mr. h

doggone said:

I personally like … USB-C …  The key advantage for me is that … the cost of charger / cord replacement is a lot less than the older Apple chargers. 

You can buy third-party USB-C to Apple MagSafe 1 or MagSafe 2 MacBook charger cables for less than $10. I have one of each type, and two USB-C chargers, and they work great!

I would expect that if Apple does bring back MagSafe as a separate port, they will still offer charging over USB-C. They could also bring out their own "MagSafe" USB charging cables rather than add a dedicated port.

Mike Wuerthele said:

mr. h said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

mr. h said:

AppleInsider said:

Apple is also employing its toughened Ceramic Shield glass to the front and back [emphasis added]

Is this definitely correct? Yours is the first review I’ve seen that states this. I was under the impression that only the front glass had the Ceramic Shield and that the back glass is an older generation of Gorilla Glass.

This is what we've been told, but other than that, we have no way to confirm it independently.

The front and back glasses are mounted on different substrates. The front is laminate, with that OLED display. The rear is effectively glued to the metal back of the phone. That in itself changes the behavior of the glass under different stressors.

OK, thanks for the reply. Did they say if this is specific to the Pro Max? Because not only have I not seen anyone else say the back glass is Ceramic Shield on the Pro Max, I've seen other reviews (for non-pro models) that specifically mention that the back glass is definitely not Ceramic Shield. Perhaps you could get back to Apple on this for clarification? Much appreciated.

Sure can. I'm off the clock at the moment, but will make a call in the morning.

Great, thanks. Here’s an article that states that the back glass on the non-max 12s is not Ceramic Shield and is the same glass as used in the 11: https://www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/results-are-in-iphone-12-scratch-drop-test-ceramic-shield-as-tough-as-it-sounds/

When I saw the headline, I thought yours was going to be the first review to point out that this phone isn't actually all that small, it's just that these modern behemoths that all the professional reviewers are used to, make it look small. Alas, I was mistaken.

I've got an iPhone 12 mini and to me, it doesn't really feel any smaller than the iPhone 6 it replaced. I'm happy that Apple have provided this "smaller" phone, but I'm disappointed it's not smaller. I don't have tiny hands, but for the way I like to hold my phone, I do have to stretch uncomfortably to reach the top quarter of the display with my thumb, and have had to enable reachability on the phone. I guess I have to keep dreaming of an iPhone 4-sized device with full-face display.

chadbag said:

@rob53 where does Apple say they won’t “allow” x86 emulation?

The claim is nonsense because Rosetta 2 is x86 emulation (well, strictly, it's x64 emulation).

Edit: as others have pointed out below, this is not correct. It's translation, not emulation.

From reading their page about it, it seems like this new version is going to still be a purely virtualisation software, with no emulation. So if you want to run Windows with it, it'll have to be the ARM version of Windows. However, apparently Microsoft have announced a "Rosetta"-type layer for Windows for ARM, that will allow you to run x64 code in Windows for ARM.