sdw2001

baka-dubbs said:

mike1 said:

baka-dubbs said:

There is only one upgrade I care about for the next iPhone and its the reason I skipped the 13.  Please just make it USB C.  That's it.  Every other device I travel with is USB-C, just make it happen Apple!

You know you can get a Lightning cable or MagSafe with a USB C connector on the other end.

Well aware and I could say that about any cable format.  Doesn't mean I want to go back to old PS/2 or Serial ports for mouse/keyboard and other peripherals.  At this point, lightening isn't just inconvenient, its also outdated at usb 2.0 data transfer speeds.  Its a great physical connector design, in that regards its superior to USB C.  However, they moved every other item they make to USB C, it would make sense to do the same with the iPhone.  

Lightning had its day.  But it's literally a decade old.  The data speeds suck, and it's prone to issues with dirt and debris.  Their physical cables are also perpetually terrible and do not hold up. I have an iPad Air 4, and the USB connection is far superior.  

Ridiculous and shortsighted. Starting pay of $20 an hour isn’t enough? For retail? If all they’re going to end up doing is reducing employment. $28 an hour to work at an Apple Store. You have to be kidding me. And where the hell do they get this living wage of $31 an hour?  That’s $62,000 a year with two weeks unpaid vacation! New teachers in well to do areas start at about $55,000 a year with a bachelor’s.  The entitlement in this country has gotten unbelievable. The notion that one should be able to live fairly comfortably by working 40 hours a week is absurd. 

What cannot continue will not.  

Some of these streamers simply cannot survive.  Others are bound to consolidate through mergers and sales (HBO and Discovery+ and CNN+, for example).  Then we have unknowns, like Peacock.  It has 9 million paid subscribers, but 7 more million as part of cable TV subs.  They are planning on investing billions to make it work.  They better, or they aren't going to make it.  I subscribed a few months ago to watch Yellowstone, but I've barely used it.  We'll see if I keep it.  I don't think Apple TV+ is going anywhere.  They've got deep pockets, a low price and a growing library of award winning content.  

We're at the point where we are approaching saturation.  Some smaller services like Fox Nation are growing quickly, but still very small.  Middling services like AMC+ have decent numbers, but don't seem to be growing much.  Then there is the impact on the big boys...Netflix, Amazon Prime and Disney+.  Netflix's price increases and growing dependence on original content put it at risk.  Gone are the days where if you wanted to stream a show, it was almost always found there.  Amazon Prime is raising prices too, but that includes Prime shipping, so I doubt there will be much of a negative impact.  Disney+ (excluding ESPN+) was a juggernaut, but has slowed and may slow much further with how they've stepped in it, politically.  My understanding is they've had a lot of cancelations since their stance on the FL bill and the leaked zoom call where execs openly discussed adding "queerness" everywhere they can (as well as a "not-so-secret gay agenda").   Disney is probably big enough and receptive enough to investors that it will quickly turn it around.  

crowley said:

sdw2001 said:

crowley said:

hackintoisier said:

Seems frivolous. 

Seems like an open and shut case.  Apple didn't have permission, therefore Apple broke the law.

Uh, no.  Apple didn't consider them manual laborers under the law, which was quoted above.  It's actually a potentially very complicated issue.  A court will decide whether the suit can even go forward.  They may have to prove that Apple knew their interpretation was questionable, or deliberately manipulated the system.  The court will have to decide what the intent of the law was.  Was it really to protect retail sales people because they open boxes sometimes? I imagine past practice and the length of time they paid bi-weekly without complaint or warning will factor in.  The damages also seem extremely overstated.  A $5,000,000 judgement would mean (before lawyers' fees) would be $50K per claimant.  All because they didn't have use of the money every week instead of every week? On what is that based...checking account average interest?  My gut tells me this goes nowhere.  

Of course the damages are overstated.  They always are so that can be negotiated down.

Well, obviously.  No response to the other substantive parts? Do you still think it's open and shut?  

crowley said:

hackintoisier said:

Seems frivolous. 

Seems like an open and shut case.  Apple didn't have permission, therefore Apple broke the law.

Uh, no.  Apple didn't consider them manual laborers under the law, which was quoted above.  It's actually a potentially very complicated issue.  A court will decide whether the suit can even go forward.  They may have to prove that Apple knew their interpretation was questionable, or deliberately manipulated the system.  The court will have to decide what the intent of the law was.  Was it really to protect retail sales people because they open boxes sometimes? I imagine past practice and the length of time they paid bi-weekly without complaint or warning will factor in.  The damages also seem extremely overstated.  A $5,000,000 judgement would mean (before lawyers' fees) would be $50K per claimant.  All because they didn't have use of the money every week instead of every week? On what is that based...checking account average interest?  My gut tells me this goes nowhere.