arthurba

On iOS everything is Safari right (or WebKit or whatever - the same engine)? On iOS app makers still must use the Apple supplied web browser calls - Apple won’t approve any alternative web browser engines for iOS right?  So are these stats about actual web browsers or just apps?  Ie: on iOS if you use the Facebook app to browse the web does that show up as Safari or as Facebook?

That Zollotech video nails it. 

The obsession with ‘thin’ is great - but not when it impacts performance. The design is probably fine for the ‘stock’ processors - it’s just the i9 isn’t really suited. 

The era where we could have performance and portability seems over. 

I’m personally waiting for the Mac Pro.  The iMac Pro  and MacBook Pro all have thermal issues.  I’ve got the luxury of not strictly needing the performance when I’m on the road.  It’s a “nice to have”. But for many ‘flexible workers’ using shares spaces and for creatives who need the PC ‘on site’ it’s not an option. A real shame.

There is a chance of course that Apple will fix this in 2019 when LPDDR4 is available. They’ve really crammed a lot into that old chassis for the 2018 15”...

If the cache is on an unencrypted drive, then it shouldn’t cache things from encrypted drives. Full stop. That’s a serious security faux pas. 

From memory, QL cache was designed and written before FileVault. So the QL cache and external drives were all assumed to be unencrypted - all good.  And (again from memory) FileVault encryption initially was only available on the main drive (without command line hacks).  Again - the security on the QL cache and the original files was the same or better. 

If the QL cache is on an encrypted drive and the data is on a different encrypted drive - the choice is much more difficult.  You can’t equate encryption.  One key may be secure and the other insecure (taped to the back of the laptop).  Best practice would be not to cache in this case.

I've used and recommended the Airport routers for years.  When I've had influence over the decision, and pushed for Airport, other engineers have been truly surprised and impressed at the quality - I always got the impression that no-one except me had ever even heard of Airport.

The fact that Apple never went for a web based admin was a good thing.  On all routers that have web based admin, almost all the security updates I see are for attack vectors on that.

I've been experimenting lately with DD-WRT firmware on Linksys routers - and I guess that's the way of the future for my home installs.  For my professional work I use a mixture of Cisco for all the wired stuff and Airport for the wireless - but I guess I'll now switch to Cisco for wireless too, though I'll probably look at whatever HPE (Aruba?) are offering as an alternative. The problem is that the Cisco wireless stuff is overkill in most situations I face, and I'll have to pay for that.

For the home market - I think Apple always struggled against the 'free router' that comes with your providers internet service (ISP).  All of the non-professionals I know just use that as their wireless hub.  In fact many 'professionals' I know do this too!  It is actually quite difficult to explain to someone why you should get extra hardware to have a different wireless network in your home.  I think at the end of the day - that's why Apple are getting out.  Linksys etc. all have the ISP's as their customer, and Cisco have the commercial market sewn up.

It's a shame - because like other posts have said - there is a lot of value Apple already bring - and more value they could bring.  But I totally see that even if they did all that - their market share wouldn't go up - it would still be just me and you buying these things and everyone else shrugging their shoulders.

That Apple are going to be pushing 'Airplay 2' soon, and it's the 'Airport Express' that really pushed the original 'Airplay' - I do wonder if maybe they have something new up their sleeves.  Eg: a Cellular/Wifi bridge with Airplay 2 (or is that just an old iPhone with a headphone port?).  Surely HomePod/AppleTV can't be their only Airplay 2 device?

Weird.  I am running Sierra and don't even have a /Library/Bundles folder.

Ahh, I see - apparently Apple has pushed out an update that installs this new folder.  I don't let updates happen automatically, so I don't have the nagware installed.  This article explains it better:
https://eclecticlight.co/2017/11/09/what-is-macos-installer-notification-and-why-did-i-get-it/