EsquireCats

I'll just add my 2c as I use Arlo Pro cameras, and generally speaking if you're using their doorbell, then you might be committed to using their other cameras to, or at least have to deal with the issues below when reviewing video footage.

1. Arlo's motion sensing is poor, even on the most sensitive setting. I can come home, unlock and enter the house without it even noticing me. (The camera isn't that far away either.) Most of the time the action has happened before arlo has even started recording.
2. Arlo's video serving service is slow, even when I know exactly the time I'm looking for, I am always left waiting, often the video thumbnails don't even load. It's utterly helpless if you're trying to track down something like damage to your property when you're not sure when it may have happened (or if the Arlo even managed to record it.)
3. Arlo's video viewer is wet garbage, you can't flick through a video to find a relevant section. The only option is to download it to the phone, then review it in a separate app once it's full downloaded. (Not very helpful if you're not sure exactly when the event happened.)
4. The video quality itself is poor. Even on the highest setting.
5. The battery life is garbage, and the plug in options such as the solar panel are insufficient. Their own usb cord and adapter frequently throw errors in the app (and thus can't be kept plugged in to keep the camera charged.)

Did I mention no HomeKit support? I can see why they fail certification. It's a shit-show of amateur hardware and software.

Re: Sherlocking.
I think we'd be better to remind ourselves that Apple don't directly earn income from OS updates. Calling this Sherlocking is tentative at best.

iOS and macOS have already included quite a lot of screen sharing/mirroring functionality for some time. Extending that onto iPads is certainly a logical pathway forward. Astropad/Duet Display were not the first people to do this either, home brew versions of this have existed for quite sometime via VNC.

The timing for Apple's introduction is likely to be one of performance, since the entire range of Apple devices are now sufficiently powerful enough to support such a feature without the use of a hardware dongle. (Something which the DuetDisplay still requires.) This point is especially important as Apple Pencil is no longer limited to Pro iPads.

It might also be poignant to consider the very wide range of software and services available for the mac. It is very easy to suggest that any new feature introduced into Apple's range of OS's is inspired by something that is already commercially available.

In theory only the US customers would need to have the US-assembled model to minimise the costs incurred by tariffs. So it's fair to say that the tariff costs won't be a very high cost to Apple for this particular product.

It is wholly naive to believe that this will cause systemic change in the US manufacturing industry, trying to import the manufacturing jobs into the USA is a huge step backwards for the USA. I've said this before, the USA is already in the sweet spot: creating the IP which is sold at high value, while outsourcing the low-wage, low-cost production jobs to other countries. The product simply wont exist on USA wages, so why live in a fantasy world of US-citizens working for $50 a day? (Who would even want that?)

journojulz said:

It will be too expensive to replace all the 32-bit apps like Indesign.

Has anyone got a good VM/parallels solution?

Otherwise i am gong to have to skip for the first time in 18 years.

Amusingly the iCloud terms make numerous references to partners providing the services. So the core claim is already invalid. Additionally the suit fundamentally misunderstands both encryption and how the internet works - since a near-random array of servers will at one stage or another hold the data during transit.

I think the USA would benefit from more frequently enforcing some of the available consequences to launching frivolous litigation, and increasing the penalties associated with such behaviours. Remember it’s not just a waste of the defendant’s money, it’s a waste of tax payer’s money too.