Last Active
  • Apple's iMac predicted to overtake HP and lead the All-in-One market

    I’m guessing most of those HP AIOs are sold to businesses, offices, etc.… I don’t know a single person who owns one of those.
  • Apple sued in Portugal over iPhone 6, iPhone 6S 'designed obsolescence' battery patch

    DECO (from Associação de DEfesa do COnsumidor, i.e. Consumers’ Defense Association), originally created as a sort of institutional ombudsman, publishes Proteste (from proTESTE, as in testing, it has nothing to do with protest), a mostly decent magazine equivalent to Consumer Reports, but eventually devolved into this sad peddler of junkware to their members.

    How can anyone take them seriously when they always pester people with offers of “great” products such as really janky Android tablets and useless plastic gadgets in exchange for attracting more members? Products that, mind you, would be completely destroyed under their own testing parameters? My mom used to be a subscriber, and the previous owners of my flat are at least members and never got around to update their address, so I always knew of and keep getting their stupid advertising in the mail. While their recent work regarding electrical bills is commendable, when it comes to consumer products they completely lost their way and should be ashamed of themselves.
  • Prepear revises logo to settle Apple trademark dispute

    Design PhD student (specialised in graphic design, namely typography and all related disciplines, including branding and corporate identity) here: Apple was absolutely in the right here. The leaf shape, while generic and very pure in a geometric sense (just like Apple's, and yes, you might argue that those shouldn't be accepted in the first place as intellectual property because of prior art and for being too generic, but context here is key) was waaaaaaaay too similar in proportion and orientation (it was just mirrored). If you look at AI's original coverage of the lawsuit, you can definitely see it:

    Sure, Apple was a bit overzealous about it, but that's kind of par for the course for a billion-dollar company. If it was resolved amicably, that kind of lays the “bullying” angle to rest, now, doesn't it? The guys at Prepear were throwing a tantrum, IMHO. Especially considering how, yes, they are a tech company (if they were, say, some random agricultural business I could see how Apple might be overreaching to branches of business their own Nice classification codes likely don't even cover, except Prepear has… apps. In App Stores).

    No, really. What's more, I actually like the revised version better. The contrast between the more continuous contour of the pair and the leaf is starker, and the latter's half-circle shape not only pairs better with the tops and bottoms of the pear, but it also somewhat echoes the counter-shape (or the “eye”) of the lowercase “e” in their logo.

    TL;DR: Not only did they not lose an expensive lawsuit, Apple actually forced them to better their own design and, as someone else said, this actually brought them some publicity. Win-win, if you ask me.
  • First third-party AirPods Max travel case arrives from WaterField Designs

    The only individuals who are maligning Apple’s case are techie man-children, who are offended that the case looks “gay”, only they cannot bring themselves to say that word at all. And they all want to insist that their personal revulsion must be universal. I have never seen any guy carrying his expensive headphones in their cases in public: they’re either wearing them on the head or around the neck, and then they’re on the desk in prominent view while filming useless 4K unboxing videos. It’s also instructive that no one is balking at the $99 price tag, but perhaps there is no price too high to protect fragile manhood.
    Or maybe they’ve just owned enough Apple products made of that material to know that it looks like total shit after only a few months of use?

    I should know that, as own an iPad 3 with a very much “gay-looking” pastel-blue smart cover, and it was never its colour (which, mind you, it shares with the knockoff I’m now using) that bothered me (again, I’m as cishet, and supposedly heteronormative, as they get, but I don’t give a flying fsck about what people think of my colour preferences and if those aren’t deemed “heteronormative” enough by their standards, offend their delicate conservative snowflake sensibilities or otherwise give them a different impression, that’s not my problem and I couldn’t care less either way), but the fact that it got dirty af and pretty much self-destructed even while having been used mostly indoors.

    That is something most people, save for some crust punks or otherwise sloppy individuals, would be ashamed of carrying around regardless of their sexuality, I can assure you. And sure, maybe us Apple users could regularly wipe that crappy polymer down with IPA and whatnot, but seriously, couldn’t Apple just switch materials already? They nailed polycarbonate, aluminium and even those Apple Watch straps, but they still haven’t figured out something more durable and washable than that pressed-on microfibre+plastic+leaf-thin matte elastomer sandwich bs.

    That a $500+ piece of kit comes with a case that not only WILL suffer that fate, but also doesn’t even provide full protection when it’s brand new and in one piece is just egregious, IMHO. Either go big, or go bust.
  • Developer devises workaround to run ARM Windows on M1 Mac

    cloudguy said:

    They will.   It's not a matter of "blinking".   It's a matter of it being worth their while.

    In the early days they formed a cartel of Microsoft, HP and Intel.   But those days are long gone.   Today, Microsoft has no reason to boycott any single type of hardware and every reason to be hardware agnostic.
    First off, this "cartel" of yours only existed in your head. It excludes major Windows OEMs like Dell, Compaq, IBM, Lenovo and Toshiba as well as lots of smaller ones.

    Second, Microsoft has every reason not to be hardware agnostic. In the past, Windows had a 97% share of end user computing. Now there is Android, iOS, ChromeOS and macOS. Keep in mind: until around maybe 2007 or 2008, most people actually did like Windows. But since then, due to the growth of the Google (3 billion Android users, ChromeOS had 11% PC market share 3Q 2020) and Apple (2 billion iOS users, macOS 8% 3Q 2020 PC market share) platforms as well as several bad decisions by Microsoft, this is no longer the case by a long shot. The last thing that Microsoft needs to do is make it easier for people to use Windows part time on other platforms, because that inevitably leads to their leaving full time. For example: employers now put "we let our workers use MacBooks!" on recruiting pitches now. 

    Let me give you an example: gaming. Were Microsoft to make Windows on ARM licenses available to Macs, were I were Apple (or simply a major reseller) this is what I would do: offer gaming MacBook Minis. Base: $699 Mac Mini. I would deploy Windows Home ($30 to OEMs) in Parallels Standard ($20 to OEMs) and use them to preinstall the Steam and Epic app stores (both free) on optimized settings with Destiny 2 and Fortnite (both free to play) preloaded and ready to go for $750. You would be a total maroon (the old Looney Tunes insult) to even consider buying an Acer Nitro 5, Dell G5, Asus TUF or any of the other "entry level 1080p gaming PCs" with 8 GB RAM, Intel Core i5/AMD Ryzen 5 and Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650/AMD Radeon RX 5600M/Intel Iris XE system because this would outperform it in every way

    Were Apple to do this,

    1. Mac Minis would fly off the shelves
    2. Developers would notice and start making apps for macOS too instead of just for Windows. (And iPadOS too ... why not?) 
    3. Pretty soon you wouldn't need Windows or Parallels anymore. Mac Minis would become the default machines for entry level gaming. (And entry level everything else).

    Tell me how it is in Microsoft's interests to facilitate this? Exactly.
    Nah. I think Mac Minis will fly off the shelves *anyway*, and Microsoft will still cave in and offer a full, non-OEM, expensive, VM-compatible ARM64 Windows license, to stem the tide and maintain relevance. If they can get away with a higher profit margin on one of those selling it to many developers who would still have to buy a Mac anyway, they will, OEMs be damned.

    Even though the iPhone wasn’t even out and the mobile and desktop market share figures weren’t, just like you pointed out, the comparable in 2006-2007 to what they are today, the same argument you made could’ve been construed back then (as a matter of fact, it was). That didn’t stop Microsoft back then, and it won’t stop them now, either. Especially *this* Microsoft, which, even with their decent devices division, is pivoting more and more towards services.