experiment_626

richardway said:

Why nobody remembers that iMac Pro is actually just updated in 2019?

That was just increasing the available memory options (something the existing chipset already supported) and using the same GPU as before, just overclocked.

Apple would have had to update the system board to incorporate Titan Ridge and they would not do that when there was no benefit at the time (since the XDR display was not announced) except the raise the cost.

bobolicious said:

How and why does this happen...? 

It happens because the iMac Pro was developed and shipped when Alpine Ridge was the only TB3 controller Intel offered. The Titan Ridge controller used on the Macs that can drive the XDR display at 6K did not ship until the year after the iMac Pro was released. And before folks ask, there were no new CPUs or GPUs for the iMac Pro until the last couple of months. So now Apple has a reason to upgrade the iMac Pro and when they do, it will add Titan Ridge.

22july2013 said:

experiment_626 said:

When Apple says "we don't know what you read", they are almost certainly stating it literally - they do not know what I, personally, read because they are not tracking personally-identifiable data. In other words, they know someone clicked on an LA Times article (as an example), but they do not know that my AppleID was the one who did that even though I am logged in with said AppleID. If Apple literally did not track that an article was accessed, they could not pay the publisher for it. And Apple has said payments will be made based on the number of accesses. But all Apple is collecting is that the article was accessed and nothing else. They are not collecting data that would allow them to begin to form a "portfolio" of me based on the publications and articles I access.

Apple did not say "we do not track", they said "we do not know". You are trying to interpret those words as "we do not track" but they actually explained why it's "we do not know". Listen to their explanation and then argue with that. Did you watch the video I cited? It's a few seconds earlier than 20:46. It seems that you ignored their explanation of how it works. You also made a totally unjustified statement that "Apple has said payments will be made based on the number of accesses." Is it possible for you to cite where they said that? Don't assume you know how it works - please cite your claims. Some days I feel like I am arguing against brick walls, am I the first person who ever felt that way? (Um, I stayed home today with back pain. I think that put me in a bad mood. Sorry.)

IMO, you are arguing semantics. If they don't track (via personally-identifiable methods), they don't know. They don't know because they don't track (via personally-identifiable methods).

And with respect, are you familiar with how Apple will be paying the publishers their 50% cut of the revenue? They've said they will do so based on reader engagement with the publisher's content: https://9to5mac.com/2019/02/13/apple-news-service/

How do you expect Apple to determine engagement if they literally don't know what articles are engaged with, which is a literal interpretation of the phrase "we don't know what you read".

And are you aware that Apple's recommendation engine surface topics for personalized stories today in Apple News? How do you think the engine can do so if it literally has no idea of what you are reading or what publications you are following?

Apple has to collect some data on what is being read in order to make the system work. But it doesn't need to know who, explicitly, is reading it. And Apple defines that lack of explicitness as "not knowing what you read".

When Apple says "we don't know what you read", they are almost certainly stating it literally - they do not know what I, personally, read because they are not tracking personally-identifiable data. In other words, they know someone clicked on an LA Times article (as an example), but they do not know that my AppleID was the one who did that even though I am logged in with said AppleID. If Apple literally did not track that an article was accessed, they could not pay the publisher for it. And Apple has said payments will be made based on the number of accesses. But all Apple is collecting is that the article was accessed and nothing else. They are not collecting data that would allow them to begin to form a "portfolio" of me based on the publications and articles I access.