macplusplus

80s_Apple_Guy said:

StrangeDays said:

rogifan_new said:

sflocal said:

What is a “Pro” phone?  Doesn’t make sense to me.

 One that costs more.

Because it does more. More features mean more price. You don’t get to have more things for free just because you don’t like spending money. 

It's really hard to argue the base 13"MacBook Pro has more features. It's a base unit with a whole lot less. Apple overuses the word Pro IMO. Using it on the true high end models would make sense at least. 

13” MBP base model is an excellent laptop for enterprises. There is nothing wrong with its Pro moniker.

OutdoorAppDeveloper said:

There is a real down side to the "pro" moniker: Customers that want a product for personal use may not want to pay "pro" prices. "Pro" means for professionals at a professional price. You get to charge more for a "pro" product but you sell a lot less of them.

Obviously. Those “pro” models will never be mainstream iPhones, Apple is certainly aware of that. This is not a downside.

robertsm said:

What’s the need for this? People don’t take pictures with their iPads 

A lot of Android owners have iPads. iOS offers more convenience than Android in terms of shooting, editing and storing videos and photos.

This is scam. Most probably Face ID was initially set up with that pair of glasses.

Face ID recognition is based on the topography of the face, not on the location of the eyes. The eyes are used only in gaze detection, and that can also be disabled in Settings.

Here is the whitepaper:
https://www.apple.com/business/site/docs/FaceID_Security_Guide.pdf

“When a face is detected, Face ID confirms attention and intent to unlock by detecting that your eyes are open and directed at your device; for accessibility, this is disabled when VoiceOver is activated or can be disabled separately, if required.

1STnTENDERBITS said:

macplusplus said:

1STnTENDERBITS said:

AppleExposed said:

zroger73 said:

FU, Apple. This is the stuff that is going to drive me back to PC's after a 12-year run and tens of thousands of dollars donated to your organization.

Apple has a 100% right to do this. Remember if anything is YOUR fault Apple gets blamed. Also if an aftermarket battery blows up an iPhone we get tons of articles, videos and memes mocking Apple.

Also, Apple has a charity?

Would you mind terribly pointing towards any evidence supporting that theory?  Both you and @sergioz used the same claim of aftermarket batteries catching fire and Apple getting blamed.  That really doesn't happen though.  Not really sure what rights you think Apple has, but the right to force 1st party and authorized repair ain't one those rights.  

Right to repair is focused on consumer protection and consumer choice.  I think anyone advocating against that, especially a consumer putting corporate desires above their own, needs to have their priorities adjusted.

Allegedly. Maybe it is more focused on stocking original components to speculate on those while behind the doors dealing with the trade of counterfeit ones? It is always more effective to inspect a company instead of inspecting millions (billions!) of itty-bitty components. Which one protects the consumer better, inspecting company or inspecting components? Right to repair or right to service? Choose one, you cannot have both, the two are mutually exclusive. Right to repair or right to warranty, choose one you cannot get both. Warranty? OK take that replacement part for free and leave !

Not gonna comment on your speculation.  It's too... nah, not touching that.  But your right to repair or right to warranty bit?  That's absolutely 100% wrong.  They are not mutually exclusive.  I'm not even sure how you came to that conclusion.  Easy.  Take a car.  You can repair your brakes, change your oil, complete a tune up, get new tires, repair a fender... I could on for a long time.  None of those things void a warranty.  There is no choose one, and you most assuredly can have both.  Again, I'm not really sure how you reached your conclusion.  I'm kinda curious.  Where did you get that idea?

Simple. “User repairability” is an attribute of the car. A car is already sold with this option. Some products are just not user-repairable. How will you repair the crashed read/write head of a hard disk? Are you qualified enough to refill a lithium ion battery or is the lithium ion battery filler is unregulated to freely circulate without any security concern? Once you understand that replacing a battery is not similar to refilling the inkjet cartridge of a printer you will come close to my point. I hope...

For Apple, and almost all industrial companies it is trivial to prove before the court that their product is not user-repairable if the product really isn’t. Try to sue the manufacturer or the importer of the Li-ion battery for right to “refill” a consumed battery!..

You have right to return. The manual states that it is not user-repairable. If you learn that after purchase then you just return the product. Nothing in this universe forces you to use a product your very capable and talented self cannot repair.