1STnTENDERBITS

About

Banned
Username
1STnTENDERBITS
Joined
Visits
20
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
1,331
Badges
1
Posts
460

Reactions

734Like0Dislike101Informative

  • Apple responds to reports of worn batteries forcing iPhone CPU slowdowns

    1STnTENDERBITS1STnTENDERBITS
    Mike Wuerthele said:
    Seems to me the choice is allow for full-speed all the time and the iPhone to conk out when under load, possibly taking the hardware with it, or throttling down when the battery is old or depleted.

    More transparency would have been good, though.
    The throttling makes complete sense.  The lack of transparency doesn't.  I had this discussion with my wife.  She says if Apple would have disclosed what they're doing people would have complained.  Which is 100% correct.  People complain. But they wouldn't be complaining about a perceived deception and underhandedness.  The cover up is always worse than the original action.  Had they said "this is how we're solving this issue" when they devised the plain, it would be a non-issue by now.
    ben20netmage

  • Chinese clothing label sues Apple, says App Store logo breaks copyright

    1STnTENDERBITS1STnTENDERBITS
    StrangeDays said:
    1STnTENDERBITS said:
    StrangeDays said:

    lkrupp said:
    Speaking of Chinese ripoffs...

    Man, the asian knockoffs are shameless... So many blatantly ripped off elements there. 
    Hmmm, KON is an Asian company... Chinese even.  Where is their knockoff?  They don't have one, you say.  Well, let's just point our deflection finger at a random unaffiliated Asian company instead of addressing the actual issue.  It's much easier to point at someone else amirite.  Look at what those guys did.  Especially someone who has nothing to do with... ahh never mind.
    Nonsense. The conversation is free to ebb and flow, and in this case I was commenting on the picture posted -- a shameless asian knockoff of an Apple product. Why does identifying the knockoffs bother you so much? Hmm if only we had a word for that...
    Daaang son.  That was a super quick transition to passive aggressive personal accusation.  What gave you the impression that the identification of knockoffs bothered me?  Couldn't I have been bothered more by the deflective nature of your comment than anything to do with knockoff product?  I mean, a cursory glance says my comment has very little to do with the knockoff and everything to do with my opinion of your comment.  
    gatorguy

  • Apple TV 4K sales resume at Amazon after two-year block

    1STnTENDERBITS1STnTENDERBITS
    adm1 said:
    I hadn't heard that argument before now and to be honest, I understand it - I've encountered umpteen elderly and non-techie types that have purchased something "smart" expecting it to work with a certain service that they use. There is a whole demographic of people that don't know of differing services and that some are platform exclusive or agnostic. If Amazon were to sell the Apple TV alongside the Fire TV and Roku's, I can fully understand how 72yr old retired Mary or 58yr old farmer Tom would expect their Amazon Prime Video to be available on all of them, to then be disappointed and get angry at the amazon as the point-of-sale.

    I know it was probably Amazon's decision not to have an apple tv app which moot's the whole thing but the argument they put forward is certainly plausible. 
    This is a bad take.  To base your argument on the elderly person who expects their Prime Video... their Prime Video... so they are technically adept enough to take advantage of Prime to order things and access and stream video, but they're technical expertise stops at the door of knowing what service offers what features?  Okay.  Yeah, I'm more inclined to believe that Mary and Tom realize Amazon wanted to limit competition for their devices so they came up with a very thin excuse to do it.  Seriously, a child could see through Amazon's "rationalization".  A child or a 72 year old retiree, take your pick.
    SpamSandwich

  • Chinese clothing label sues Apple, says App Store logo breaks copyright

    1STnTENDERBITS1STnTENDERBITS
    StrangeDays said:

    lkrupp said:
    Speaking of Chinese ripoffs...

    Man, the asian knockoffs are shameless... So many blatantly ripped off elements there. 
    Hmmm, KON is an Asian company... Chinese even.  Where is their knockoff?  They don't have one, you say.  Well, let's just point our deflection finger at a random unaffiliated Asian company instead of addressing the actual issue.  It's much easier to point at someone else amirite.  Look at what those guys did.  Especially someone who has nothing to do with... ahh never mind.
    muthuk_vanalingam[Deleted User]mac_128

  • Chinese clothing label sues Apple, says App Store logo breaks copyright

    1STnTENDERBITS1STnTENDERBITS
    boltsfan17 said:
    foregoneconclusion said:
    According the The Verge, Kon is basing the lawsuit on owning the trademark, not the copyright. However, I'm not so sure they have a basis for suing even in China. Logos based on triangles that are constructed of various shapes are not unusual at all, so the fact that Apple's logo is contained within a box, has a different color scheme, and also different shapes to make the triangle...not sure it's close enough. For example, the Amblin Resources logo is pretty similar to both of those logos and obviously came before both (1988). http://www.logobook.com/shape/triangle/page/2/
    I don't see how this is even a case. The App Store logo, while changed to a simpler design, predates the existence of Kon. Plus, how could there possibly be monetary damages? Apple isn't selling clothes. 
    They're not being sued for the old pre-existing logo.  They are being sued for the similarities between the current logo and the KON logo.  Their old logo is immaterial.
    SpamSandwich