Eric_WVGG

Soli said:

CheeseFreeze said:

AppleScript syntax looks ridiculous. In an attempt to make it user friendly, it's really not. 
Why not just switch to Swift syntax? Looks much more standard and looks way more friendly.

 What is this Swift syntax for Automator that would be more "friendly" than AppleScript?

It's very difficult to learn or memorize "the right way" to say something in AppleScript, because it looks like English (where there's no one right way to say anything), but it's actually syntactically strict (like any programming language). So you might take a statement like…

set message to make new outgoing message with properties {subject:theSubject, content:theContent, visible:true}
… but try to write it like…
make new outgoing message with properties {subject:theSubject, content:theContent, visible:true}
… or…
set new outgoing message with properties {subject:theSubject, content:theContent, visible:true}
… or…
set message to new outgoing message with properties {subject:theSubject, content:theContent, visible:true}

See the problem? These all "look" fine, but only the first one actually works.

Swift is C-syntax, which makes familiar to anyone who does C or Javascript which means basically every programmer alive. What we want is…
let message = Message(subject:theSubject, content:theContent, visible:true)

Nice to see all the Bike Share points, but we still can't get directions with bicycle as the mode of transit. Walking directions send users the wrong way down one-way streets, driving directions point bicyclists to freeways. 

It's a pity; Google Maps has the data, but doesn't have first-class integration with Apple Watch + AirPods. Nothing’s quite perfect.

The “flat button” on my watch kind of sticks. I do a lot of bouldering, suspect that sweat plus chalk dust are to blame. (Climbing is also responsible for a nice little scrape up in the corner, guess I’ll be going with stainless steel for the sapphire screen next time...)

Damn. Those are cool. I'm nearly positive they are in violation of the USB 3.1 spec, but I'll be grabbing a couple anyway.

[edit] Here it is, courtesy of some wonk:

This adapter does NOT comply with the USB Type-C specification version 1.1 section 2.2 of the specification which states the following :
"USB Type-C receptacle to USB legacy adapters are explicitly not defined or allowed. Such adapters would allow many invalid and potentially unsafe cable connections to be contructed by users."

This is because if you combine this adapter with a USB Type-A to Type-C cable, you may create a dangerous condition where two power supplies may be connected together opposing each other using the combined cable.

Furthermore, this adapter violates Section 2.3.1 :
"Power is not applied to the USB Type-C host or hub receptacle (VBUS or VCONN) until the DFP detects the presence of an attached device (UFP) port."

In my testing, even when no UFP device is attached, this receptacle port's VBUS line is powered on at 5V. It should only be at 5V when a UFP device is present.

This adapter and port violates Section 4.5.1.2.1 - Please see figure 4-5. A correct DFP receptacle must use two distinct Rp resistors. According to my testing, the CHENYANG adapter leaves the CC lines completely floating, with no Rp at all on either CC pin.
This means that the Chromebook Pixel 2015 does not detect a charger device at all, as it depends on the presence of Rp to start charging.

Finally, this adapter also claims to support USB 3.1 SuperSpeed, but because it is only a passive adapter, there is no way to support both orientations of a potential USB device as that requires a mux on the receptacle end. Indeed, when I tried it, it would only ever enumerate a USB-C thumbdrive as high speed (usb 2.0).

Long story short : This adapter is a type forbidden by the USB Type-C specification, and should NOT exist. It gets my lowest rating of 1-star because there is no simple thing that the manufacturer can do to make this adapter correct.

I got to play with a Magic Link at a… Best Buy? Circuit City? … back in the day. Was immediately turned off by the dorky Microsoft Bob style "here's your desk" UI. Still surprised at how poorly they sold.

Looks like a fun movie, though, in the vein of Helvetica and Objectified.