stompy

AppleInsider said:

The USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF) has muddied the waters surrounding how different USB standards are named, with USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 set to become different generations of USB 3.2, while USB 3.2 itself will become the more confusingly named "USB 3.2 Gen 2x2."

They only did this because so many people claimed that USB 3 naming and branding couldn't get any more confusing. /s

lkrupp said:

I’m just stupefied by those who see Apple as the bad actor here. This take is all over the tech blogs. On MacRumors the comments are like 10-to-1 against Apple as abusing its power and how it shouldn’t be able to do this to a company and they hope everybody dumps their Apple products to teach Apple a lesson. 

Hope this convinces you to never again read comments on MR. It's like asking a random stranger to gouge out your eyes.

flydog said:

AppleInsider said:

The emails haven't made an appearance at an ongoing U.S. Federal Trade Commission trial accusing Qualcomm of monopolistic practices, forcing chip buyers to accept patent licenses at the same time.

And they likely won't since emails are hearsay and not admissible except for limited purposes.

Plenty of emails already presented in this case. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-11/qualcomm-casting-intel-as-hypocrite-backfires-in-antitrust-trial

tbornot said:

let's not forget the Apple stealing windowing and mousing from Xerox thing, too.

Apple asked Xerox executives to see their technology, and they agreed.  That isn’t stealing.  Of course, it wasn’t a good idea, but Xerox didn’t know what they had.

Apple also compensated Xerox PARC with a pre-IPO Apple stock deal. Stealing? Not even close to that old myth.

Mike Wuerthele said:

canukstorm said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

racerhomie3 said:

I seriously disagree with this. I hope Apple never compromises on the Mac again. The $800 Mac Mini is an excellent machine. The $200-400 is served by the iPad. Btw the iPad has the NVME storage that is in the Mac Mini.

The iPad Pro does, the sixth does not have the same speed. Was the 2012 Mac mini compromised for $599?

Yes.  It doesn't perform anywhere near as well as the new Minis. Not to mention, the old Mini came standard with an HDD while the new one comes standard with high-speed PCI-e SSD

I should have been more clear. Not compromised NOW, compromised in 2012.

While I get what you're trying to say, virtually every engineering endeavor has compromises. The 5400 RPM drive was ridiculous the day I bought it, and a compromise I was unwilling to live with in my October 2012 i5 mini. I believe the mid 2012 MacBook Airs were all SSD, I would have gladly given up the 512GB spinny disk for 128GB SSD.