A) Who says you’re only allowed to work on one problem at a time? This is a simple problem with a simple fix. There’s no reason not to fix it immediately.
B) Considering this is the easiest way for a defendant to push back against a troll’s patent in order to get it invalidated, arguably, yes, this is one of the biggest issues, especially because it’s been happening more often.
Sorry, I misread this earlier, or else I would have covered it in my initial response.
a guy who made something that wasn't ever profitable or a worthwhile business
So, I assume you're referring to Tumblr, but what you seem to be unaware of is that he had attained a good degree of success outside of Tumblr. In fact, he's arguably more well-known for his later successes (the first read-it-later service on mobile, a digital magazine, and then the most popular third-party podcast/podcast service on iOS) than for his involvement with Tumblr, though obviously Tumblr is the largest product he's worked on. Moreover, all of his subsequent work has not only been profitable, it's also been entirely on his shoulders, since he's been doing it all as an indie app developer, handling all of the business and software development on his own.
All of which is to say, I can see how you'd be confused about why I'd be interested in hearing what he has to say if you weren't aware of any of the rest of that stuff.
I never accused you of shilling, nor do I think you are. I accused you of assaulting my character while hiding behind AC, both of which are true. And if I had to make a guess at your motives, I suspect you're simply in it for the lulz, given that you made your entrance by derailing the conversation with ad hominem attacks then followed it up with your own diversion over a completely unrelated topic.
I'm happy to respond to ACs, even deliberately antagonistic/trollish ones such as yourself, but if you're not willing to engage in a conversation over the topic at hand, I really don't have anything further to discuss, and you're barking up the wrong tree if you're hoping to get a rise from me.
Well, I admitted that I'm frequently wrong, so maybe I'm wrong about people frequently being wrong?;)
Though, you were definitely wrong last week when I disagreed with you over...something or other. I know we disagreed, but darn if I can remember what the topic was.
We're all entitled to tell each other to fuck off for any reason whenever we want.
Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Quit replying to this thread at this point you've gone from expressing yourself to coming across as a shill pushing Marco's personal brand.
I find that when people say a line like this, particularly while hiding behind AC, it's because they don't like what someone else is saying, but they also have no idea how to refute any of it in a rational, reasoned manner. The remainder of your comment supports that notion.
I'm fine discussing anything I've said, including your disagreement with any of it, but don't hide behind AC while accusing me of shilling. My entire comment history is plainly available for all to see. Where's yours?
You realize that USB-C is in no way proprietary crap, right?
You realize that other than supplying power, the interface is essentially crap, right?
When functionality becomes that crippled, the interface might as well be proprietary crap.
Moving the goalposts much? You made a specific claim, you were told you were outright wrong, and now you're trying to say that you may as well be right? Huh?
Moreover, I understand having ideological differences with proprietary things, but what the hell does it even mean when you suggest that something that's low quality may as well be proprietary? That makes no sense at all.
He's both lucky and good, from what I've gathered. He got lucky with Tumblr, to be sure, but his Tumblr payday only came relatively recently. In the meantime, he left Tumblr to go indie and ended up building the first read-it-later type app (Instapaper) that went on to quite a bit of success. He later sold that and then built (one of?) the most popular third-party podcast players on iOS (Overcast), which is still his primary business today. In both of those he operated as a one-man team, running the entire business and doing all of the software development on his own, so it's not as if he stopped building things after his financial windfall.
If he’s “frequently wrong” then why listen to him?
I said, "like anyone else, he's frequently wrong [...]". Anyone who expresses opinions frequently is frequently wrong. That's the nature of expressing opinions, particularly when you're asked to express them off-the-cuff. One of the few things I'm sure of is that I'm frequently wrong.
In his case, however, he's able to accept correction, quick to admit that he's wrong, and whether he's right or wrong or whether I agree or disagree, he does a good job of walking you through his thought process that oftentimes hits on points I wouldn't have otherwise considered. That's why I keep listening to what he has to say.
So no, I don't listen to quack medical advice, but I do listen to opinions expressed by well-informed people who are willing to put themselves out there as having an opinion on various topics, particularly controversial ones, some of which I agree with and some of which I don't.
Like I said, I don't know why his recent blog posts over minor topics have been making it to Slashdot's front page, but your snark is equally uncalled for. Just because the guy is richer than you doesn't mean he's not entitled to an opinion or that his opinion is in some way invalid or useless. Quite the contrary, I actually think he has some rather interesting things to say (some I agree with, some I disagree with), contrary to your contribution to this discussion that didn't add anything of value.
I put credence in what he says, but I don't understand why it's on the front page of Slashdot, given that it's basically an op-ed, which doesn't seem appropriate for here.
I follow his blog and listen to (some of) the podcasts he's on. He's opinionated, comes up against a lot of interesting situations because he pushes things in ways they weren't meant to be pushed, and, frankly, has enough disposable income after his successes (e.g. being the #2 employee at Tumblr) that he's able to do a lot of firsthand product research on products I am occasionally interested in purchasing. That said, like anyone else, he's frequently wrong about all sorts of things, and I'm sure he'd be the first to tell you that.
Great points all around, I'm glad someone made them. You're right that I glossed right over those distinctions, though I'll say that I did so intentionally since I wanted to focus on other aspects of the situation.
Yeah, that was a typo. I realized I was using "data" interchangeably with "server" when I shouldn't have been. I went back and replaced most of them, but missed that one, apparently. I didn't want to get anywhere near the topic of who owns the data, since that wasn't the point of my post and wasn't at all something I was trying to address.
It doesn't matter who owns the server, since even if it is MS Ireland, they're almost certainly a wholly owned subsidiary of MS US, meaning that MS US owns that data regardless. And if the US government compels MS US to hand the data over, they'll be making a request that's illegal in the country where the action must be undertaken, regardless of whether it's MS US or MS Ireland doing the deed, so in that regard it also doesn't matter who owns the server.
Of course, just because it doesn't matter who owns the server doesn't mean it's legal for the US government to make that request, nor that it's legal for MS (regardless of which brand we're talking about) to hand the data over.
Ideally, the people on the ground in Ireland would simply refuse to comply with the order if MS was compelled to hand over the data. After all, the US government has no authority over them, nor an ability to prosecute them, nor an ability to pursue a prosecution of them via diplomatic channels given that the request was illegal in the first place. In fact, the proper way for this to work is that the US government uses those diplomatic channels to seek an extraction of the data pursuant to its treaties with Ireland or the EU.
Unfortunately, it may be possible for MS US to extract the data from Ireland without the involvement of the people in Ireland. If that's the case, then those Americans may be opening themselves up to contempt or court and other charges for failing to produce documents that they are capable of producing. When Apple was facing a similar situation with the FBI attempting to compel them to add a backdoor to iOS, the rumors leaking from internally indicated that the team that would have been compelled to take those actions planned to quit if push came to shove, and that other companies were already lined up to accept them if need be. I'd expect that the same would be true here: anyone who quit over an issue like this would have no trouble finding work elsewhere in the industry.
They confirmed earlier this year their intent to reboot (pun not intended) the Mac Pro line by releasing a new design for the Mac Pro in 2018 that focuses on modularity. In the meantime, they did a minor spec bump and price drop, while also announcing an iMac Pro model due for release later this year that actually has decent specs for lots of pro work, though it’s obviously lacking in expandability.
If a job candidate walked in and handed me proprietary backend code from his current employer, you can pretty much be guaranteed that he wouldn’t be getting the job. Aside from the obvious legal concerns, how could we be expected to trust that he wouldn’t do the same thing later with our code?
Amen to that, but what does any of it have to do with the littering problem being discussed here? Whether someone is suffering from an unfortunate addiction or not has no impact on their ability to dispose of their trash.
Their record profits are coming from their chip division, driven primarily by sales of memory. Even Apple uses them as their main supplier for all iPhones. Samsung is positioned to profit off the entire mobile industry, not just off of their own devices. That may be part of the reason Apple and other companies recently banded together to buy Toshiba’s memory business, since it’d give them a way to ensure there’s some competition, or at the very least an alternative supplier who can help drive prices down.
The phones may be overpriced, but neither company is nickel and dining their customers in this instance, since both Apple and Google include the dongle in the box. And it makes sense that they’d do so, since it’s an easy way to add value to their premium-priced phones while also easing the pain during this transition to wireless that they’re forcing on consumers.
Now, if Google was making their customers buy it separately, that’d be something worth complaining about, but aside from the generally high price of these phones that you pointed out, there really isn’t much to complain about here.
A) Read through Ken Thompson’s Reflections on Trusting Trust. No major OS provides the guarantees you’re talking about. If you want those sorts of guarantees, you need to be compiling your OS updates from source using compilers you compiled from source that were themselves compiled using compilers you compiled from source, and so on down the entire toolchain until you’re in binary, and then we’ll need to have a talk about the trust you place in your hardware. If you’re that concerned about attacks against your OS—and there are people who have valid reason to be so—then you’re correct: iOS is not meant for you. But neither is any other other OS.
Frankly, if you’re not comfortable taking a company at its word when it publishes white papers detailing their update mechanisms and then publicly stands against the FBI in court when the government demands they add a backdoor, that’s fine, but recognize that you’re more or less suggesting a conspiracy at that point. And if you’re going to suggest a conspiracy at one company, why stop there? I’d question why you’re comfortable taking a different company at its word when you have no better guarantee from them, given that, as the link above should make clear, a hash for a binary posted to git is no guarantee that the binary matches the source posted to git. Again, if you’re in conspiracy theory territory, own it and don’t take anyone at their word. Otherwise, you need to choose a level of trust that’s appropriate to your needs and comfort. If seeing source makes you feel warm and fuzzy, that’s fine, but don’t suggest it provides guarantees it doesn’t.
C) Probably because Apple was actively making efforts to block unsupported hardware up until recently, via the now infamous Error 53. It’s only in the last year or so that Apple eased up and stopped trying to actively block unsupported hardware. So, why’d it happen now? Probably because this is the first major update since they eased up. That’d be my guess.
BS, several updates have clearly started on their own on my 5S despite my deliberately avoiding updating.
You’re mistaken. They’ll download themselves and prompt you to install them, but they won’t actually do so until they have your go-ahead. Moreover, in addition to Apple’s white papers making the process I described clear, I also have firsthand experience with your particular model, since it’s the same one I use on a daily basis, and I’ve never observed the behavior you’re reporting.
A) Apple can’t update them remotely. Users have for as long as I can remember had to provide their password to confirm any updates to the OS. It’s specifically done that way to prevent attackers from loading updates they created or control.
B) iOS has always been billed as being made to run specifically on Apple’s hardware. You’re welcome to try using it on unsupported hardware, but Apple has never claimed it supports any hardware other than their own. If you choose to try doing so, you do so at your own risk.
C) Hanlon’s razor would suggest it’s more likely that this was a simple mistake than a case of malice. After all, it’s hardly unreasonable that an entirely unsupported hardware configuration would accidentally get broken by a major OS update. Were this a case of malice, it wouldn’t be getting fixed at all, let alone as quickly as it was.
Thank you for your entertaining comparison, but we, Europeans, know where Houston is located. And Yellowstone. No need for the explanation.
I'm afraid I disagree. I appreciate that you know where they are, and I'd like to make it clear that I was in no way trying to offend, condescend, or imply anything in my providing those comparisons, other than that we are dealing with something at a scale that defies comprehension. That said, I can also say with certainty that you're quite incorrect in generalizing your knowledge of US geography to all Europeans.
For instance, my wife had some friends from Spain visit the US for vacation a few years back. They asked if they could drop in to visit her in North Carolina for lunch at some point, and she enthusiastically agreed. Unfortunately, the plans fell apart rather quickly when she broke the news to them that LAX, which was where they were flying into from Heathrow, is at least a three day drive from North Carolina, rather than the few hour drive they assumed it'd be. Or the time a coworker of mine had some relatives from the Czech Republic call him after they had just landed in the US, asking if they could stay with him for a few days at his home in Texas. He said "absolutely!" (he had spent a few weeks with them over there, so he was eager to repay the favor) and asked where they were at. Los Angeles.
Hell, not even my coworkers have a good sense of the scale involved. I asked one how many miles he thought Houston was from Yellowstone, and he pegged it at 2400 miles. Mind you, I too live in Texas, so people have a decent sense of where Houston is at the very least. Which is my way of saying that I truly wasn't trying to pick on Europeans. I was merely trying to put the sense of scale in context, since even Americans have trouble wrapping our heads around it, despite it being in our backyard.
However, we do appreciate the fact that Yellowstone is located in your backyard... and not in ours, so thank you, again
Living around the world won't spare you if this thing decides to blow. Even if the air around the entire world wasn't left in an unbreathable state on account of poisonous gasses and ash, you'd still be under clouds for the rest of your life. You'll have a slow (or perhaps not-so-slow) death to look forward to as you witness the onset of a new ice age.
There's "insane taxes" on all packages, though. There's a sports tax, a religions tax, a soap opera tax, etc.
If you asked me to list examples of problems facing the world today, and I responded with "child slavery, having to wait for elevators, and people who snuffle instead of blowing their noses" as my list, you'd probably look at me funny, since that first one is in a league of its own compared to the others. Right?
Likewise, ESPN's sports tax is not like those other taxes you listed. Not even close. Back in 2013, ESPN collected affiliate fees that averaged to $5.13/mo. for each cable subscription, meaning that any American with a cable subscription in 2013 was paying $5.13/mo. for ESPN, regardless of whether they were part of the then-1/3 of Americans who watched it. Today? Despite losing over 12M viewers, ESPN collects over $9/mo. per subscriber for its channels. Again, that's regardless of whether the subscribers watch it or not, and that number is still going up because ESPN is still the single biggest thing keeping viewers from cutting the cord. For comparison, AMC (i.e. a channel with several big name shows) barely pulled in 1/10 the affiliate fees of ESPN back in 2013, and even less today.
When low-cost TV packages get at $10 per month with no other fees, then they'll be competitive with Netflix and others.
I agree that they need to cut fees in general to get to that point, but if just one of those fees accounts for over 90% of your proposed monthly subscription, don't you think it's worth specifically calling that one out for hindering providers from offering competitive packages? In fact, wouldn't you agree that it's a waste to even bother mentioning channels that only cost a few cents each month in the same breath with ESPN?
Slashdot Mirror
A) Who says you’re only allowed to work on one problem at a time? This is a simple problem with a simple fix. There’s no reason not to fix it immediately.
B) Considering this is the easiest way for a defendant to push back against a troll’s patent in order to get it invalidated, arguably, yes, this is one of the biggest issues, especially because it’s been happening more often.
Sorry, I misread this earlier, or else I would have covered it in my initial response.
a guy who made something that wasn't ever profitable or a worthwhile business
So, I assume you're referring to Tumblr, but what you seem to be unaware of is that he had attained a good degree of success outside of Tumblr. In fact, he's arguably more well-known for his later successes (the first read-it-later service on mobile, a digital magazine, and then the most popular third-party podcast/podcast service on iOS) than for his involvement with Tumblr, though obviously Tumblr is the largest product he's worked on. Moreover, all of his subsequent work has not only been profitable, it's also been entirely on his shoulders, since he's been doing it all as an indie app developer, handling all of the business and software development on his own.
All of which is to say, I can see how you'd be confused about why I'd be interested in hearing what he has to say if you weren't aware of any of the rest of that stuff.
What would I be shilling for, seriously?
I never accused you of shilling, nor do I think you are. I accused you of assaulting my character while hiding behind AC, both of which are true. And if I had to make a guess at your motives, I suspect you're simply in it for the lulz, given that you made your entrance by derailing the conversation with ad hominem attacks then followed it up with your own diversion over a completely unrelated topic.
I'm happy to respond to ACs, even deliberately antagonistic/trollish ones such as yourself, but if you're not willing to engage in a conversation over the topic at hand, I really don't have anything further to discuss, and you're barking up the wrong tree if you're hoping to get a rise from me.
Well, I admitted that I'm frequently wrong, so maybe I'm wrong about people frequently being wrong? ;)
Though, you were definitely wrong last week when I disagreed with you over...something or other. I know we disagreed, but darn if I can remember what the topic was.
We're all entitled to tell each other to fuck off for any reason whenever we want.
Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Quit replying to this thread at this point you've gone from expressing yourself to coming across as a shill pushing Marco's personal brand.
I find that when people say a line like this, particularly while hiding behind AC, it's because they don't like what someone else is saying, but they also have no idea how to refute any of it in a rational, reasoned manner. The remainder of your comment supports that notion.
I'm fine discussing anything I've said, including your disagreement with any of it, but don't hide behind AC while accusing me of shilling. My entire comment history is plainly available for all to see. Where's yours?
You realize that USB-C is in no way proprietary crap, right?
You realize that other than supplying power, the interface is essentially crap, right?
When functionality becomes that crippled, the interface might as well be proprietary crap.
Moving the goalposts much? You made a specific claim, you were told you were outright wrong, and now you're trying to say that you may as well be right? Huh?
Moreover, I understand having ideological differences with proprietary things, but what the hell does it even mean when you suggest that something that's low quality may as well be proprietary? That makes no sense at all.
He's both lucky and good, from what I've gathered. He got lucky with Tumblr, to be sure, but his Tumblr payday only came relatively recently. In the meantime, he left Tumblr to go indie and ended up building the first read-it-later type app (Instapaper) that went on to quite a bit of success. He later sold that and then built (one of?) the most popular third-party podcast players on iOS (Overcast), which is still his primary business today. In both of those he operated as a one-man team, running the entire business and doing all of the software development on his own, so it's not as if he stopped building things after his financial windfall.
If he’s “frequently wrong” then why listen to him?
I said, "like anyone else, he's frequently wrong [...]". Anyone who expresses opinions frequently is frequently wrong. That's the nature of expressing opinions, particularly when you're asked to express them off-the-cuff. One of the few things I'm sure of is that I'm frequently wrong.
In his case, however, he's able to accept correction, quick to admit that he's wrong, and whether he's right or wrong or whether I agree or disagree, he does a good job of walking you through his thought process that oftentimes hits on points I wouldn't have otherwise considered. That's why I keep listening to what he has to say.
So no, I don't listen to quack medical advice, but I do listen to opinions expressed by well-informed people who are willing to put themselves out there as having an opinion on various topics, particularly controversial ones, some of which I agree with and some of which I don't.
My heart bleeds for him, it really does.
No one is suggesting it should.
Like I said, I don't know why his recent blog posts over minor topics have been making it to Slashdot's front page, but your snark is equally uncalled for. Just because the guy is richer than you doesn't mean he's not entitled to an opinion or that his opinion is in some way invalid or useless. Quite the contrary, I actually think he has some rather interesting things to say (some I agree with, some I disagree with), contrary to your contribution to this discussion that didn't add anything of value.
I put credence in what he says, but I don't understand why it's on the front page of Slashdot, given that it's basically an op-ed, which doesn't seem appropriate for here.
I follow his blog and listen to (some of) the podcasts he's on. He's opinionated, comes up against a lot of interesting situations because he pushes things in ways they weren't meant to be pushed, and, frankly, has enough disposable income after his successes (e.g. being the #2 employee at Tumblr) that he's able to do a lot of firsthand product research on products I am occasionally interested in purchasing. That said, like anyone else, he's frequently wrong about all sorts of things, and I'm sure he'd be the first to tell you that.
Great points all around, I'm glad someone made them. You're right that I glossed right over those distinctions, though I'll say that I did so intentionally since I wanted to focus on other aspects of the situation.
Thanks for the insightful comment!
Yeah, that was a typo. I realized I was using "data" interchangeably with "server" when I shouldn't have been. I went back and replaced most of them, but missed that one, apparently. I didn't want to get anywhere near the topic of who owns the data, since that wasn't the point of my post and wasn't at all something I was trying to address.
It doesn't matter who owns the server, since even if it is MS Ireland, they're almost certainly a wholly owned subsidiary of MS US, meaning that MS US owns that data regardless. And if the US government compels MS US to hand the data over, they'll be making a request that's illegal in the country where the action must be undertaken, regardless of whether it's MS US or MS Ireland doing the deed, so in that regard it also doesn't matter who owns the server.
Of course, just because it doesn't matter who owns the server doesn't mean it's legal for the US government to make that request, nor that it's legal for MS (regardless of which brand we're talking about) to hand the data over.
Ideally, the people on the ground in Ireland would simply refuse to comply with the order if MS was compelled to hand over the data. After all, the US government has no authority over them, nor an ability to prosecute them, nor an ability to pursue a prosecution of them via diplomatic channels given that the request was illegal in the first place. In fact, the proper way for this to work is that the US government uses those diplomatic channels to seek an extraction of the data pursuant to its treaties with Ireland or the EU.
Unfortunately, it may be possible for MS US to extract the data from Ireland without the involvement of the people in Ireland. If that's the case, then those Americans may be opening themselves up to contempt or court and other charges for failing to produce documents that they are capable of producing. When Apple was facing a similar situation with the FBI attempting to compel them to add a backdoor to iOS, the rumors leaking from internally indicated that the team that would have been compelled to take those actions planned to quit if push came to shove, and that other companies were already lined up to accept them if need be. I'd expect that the same would be true here: anyone who quit over an issue like this would have no trouble finding work elsewhere in the industry.
They confirmed earlier this year their intent to reboot (pun not intended) the Mac Pro line by releasing a new design for the Mac Pro in 2018 that focuses on modularity. In the meantime, they did a minor spec bump and price drop, while also announcing an iMac Pro model due for release later this year that actually has decent specs for lots of pro work, though it’s obviously lacking in expandability.
If a job candidate walked in and handed me proprietary backend code from his current employer, you can pretty much be guaranteed that he wouldn’t be getting the job. Aside from the obvious legal concerns, how could we be expected to trust that he wouldn’t do the same thing later with our code?
Amen to that, but what does any of it have to do with the littering problem being discussed here? Whether someone is suffering from an unfortunate addiction or not has no impact on their ability to dispose of their trash.
Their record profits are coming from their chip division, driven primarily by sales of memory. Even Apple uses them as their main supplier for all iPhones. Samsung is positioned to profit off the entire mobile industry, not just off of their own devices. That may be part of the reason Apple and other companies recently banded together to buy Toshiba’s memory business, since it’d give them a way to ensure there’s some competition, or at the very least an alternative supplier who can help drive prices down.
Dang link got broken. Here’s a fixed link to the graph.
While you’re right about consumers generally not caring about or needing this, you shouldn’t be so dismissive. Anandtech has a nice graph showing the projected split between SSDs and HDDs in enterprise over the next few years, and it makes it pretty clear that this sort of technology will not only remain relevant, but will, in fact, remain dominant for the foreseeable future.
Of course, for those of us building NASes or otherwise working with large files at home, cheap storage is still important.
The phones may be overpriced, but neither company is nickel and dining their customers in this instance, since both Apple and Google include the dongle in the box. And it makes sense that they’d do so, since it’s an easy way to add value to their premium-priced phones while also easing the pain during this transition to wireless that they’re forcing on consumers.
Now, if Google was making their customers buy it separately, that’d be something worth complaining about, but aside from the generally high price of these phones that you pointed out, there really isn’t much to complain about here.
A) Read through Ken Thompson’s Reflections on Trusting Trust. No major OS provides the guarantees you’re talking about. If you want those sorts of guarantees, you need to be compiling your OS updates from source using compilers you compiled from source that were themselves compiled using compilers you compiled from source, and so on down the entire toolchain until you’re in binary, and then we’ll need to have a talk about the trust you place in your hardware. If you’re that concerned about attacks against your OS—and there are people who have valid reason to be so—then you’re correct: iOS is not meant for you. But neither is any other other OS.
Frankly, if you’re not comfortable taking a company at its word when it publishes white papers detailing their update mechanisms and then publicly stands against the FBI in court when the government demands they add a backdoor, that’s fine, but recognize that you’re more or less suggesting a conspiracy at that point. And if you’re going to suggest a conspiracy at one company, why stop there? I’d question why you’re comfortable taking a different company at its word when you have no better guarantee from them, given that, as the link above should make clear, a hash for a binary posted to git is no guarantee that the binary matches the source posted to git. Again, if you’re in conspiracy theory territory, own it and don’t take anyone at their word. Otherwise, you need to choose a level of trust that’s appropriate to your needs and comfort. If seeing source makes you feel warm and fuzzy, that’s fine, but don’t suggest it provides guarantees it doesn’t.
C) Probably because Apple was actively making efforts to block unsupported hardware up until recently, via the now infamous Error 53. It’s only in the last year or so that Apple eased up and stopped trying to actively block unsupported hardware. So, why’d it happen now? Probably because this is the first major update since they eased up. That’d be my guess.
BS, several updates have clearly started on their own on my 5S despite my deliberately avoiding updating.
You’re mistaken. They’ll download themselves and prompt you to install them, but they won’t actually do so until they have your go-ahead. Moreover, in addition to Apple’s white papers making the process I described clear, I also have firsthand experience with your particular model, since it’s the same one I use on a daily basis, and I’ve never observed the behavior you’re reporting.
A) Apple can’t update them remotely. Users have for as long as I can remember had to provide their password to confirm any updates to the OS. It’s specifically done that way to prevent attackers from loading updates they created or control.
B) iOS has always been billed as being made to run specifically on Apple’s hardware. You’re welcome to try using it on unsupported hardware, but Apple has never claimed it supports any hardware other than their own. If you choose to try doing so, you do so at your own risk.
C) Hanlon’s razor would suggest it’s more likely that this was a simple mistake than a case of malice. After all, it’s hardly unreasonable that an entirely unsupported hardware configuration would accidentally get broken by a major OS update. Were this a case of malice, it wouldn’t be getting fixed at all, let alone as quickly as it was.
Thank you for your entertaining comparison, but we, Europeans, know where Houston is located. And Yellowstone. No need for the explanation.
I'm afraid I disagree. I appreciate that you know where they are, and I'd like to make it clear that I was in no way trying to offend, condescend, or imply anything in my providing those comparisons, other than that we are dealing with something at a scale that defies comprehension. That said, I can also say with certainty that you're quite incorrect in generalizing your knowledge of US geography to all Europeans.
For instance, my wife had some friends from Spain visit the US for vacation a few years back. They asked if they could drop in to visit her in North Carolina for lunch at some point, and she enthusiastically agreed. Unfortunately, the plans fell apart rather quickly when she broke the news to them that LAX, which was where they were flying into from Heathrow, is at least a three day drive from North Carolina, rather than the few hour drive they assumed it'd be. Or the time a coworker of mine had some relatives from the Czech Republic call him after they had just landed in the US, asking if they could stay with him for a few days at his home in Texas. He said "absolutely!" (he had spent a few weeks with them over there, so he was eager to repay the favor) and asked where they were at. Los Angeles.
Hell, not even my coworkers have a good sense of the scale involved. I asked one how many miles he thought Houston was from Yellowstone, and he pegged it at 2400 miles. Mind you, I too live in Texas, so people have a decent sense of where Houston is at the very least. Which is my way of saying that I truly wasn't trying to pick on Europeans. I was merely trying to put the sense of scale in context, since even Americans have trouble wrapping our heads around it, despite it being in our backyard.
However, we do appreciate the fact that Yellowstone is located in your backyard... and not in ours, so thank you, again
Living around the world won't spare you if this thing decides to blow. Even if the air around the entire world wasn't left in an unbreathable state on account of poisonous gasses and ash, you'd still be under clouds for the rest of your life. You'll have a slow (or perhaps not-so-slow) death to look forward to as you witness the onset of a new ice age.
Have fun with that.
There's "insane taxes" on all packages, though. There's a sports tax, a religions tax, a soap opera tax, etc.
If you asked me to list examples of problems facing the world today, and I responded with "child slavery, having to wait for elevators, and people who snuffle instead of blowing their noses" as my list, you'd probably look at me funny, since that first one is in a league of its own compared to the others. Right?
Likewise, ESPN's sports tax is not like those other taxes you listed. Not even close. Back in 2013, ESPN collected affiliate fees that averaged to $5.13/mo. for each cable subscription, meaning that any American with a cable subscription in 2013 was paying $5.13/mo. for ESPN, regardless of whether they were part of the then-1/3 of Americans who watched it. Today? Despite losing over 12M viewers, ESPN collects over $9/mo. per subscriber for its channels. Again, that's regardless of whether the subscribers watch it or not, and that number is still going up because ESPN is still the single biggest thing keeping viewers from cutting the cord. For comparison, AMC (i.e. a channel with several big name shows) barely pulled in 1/10 the affiliate fees of ESPN back in 2013, and even less today.
When low-cost TV packages get at $10 per month with no other fees, then they'll be competitive with Netflix and others.
I agree that they need to cut fees in general to get to that point, but if just one of those fees accounts for over 90% of your proposed monthly subscription, don't you think it's worth specifically calling that one out for hindering providers from offering competitive packages? In fact, wouldn't you agree that it's a waste to even bother mentioning channels that only cost a few cents each month in the same breath with ESPN?