randominternetperson

About

Username
randominternetperson
Joined
Visits
183
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
7,192
Badges
2
Posts
3,084
  • Macs can now detect water in USB-C ports and spot warranty fraud

    Apple is weird about water.

    Modern iPhone are advertised to be very water resistant, being able to survive drops in the bath or whatnot.

    So why, when I was going to get a battery replacement on my own dime, did they ask if my phone "ever got wet"?  Whose phone never gets wet? So of course I said no and that was that.
    williamlondonappleinsideruserwatto_cobradarkvaderpulseimages
  • Apple Store tipping, watchOS 10 at WWDC, Google Passkey support

    Dooofus said:
    Shareholders want a return on their investment.  Why should Apple pay workers any more than they do now? The stores are fully staffed by people working there of their own free will. That means they are already paying the right amount. Any more would be pissing away profit.
    I'm as big a capitalist fanboy as anyone, but this is nonsense.

    Without speaking to the Apple Store situation, of which I know nothing, just because an employer has employees doesn't mean they are paying "the right amount."  I'm sure if Google (or Apple) capped it's pay at $100K, they would still have no trouble hiring 10s of thousands of human beings. Would they be world-class engineers, etc.? Probably not. And if they were, would they be as content and productive as if they were making a salary commensurate with their skill set? I doubt it.

    It is very possible for an employer to be underpaying people and still have employees. Therefore, it can be in the best interest of a company (and its shareholders) to increase employee pay even if all their positions are currently filled. If nothing else, employee turnover is very expensive (as is churn in most contexts).

    Here's an extreme example. Suppose the Golden State Warriors (the NBA team closest to Cupertino) decided to not pay any players more than the league minimum. Would they be able to field a team of 15 players?  Absolutely.  There are thousands of former Division 1 hoopsters who would be happy to be professional basketball players, regardless of the salary. Would the owners profit from this move? Probably not.
    hammeroftruth9secondkox2muthuk_vanalingam
  • Apple, Travis Scott, others sued for $2B by attendees injured at Astroworld

    Beats said:
    They should sue the mob that injured them. 
    Bizarre, how the individuals that crushed and stop me PED over the victims apparently are not on the liability radar. Ah, I see, more effort, less deep pockets… not worth the effort; and why share liability when there is the easy way.
    You guys beat me to it. First thing I thought. True that you can’t sue them for billions though.
    Come on. Pushing and shoving at the back turned into tight crowding in the middle of the pack and deadly compression at the front. No one individual in the crowd can be blamed for most of what happened. 99% of the people in the crowd were victims of recklessly bad planning and crowd control.

    Apple will get off the hook pretty quickly, assuming they had no involvement in the in-person logistics. If, as we all assume, Apple just took care of the filming and streaming, they'll be fine.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Apple stock closes at record high, Microsoft unseated for top valuation

    "aggressive release timeline of 2025"

    Well not that aggressive.  Project Titan has been underway for a decade, right?
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Compared: 2021 New 16-inch MacBook Pro vs. 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro

    nicholfd said:
    nicholfd said:
    zoetmb said:
    laytech said:
    Im sure someone has commented above but no Face ID, surely not. Are we still logging in with finger print? Surely not.
    So?  I prefer TouchID and I would prefer it on the iPhone as well.    It's easier to stick a finger over there than to have to stare at the camera and be recognized.   Especially on the phone in the car.    I HAVE to buy a new IPhone because I'm currently using an iPhone6 and a lot of the apps won't work anymore and it's bugging me that they won't restore TouchID until next year, so I'm going to be stuck without it. 


    And I wouldn't hold my breath "waiting until next year".  No one knows if Apple will ever return Touch ID.  Face ID is superior in almost all scenarios (and is proven more secure), so why return to something that is in general, inferior?
    Except when you are wearing masks and try to unlock your phone in the last 1.5 years.
    Not if you have an Apple Watch (I do).  My watch unlocks my phone almost as quickly as my face does.  The only time I'm not wearing my watch is when I'm cleaning up/showering.  So not an issue for me.

    ps. I did say "almost".
    There are 1 billion+ active iPhones in the world, of which at least 700-800 million would be having FaceID. How many of those iPhone owners have Apple Watch to unlock their iPhones? Yes, it is NOT an issue for you. But what about the rest of the world population who do not have Apple Watches?

    Edit: My earlier estimate of 700-800 million iPhones with FaceID seems to be on the higher side. For the last 4 years, considering a total of 800 million iPhones sold, it would be between 500-600 million iPhones with FaceID currently active, with earlier generation iPhones (7, 8 and SE series) making up the rest. Even then, the percentage of iPhone users with FaceID but not owning an Apple Watch is a HUGE population and their needs cannot be brushed aside just like that.
    We're talking about unlocking Macs here, not iPhones.  AppleWatch + MacBook is a great combination. The only time I use the TouchID on my MacBook is for purchases; otherwise it just logs be in automatically.  I'm sure FaceID would be cool too (and I'll welcome it when it comes), but for the millions of people who own Apple Watches, these new MacBook Pros don't need FaceID.
    williamlondonwatto_cobraGeorgeBMac