tht

nubus said:

jdw said:

You folks demanding change and company breakups don't know how good you have it now.  You moan and groan and scream to get Big Brother involved, and when he gets involved, your world changes for the worse.  But will you blame yourselves when that happens?  Ha!  Hardly.  You will turn your attention to yet another free market activity to ruin with the iron fist of government.

Eh... we do have it better after government decided that MS had to unbundle IE. At the time pages often required ActiveX which only worked on Windows and had a lot of security problems. I couldn't access my online bank from a Mac. Now I can - thanks to government insisting that MS couldn't use Windows as a vehicle to kill competition on browsers. It isn't a free market - but would you really want a market without any standards for food or car or drug safety?

I don't think you could say that gov't action or regulation caused the decline of IE. IE had pretty close to 90% worldwide marketshare from 2002 to 2004 or so. Its decline started in 2005, 5 years before the MS Windows browser ballot started in the EU, right? The decline also coincided with the Firefox reaching maturity,

The single biggest reason for IE's decline in the aughts was ActiveX and the nightmare that was web-browsing in the aughts. I don't know how many people on this forum were old enough to use computers back then, but web browsing was dangerous activity with IE and Windows in the early 2000s. You were one innocent click away from having cascading, infinite popups, persistent tool bars taking up a rather large portion of your browser, persistent malware that required a format and reinstall to get rid of. This was due to IE/ActiveX's security model.

With Google services becoming popular in the latter half of the aughts and the release of Chrome being the best way to use those services, Chrome rose in share, IE's marketshare decline became permanent. It is curious why MS couldn't develop IE to be competitive, as IE just could not catch up to various WebKit browsers in quality and features. (Their business was not reliant on it, etc?)

The best way to reduce the risk of web browsing back then was to use Firefox, or a Mac or Linux. The iPhone's security model and App Store design was born from the security nightmare in the 2000s. I'd argue it is this security model that allowed consumers to buy and or download software much more safely, and enabled an expansion for the market of software and services.

If governments want to introduce regulation to increase browser choice, they should enforce websites to use Web standards.

mjtomlin said:

TSMC customers that include Apple will increase orders for second generation 3nm process wafers

Not so sure this applies to the M3 Ultra; the next generation 3nm process is not compatible with the first generation, which is why so many other companies have opted to pass on it and wait.

The A18 will make the switch as will the M4.

Yeah. Apple is already making M3 Max chips on N3B. What's the point of using N3E when TSMC is fabbing M3 Max chips on order low millions of chips? The M3 Ultra is two M3 Max chips and the UltraFusion silicon bridge. So, the compute chips are already available. Just waiting on the silicon bridge chip, qualification/validation of the M3 Ultra, and marketing timing. Apple still needs to up their ambition and ship the quad Max chip solution too. You hope they can ship it for every generation.

N3E? Yeah, that might arrive in time for the A18 and M4 family of chips. Apple could be using four generations of TSMC 3nm fabs: N3B, N3E, N3P and N3X. Won't see TSMC 2nm chips until late 2026 at the earliest.

tenthousandthings said:

Interesting, basically a hybrid 5K/4K -- 5K horizontal and 4K vertical. Extended 4K or Truncated 5K. Take your pick! 

Good to see movement, finally, in the desktop display space. Started last year with the Dell 6K competitor and the Samsung 5K copycat. After years of 4K being mostly good enough.

Your tease about "8K monitors" expected at CES has me interested...

There's no movement here. If it is a Thunderbolt 4 monitor, it's bandwidth limited to 32 Gbit/s bandwidth, whatever combination of pixels and refresh rate gets you there. These new Dell 34 and 40 inch monitors are 136 PPI displays or so, using typical resolutions we've seen for a long time now.

Contrary to the article title, these Dell monitors are not aimed at the Studio Display. Time and again, Mac users want 220 to 250 PPI external displays to match their laptop displays, or the native pixel density that macOS is designed for. Since they are 136 PPI, it's the same story since Thunderbolt 3 came out, almost 8 years.

The 40" 5K2K isn't even that original. The LG 5K2K 34" has been around for what, 6 years?

StrangeDays said:

humbug1873 said:

So with the 3d scan of your ears for the AirPods and know the 3d scan of the face for the Vision Pro (FaceID is only stored locally!) ... Apple know gains the looks of all the users buying into the ecosystem. 

2024 is much closer to 1984 now.

Incorrect nonsense. FaceID converted to a hash and stored locally. Try again 

Hehe. Who's going to tell humbug1873 about the surveillance culture of today?

Like, your face, fingerprints, PII, income, family, spending, location habits are all known to the government or can be known with just a little effort? Not only that, the media be it social or traditional are designed for enragement, not delivering information. It's mostly promoted propaganda, made-up tabloid stories, and time-wasters?

Apple? Yeah, the biometric ID is just a bunch of randomized numbers which are useless for reconstructing what a face or fingerprint looks like.

Looking forward to finally seeing what people can do with the device.

Big thing for me is being able to use it for keyboard input dominated workflows. Hopefully Terminal.app is part of the software load. Wonder how they are going to do the cursor. Every spatial view has a cursor? One cursor that traverses all the spatial views?