jellybelly

About

Username
jellybelly
Joined
Visits
33
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
238
Badges
1
Posts
59
  • Apple YouTube video answers often-asked iPhone switching queries

    To AppleInsider:
    Can you put a link to the video in the story?  
    I’d like to send it, after reviewing, to Android using friends who are curious about switching and hesitate, thinking it’s a hassle. 
    appleinsideruserwatto_cobrajony0
  • Apple releases full trailer for animated comedy 'Luck'

    I don't know - every time I see Apple announcing something for their streaming services, it feels contrived. It's comes across as a "look - me too!" approach where a consortium looks at market data and makes creative decisions based on those. I know this isn't different from, say, Netflix, but for some reason it feels contrived to me.

    Maybe it’s just titles/movies of no interest to you.  
    This one doesn’t grab me, but I do family movie nights in the parks, and in two years when this is available to show publicly, with royalties paid of course,

    I think the grade school kids will bring their parents to see it for the 3rd or 4th time.  They usually have the DVD or have rented it, and love to come to the park for fun, games, prizes for all and free popcorn and a free movie—everything is free.  

    I’ve done over 90 in the last 14 years.  So, I’m glad to see it coming out for their sake. I fund it for about $350 in royalties, $200 in publicity, $150 in popcorn, water and prizes, and $200 for drum circle before movie plus occasional local singer songwriter. 
    It’s hard work, but in the end, I get as much or more out of it than the families.  Imagine creating lifetime memories for kids and their families.  It does a person good, as they say. 



    Beats
  • HomePod 15.1 update brings Apple Music Lossless & Dolby Atmos support

    hucom2000 said:
    It still boggles my mind that we can have lossless on a HomePod mini, but not AirPods Max…
    I remember a discussion on this several months ago. 

    From Apple website: https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT212183
    Can I listen to lossless audio using Apple’s Lightning to 3.5 mm Headphone Jack Adapter?

    Yes. The Lightning to 3.5 mm Headphone Jack Adapter is designed to transmit audio from the iPhone’s Lightning connector. It contains a digital-to-analogue converter that supports up to 24-bit/48 kHz lossless audio.

    —> So, yes on headphones with analog 3.5 mm jack.


    Can I listen to lossless audio using the AirPods Max Lightning to 3.5 mm Audio Cable?

    The Lightning to 3.5 mm Audio Cable was designed to allow AirPods Max to connect to analogue sources for listening to films and music. AirPods Max can be connected to devices playing Lossless and Hi-Res Lossless recordings with exceptional audio quality. However, given the analogue-to-digital conversion in the cable, the playback will not be completely lossless.


    So the work-around I heard discussed is the digital to analog DAC in the Lightning to 3.5 mm Headphone Jack Adapter into the Lightning port, then the Lightning to 3.5mm Audio Cable (it should be called Audio to Lightning cable) to AirPods Max.

    It sounds like a double conversion could lose something in each step, but the discussion was that it sure beat the hell out of Bluetooth.  I’m wanting to find a Lightning to Lightning cable and try it. 

    What I remember in the discussion by some audiophiles is that you don’t get all the way to the “pure” lossless, but you get pretty darn close.  And since there are many who can’t discern the difference between a high quality lossy codec (AAC?) and lossless, I’d say I’d be pretty happy with “pretty darn close” to lossless.

    But my hope is based on one discussion.  I hope a high end sound engineer writes an article on this. Is anyone on Anandtech reading this? Or at Audiophile Magazine?

    Could AppleInsider interview a sound engineer and do some double blind testing?




    Alex_Vwatto_cobra
  • How Tim Cook reshaped Apple in his first decade as CEO

    The follow on to the iMac’s ‘just-in-time’ success was the iPod scale up. It greatly expanded the Apple brand beyond computers into a Apple becoming a cultural icon. 

    Without scaling up so fast to meet the accelerating adoption demand via supply chain genius of Tim Cook, the iPod would not have met the demand and subsequently would not have funded the miniaturization engineering advancements needed in the iPhone, nor funded the R&D for development of the iPhone.

    At the time of iPod success and meeting the leaps in production/supply needs, the bond was set between Tim Cook and Steve Jobs. They were learning from each other at that point.

    The next two critical individuals beyond Steve Jobs and Tim Cook were Avie Tevanian (OSX platform) and Jony Ives (design).

    Who else were so highly critical after these four?
    mike1StrangeDaysronndesignrradarthekat
  • Apple to remove popular DOS emulator for iOS from App Store

    dysamoria said:
    larryjw said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    larryjw said:
    I think Apple's guideline rejecting executing code is needs to be eliminated -- an emulator is an emulator. 

    In reality, executing code in an emulator is what programs do. For example, PDF files are themselves computer programs which instruct and iPad how to render a PDF visually.

    Isn't programs as data and data as programs the basic principle of computing? 


    No, PDF is a document format. It doesn’t run, it’s rendered, same with music files. But that’s not the real problem. 

    The emulator allows apps to run code that can’t be seen or examined by Apple, and that has always been against the rules. PDFs, the other hand, are pretty benign. It would be quite hard to piggyback an App Store in a PDF document. 

    So the real problem is the lack of consistency in applying the rules. This should never have  been allowed in the App Store in the first place, so they’re going to look like real dicks for removing it now. 
    No, a PDF is a program. Just because a PDF can be labeled a document doesn’t mean it’s not a program. You need to take abstraction up a level. 

    A previous commenter also suggested that a program must be executed on the CPU. That’s also not correct.

    In designing systems, one is always trading off between the “executable” and the “data”. Different languages tend to encourage marking the boundaries differently, but it remains that these boundaries between data and executable are quite arbitrary. 

    In a micro programmed CPU, your “executable” is just data. To the hardware guys, the micro program is just data which drives NAND gates and voltage changes. 
    It’s not an executable. That’s the issue. 

    PDF Files can definitely contain executable code
    Some of you have been around since dawn of OSX, but are forgetting OSX and it’s current derivatives use the PDF spec for graphics as a major part of the display interpretation and execution. Much of that was inherited from NeXT code with genius Avie Tevanian as major architect at NeXT and Apple.

    Any PDF graphics (all graphics for that matter) contained are handled by existing OS layer close to the kernel. It’s safe and mature. Non-PDF graphics are translated and handled as display PDF and display PDF shouldn’t be the issue. PDF documents have features like links, authentication and more that are likely at an execution of function in a sandboxed area. 
    The graphic display computing is now baked into silicon for speed in Metal. 

    I’d imagine DOS has many vulnerabilities. Whether the sandbox can be penetrated (or escaped) is something Apple engineers can determine in a non-disclosed manner. 
    There seems to be a lot of conjecture as to why the App was rejected beyond the stated reasons.
    watto_cobra