by habit.

Besides, macOS Catalina prevents unsolicited downloads by requesting permission from users for every site. As long as Catalina installation rate increases, that malware issue will become more and more marginal on the Mac platform.

AppleInsider said:

Security firm Kaspersky says that in 2019 the Shlayer Trojan infected one in ten Mac users,