MplsP

davidw said:

MplsP said:

Ok, how about a better description of what was patented and how Apple allegedly violated the patents? Also what did the original company do and why is Identity Security LLC considered a patent troll?

I love seeing patent trolls lose but from reading the article I can’t tell it they’re really a patent troll or if they’re a small company from whom Apple actually stole IP. 

If you had read the first sentence of the article, you should know that it wouldn't had matter if the plaintiff was a"patent troll" or a small company, the jury found that Apple did not infringe upon the patents. I don't know how you could come to any sort of conclusion that Apple might had ...... "actually stole IP". Unless you're just trolling. 

The fact that the jury found in Apple’s favor just means Apple’s lawyers did a better job of convincing 12 (ignorant) lay people than the plaintiff’s lawyers did. It has nothing to do with whether the plaintiff was a patent troll or whether Apple was right or wrong. 

Yet they still insist on using those asinine pentalobe screws! Can someone explain what is wrong with industry standard torx? (I also have to question iFixit’s complaint that you could puncture the battery with a screwdriver. Just how much force are you using on a 1mm screw???

tundraboy said:

Here are your choices with respect to smartphone design:  Compact, Powerful, User Serviceable - Choose 2.  

Or apply some engineering and get all 3

DAalseth said:

I’m going to go a different direction. I’m wondering if Apple pulled back because it didn’t want to be accused of trying to push into Banking. They already are getting grief over being too powerful and moving from computers into phones, then music, then media and streaming… Perhaps they didn’t want to open another front for people to accuse them of bad behaviour. It’s not like this side of things is bringing them much money. 

Agreed. Also, from what I've read in other articles, Apple Card users tend to be higher than average income and tend to pay off their balances more. That demographic tends to take advantage of 'buy now, pay later' offers less frequently and also tends to be better at avoiding finance charges meaning the program likely earns less money.

chasm said:

dee_dee said:

This isn’t luxury anything until the toddler software is improved. 

I use an iPad Pro for (mostly) writing, photo editing, some art creation, Keynote, and a few other things. I pull out my Apple Pencil 2nd gen for some very light sketching and calligraphy.

In no way whatsoever do I feel the slightest bit constrained by the operating system (not software as you incorrectly called it). Of course, not everyone’s use case is the same — something you’ve overlooked, but then I doubt you’ve even used an iPad, let alone the Pro model — and certainly there are some limitations in iOS and iPadOS compared to macOS under certain circumstances.

But as far as I can tell, there’s very little to nothing “getting in my way” when using an iPad Pro for the varied tasks I’ve mentioned above. It’s a touch-first device, so it is only a surprise to you (apparently) that this puts different priorities on the OS.

That said, I’m looking forward to seeing what Apple does with iOS and iPadOS in the fall, and outlines for us at WWDC. As you imply, there’s a lot of potential that could be leveraged, and perhaps the “AI-ification” of both macOS and the other systems will explore some of that potential.

But I very, very, very much doubt iOS and iPadOS will ever be replaced with macOS as you seem to be suggesting.

I have a 12.9" iPad Pro and a 16" MBP. I feel constrained by iPadOS on a regular basis. There are many things I prefer to do on my iPad but having tried to replace my MBP with my iPad I'm repeatedly stymied. Beyond what I can't do, there are innumerable things that I technically can do but they are significantly more difficult or cumbersome.

iPadOS may not be a toddler OS, but it's certainly struggling in preschool.