Last Active
  • Apple's 15-inch MacBook Air: Rumors, and what we know

    MacBook Air was called Air because it was significantly thinner than laptops of the time.

    We don’t need an Air moniker anymore.

    Just a MacBook 13/15 and MacBook Pro 14/16

    I don’t know why we couldn’t just get the two sizes with the screen size as the main differentiator…
  • How the new Mac Studio fills a crucial gap in Apple's desktop lineup

    Like we've said before, this isn't the mythical minitower that the devout have been clamoring for, for over 20 years. It doesn't have PCI-E, nor vast user expandability.

    Doesn’t Thunderbolt does offer vast user expandability?

  • Apple uses Messages colors to bully Android users, says Google

    iMessage has been unchanged since it debuted and colors were necessary for mixing SMS with a modern message service.

    There is no Apple campaign promoting blue bubbles  :D

    so silly.
  • Klobuchar defends bill that would bar Big Tech from preferring their own services

    darkvader said:
    How does anybody claim with a straight face that something like this that will obviously help consumers could possibly 'hurt consumers'?

    Oh, right.  Bribery.
    If you diminish the product, cripple it, then you hurt all the satisfied customers and you hurt the capitalistic incentives of the company producing the product. 
    Nothing about bribery, wtf. I'll tell you with a straight face, that as an iPhone user since iPhone 3G and an iOS developer, all this legislature is ridiculous and I don't want the government forcing changes to it.

    You don't tell Best Buy not to promote their protection plans, instead let someone else offer an insurance service in your store.
    You don't tell Nintendo not to promote their first-party games on the console platform they created.
    Why should you tell Apple they can't promote services to enrich the iPhone experience, on the platform they created?
  • Google fined $177M by South Korea for abusing smartphone dominance

    Fragmenting an OS is an awful idea. Google needs to open source because they are built on an os foundation but...the resulting product should be licensable no?

    I think if they fork Android, they shouldn't be able to call it Android and no Google services. Seems fair enough. Google should be able to withhold unique and expensive developments from the open source version as well.

    Just Samsung and government corruption.