AppleZulu

There's nothing surprising here, because Apple's course is the more difficult one. As noted in the article, there are two giant hurdles for Apple's implementation of Siri that aren't so big for others. The first is privacy, and the second is quality. Moving more Siri functions out of the cloud and on-device means processing has to be much tighter. Limiting the personal data that Apple collects means there are fewer contextual points that Siri can use when responding to a query. On the quality side, Siri is far less likely than competitors to offer an incorrect answer, but far more likely to offer a web search or to simply confess to not being able to produce the answer. 

Interestingly, this is analogue to your choices when hiring a human personal assistant. Do you want an assistant who is respectful and discreet, or one who knows more about you because they regularly rifle through all your stuff and share info about you with friends and paying customers? That second option will already know you might want to order some flowers, but that's because they listened to every bit of that argument you had with you wife this morning. Do you want an assistant who asks for clarification and is willing to admit when they simply don't know the answer, but can help you find it, or one who always tells you what you want to hear, whether or not their info is correct? The first one can be a little frustrating, but that second one is willing to send you out there misinformed. 

I know I'd rather have the assistant who is discreet and self-confident enough to be honest about what info they can provide.

ericthehalfbee said:

lkrupp said:

Government regulations being proposed will make this ‘victory’ moot. So maybe Epic can open its own app store in the EU but not in the U.S. ? How ill that be handled?

This will kill any proposed legislation in the US. Nobody is going to try and pass a law that overrides the rulings of two courts. I think they were waiting for this outcome before moving on, and now any proposed bills will be shelved.

As to allowing a separate store in the EU it will be simple. Depending on the country you live you’ll get a slightly different version of iOS.

What I expect to happen in the EU is numerous criminals and shady developers are going to infest iPhones with malware and privacy invading features. Users will be screaming at Apple (who else will they blame) and Apple will sue the EU for instituting a law that directly caused harm to iPhone users. Unlike the imaginary harm the EU is trying to prevent by forcing 3rd party stores. 

Excuse me while go troll Epic and the Coalition for App Fairness over this loss. 😉

That’s not how this works. Unless the courts rule something is unconstitutional (that didn’t happen in this case), a court ruling doesn’t stop pending legislation. In fact, if lawmakers don’t like how a court rules on something under current law, their remedy is specifically to pass legislation to change the law. 

Once again, this would be easier to swallow if Netflix would simply decouple access to 4K UHD (tech that’s standard on all but the smallest new TVs) from multiple-stream subscriptions. 

Honestly, this does not make much sense. 

HBO Max will become just Max, and will have the combined content of HBO Max and Discovery+. Max will cost the same as HBO Max does now.

Meanwhile, Discovery+ will continue as a stand-alone service with the same content and price as it has now.

So... HBO Max changes its name and gains extra content, and everything else remains the same. 

From the viewer's end, current HBO Max subscribers won't need to change anything, unless they're also currently Discovery+ subscribers, in which case, they'll cancel their Discovery+ subscription. Current Discovery+ subscribers who aren't also HBO Max subscribers won't need to change anything either, unless the smaller price bump between that and the new Max service is worth it to cancel Discovery+ and get the combined Max service. 

From the business end, it sounds like a net loss, since the gains from the D+-only subscribers who pay a little extra to upgrade will surely amount to a lot less than the loss from subscribers of both who drop D+. 

The foldable iPhone idea continues to be an answer looking for a question. 

Other than the novelty of being able to say "Look! It folds!" there's no practical use case for it, and there are plenty of reasons why it's not a particularly great idea. First, a folding phone needs an additional screen on the back that remains on the outside of the device when folded, so that the user can easily see who's calling, the time, etc., without unfolding it. That requires not only the cost of additional hardware, but additional code in iOS and any application that might make use of that screen. The iPhone's camera lenses already create a less-than-ideal form factor, which makes for an even thicker hunk of glass and metal when the device is also folded, which would be very bulky in the user's pocket. No matter how great the engineering of the folding screen and hinge mechanism, it increases the opportunity for damage and breakage over the existing form factor, without a justifying benefit in trade. The list goes on.

The fact that some number of people answered affirmatively to a survey question about whether they'd like a folding phone is meaningless. Without being presented with the actual design and cost, the question is simply asking people if they want a novelty. Many will say yes in the abstract, but no when they see what it actually is. 

To the extent that rumors of Apple patents and work on a foldable screen are conceivably correct, a foldable iPad is a far more likely use for the technology. It wouldn't need an outside screen when folded. Such a device would be opened and closed a mere fraction of the times a folding phone would. A phone comes in and out of your pocket for short interactions possibly hundreds of times a day, and often while you're standing or walking. An iPad, not so much. Its hinge and the folding screen would receive far less wear-and-tear, and an iPad would be dropped far than an iPhone, reducing the likelihood of impact damage to the mechanism.