macplusplus
About
- Username
- macplusplus
- Joined
- Visits
- 293
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 3,141
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 2,119
Reactions
-
Netflix disabled AirPlay because it isn't being told what device is getting the stream
Apparently Netflix doesn't think so. Device is a wrong term I used, Netflix sells subscription per screen. What is their point I don't know. I suspect it is the recording, this is why they need to inspect not the subscribed device but the screen itself to see whether it is a dumb screen or a recording port. You cannot record Netflix on Quicktime Player for example, they detect that this is not a screen.flydog said:
The device that is streaming via AirPlay is the device. AirPlay can only stream to one device at a time so there is no need to distinguish between different TVs for that purpose. If that was the case Netflix would have stated so instead of relying on an explanation that is more dubious on its face.macplusplus said:Since they sell plans per device, it is understandable that they distinguish between devices. Besides, AirPlay to an Apple TV doesn't make sense: you download to your mobile device via wi-fi, then AirPlay to the Apple TV over the same wi-fi, unnecessary two way traffic that would reduce playback quality. Why not use the Netflix app on the Apple TV instead? It syncs perfectly between devices, you can also hard-wire your Apple TV directly to your router via Ethernet. That policy may only affect TV sets with AirPlay but without the Netflix app. The solution appears to be the usual one: buy the dumbest TV you can tolerate and attach an Apple TV. So AirPlay implemented on a TV without tvOS is useless, it may help you to AirPlay YouTube from your mobile device but such TVs may already have YouTube.
Moreover, there is no need to distinguish the type of device for this purpose. The only thing that is relevant is the number of devices.
-
Review: The 2019 21.5-inch iMac 4K is iterative, not transformative
This is not the 2019 4K iMac described in the article, this is the $1099 1080p iMac you're comparing. The article says:elijahg said:For comparison:
This Dell is £1029, slightly less than the base iMac. It has an 8th Gen i5, newer than the iMac. It has faster RAM. It has a much better GPU, a Nvidia GTX1050 vs Intel Integrated. It has a 128GB SSD and a 7200RPM 1TB HDD. Still think the iMac should have an SSD? Granted, the display is likely to be better (though the iMac one is smaller, and neither are 4k)
The iMac is actually much closer to Dell's £749 offering. That still has a faster HDD, and faster RAM, though the graphics are slightly worse. Other than that, you get pretty much the same machine for £300 less. Of course you have to then deal with Windows, but Windows 10 whilst not exactly great, is nowhere near as bad as older versions. I love Apple, but the prices are just becoming ridiculous. The prices are markedly affecting sales, but for some reason Cook is obsessed with maximising profit, even if it means less sales and ultimately, less total revenue.nemaworm said:This 2017 1 terabyte which has a 32gb fusion (not 64gb like the previous poster said) is terrible at launching apps.
Oh geez I didn't realise they'd gone down to just 32GB now. That's a f**king piss take.
"The 21.5-inch 4K iMac that we're reviewing is the base model iMac that you can buy for $1,299 (or on sale for $1,249 at Amazon) and it features a Quad-core i3 Processor, 8GB of RAM, a 5400RPM 1TB Hard Drive, and it's also equipped with a Radeon Pro 555X with 2GB of VRAM."
-
Apple unveils 5th-gen iPad mini with Apple Pencil support, better Retina display
I don’t believe you really think that the 12.9” iPad is not very portable so that it would require an iPad Mini companion for portability !rogifan_new said:
I have a 12.9” iPad. It’s great but I wouldn’t consider it very portable. Are you suggesting no mini owners also have a bigger iPad?macxpress said:
Almost as ridiculous as your post. Why the hell would someone buy an iPad Pro and then an iPad mini for portability? As if the iPad Pro isn't portable enough? LOL!!!!!!!rogifan_new said:So if you have the latest Pro and also would like a mini for portability you can’t share a Pencil across the devices. How ridiculous.
-
Benchmarked: Razer Blade Stealth versus 13-inch MacBook Pro with function keys
The native display resolution DOES change the performance in real world usage. Yet the MBP (of last year) performs better than the Razer (of this year) considering that it doesn't have the discrete GPU. 31075 OpenCL without the discrete GPU versus 47516 with GeForce MX150 means that MBP performs even better.KITA said:
I'm not sure what you mean by "barely compete", the graphics tests are all running at the same resolution. The native display resolution doesn't change that.macplusplus said:
The article doesn't even mention the low-res 1080p display of that mid-range model. Moving less pixels than the Retina display of MBP it can barely compete despite the boost from the discrete GeForce MX150. The Macbook Pro moves twice as much pixels as that gamers' machine: compare 2560x1600 to 1920x1080. And it does that without the boost from a discrete GPU.foregoneconclusion said:
Right on the money: it's specifically intended for gaming, so it isn't really a very good comparison to begin with. For example, how many people working in a typical corporate office that use PCs are going to be given a Razer Blade Stealth as their working laptop? I doubt that ever happens. They would get a PC model that was specifically intended for use as a working PC, not a gaming PC.macplusplus said: Because that "staff" know how they will be ridiculed if they put the battery benchmark in the article. The battery life is most probably two hours or so, because a gaming laptop is expected to be used mostly plugged in. That one is a laptop for teens, who want it to carry their games alongside when hanging out with friends. Teens like that brand's flashy keyboards and mice too.
The NVIDIA GPU with CUDA is also useful for compute workloads, something none of these benchmarks highlight.
That must be a new trend, comparing a machine with discrete GPU to a machine without one...
And whatever benchmarks say, the inclusion of a discrete GPU affects the thermal balance and battery life, all other specs being equal. And those are not equal in that comparison, there is a huge difference in display resolutions. -
Compared: Fortnite on the iPhone XR versus Note 9
Well, Galaxy Note has two times the RAM XR has: 6 GB vs 3 GB, that leverages the resolution difference. Yet it still stutters.melgross said:Well, considering that the Note 9 has about three times the pixels to move about, render, etc, it’s not surprising that it lagged here. Trying a phone with a smaller screen with fewer pixels would have been a better match to the X-ray, if it had the same SoC as the Note 9. The Xs Max is the only real proper match against the Note 9 here.
