MplsP

mpantone said:

lukei said:

Cesar Battistini Maziero said:

I NEED WhatsApp for the iPad, everything uses WhatsApp in Brazil and not having it one iPad is my biggest gripe today.

That and the fact that it doesn't run MacOS

Just use the web app, it works fine 

The web app on iPad is fine if you only have one Instagram account. It's far more awkward than a native app (even the scaled iPhone app) when switching between multiple accounts.

Meta is a very obtuse organization with precious little vision. They really can't see that the tablet experience can be vastly different than the smartphone experience. There are many possibilities on the larger tablet screen that really aren't available on smartphones from a practical sense. I'd love to see something like a hybrid Flipboard type interface as an option or putting the main feed, reels, and following together on the same screen.

Have you tried private browsing windows so the cookies aren't shared between the two windows?

bobcubsfan2 said:

Trump obviously does not understand the difference between assembly and manufacturing. Tim Cook should send a bill of materials for the iPhone 16 Pro Max showing where the parts are manufactured. 

Trump doesn’t understand a lot of things. Most importantly he doesn’t understand what he doesn’t understand.

I’m confused - If I go to bed with my Apple Watch on and put it on silent, why would I want to get alerts that I’m trying to avoid with the silent mode?

danox said:

MplsP said:

one potential issue/question that I haven't seen answered is how much Apple is paying in patent royalties to QC for their C1 modem. Given QC's cellular patent portfolio it's unlikely Apple could produce a competitive modem without licensing at least some patents. Even if they're covered under FRAND there's still a 'reasonable' fee. If Apple were to put the modem in every MBP then they would likely have to pay a fee for each device, unless they could somehow get an agreement to only pay for the modems in use.

The Patent Troll known as Qualcomm will be suing, no matter what….. preordained.

Apple will be Qualcomm’s nightmare because Apple isn’t looking to just stand still and collect toll fees. The C1 modem is just a beach head the C2, C3, C4‘s will be even better and more importantly with new Apple devices coming up will have functionalities that Qualcomm, similar the ghosts of tech past like Kodak, Xerox, IBM, Motorola of Schaumburg, Illinois or Intel who also didn’t want to move forward. 

In short Apple will step up and iterate into the future at a pace most don’t want to do, if it wasn’t for Qualcomm buying out Nuvia they would be lost in the wilderness when it comes to Arm SOC’s, their team up with Microsoft has been a fiasco so far not completely their fault because their partner Microsoft doesn’t feel any sense of urgency.

Maybe, maybe not. Presumably Apple is already paying applicable patent fees for the C1 modem. 

Xed said:

sloth77 said:

Xed said:

proline said:

You're probably right. It's sad, because with MagSafe half the electricity gets used to increase the entropy of the universe which raises carbon emissions for no reason. It is slow, it makes the phones bigger and heavier, and hardly anyone uses it. And yet, for so many years the only thing reviewers would say every September was "and it still doesn't have teh wireless chargez!". Apple doesn't want the big story in September to be that, so they will include the wasteful and useless thing.

There's a ridiculous number of false statements in your post. Is that suppose to be parody that is falling flat?

Actually most of the statements are true.  It is less efficient than wired charging, it is slower than wired charging and it does make the phone fractionally heavier (if not bigger).

But I don't agree that hardly anyone uses it - I suspect most people wirelessly charge.

You believe that...

• MagSafe half the electricity gets used to increase the entropy of the universe which raises carbon emissions for no reason
• It is slow
• hardly anyone uses it
• wasteful and useless thing

None of those things are true as stated and most of the others have some truth to them but are lame duck statements, like "makes the phones bigger and heavier."

Wireless charging is horribly inefficient. MagSafe is better but moves up from horribly to just woefully inefficient. Best case is 75% efficient. And that's without a case. Add a case and the numbers only get worse. If you were filling up your car and 25% of the gas leaked out of the nozzle before it got to your tank would you keep going to the same gas station just because it was convenient?

Magsafe is also undeniably slower. If you have no case and the highest power puck it's not a huge difference, but as with power that difference goes up when you add a case.

As far as hardly anyone using it, I have no idea of the numbers but I would say that is false. If they're not using MagSafe then many people are using some form of wireless charging. Which comes to the next point - MagSafe really is the optimal case for wireless charging - the magnets hold the two coils in the optimal configuration. If you're not using MagSafe the efficiency drops off exponentially.

Wasteful? absolutely - we've already shown that. Useless? Well, not totally but most of the uses are not really necessary. They arise because people are just too lazy to plug their phones in. There are some situations like the Apple Watch for which inductive charging is really the only viable option but for phones it's strictly convenience. (the statement about everyone complaining about the absence of inductive charging before Apple introduced it is also true - I clearly remember all the posts here on AI about it.)

Below is a link to the best article I've found looking at MagSafe efficiency.

https://www.ifixit.com/News/94409/wireless-charging-trading-efficiency-for-convenience