vadimyuryev

What I want is Face ID with multi-user support. 

For example, you've got a business with 20 staff members. Any one of them can walk up and be instantly logged into their account. 
That would introduce issues when there are multiple people standing there, but it would be cool.

Same thing for iPhone. Currently, you can only have one face registered, so the wife has to enter the passcode. 


A complete iMac redesign would definitely be a shocker. Everyone who bought the iMac Pro would be pissed, lol.

bigpics said:

So Apple Insider is tacitly saying (by not mentioning let alone asking for) that the MBP's "semi-vaunted" Touchbar is a gimmick going no place on the Mac platform as a whole (meaning developers won't be supporting it for long, even the minority who do now)....??

We do mention it here. We'll do a video on the Touch Bar after we get our hands on the new lineup.

eonaeon said:

They need SSDs as standard config across the line

That was gonna be one of my wishlist items, but it would have to be 256GB to keep the price down, and some users would end up running out of storage and complaining. Maybe if they gave users the option to choose a 256GB SSD or 1TB Fusion.

Maybe they'll completely ditch 1TB Hard Drives for Fusion Drives for the base 21.5" models. 

macOS World's Tallest Thermometer

http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf

They could have placed it in Group 3: The agent is not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans.
or Group 4: The agent is probably not carcinogenic to humans.

But they ruled Group 2B: The agent is possibly carcinogenic to humans.

"This category is used for agents for which there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. It may also be used when there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans but there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals."

"Limited evidence of carcinogenicity: A positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer for which a causal interpretation is considered by the Working Group to be credible, but chance, bias or confounding could not be ruled out with reasonable confidence."

That was back in 2011, just before 4G started to get implemented.


In my opinion, there wouldn't be so many people concerned about Wi-Fi and Cell Phone radiation if it was 100% safe, even if all of those people aren't "scientists."

Opinion #2: Not many are willing to go Amish, including me. 

Opinion #3: There are so many things in our daily lives that have the capability to cause cancer, including preservatives/chemicals in food and hygiene/skin-care products, that even if this wireless radiation was causing health issues like cancer, there are much bigger fish to blame it on. 

Either way, they'll give you a fat dose of more chemicals or zap you with some more radiation. Ironic, isn't it?