sirbryan

With as much junk/scam/spam/duplicate apps as there are, it's also frustrating to run up against reviewers who don't think your app does enough/has enough quality to be "worthy" of the App Store.

I wrote a simple HLS player for Apple TV to use as a player at remote locations to view our broadcasts (church, school, whatever) where a non-techy person was going to be handling the on-site gear. I could give them the Apple TV preprogrammed with the URL, or email/text it to them to copy & paste into the app, then have them open the app when on site. If the app crashed or power failed, all they had to do was re-open the app to restart the stream.  It is a great replacement for Windows laptops that would choose 15 minutes before the event to update themselves.

The Apple TV version of the app was accepted and has been on the store for a number of years.  I decided to release an iOS version (the exact same app), but it was denied due to it being spam and lacking any kind of, well, anything.  (Nevermind it's tvOS companion had been up for years.)

I find it amazing that all these copycat apps make it through review, and yet the "cousin" of one that's been up for years doesn't.

Remember, 5G is a specification, not the bands themselves. 2G (EDGE/CDMA), 3G (UMTS/CDMA), 4G (LTE), and 5G [have] run on existing 800-, 900-, 1700-, 1900-, 2100MHz cellular bands, as well as the new hotness in 700- and 600Mhz. 

Theoretically, chipsets could be designed to run 5G-spec'd RF signals from DC to daylight.  But even then, that's just the RF portion of the specifications.

Also, just because the spec carves out use in the Part-15 bands (2.4-, 5-, 24-, 60GHz) and other licensed bands (28GHz, etc.) does not mean all manufacturers and chipsets will (immediately) provide support for all of them. (That's a lot of antennas and/or antenna tuning tech to cram into a handset.)  There's a lot of room in there for IoT devices, hotspots, fixed wireless applications, etc.

jdw said:

This is why so much of American manufacturing has moved outside the USA.  All those seemingly positive changes that arguably do benefit the employee is what leads to people having a harder time finding jobs in the US.  Somebody complains, changes are made, laws altered, then it gets too expensive to manufacture in the USA, then the company moves manufacturing overseas and those jobs are gone.  

Who pays me to drive to work?
Who pays me to drive home from work?

Sorry, but we all use a lot of personal time that is unpaid when it comes to our job.  A bag check is nothing in the greater scheme of things.  And it seems to have been implemented because of morons who get hired at Apple yet then feel entitled to take what is not theirs.

The more benefits you give people, the more they will want.  Human beings are never satisfied.  I think Apple has struck a good balance to date considering just how difficult the human brain is to handle.  It's really amazing they are still based in California with all the left-leaning laws and verdicts handed down.  

One fact that many commenters are missing is that it this extra time spent on premises is required by the employer, and the whole exit process is under their control.

Walking down the long corporate hallway or driving to/from work is (generally) in the control of the employee and is done voluntarily (i.e. to get to/from work, to do the job).  Most corporate positions are also salaried, such that you get paid whether you spent 30 hours or 50 hours working that week.  Drive/walk times are irrelevant. (Yes, there are a select salaried positions that are exempt from overtime, but that's a different beast.)

Where Apple is requiring hourly employees to clock out, but then is also detaining them with the threat of discipline if they don't comply is where they cross the line.  It is a shame it took 7 years to hash out common sense.

Stuff like this has always been sticky for hourly workers.

Years ago, my dad was on the timekeeping development team at a large call center company. Call agents caused a big fuss (and won) because they weren't getting paid for the 2-4 minutes it took for them every day to log into their computers and open the time-keeping app. Even though the total wages not paid added up to maybe $50 over a calendar year, they built an elaborate solution that automatically clocks call agents in when they log in to the computer.

razorpit said:

Certain Windows apps would previously fail because they required hardware that Parallels wasn't able to mimic. Many of these will now work, with Parallels saying its new version can run over 200,000 Windows apps.

Would love to know what one or two of those apps are. I had to run SolidWorks 2020 on a 2010 Mac mini yesterday for some testing. While it was painfully slow, it worked.

Parallels Desktop 16 for Mac also claims to run those apps faster than before, with Windows launching twice as fast, and resuming or shutting down up to 20% quicker. It also improves on the previously significant issue that virtual Windows could request extra disk space, but not then return it when shut down.

My comprehension is a little off. If you are running an older version of Mac OS will you notice these advancements as well? I skipped Catalina, I did have it on one test machine for support purposes. I may be a little more open to Big Sur.

macOS has had "hypervisor.framework" for a while, but offline discussions and tea leaf reading leads me to believe this is the first year VMware and Parallels may have gone "all-in" with it (perhaps the reason for "25 person-years" of work).  Based on release notes for betas and tech previews, it also appears to be the first year that the new version of those hypervisors will not work on previous versions of macOS, likely due to the kext changes.

StrangeDays said:

While it starts at free, that the networks are charging for premium levels of spam and robocall blocking is absurd -- theyre already charging us a service fee. Them able to make money off robocallers removes the incentive for them to fix the actual problem.

Agreed.

CallerID costs nothing, calling Name costs minimal (because CNAM dips go to some other company), and they've all had to implement call authentication with STIR/SHAKEN, so charging people for weeding out everything else really is a money grab.

I appreciate T-Mobile's offering of all of those capabilities now for free. I forgot what having true Caller ID was like (on landlines) until I got a business line where calling name was included.