diman80

melgross said:

So wait, is this saying (rumor, rumor) that we will be getting a tele optical zoom lens? Because, if so, that’s a very odd way to describe it. Otherwise, it sounds like the old Leica various focal lens, which was not quite a zoom because you would move the “zoom” control, but just get several fixed focal lengths.

either would be better than no optical zoom. But I would prefer a true 3x optical zoom for the main camera. Something like 24-72mm equivalent. That would make their best camera more like a stand alone digital camera. Eventually, I’d love a 12-24 for the new ultra wide. And a 72 -288 for the tele. Those ranges because it’s hard to make a wide range wide angle zoom, but easy to make a wide range tele zoom. It would kill the 4:3 format which is barely hanging on as it us.

appleinsideruser said:

Perhaps they should/will call it the iPhone 26? 

anonymouse said:

So, AI's writers seem to be having trouble distinguishing what is Liquid Glass and what is not. Liquid Glass is specifically a full cosmetic makeover, including some changes in the way UI elements behave and react, that is being applied simultaneously to all of Apple's OSs. The Spotlight changes — e.g., a clipboard manager — you reference above, apart from the appearance and behavioral changes in the controls themselves, are not part of Liquid Glass.

Likewise, not every enhancement to every OS is necessarily related to Liquid Glass. Yes, these new features do appear with Liquid Glass UI elements, but that doesn't mean they depend on Liquid Glass to exist. Apple could have added a clipboard manager even if they had not included Liquid Glass in this release. So, basically, if you are looking at enhancements that are, "more than skin deep," they are probably not part of Liquid Glass, even if you have never seen them using any other "skin".

mike eggleston said:

As a parent, I can definitely say that this is a bad idea. Apple already lets me mark accounts as a child account. As such, when one of my kids asks to be allowed to download an app, it has to get permission from me or my wife. This is already a simple enough solution to this problem,...

Not exactly true. In reality, setting up Screen Time and App Store preferences for children of different age groups is quite complicated. The system works slowly (e.g., approvals via iMessage), and it’s not cross-platform. So having age-based limits at the App Store level does make sense.

An Apple ID already contains enough private information, so no additional data needs to be shared. Privacy isn’t a concern in this case because if a child’s account is connected to a parent’s, no personal information is required, but if it isn't — then parents have no control. That’s exactly the loophole that App Store-level age management is meant to address.

NEO_STEPHENS said:

They will not have an effect because the CEO's are breaking their necks to rush to the White House to kiss the ring and get exemptions for their particular company - soooo, I don't seen an increase in the price (because of tariffs).