CloudTalkin

HeliBum said:

Breaking encryption is against the law as a result of the DMCA, so I see Apple as having legal justification for this action if encryption is being broken to accomplish the hacks, which it likely is.

A DMCA takedown is a protective measure covering copyrighted material.  Encryption algorithms aren't copyrighted material and arent' subject to DMCA restrictions.  Apple probably knew that but figured some wonk at Twitter in control of takedowns wouldn't know that, so they gave it a shot.  It worked.  Unfortunately for Apple, it also came with the Streisand Effect.  It made Apple look as if they were abusing the DMCA.  That Streisand Effect probably made Apple reverse that decision PDQ.

philboogie said:

CloudTalkin said:

Apple is the first smartphone vendor to implement UWB tech in their smartphones and they only did it in 2019 with the 11 series.

Samsung implemented UWB before Apple, in 2005:
https://phys.org/news/2005-02-samsung-freescale-ultra-wideband-enabled-cell-3gsm.html

Phil, did you read that article?  I ask because you presented it as a counter argument to my assertion that Apple is the first smartphone vendor to implement UWB in a smartphone.  The article doesn't counter my argument, it actually supports it.  Respectfully, go back and read it.  You will find Samsung did not implement UWB.  Samsung allowed one of their phones to be used as a demo for Freescale's UWB prototypes.  Execs from both companies call the project a product concept, with Samsung's EVP of R&D stating, "Adding Freescale's UWB to our cell phone for this demonstration, we have created a unique product concept that showcases the possibilities for next generation mobile/cellular products."

It was a product demo.  Afaict, nothing ever came from it.  To date, again afaict, Samsung still doesn't have a phone, smart or otherwise, that utilizes UWB.  Pretty sure that's going to change though. https://www.engadget.com/2019/08/01/sony-and-samsung-resurrect-ultra-wideband-to-improve-location-tr/   Funny tidbit.  The article ends with this nugget: "The technology is still a fair way off from consumer use, but it's already being leveraged in enterprise -- and particularly by the automotive sector..."   Engadet article from Sept says fair way off from consumer use.  Little less than 2 months later, Apple releases UWB tech for consumer use.

rogifan_new said:

CloudTalkin said:

How to turn a mole hill into a mountain.
Step 1.  Implement a function.  Tell no on about it.
Step 2.  Have it discovered by someone outside the organization.
Step 3.  Retroactively explain, then offer an opt out.

Opt out after the fact gives the impression that "we're only offering an opt out because someone found out what we're doing".  Unnecessary self infliction.

Apple stop punching yourself in the nuts.  The optics are always worse when "caught" doing something.  That vaunted Marketing department could have easily preemptively spun this as a security and safety bullet point  of the 11 series and 100% we would have had multiple articles extolling the virtues of UWB geofencing.  Not a negative peep would have been heard.

It seems to me it’s others turning a mole hill into a mountain. It’s almost like tech media and security researchers want people to be in a constant state of panic or freakout.  It’s like when the news came out that Google was working with a big hospital system on analytics. Big freak out in tech media even though the number of people at Google working on this project was small and everything was HIPPA compliant. 

Those are two different sides of the coin.  The media is always going to react with hyperbole.  It's what it does.  It's how it drives views.  It's the media and it's always going to overreact.  I know it.  You know.  More importantly, Apple knows it.  As I said, the UWB issue could have easily been presented in a positive light.  There would have been no reason for anyone to freakout.  An old adage comes to mind: ounce of prevention or a pound of cure.  The media is never going to change, but Apple can always smartly handle the narrative around their activities.  This is another instance where they didn't.

How to turn a mole hill into a mountain.
Step 1.  Implement a function.  Tell no on about it.
Step 2.  Have it discovered by someone outside the organization.
Step 3.  Retroactively explain, then offer an opt out.

Opt out after the fact gives the impression that "we're only offering an opt out because someone found out what we're doing".  Unnecessary self infliction.

Apple stop punching yourself in the nuts.  The optics are always worse when "caught" doing something.  That vaunted Marketing department could have easily preemptively spun this as a security and safety bullet point  of the 11 series and 100% we would have had multiple articles extolling the virtues of UWB geofencing.  Not a negative peep would have been heard.

jbdragon said:

davgreg said:

So how will this impact battery life?

The greatest advantage my iPad Pro has over my MacBook Air is battery life when doing similar stuff.

The Apple Watch uses OLED as it's more energy efficient. There is no back light. So anything black on the screen uses no power and white uses the most power. This is also why most all of the watch faces are mostly black. Dark Mode on a iPhone with a OLED screen will give you similar results.

MicroLED are even more energy efficient than OLED.

So I remember Apple acquiring a company that was working on MicroLED displays a few years ago. Samsung has their HUGE MicroLED display and it's large because they hadn't gotten the MicroLED's small enough to use in a smaller 4K TV. Now it's down to iPad side? Home come not a single other Computer, Tablet, etc are using MircoLED as this article sounds like everyone is lining up to make them for Apple. Seems kind of strange to me.

JB.  You're confusing MiniLED - the topic here- with MicroLED.  This isn't about MicroLED.