mpantone

ravnorodom said:

I am surprise they haven't killed Google+ yet. I have no idea what it does beside just being a profiler of an existing Google profile?

They shut down Google+ services in 2019.

I think Google Plus URLs resolve elsewhere just to prevent 404 errors.

The biggest problem with this decision is that some American iPhone users can't upgrade because Apple will not sell an iPhone 14 with a physical SIM card tray to Americans.

For example, Mint Mobile only supports physical SIM cards right now. Hopefully these carriers (they're all MVNOs) will eventually add eSIM support for customer retention. Right now their customers can't buy the new iPhone 14 models without jumping ship.

But the fact remains that without a SIM card tray, that limits all carrier usage (both US domestic and international) to those companies that support eSIMs. 

gilly33 said:

Thought we might get a new AirPod Max. Hmmm?

Unsurprisingly Apple prioritized their top selling AirPods model: the Pro earbuds. 

Next up will probably be the standard AirPods. The Max headphones will be the last to be refreshed.

caladanian said:

Why is the change from lightning to USB-C so slow after iPad Pro and MacBook (Pro)?!

My guess is that this is mostly a business decision based on how the products are being used but there could be other factors.

Apple knows how AirPods and AirPods Pro are being used, most frequently paired with an iPhone. Apple knows it will change over to USB-C, they just need to pick a time to do it. If the iPhone is being charged with a Lightning cable, it makes the most sense to have the AirPods charging case use the same connector since one cable can be used on both.

Undoubtedly prototype iPhones and AirPod charging cases using USB-C have been in their labs for several years. If it comes this fall, it's not like they made the decision to switch ports this summer.

Note that the two connectors -- Lightning and USB-C -- are physically different, not just in size. For Lightning connectors, the exposed male connector is on the cable (inexpensive to replace), the female part of the connector is in the device.

For USB-C connectors, the opposite.

This means that damage/failure of the male connector (more likely) is more expensive to repair in USB-C devices. There may be higher risk of debris (in one both sides, male and female) interfering with proper connection due to smaller physical clearances. It might work great sitting on a workbench in a lab, but real world usage is different, like shoving your phone into lint-filled pocket.

And don't forget there might be additional challenges in developing reliable water resistance in USB-C device ports.

If a currently marketed device has a certain degree of physical resistance, it's not likely that Apple will want to revert to a level that provides less resistance, like going from IP67 to IP65.

lkrupp said:

blastdoor said:

22july2013 said:

I was already preferring (and eager) to buy an Apple Car back in 2017, and was forced to buy something else instead. At least I got CarPlay. However now I live in a condo where I can't install an electric power station required for an all-electric car, so I wouldn't be able to own an electric vehicle anymore. You pretty much need your own garage to own an electric car, which leaves out roughly half the population (mostly the poorer half.)

We charge our Bolt using a regular outlet (aka level 1 charger). It’s slower, but we can still add more miles over night than we typically use in the day. So you don’t necessarily need to install a level 2.

Of course, if your condo has no outdoor outlet close to where you park then level 1 won’t work either. 

I probably wouldn’t have an electric car if I couldn’t charge at home, either.

Well then don’t move to California as the state is ready to pass legislation banning fossil fueled vehicles by 2035. Excuses, excuses for not going electric, and irrational ones at that.

That is NOT the policy being discussed.

The proposal is to halt sales of NEW fossil-fuel based vehicles in 2035. Existing fossil fuel based vehicles won't be prohibited nor will the sale of used ones. And they won't be turning people at the border either. They're not going to shut down gas stations on January 1st. It's not like the owners of 2034 Toyota Celicas will need to turn their keys in on New Year's Eve. A limited number of PHEVs (Plug-in Hybrids) will still be available.

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/california-moves-accelerate-100-new-zero-emission-vehicle-sales-2035

Medium and heavy-duty vehicles will be given guidelines with a goal of phase out by 2045. Drayage trucks (like typical 18-wheelers that you see on the roads, Class 8 I believe) also have the 2035 target date at the moment.

So much misinformation in the comments section these days.

Appalling.