InspiredCode

jayweiss said:

Parity with a Mac would only occur if it was able to run macOS. 

There are rumors that the iPad Pros might get some ability to run macOS apps. I assume that would mean either running macOS apps (much like Macs can run iOS apps) in a separately sandboxed filesystem or running macOS in a VM. Stage Manager would probably make this feasible.

magman1979 said:

Obviously this idiot has never seen the exemption lists of MANY VPN clients, even those outside iOS ecosystem, such as Windows and macOS...

Take Cisco AnyConnect, do you know how many domains are in the default tunnel exemption list that end users CANNOT modify?!?!

The guy making these claims is so full of shit it's not even funny. I have yet to see ONE SINGLE COMMERCIAL VPN service that totally routes 100% of connections via the tunnel, except for my own OpenVPN server I run, which I have setup to route ALL traffic, and it actually does, even on iOS!

Split tunnel exceptions are just for VPNs (like Cisco AnyConnect or OpenVPN) that connect you to a home or work network. Consumer VPNs used for privacy should be sending all traffic. They should certainly be sending Gmail and DNS traffic which the author mentioned was bypassing the VPN for new connections.

I don't think Apple is charting the right path, but something needs to be done about all the broken games on iOS and macOS.

For games, I think there should be a subset of Apple APIs that are guaranteed not to change (including a stable architecture using Rosetta or LLVM bitcode). People like their games to be able to run forever. If a game can never break API compatibility, we wouldn't have the problem of so many games that stop working. This would also help promote games to a form of media. Media should never stop working just because it is older.

There is a *BIG* reason why game publishers think the 30% cut they pay to Xbox and PlayStation is fair, but they feel the 30% cut to Apple isn't. Those platforms guarantee a game will run for the life of the platform without changes. If the game publisher doesn't have to retain developers to support the game throughout its lifespan they are getting their money's worth. They would make more money over the long term and they wouldn't have to face angry gamers when the game stops working. If Apple can provide the same guarantees, I think they can argue that they are pricing fairly.

JWSC said:

I imagine the initial AppleBank™ rollout could feature blockchain based AppleCoin™ operating at near break even margins to support fast banking services growth.  Imagine getting reasonable interest rates and no nickel and diming customers with hidden fees.  Imagine an open and honest bank.  It would be revolutionary.

It would also be damn near impossible because doing so would create a long list of business and Government enemies for Apple.  Any moves in this direction will have to be turtle slow.  But one can dream.

I would love to see Apple get in to both crypto and trading. Secure crypto storage feels like a core Apple competency. Not sure about AppleCoin, but an environmentally friendly crypto option would be great. We need to get away from the Chinese coal burning crypto mining farms.

cpsro said:

If it's premium priced, it mightn't have much content.

Since almost all existing VR content is written with Unreal Engine and Unity, ports will be trivial. It will likely be powerful enough to run desktop-class VR content, so it may have more content then the Quest headset. I'm also not sure that casual use is Apple's focus with this headset. I think they just want to get something out for creators and developers. A more consumer friendly headset would likely come later. If developers release for this headset, they will be better prepared for the next one. I would expect if comfort levels can be achieved that these devices will also be used for non-VR content which could make the price point easier to swallow.