Soli

canukstorm said:

rezwits said:

Seems like studios will "kinda settle" by getting a Mac Pro, i.e. this will be

… (more)

something they don't really want to go BACK to for some places.

But the XDR Display SEEMS to be the reason they will really really want to be ok settling...

I have read a few comments from people that just really only want the display!  ha

You don't need a Mac Pro to be able to use the Pro XDR display

"Pro Display XDR is compatible with the following Mac models running macOS Catalina 10.15.2 or later:

• Mac Pro (2019) with MPX Module GPUs
• 15-inch MacBook Pro (2018 or later)
• 16-inch MacBook Pro (2019)
• 21.5-inch iMac (2019)
• 27-inch iMac (2019)
• Any Mac model with Thunderbolt 3 ports paired with Blackmagic eGPU or Blackmagic eGPU Pro"

https://www.apple.com/ca/pro-display-xdr/specs/

And of course any PC that supports TB3 with a video card that push that resolution. (less)

cgWerks said:

Soli said:
What about it is

… (more)

so bad?

Well, for one, imagine the visibility the driver will have. Or, imagine trying to actually haul anything in a bed designed like that. Or, imagine how dangerous it would be to pedestrians. It's utter cr*p. I'd put it in a list of top 10 worst automotive designs, maybe top 5.

1) The visibility seems great with those cameras in the driver's view showing the cameras replacing the side mirrors. Of course, that's still illegal in the US so if they have to add side mirrors I'd assume it's about as good as any other large pickup truck on the market. But let's remember that this is a modern vehicle that has sensors and AI that make it less prone to hitting objects than pick up trucks that don't have these features.

2) How is it different than another pickup with a 6.5' bed? Because it doesn't have flat sides? The only means it can't have some generic topper on it. I've seen countless trucks have crap fly out the back because they didn't secure it properly. This includes my own truck which had something int here that flew out that I forget was in there; if I had a rolling cover I'd probably using it, especially since it would secure the trunk contents. The Honda Ridgeline had a sloping bed in a unibody frame and there are countless trucks that have things added to the bed to make them poor hauler for different types of loads. This is why truck buyers consider their specific needs when determining a purchase, but it not being the right needs for you doesn't mean it's a bad engineering decision.

3) How is the Cybertruck any more dangerous than if you're hit by this pickup truck? And let's not get into how semi tractors are designed.




There are certainly hurdles for this next Tesla, but they are one I've already mentioned and others, but yours are not reasons I'd say that it's the worst engineering design of a truck. (less)

StrangeDays said:

seanismorris said:

… (more)

Soli said:

seanismorris said:

Before buying an Apple Watch for this feature, you might want to listen to real cardiologists on YouTube.

What does this mean?

(less)

It means “You could have an arrhythmia even if your heart is healthy” webmd.

If you listen to a cardiologist they’ll tell you the Apple Watch has questionable value.  Just because a couple instances of the heart monitor gets a person in to see their doctor and there is a problem, that leaves out thousands (?) of unneeded visits and stress that results.  The cardiologist explains that the tests themselves can be harmful (it’s not just listening to the heart).  It’s a numbers game...

Now if you’re an older person or a person with a known problem, owning an Apple Watch makes a lot more sense (if you bought it for that reason).

AW a-fib detection does not use the ECG testing feature, it's passive monitoring based on heart rate. The vast majority of the population will not have false positives. While it is possible a-fib could go undetected, so would it if not wearing AW. Thus, there is absolutely no reason to opt not to use AW for a-fib detection. Except general anti-Apple FUD, of course.

What else ya got?

One might be under the impression that all causes where the Watch alerted the wearer to AFib are being reported by the Apple-focused tech media, but I know of two people who were alerted of AFib (in Series 3 Watches, not the models that included the single-lead ECG feature) repeatedly and eventually went to the doctor because they had also been feeling lethargic lately. Both cases found that AFib was not "a fib" and had emergency surgery to correct the issue. I wonder how many other cases have been detected and resolved but not reported on by the media.

I see other application for this, too. Like automobiles where you send and receive data about the other autos around you.

. .