Mike Wuerthele


Mike Wuerthele
Last Active
  • Apple's ad agency recommends a stop to Twitter campaigns

    Hey, AI, are you eyeing this thread as another ripe juicy comments section to delete, like so many others of late?

    "Insanity Is Doing the Same Thing Over and Over Again and Expecting Different Results"
    Not yet. I'm not sure "two" counts as "so many" though.

    They'd stay open, if forum-goers, yes, including regulars, could behave themselves.
    Not sure when you started counting, but it's more than two threads you've deleted (in the past 90 days you've deleted 3 threads on Elmo alone), and that's the thing with forums, they need to be managed. This site has long threatened its forum members with deleting the forums because "they're too hard to manage" but it's always a slap in the face to people who come here *for* the discussion and spend lots of time, energy and passion in the forums only for you to delete all that effort of theirs when things get too hard for you.

    Perhaps a poll of the members here whether they approve of your thread deletion?<wry grin - don't do this please>
    We have rules. They don't get followed, and threads get deleted because of it, and that's after a pile of moderation has already gone into it, before the deletion. That's the way it goes, that's the rules of the place. AI is a business, not a hobby. Moderation isn't hard, but it isn't instant, and time is, in fact, money.

    If folks could stay civil, things would stay open all the time -- yet here we are. That's why we keep trying to leave threads open because as a rule we have faith in our readers., Instead we've lately been rewarded with nonsense that's labor-intensive to prune.

    Don't complain to me about it. Complain to your fellow forum-goers. 

    This avenue of conversation in the forums has concluded. You are welcome to continue in a direct message, if you're so inclined.
  • TikTok is still your one-stop shop for total nonsense about Apple

    swineone said:
    swineone said:

    The concept of planned obsolescence is so broken it only takes a moment of actual, coherent, thought to understand why it isn't happening.
    Until and unless Apple provides a blessed API call and approves an app that allows you full control over battery charging, then yes, planned obsolescence is a very real, concrete and provable thing. No, the non-working (and half-useless even if it worked) “Optimized Battery Charging” feature is not it. It is In fact the proof that Apple designs planned obsolescence into all of their hardware save Macs, since the technical capability for controlling charging exists but they won’t let the owner control it as they please.

    If users were given that capability and followed a few simple battery care steps (plug phone in whenever possible while limiting battery SoC, do not expose to high heat, do not fast charge) then a mobile phone battery would easily last as long as an EV battery, rather than forcing you to swap the battery after a couple of years — which, at this point, is only marginally cheaper than upgrading, and thus people make the rational choice of upgrading; ergo, planned obsolescence.
    They absolutely would not. The volume difference between the two batteries alone and how that differs on a chemical and physics basis would prevent that.

    A battery replacement is between $50 and $100 on an iPhone. A new device is at a minimum $500. This is still not "planned obsolescence." Batteries die. It is a fact of physics and life.
    They would, and I have the data from my personal devices to prove it (Coconut Battery history of battery health data). Batteries do die, but they do not need to die in a couple of years; EVs are proof of that.

    Where I live, I could sell a used iPhone 11, and adding the money saved by swapping the battery at an authorized Apple shop or Apple Store, buy a new (not used, new) iPhone 12 if I monitored deep discounts which regularly occur. Perhaps even a 13 if I invested a little more. It’s much more rational to do that rather than pay for swapping the battery and keep 3 year old hardware. Ergo, Apple gets a new sale and benefits from the planned obsolescence they design in.
    1) Not data, that's like ten phones on the outside.
    2) I appreciate your personal experience in the matter, but that's still not planned obsolescence. Comparing EV batteries that are about ten thousand times more reactants, cathodes , and anodes by volume to a cellphone battery isn't a like to like comparison. Three to four years is the top of the bell curve for average lifetime on a lithium ion battery that's cell-phone sized in a phone from Google or Apple, with to two or three on Samsung, versus eight or nine on a EV battery. It's the physics and chemistry of a reaction at volume, versus in a smaller-size.

    Planned obsolescence is "oh, sorry, no more support for a modern OS" in three years or less. It isn't "gee, I don't want to pay $50 to keep a phone running that still will run the modern operating system for another three or four." That's a personal decision, based on what you consider your needs, and not a conspiracy by manufacturers to keep you upgrading. I don't think if you had that mythical eight-year iPhone, that you'd keep it for more than three years anyway, to be honest, based on what you've said here so far.

    Your resale discussion is about how well the iPhone retains value over time, more than anything else.
  • Apple's ad agency recommends a stop to Twitter campaigns

    No ad agency recommends limiting your reach on the largest platform you advertise on. LOL
    Twitter is either the sixth- or seventh-largest platform it advertises on. This is Apple's social media ad manager.

  • How iPads, iPhones, Macs are used in the special education classroom

    tommikele said:
     Clearly, devices make it better for teachers and students and provide more options and customization. But frankly, I am not buying the cost savings angle and the article doesn't offer any proof. It also says "after the initial investment ..." Well the initial investment is huge and disregarding it pokes huge holes in the claim of cost savings whether it is taxpayers or parents footing the bill or a combo of that and what about families who can't afford $300-$1000? Schools should put the squeeze or corporations and foundations to pay the devices. After all, the big are taxpayer subsidized anyway.
    If families can't afford $300 to $1000, then they certainly can't afford the $1800 example in the piece for a one-purpose device.

    Assistive talkers are $3000+. An iPad and Proloquo is $700. The FM Units start at $1800 for a crappy one. An iPad and AirPods Max are $800, and if you have the iPad already, then obviously, that layout is less. Otherwise, you're buying both.

    Tom, have you tried to "put the squeeze or corporations and foundations to pay the devices?" I have, and it's not as easy as you think it is.
  • Twitter relaunching Verified, with manual authentication checks

    hmlongco said:

    If you're referring to the Black Friday deals posts, feel free to not click on them, the same as you shouldn't click on anything else you don't want to read.
    Well, you do make that a bit difficult when, "above the fold", there's exactly one article that's not an ad, sponsored ad, or deal advert-story. And when the Latest News section is about 60/40 "deals" vs content.
    As Black Friday and Cyber Monday fall behind us, that ratio will change. It's not what I'd call an enormous amount of labor to scroll the page. As Lkrupp has said, and the forum rules are clear about, AppleInsider is not a hobby.

    This concludes this avenue of discussion in this thread. If you'd like to continue it in DM, by all means, do so.