tht
About
- Username
- tht
- Joined
- Visits
- 195
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 8,024
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 6,021
Reactions
-
Cracked screens & dead batteries are selling more iPhones than AI
Yup. Not a surprise.
A lot of sturm and drang among the investorati and mediarati for AI turning over the market, but that's investor money flashing in front of their eyes. For the mass market consumers? AI is next generation auto-complete or next generation search, after a very long period of stagnation, and that type of stuff doesn't really matter to mass market consumers, such that they will spend more money on it, change their habits for, etc.
Moreover, AI is mostly a web-service. Why would it drive hardware upgrades in consumer devices?
-
Craig Federighi says macOS would ruin what makes the iPad special
My primary fear with allowing dual-booting of macOS on iPads is that Apple stops advancing iPadOS because there is less customer demand to do so.charlesn said:
Comments like this convince me that reading comprehension has become a lost skill in America. Pretty aggressive response considering he didn't say that you--or any iPad user--HAD to have their iPad running MacOS. What he said was: "The iPad OS can be the default, but please allow power users to install OSX." See? Not only do you not have to run MacOS on your iPad, you don't even have to install it! He would simply like that option for people who do want to install it. And your problem with this request, which would not affect you in the least, is WHAT exactly? I have suggested this as a possibility myself, since Apple Silicon can boot into either OS, and this kind of separate solution doesn't involve ANY compromise in either OS--no need to try and kludge a touchscreen into MacOS or complicate iPadOS--both OSes work exactly as they do now, which is why he specifies the need for a Magic Keyboard folio, because you'll need a keyboard and trackpad for MacOS. Of course, we all know why this will never happen: Apple wants to continue to sell us two devices, not one. It's also why they've resisted ease-of-use functionality in iPadOS (the files system, multitasking, etc) that would make it more of an easy laptop replacement for more people. It's really as simple as that.kiltedgreen said:
Please, just buy a MacBook if you want a “damn fine portable Mac”, it’s already here. I for one do not want my iPad running macOS - I’ll leave that to my Mac thanks.mfryd said:However, this is not a reason to prohibit running Mac OSX on an iPad. Users should have a choice as to which OS they run.I have nothing against the iPad OS. It's a great solution for many (but not all) users. Why not allow users to choose which OS they are running?
The iPad OS can be the default, but please allow power users to install OSX. iPad apps already work inside of Mac OSX, so no functionality is lost.
An iPad with an M4 processor, 16GB RAM, 2TB SSD, Thunderbolt 3, and a Magic Keyboard Folio (Keyboard and trackpad) would make a damn fine portable Mac.
I think the ideal for iPadOS is to do everything that macOS can do, but with touch input. All files and documents are cross-compatible. All workflows are cross-compatible. All the features are the same. The only difference is the iPadOS UI is designed for a touch interface while macOS is designed for a pointer interface. Or perhaps, iPadOS is designed for a horizontal display while macOS is designed for a vertical display.
Apple has its own vision for what the iPad is. It's not what a lot of users want. So, the march of progress for iPadOS is glacial. If they are going to release an 19" folding display iPad, this will hopefully increase the pace. A 19" folding display, capable of being configured to multiple form factors: large flat tablet, clamshell laptop, vertical display like an iMac, and if the hinge is 0-to-360, a heavy 13" tablet, will drive more PC operating system features into iPadOS. Would be good to see it come out.
-
Apple & Google profit as Chinese VPNs collect your private data
You should have just directly said it. It's not hypothetical. There are VPN services that are working for the FBI, CIA, whatever government agency. Facebook even had their own VPN service to surreptitiously track users. They shut down Onavo because of controversy, but that doesn't mean they don't have some other VPN service under a different front company or handshake agreement; or, already have agreements with multiple VPN companies for data.hmlongco said:If something ever needed to be Sherlocked...
And I've said it before and I'll say it again, if I were the US government and wanted to track sketchy people, I'd back a "private" VPN service that looks to be above broad...
Not sure how far anyone should trust a VPN service. From a well-known company who has ethical principles, probably can trust them. At least up until a change in management.
-
New report about Apple's 10 main challenges ignores two main factors
Last year, Gurman was saying John Ternus is the CEO-in-waiting if Cook retires 3 to 5 years from now. Jeff Willams if Cook retires now. Both guys are surely hoping Cook continues to end of 2028.
Most of these are not really problems per se. The “No Next Big Thing” is not a real problem. The AVP being too expensive isn’t a real problem.Like the article needed 10 items or “problems” and the writers had to do the word count padding thing that students do to complete their assignment. More adjectives here, a phrase there, split one thing into multiple things.The big issue is having to deal with government scrutiny and policies, but they don’t sound that big to me. If they lose the default placement deal for search with Google, they are going to try to replace it with a default placement deal for AI services. Being forced to open up their platforms hurts their egos, not their bottom lines. They are addressing tariffs through diversifying their manufacturing and supply chains. Cook explicitly said it: India, Vietnam, etc.
If the USA passes a law that only American manufactured products can be sold in the USA, they will have Foxconn build the plants and raise prices accordingly. Everyone is in the same boat and nobody has an advantage.Like with everything, it’s really the decision making that makes, breaks or maintains the company. Having the processes in place to ensure good decision making. This is what Apple U was supposed to do.WWDC25 is a good example of the decision processes remaining to be good, imo. They didn’t double down on the mistakes from last year, have re-learned the value of saying no, or yes, to things. When the decision making process goes bad, it actually takes a while, but it does mean there is an inevitability to it if they can’t stop the train. Witness Intel or Boeing.
-
If you were underwhelmed by WWDC 2025, you're not alone
Apple is not ok with nothing, or no genAI services, and ChatGPT is included, along with options to include other genAI services in Xcode for code gen. I think you can assume that Apple offering a 3rd party genAI service as a fallback to user prompts is a permanent position. They want genAI companies to bid to become the default "fallback" service. If no company bids billions to be in this position, Apple will live with their own, which will not be as performant as existing versions. At least I think that's how I would play it if I was in their position.danvm said:
Could we say that Apple is also OK with the 30% fail rates of OpenAI, considering how they integrate ChatGPT with iOS 26? If it's so bad as you think, why Apple is integrating with it?Wesley_Hilliard said:
Your comments read like a Samsung fan in a forum circa 2014. They're tired, old arguments that never prove true. Siri still works in its core competencies and sucks greatly at things outside of those, and Apple promised an update that didn't arrive. That's annoying, but it's one feature out of a dozen that shipped in 2024/2025. There was never vaporware, just hallucinating AI that had a higher-than-desired miss rate.ChiIrishReed said:
Ok. Delete the sentence about Steve Jobs and look at the rest of the comment. Where is the lie about Siri, about AI, about Apple being behind and promoting vaporware and not having anything complete issued at roll out time?Mike Wuerthele said:
Seven years ago, still evergreen.ChiIrishReed said:It’s time for Tim Cook to be fired. Steve Jobs would be and is rolling over in his grave. Nothing groundbreaking or innovative has happened under Cook’s watch. I’ve been an active apple fan since 2000. Apple intelligence last year (and Siri) was nothing but false promises and vaporware starting with WWDC 2024. Apple AI this year is still woefully behind any of its competitors. Apple’s tech is behind Android features that have been out for years on other phones (and yes I know those phones are less secure and have bloatware - but that doesn’t invalidate the point) and yet Apple is selling these as new and revolutionary software updates. Tim is too cautious and these promises of a new OS every year, except some features being available later in the year (just wait customer) in an iOS update is nothing but lies and poor product development year after year. It’s not necessary. Gone are the days when Apple was innovative and the OS actually had every feature when it was released the first time, without promises for later. Same with the hardware. Incrementalism is not only boring, it’s costing Apple its edge. What is apple working on?Let me pull a select quote."If Steve Jobs Was Still Alive"
"If Steve Jobs were alive today" are arguments are, by their very nature, specious and ridiculous. For one thing, they're based entirely on conjecture, as no one knows exactly how someone who has been dead for close to seven years would react to a unique situation arising today, much less the adherence to Moore's Law in iPhone processors that Intel has failed to deliver for the Mac. It's an argument that's impossible to prove and equally impossible to refute.
For another, these arguments implicitly invoke a fictitious, idealized version of Steve Jobs who always did everything right and never made mistakes or became embroiled in crises at Apple — one bearing virtually no resemblance to the actual Steve Jobs.
Google and OpenAI might be okay with 30% or greater fail rates, but not Apple. Apple's focus on incremental updates and products that actually enhance a user's life are what sets it apart. Cook's reluctance and ability to step back and rethink shows why he's an excellent CEO in a world where Humane and the Cybertruck exist.I'd also love to know where Android is ahead, specifically. To my eye that OS has languished over the past six years or so in favor of announcing party tricks that never ship. Or is Google's graveyard of PR ploys a figment of my imagination?And what was Apple doing in leaps and bounds before that it isn't doing now? Other than releasing a new product line twice a decade, where exactly has Apple ever moved fast, broke things, and came out ahead of the competition other than privacy and security? Apple is good because it is cautious. I don't understand people's drive to change that.
I don't think Apple has much intention to develop a ChatGPT level genAI service. Their genAI services will be targeted and local, designed for small domains. A ChatGPT level service means continually accruing everyone's information. It doesn't stop. Everything you do, say, see, identify, write, make, and "you" means everyone, needs to be ingested. You think Apple is going to do that?
