ranson

This is an interesting choice with somewhat dubious reasoning: pay us $8 for the continuing privilege of using the least secure MFA mechanism.

Most likely, the SMS's were too costly for Elon's liking, while Authenticator apps are both more secure and effectively free for Twitter to support. So from a financial perspective, it makes a lot of sense. From a security posture, forcing users off of SMS and over to an Authenticator app is a good long-term decision.

However, the outright disabling of nonconforming users' existing SMS MFA on March 20 is a terrible idea, as it will expose what is likely millions and millions of accounts to being compromised, should their passwords have been previously harvested. This will particularly impact users who rarely access Twitter anymore, if at all. A better approach here would be to retain the SMS MFA on those users indefinitely, but require them to explicitly disable MFA or switch to an Authenticator app the next time they access Twitter after 3/20. You should never just turn someone's MFA off without their explicit approval.

Hedware said:

Somehow everybody gets asked except for consumers. As a owner of Apple products,  I do not want my privacy and security compromised because some lazy developers want to have open skies. They should attempt to build some decent apps. 

I fail to understand how this compromises YOUR security. It's very simple. If YOU don't want to use a third party store or sideloading to have access to an app, then YOU don't have to. See, no security problem for YOU. But others, who want to put software on their phone that Apple has declined to list in their App Store, should have that opportunity, given it is their device that they own.  None of that compromises YOUR security in any way.

I hear the argument that "well, there are apps that will move to their own stores instead of Apple's, and then we can't trust the app maker to not do nefarious things."  Fine, then don't install the app. If you can't trust their product because it's not in Apple's Store, then frankly, you can't trust the app at all and should not use it. Note that numerous scam apps are in the Apple Store already (see this AI article from just this morning), and popular apps like Tik Tok and Facebook actively track you in spite of the tracking transparency options. So again, if you think you wouldn't be able to trust them outside of the Apple store, those apps being in the Apple store is really no different. It's a completely false sense of security.

So nobody's security is unwillingly compromised here. We are adults, and we can make informed decisions about what apps to install, even when it runs counter to Apple's opinion. This harms no one except those who choose to go down that road and make bad choices.

racerhomie3 said:

Apple should give iPads battery life of 20-30hrs. It would be an awesome upgrade since iPads have gotten 10-12hrs of battery since 2010.

When I got my first iPad in May or June of 2010, I could put it on a bookshelf with a full battery, and come back to it 3 weeks later with 60 to 70% still of the charge left.  I just picked up the new M2 iPad Pro 12.9", and the battery will drain completely dead in under 4 days without use. Very disappointing.

Seems like the author is just ranting more than anything here? Wireless Carplay is actually gaining wider adoption by the automakers, as the piece rightly notes. Apple does not author the SiriusXM app, so it's not their problem to solve? Why not post some side-by-side pics of the Jeep's UX vs CarPlay to demonstrate how the former is better? Automakers not integrating CarPlay into auxiliary displays? so what? I am not sure how any of this is truly a problem for Apple.

The other week (and this is absolutely not a joke), we ordered an HDHomeRun as a christmas gift for my mother-in-law, and received a rifle scope. Amazon was incredibly gracious and apologetic. But this seems like hired help for the holiday rush being under-trained and overworked, which leads to mistakes.