crowley

macgui said:

coolfactor said:

It always falls on deaf ears, but I frequently raise a related issue when prices are posted in these articles, or links to Amazon "deals", which are usually US-only. It seems that the editors keep forgetting that they have a worldwide audience, and $499.00 in USD is not $499.00 in other currencies, so simply adding "USD" next to prices shows some respect for non-US readers.

Bullshit. AI has said multiple times in response to similar statements and direct requests that as a US site, they'll use US dollars without specifying that it's USD being referenced and that policy won't change. They forgot nothing and there have been no deaf ears. Just because you didn't get your way doesn't make it so.

They made an editorial choice as is their preference and right. If I go to a site UK, Japan, China, or Spain, I'll expect units used by that country and if they use US units as well I'll be appreciative but not expectant. One thing I won't be is butt-hurt because there's no USD posted.

That's how I behave when in a foreign country as well. I don't expect or demand that anybody speak English but appreciate it if they do. I see no reason to behave differently just because I access a different country via the web.

Implying the lack of USD shows disrespect is ridiculous and as as whiny as 22july2013's post. First world problems.

radarthekat said:

JP234 said:

thrang said:

Union organizers across Apple's retail footprint say that pay has fallen below living wages in many markets, including Atlanta.


It's not really the sole responsibility of a company to pay a "living wage" whatever that really means. 

No it's not the sole responsibility. It's just one of the responsibilities of a company to the people responsible for its success (or failure). The man who mops the blood off the operating room floor is as responsible for the lives of patients as the heart surgeon. Neither works without the other, and you've missed that completely.

Are you sure?  I would contend that CEO pay is based not upon the number of hours worked versus those working on the manufacturing line or in the stores, but rather by the impact of the work the CEO does.  A CEO routinely makes decisions that have significant impact on the future of the entire business.  Rarely, an individual worker at the retail or manufacturing level has such impact, and if he/she does, his/her pay and position would be substantially raised in recognition of that impact.  Compensation is far more about each employee’s impact than about proximity to the product or service or hours worked.  

So let’s talk about your heart surgeon versus the employee who mops the blood from the operating room floor.  If the person cleaning the operating room calls in sick, another orderly can be assigned the task.  There’s likely some formal process for accomplishing that task and it’s likely there are a number of orderlies trained to carry it out.  Even the surgeon scheduled to perform the next operation, could, if necessary to prep the room, could step in to perform that task.  The impact to success of the next heart surgery performed in the operating room is not significantly reliant upon the orderly originally assigned the task.  A nurse could perform the task if needed.  Many others could perform that task.

If the Surgeon, however, is unable to come to work, a nurse, orderly or some other hospital personnel other than another doctor, could not be expected to be able to step in.  The role of heart surgeon is highly specialized, requiring advance medical knowledge and experience.  And the attainment of this knowledge and experience, over a long period of time and at great personal effort, allows the surgeon to perform what those without that experience and knowledge could not reliably perform.  This makes the surgeon far more valuable than the person who cleans the blood off the operating room floor.  

I’m a bit shocked I had to explain that.  

charlesn said:

And the benefit of losing the jack is that it opened the door to AirPods and all the innovation we've seen in wireless listening from nearly every major audio company. 

JP234 said:

ITGUYINSD said:

JP234 said:

The real question…
Why does the iPhone still have a Lightning port instead of a USB-C port?

Lightning is thinner, allowing more room for electronics, and thinner cases. And thin is in, baby!

Is there actually anything over or under the lightning port inside an iPhone?  The teardown pics don't show much of anything.  What electronics would be squeezed out if a USB-C port were installed?

What am I, an engineer?