mfryd

The report is wrong.  The EU rule does not require Apple to use USB-C, it gives Apple another option.

The rule only applies to phones that charge with a wire.  It does not apply to phones that charge wirelessly.   

lkrupp said:

But, but, but... The iPod wasn’t first music player so how could it have changed the world? Apple, always late to the game, never changing anything, just copying what’s already there and applying clever marketing so stupid people will buy it. From computers, to music players, to mobile phones, to tablets, to watches, the mantra from the critics is consistent. 

It won’t be long before one of AI’s own bridge trolls comes along to point this out. They almost always do. I’m just making it easier for them. /s

p.s. I have a 2003 iPod (Dock Connector) that still holds a charge and still works.

Apple has a track record of taking something that exists, and improving it.  When Apple gets it right, the product can really take off.

It's not that Apple is "late to the game", it's more like the game isn't serious until Apple starts playing.

Music players existed before the iPod, but the iPod was better and easier to use.  The iPod made portable players mainstream, and the iPod dominated the market.

Graphical User Interface computers existed before the Macintosh.  Xerox had their workstations, and Apple had the Lisa.  But the Mac did it better, and for awhile was the leader in GUI computers.

Let's not forget that cell phones existed long before Apple entered the market.  There were phones that could send email and access the web.   The iPhone was simply better.   Over 95% of all phones sold today are iPhone, or Android phones based on the iPhone keyboardless/touchscreen model.

GrannySmith99 said:

...

Questions:

• If i was to buy an M1 Mac (or M2...) and install Windows 11 ARM through Parallels, would it run my Intel windows App?

Probably.  The ARM version of Windows 11 is able to run most Intel Windows software.  I am running an old Windows intel version of Quickbooks using parallels on my M1 Max MacBook.  I have not noticed any problems.

JP234 said:

It mystifies me as to why anyone would want to run Windows on a Mac, silicon or otherwise. Sure you can do it, but in the words of my late mother, "JP, just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD." Mom was wise.

With Windows PCs available for next to nothing, both new and refurb, with Windows pre-installed (you know Windows is not included with either emulator, right?), please, someone provide me with justification for not just buying a cheap PC to run your QuickBooks Pro, or some other application not available on MacOS?

It's a reasonable question to ask, and there are reasonable answers.

Consider someone who needs to run a mix of Mac and Windows applications.  There are conveniences to having them all on one machine, rather than split across two machines.  

• It's trivial to share files between the two platforms when they are hosted on the same platform
• If you are on the road, A single laptop weighs less than two laptops
• A single Mac based backup strategy can backup both platforms
• VM software may cost less than a separate second machine
• VM software makes it easy to switch back and forth between the two platforms for workflows that involve both Windows and Mac applications

Now, if your workflow is such that some says you are at your desk working in Windows, and some days you are at your desk working in Mac, then two separate machines may be the best solution.

Personally, when I am on the road, I am much happier carrying only a single laptop.

Fred257 said:

Nice tax write off.

Not really.

For every dollar given to a charity, Apple saves about 15¢ in federal taxes.  So for every dollar donated to charity, shareholders end up making a dollar less in profit.

I would hardly say it's a "nice write off" when it literally costs $1 to save 15¢ in taxes.