xyzzy01

About

Username
xyzzy01
Joined
Visits
113
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
358
Badges
0
Posts
155

Reactions

185Like12Dislike37Informative

  • Apple delays Face ID for 2021 iMac

    xyzzy01xyzzy01
    neilm said:
    What takes them so long?! ...it’s the same with the Touch Bar - it never could get hold because the external keyboards didn’t have it. It’s either all or nothing - if a function is not widely supported it will not get used and vanish again. 
    The Touch Bar never became popular because most users simply don’t see much value in it. 

    Extending the TB to external keyboards would have been problematic because of the need to encrypt the fingerprint sensor’s communication with the host Mac. Then there are also the issues of cost and compatibility with third party keyboards.

    I don’t mind the TB on my 2016 MBP, but I wouldn’t miss it either — as long as there’s a fingerprint sensor. Put it down as an interesting experiment that just didn’t work out.

    You can have the fingerprint sensor without the touch bar - e.g. the Macbook Air and the lower end Macbook Pros do.
    watto_cobra

  • Apple delays Face ID for 2021 iMac

    xyzzy01xyzzy01
    caladanian said:
    What takes them so long?! ...it’s the same with the Touch Bar - it never could get hold because the external keyboards didn’t have it. It’s either all or nothing - if a function is not widely supported it will not get used and vanish again. 

    Those are different. FaceID is an OS level authentication feature, and doesn't really need much in the way of application support. It would be useful on iMacs - very much so - but I don't think the "will not get used and vanish" is a scenario here.

    For the touch bar, I agree with you. When a lot of users don't have it - only some of the Macbook Pro users do - applications will often ignore it. Given that Apple has not brought it to standalone keyboards - like the one for iMac - or even the Macbook Air, it's obvious they're not planning for it to be a commonly used feature. App developers notice, and thus ignore it.


    sailorpaulStrangeDayselijahgmuthuk_vanalingamcaladanianwatto_cobra

  • Prolific indie game porter won't develop for macOS anymore

    xyzzy01xyzzy01
    dysamoria said:
    xyzzy01 said:
    TLDR Someone doesn't think its worth it to replace his old laptop or learn new tech to support a tiny sliver of a microscopic partcile of a market.

    While the first part - not replacing his laptop - sounded strange, the second is an issue. As Apple has gotten bigger, they've moved away from open standards and created their own products. In this case, they've deprecated OpenGL (after not their version for a long time) and created their own graphics API - Metal. That makes porting much more work and less interesting - and as a long time Apple user, it's something I don't like too. It will make porting harder, maintenance harder and create more platform-specific bugs. It will also make less ports happen.
    There’s a project to get OpenGL’s replacement Vulkan wrapped by/translated to Metal. It’s called Molten. It’s not yet complete (covering all of the Vulkan API), but it’s in progress.

    https://moltengl.com/moltenvk/

    As for Apple Silicon... I keep reading people saying that anything which compiles on Mac OS Intel is a quick conversion to Mac OS Apple Silicon. Is that not factual?

    Interesting project.

    As for Apple Silicon - it is as simple as a recompile if you have a simple app which consists of only its own code, and calls to the MacOS APIs.

    If you have a large project, things can be way more work.... from "a little more" via "completely dependent on someone else" to "not happening".

    Some examples of "dependent on someone else":
    "Pycharm", "IntelliJ" etc are nice developments suites. However, they run on top of Java - so you depend on that to be available for the SI.

    Large projects often depend on a large set of libraries developed by third parties (or in-house). You need them to available as well... Some of them are available, some of them aren't, and some are available but only for newer versions of the libraries/engines than the ones you're using. Maybe it's a trivial change, maybe you need to rewrite parts of the codebase.


    elijahgdysamoria

  • Prolific indie game porter won't develop for macOS anymore

    xyzzy01xyzzy01
    goodbyeranch said:
    TLDR Someone doesn't think its worth it to replace his old laptop or learn new tech to support a tiny sliver of a microscopic partcile of a market.

    While the first part - not replacing his laptop - sounded strange, the second is an issue. As Apple has gotten bigger, they've moved away from open standards and created their own products. In this case, they've deprecated OpenGL (after not their version for a long time) and created their own graphics API - Metal. That makes porting much more work and less interesting - and as a long time Apple user, it's something I don't like too. It will make porting harder, maintenance harder and create more platform-specific bugs. It will also make less ports happen.
    lkruppelijahgols

  • Mobile ECG device firm AliveCor sues Apple for alleged patent infringement

    xyzzy01xyzzy01
    ‘Apple knew of these patents’ - aka we shook them down to pay us. 

    I hope these ‘on a wearable’ patents get blown up like the ‘on a computing device’ ones.  Better yet, never granted. 

    To be fair, the article mentions that AliveCor was the first one to get a consumer ECG device cleared by the Food and Drug Administration - so they're not a patent troll in the normal sense of the word, and Apple is sure to have been aware of the device and related patents.

    That said, this does not mean that the patents in question are good or that they cover Apple Watch.
    aderutterwatto_cobra