elijahg

jeffreytgilbert said:

What kind of wishy magic supply and demand reality distortion field nonsense is this? 

That was my conclusion too. Constrained supply = higher prices in every situation I can think of. Constrained supply itself doesn't make future prices fall lower than they were to begin with, even when the yield improves. Guarantees of component supply is irrelevant if there are unforeseen circumstances like a fire. Hard disk prices never fell to the same absurdly cheap level after the constrained supply due to floods in Thailand.

CloudTalkin said:

InspiredCode said:

I hate those ads. It would be great if at least Apple One subscribers could turn them off.

All Apple users can turn off Personalize Ads.  It's pretty easy.  You can't get rid of advertising altogether (which may be what you're requesting).  If you turn off Personalized Ads you'll still get just as many ads as you would have with it on.  They just won't be as relevant to you as Personalized Ads.  

It's actually a pretty good idea to have no ads at all as a perk of an Apple One sub.  Apple is a for profit company so the idea of foregoing "free money" might not go over so well.

So can you for most third-party tracking, but Apple is (correctly IMO) forcing third parties to ask permission before enabling it. The point of the lawsuit is that Apple has its own ad tracking on by default, whilst forcing third parties to ask permission.

This is the speed I get in the UK under our partly subsidised and pretty well regulated broadband infrastructure:

M68000 said:

elijahg said:

darkvader said:

Weird.  There's really nothing compelling about the iPhone 12 over previous models. 

Yeah, yeah, it's got 5G.  Whatever.  Honestly, except for tethering, I never had a problem with using a phone on 3G.  4G was definitely nicer for tethering, of course, and I suppose 5G would be somewhat nicer still, except that fast 5G is unlikely to exist where I'm likely to be when I need tethering capability.

And of course with the pandemic I'm REALLY glad I have an iPhone without FaceID, especially since it turns out that TouchID works really well even through nitrile gloves.

It seems weird to me that they didn't add the TouchID home button from the iPad to the iPhone 12, and it's rumoured to not be in the 13 either. The watch-assist unlocking is nice, but not amazing, and requires an AW - plus it took them over a year to add, despite the infrastructure already being there. Apple's SW development is excruciatingly slow for some reason.

Let’s hope the Touch ID is coming under the screen,  which is much more elegant

I agree - though not sure what the accuracy is like comparatively. I think a lot of Android phones with this tech sacrifice accuracy (and security) for speed. The reason I mention the power button version is the tech already exists, Apple just has to transplant the iPad power button into the iPhone, and done. 

AppleInsider said:

For example, published results of the tool repeatedly show users as having relatively low counts of "Power On Hours," typically in the low-hundreds and lower. For Macs running for two months, this seems to be a little low compared to what would be expected. 

In AppleInsider testing with its writers using M1 Macs since the issue first cropped up on February 13, the power on hours statistic showed 300 hours for one, despite being on for 23 hours a day since its initial purchase on the first day of availability. Another writer has owned their Mac mini for two months, and has racked up a mere 70 hours on that figure -- about nine work days.

This may indicate that the tool isn't necessarily receiving the correct data in its queries. We've been trying to get some concrete answers, and more data on the issue since February 15. 

This is because macOS aggressively turns off the drives when not in use. My 2019 Intel iMac's 512GB SSD has just 57 days worth of "power on time", but is most certainly has been on for more than 57 days! It has had 12,000 power cycles since new. On the other hand, the "Available spare" is at 100%, the percentage used is 2% with about 50TB of writes. The first screenshot at the iMore link shows 150TB of data written, that's a _lot_ of data written in a few months, which would explain the percentage used - in fact doing better than the SSD in my own Intel Mac. The one showing 1% with 15TB used is likely just a rounding error, it's probably less.

Also, if it is because of swap usage, similar endurance issues would be seen on the Intel Mac SSDs unless its a bug in the kernel's memory management on the M1. Activity monitor would likely show writes which might indicate the source if it is a swap related issue.