AppleZulu

This just reinforces my thought that Apple will be rolling out an AI implementation that will allow Siri to provide you with a morning news summary sourced from your Apple News+ app, avoiding copyright issues entirely. It could also include information from other sources to which you have subscribed. It will verbally give you the news summary, naming sources, and then offer to drop links to any items of particular interest that you would like to read in full later. 

ssfe11 said:

There is something seriously wrong with this woman. 

Warren is right about a lot of things, banks and other predatory lenders, for instance. 

She's misguided about Apple, however. A lot of people are misguided about Apple, even among regular commenters here. Even though it's right there for everyone to see, people simply do not understand that Apple functions differently from other tech companies. Its devices are produced as complete units, software and hardware developed together. As @darelrex pointed out above, it's not divisional. After all these years, it's surprising that no other company in this sector has copied that model, but it sets Apple apart, and makes people erroneously believe that it's "stifling competition" in areas where it's not designed to have competition in the first place. Apple operating systems do not compete with other operating systems for placement on third-party hardware. Apple hardware does not compete with other hardware for adoption by third-party operating systems. Because it remains a unique characteristic, people do not "get it," which leads to Sen. Warren's confusion, as well as the confusion of regulars here, who are constant posting things about what Apple should do that will never be things that Apple will do, because Apple doesn't work that way.

DAalseth said:

rotateleftbyte said:

DAalseth said:

The smartest thing Apple did, and also the most criticized, has been to not use macOS on the iPad. It’s a different device, that needs a different environment and UI. Now I think it could do more, and slowly they are making padOS do more. But if they had just dropped macOS onto the iPad, like Microsoft has done with the Windows on the Surface, it would have languished and died. macOS would not fit on a tablet. The modifications you would need to make it work on a tablet environment would be so extensive that, you’d end up with padOS.

The fact that Apple had the guts to go all in and not try to shoehorn a desktop onto the iPad is to a great extent why it is doing so well.

MacOS would fit on the iPad but that is not the point.

Exactly, they could have, it’s capable of running full macOS, but they were smart enough to understand that would have been a mistake.

danvm said:

DAalseth said:

The smartest thing Apple did, and also the most criticized, has been to not use macOS on the iPad. It’s a different device, that needs a different environment and UI. Now I think it could do more, and slowly they are making padOS do more. But if they had just dropped macOS onto the iPad, like Microsoft has done with the Windows on the Surface, it would have languished and died. macOS would not fit on a tablet. The modifications you would need to make it work on a tablet environment would be so extensive that, you’d end up with padOS.

The fact that Apple had the guts to go all in and not try to shoehorn a desktop onto the iPad is to a great extent why it is doing so well.

Maybe Apple didn't shoehorn a desktop in iPadOS, and that's the reason we see the limitations, for example, in multitasking. .  

Not sure why multitasking comes up. I mean it does. Maybe you don’t have separate windows for everything, oh yeah, now you do, but it does. As far as the Surface being a “better device”, I’d let sales answer that one. Sure the surface has the full Win11 environment going for it, but the iPad outsells it handily.

danox said:

DAalseth said:

The smartest thing Apple did, and also the most criticized, has been to not use macOS on the iPad. It’s a different device, that needs a different environment and UI. Now I think it could do more, and slowly they are making padOS do more. But if they had just dropped macOS onto the iPad, like Microsoft has done with the Windows on the Surface, it would have languished and died. macOS would not fit on a tablet. The modifications you would need to make it work on a tablet environment would be so extensive that, you’d end up with padOS.

The fact that Apple had the guts to go all in and not try to shoehorn a desktop onto the iPad is to a great extent why it is doing so well.

That is very true. The iPad didn’t need the full OS on it, I think people saying that it should have the full OS are just using it as a talking point and it’s like saying Apple should have a touchscreen on the Mac computer, not taking into consideration that the Apple touchpad is by far the best in the business, Microsoft to this day, still can’t get it, close to right.

I had occasion to configure and support some Win touch screen systems, as well as some experimental work trying to integrate a Surface into the systems the company I worked for manufactured. Windows with touch scabbed on top really is not a good experience. Apple went the right route starting with a simplified UI and adding features to it. 

Now after 13 years of growth, it’s a powerful system. My M1 iPP is my primary computing device for creativity and business. 

The thing people forget when they say macOS should run on iPad is the fact that macOS also runs every Mac up to Mac Pro. This sets up significant functionality conflicts noted in your experience with Windows. An iPad without a touch UI would be pointless. A Mac Pro with touch would be pointless. (A multi-screen desktop workstation with a touch UI would be an ergonomic nightmare.) An OS that carries two different UIs, with each displaying separately based on the hardware configuration adds a lot of useless bloat and increased likelihood of bugginess. 

There’s a good reason iPhone was created with its own distinct touch-based UI, rather than some sort of adaptation of macOS. It followed easily with the introduction of the iPad that a tablet device would be better served by an extension of iOS than by an extension of macOS. Even as iPad has become a much more powerful hardware device, that fact still remains true, and this continues to be the reason there won’t be an iPad and MacBook merger, a la MS Surface. A tablet with a workstation OS with a touch UI scabbed on top is a hot mess. 

It was an interesting choice to leave this out of the article, but here's the link: https://www.apple.com/iphone/why-upgrade/ 

It's interesting to note that the page only compares iPhone 11 and 12 models (but not iPhone 13 or 14 models) to the iPhone 15. 

Perhaps this link should be offered without comment as the stock response to the annual whinging about "incrementalism" when new iPhone models come out. 

avon b7 said:

AppleZulu said:

avon b7 said:

AppleZulu said:

discountopinion said:

Apple has a natural mesh wifi option which would be to take a page out of Amazons book for their Echo smart speakers that can act as wifi extenders. 

Eero and other mesh wifi devices are slowly encroaching on smart home connectivity such as being thread hubs or zigbee hubs. This is a slow constriction of Apples home aspirations and I see no gameplan to remain relevant.

Why not have the HomePods act as mesh wifi? Clearly the trend is to have the computational horsepower and add some augmented wifi circuitry and antennas. Not ideal likely but could potentially work.

Apple with its gross margin targets will unlikely compete successfully with dedicated mass market mesh wifi.

I thought at their initial introduction that HomePods would also be mesh routers. They weren’t, of course, and on further thought it probably isn’t a great idea. HomePod placement will always be about the best place for music playback and the best place for issuing Siri voice commands. 

Mesh router placement is about maximizing backhaul to the primary router while also maximizing WiFi coverage. 

If HomePods were also mesh routers, users would still prioritize audio for placing them and then complain about spotty WiFi coverage. A combo device just isn’t ideal. 

I don't think that would be a problem. Anything with a cable on it isn't likely to be in an open space, so a router/mesh and HomePod combo could work well.

Even better would be a stackable solution where users could decide which elements to stack and allow for futureproofing by replacing them for upgraded versions, leaving the main audio hardware in place. 

It’s not about being in an open space. It’s about placing theoretical combo HomePods/mesh routers on the furthest wall of the furthest room from the primary router, because that’s the ideal place for audio in that room, but entirely suboptimal for the purposes of providing effective WiFi coverage for everything else. 

Also, stackable, swappable components? You know this is in reference to Apple devices, right?

I actually have two mesh systems running off two routers. The mesh satellites are in what you would describe as 'bad places' but my management app has a floor plan of my flat which shows a map of the signal strength in each room. My entire flat shows up in green with an signal connection described as 'excellent'. And that is with running the entire mesh on 'medium' power. I can choose between three signal strength options.

There is no reason Apple couldn't develop a stackable ring setup with different rings for different features sitting under a HomePod. Air quality sensors, networking, lighting, storage, IoT uses etc and let the user mix and match. 

If your flat is truly a flat, it’s likely not challenging for much of any WiFi configuration, so your personal anecdotal observations don’t say much.