InspiredCode

22july2013 said:

The truck was taken to the nearby village of Crick

I guess they are up Crick's Creek now.

Does Apple buy insurance or are they big enough that they just self-insure themselves, like governments do?

It may have been a retailer or customer/school shipping them. I’m not a logistics expert, but sounds like a lot of product in one load for insurance purposes. Insurance often requires smaller loads for expensive product to reduce hijack risk. 48 pallets would mean they are double stacked which I think many of Apples boxes are not designed for, but I don’t recall for sure. The price sounds about right for iPads to me.

mattinoz said:

commentzilla said:

There will also be savings from getting rid of 3rd party GPUs!

Unless they don’t get rid of discrete GPU in the machines that have them already. 

Rumors point to Apple releasing their own discrete GPU. There are probably some savings from making their own GPU, but Apple will probably price at a premium. Of course they will have savings from omitting the GPU on lower end machines that will still have discrete level of performance comparing to existing discrete chips. The integrated GPU is rumored to be competitive with a Radeon 5500 based on iPad performance. I'm guessing Apple's discrete chip will be at least twice as fast as a Radeon 5500, but we'll see. I assume ASi chips with more cores will require the discrete GPU.

Rayz2016 said:

mdriftmeyer said:

red oak said:

The performance + battery improvements alone are enough to fundamentally change Apple's unit market share in the PC industry.    This analyst seems to be missing that fundamental point.   A lower priced SKU variant is just the icing on the cake.  

It'll be generations behind AMD in performance and won't gain much now that AMD will own Xilinx. Both will be introducing FPGAs and more DSPs to their CPU designs. AMD has the most advanced CPU designs in the world.

Prices will be the same but their profit margins will increase due to being the CPU designer.

I see you’re still butt-hurt that your favourite chip house didn’t figure into Apple’s plan. 

You haven’t seen ASi, and you haven’t seen AMD’s new whatever, so you don’t know which is faster and which runs cooler. 

You also don’t how much it cost to develop the new chips, or do you think Apple’s chip designers work for free?

Right. There is a huge penalty to keeping the x86 architecture. Before factoring in energy savings, ASi outperforms Intel and AMD by 4-5x on some operations because they are not stuck with legacy decisions. ASi has a better memory model for concurrency which can boost multi-threaded code. The ASi memory model is also much more secure than Intel/AMD which is obviously important to Apple. Same on the GPU side where Apple is using TBDR and Intel / AMD / NVIDIA are still using pseudo immediate mode rendering for compatibility reasons. Apple has much more control over how their developers build software to help make this kind of transition.

jblongz said:

Flagged as malware because these software may have access and/or capability to monitor you in an intrusive way.

That isn't the reason. Most likely Apple has nothing to do with this.

I didn't verify this, but it sounds like a code signing issue to me.

Apps that were code signed with a provisioning profile that use advanced capabilities before February 22, 2017 will work for 5 years before showing this error. Apps signed after that will work for 18 years.  These apps probably have not been updated in the last 5 years so they are now expired.

From Apple docs:
"For apps that utilize advanced capabilities with a Developer ID provisioning profile Gatekeeper will evaluate the validity of your Developer ID certificate when your application is installed and will evaluate the validity of your Developer ID provisioning profile at every app launch. As long as your Developer ID certificate was valid when you compiled your app, then users can download and run your app, even after the expiration date of the certificate. However, if your Developer ID provisioning profile expires, the app will no longer launch."

macplusplus said:

KITA said:

Interesting. This may impact iOS/macOS gaming even further, potentially making third party developers choose to drop support of iOS/macOS or find a new game engine.

It told Epic that by August 28, Apple will cut off Epic’s access to all development tools necessary to create software for Apple’s platforms—including for the Unreal Engine Epic offers to third-party developers, which Apple has never claimed violated any Apple policy. Not content simply to remove Fortnite from the App Store, Apple is attacking Epic’s entire business in unrelated areas. 

If the Unreal Engine can no longer support Apple platforms, the software developers that use it will be forced to use alternatives.

Apple would lose out on Unreal Engine 5 as well it sounds like.

...

Although they are the owner of Unreal Engine, there are less than fifteen iOS games developed with it, according to Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unreal_Engine_games

A recent mainstream game for the Mac is Borderlands 3, but it requires a graphics card of 8 GB on the Mac ! What a game engine is that !

So not many people will miss them once they are gone, and the whole affair will be forgotten in a couple of months even in the blogosphere that feeds it and life will continue as usual...

The Wikipedia article is just showing a few examples.  There are 1000s of games using the engine.  It is very popular for both Indies and big studios.