svanstrom

Rayz2016 said:

I feel there is a solution to this, and it might lie in a collaboration between Apple and Google. 

They wouldn't need to invent it they could just endorse and provide user storage for one of the open source open standard projects around.

Still once they do they have pretty much dictated the winner of the standard. 

they only use it because it's the only option for some things for some people. Zuck is clueless in that he thinks people like FB. They don't. They also rightly point out that FB does nothing for small businesses and that FB is a hideous data mining monolith that exists only to serve Facebook (and the lizard man).

switch.

I'm hoping for a much cheaper version, that sounds decent, with the same level of ANC, H1 chip, but without the spacial computational audio stuff, no gyro's  and I don't even need a sensor in each ear cup to pause sound.

I was thinking the same thing about the on/off switch, but then I started to look at Apple's other headphones and realized that many or most of them don't have an on/off switch.

nbsp;doesn't cause havoc, and the emperor suddenly appears naked in public.

I've always had serious doubts about the efficacy of targeted ads - I tend to see them primarily after I've bought an item (and am no longer in the market).

I suppose if you're the type who hems and haws and takes days or weeks to make a purchase this could have an effect on you, but once I've decided to pull the trigger I go in, visit a few sites, and simply do it.

It's not like all those targeted ads get you a better deal or something.

at a time they're most likely to buy/convert. They're putting buyers in touch with sellers and the sellers don't have access to any of the data, so this really is Apple trying to hurt FB's revenue model. This will also harm small businesses and start ups who have found it so effective. The alternative for the audience is to see ads that aren't relevant and for advertising to become more annoying that it is currently.