Is that true? I've had Android phone for 6+ years and can't ever remember a 'system' popup asking for a password. There's no equivalent to an iTunes account. If I'm asked for my Google Play account password I'm very wary. I'm genuinely curious if this sort of phishing has been tried on Android?
No. On Android, they just pull the stuff out WITHOUT User Intervention...
Well, normally I would agree, but this one is not quite phishing anymore, it is more an OS dialog impersonation attack, and the user cannot really see what is going on. Make this dialog appear when it is reasonable to expect, and the user really does not have much of a chance.
Again, why is this even news?
Impersonation of a Login Dialog can be done on ANY OS, period. And with stuff like Text Substitutions in a Dialog, pretty much no amount of App-Scanning by %APP_APPROVER%
is going to discover a cleverly-obsfucated Dialog creation function.
What Apple (and others) could POSSIBLY do, is to make a "Credentials" Dialog appear COMPLETELY different from any-other-Dialog, using baked-in UI elements that are simply not accessible to Apps. Kind of like building holograms and micro-printed ribbons into Currency.
Or, Apple can just change their policy and REQUIRE Biometric Authentication (TouchID/FaceID) if it available on-device, which just returns a "Pass/Fail" to the Application, rather than ever asking for something like an AppleID login.
My bank's App displays a screen at Launch that offers two options: TouchID or my BANK's PIN. Could it be spoofed? I guess; but there would not likely be enough people that would use the PIN to make it worthwhile, especially since they would have to repeat that engineering for multiple Banks (all with varying login processes), thus making their detection (and banning) a virtual certainty.
Yep, I read that. I also read the article that it links to. That's still not a reason why.
Maybe I can clarify. When someone asks, "Why doesn't the wifi and bluetooth shut off when I tell the wifi and bluetooth to shut off?"
An answer to that question is not, "When you tell the wifi and bluetooth to shut off, it disables wifi and bluetooth to non-Apple services."
That's a description of what happens. It is how that order is executed. It is not an explanation of why.
An explanation would look something like, "Because Larry goofed up when he wrote that bit and it's easier to pretend that it's on purpose than it is to fix it." or "Because we have decided that you never really want to turn off Apple services, despite whatever you might say." or even "Because Apple knows best, trust in Apple. There there, shhh. It'll all be okay."
Those are explanations.
So, you want some sort of "admission of guilt" for something that was CLEARLY a design decision?
YOU ARE FUCKING SICK!
And News Flash: Every single OS and Application on every single platform and device makes dozens of "assumptions" (what engineers call "design decisions"), based on what their best guess (perhaps in conjunction with independent research and/or alpha testing/focus-groups) as to what would result in a more "useful", "less-confusing", and/or "pleasant" experience for the user.
If you want to spin that into some negative "Because Apple knows better than you" concept (which you so obviously do), then you'd better start railing about EVERY design decision, control, and UI element in EVERY single OS and Application ON THE FUCKING PLANET. Because that's exactly where your illogical diatribe has led you.
And BTW, Apple didn't DECIDE to remove CHOICE; they just provide MORE CHOICE: Control Panel = "Soft" Disable; Settings Switches/ Airplane Mode = O-F-F
Got it? I sure hope so; but since continued social intercourse with you is likely fruitless, this will be the last attempt at communication with you on this subject.
That link only explained WHAT it does, which TFA already did, so the link was worthless. It did not explain WHY it is doing what it does.
The WHY is simple: As the linked article says: So you can continue to have access to the listded Apple-specific, mostly PEER TO PEER services, without having to:
1. Try to use them
2. Get an Error
3. Turn WiFi/BT BACK ON
4. Try the Service again
5. Remember to turn WiFi/BT BACK OFF...for EACH AND EVERY time you want to use one of the listed Services.
Yeah, that sounds like a User Experience I (or any sane individual) would want... NOT!!!
If that doesn't help you understand, then just go to Settings and flip the little Switch on WiFi and BT to "OFF" and guess what?
IT'S ***OFF***
Simple as that. It even puts a slash through the WiFi and BT Symbols in the Control Panel to remind the user that those Subsytems are actually O-F-F.
That link does NOT provide any explanation about why I'd still want to use those specific features after disabling Wi-Fi, nor does it explain what constitutes a "new location" or what's so special about 5 am.
If you thought the explanation were confusing or incomplete, Then you are simply too stupid to drive a Smartphone.
Better go back to Android, where the reasoning and ramifications of every control setting are clearly and thoroughly explained...[/sarcasm]
You say that your linked article explains why iOS doesn't shut off WiFi or bluetooth when you tell it to shut off WiFi and Bluetooth. And the title of the article you link is: "Apple clarifies why iOS 11 Control Center toggles don’t fully disable Bluetooth and Wi-Fi" but... the article does not offer a reason why iOS does this. It only describes how iOS does this.
That's good information to have too, but it's pretty far from a reasonable explanation. It's not any explanation.
I'm not sure what you would consider a "reasonable explanation"; but the first paragraph of the article makes it pretty clear to those that can read:
"In a support document published today on its website, Apple explains that toggling off Wi-Fi and Bluetooth by tapping their corresponding icons in the new Control Center still leaves the radios on for features like AirDrop, AirPlay, Handoff, Instant Hotspot, Apple Pencil, Apple Watch and Location Services."
I don't know about you, but, IMHO, a paragraph with the phrase "Apple explains..." Is a pretty good place to start looking for an explanation...
However, it is also true that most Slashdotters hate single-owner "proprietary", and that AptX fails that test
Only when it affects them. They hate being limited in software options, they hate being drawn into licensing agreements, they hate the proprietary lock-in being used for pesky shit like DRM etc. For the most part people (including most slashdot users) don't give two shits about something buried deep in a communications protocol unless it a) has a negative affect on quality or b) doesn't work.
As for Apple putting weight into their earbuds (I note that you didn't specify EarPods), there is another possible explanation: Retention in the ear, and/or balance.
They didn't do it on Earpods, that would be stupid. They would fall out of your ears. But then we were also talking about high quality audio here. Apple doesn't pitch their Earpods as their top quality audio product.
TL;dr Give it a rest, Hater.
To be fair I'm an equal opportunity hater and a bit of an arse online. I don't care if it's Windows chewing up your dataplan, Samsung phones bursting into flames for shithouse quality control, or Apple blowing marking gas out their arse attempting to do something different while also justifying the highest markup in the audio industry, hating is a hobby of mine, and slashdot... well the amount of cannon fodder I get here makes I like my crack dealer.
If you think Apple has the highest markup in the audio industry, you simply haven't purchased any real audiophile gear.
$20,000 speaker systems with no more than $150 worth of components in them, $3500 35W amplifiers that look like a science fair experiment inside, $2000 preamps with $0.85 op amps and 11 cent 5% resistors and +/- 20% aluminum electrolytic capacitors in the audio path, $1500 disc players with about $50 worth of components, including the "audiophile-quality Burr-Brown DACs" (that you can buy from DigiKey for $2.85 in single-unit quantities)... The list goes on and on.
Does Apple make good coin on their products? Yes, and they aren't trying to hide that fact. But:
1. Their products are almost universally well designed, and use high-quality components.
2. There are a LOT of "audio industry" OEMs that have MUCH higher margins on their products than does Apple.
He's completely correct. Most do not support AAC. That does not mean AAC supporting ones are difficult to find. I'm sure you can understand that nuance.
To demonstrate this phenomenon using your highly scientific method, replace AAC in your amazon search with aptX, or leave it out altogether.
The compare count of product listings.:)
Apparently, you didn't understand the nuance of his sarcastic connotation, that being that AAC choices were restricted to Apple and Beats.
And no, the proprietary aptX is NOT an equivalent. And did I mention "proprietary" (owned by Qualcomm)?
By contrast, AAC is an industry-standard (not Apple-proprietary, as many believe).
If I wanted to sit around the fireplace and sing Kum ba yah while ranting against corporate ownership, I too would support AAC. In the meantime I'll happily say that apt-x and AAC sound no different, offer no real benefits over one another to the end user who really doesn't give a shit as long as it works, and yet we still get average quality sound many thanks to sub-standard use as little power as possible because we gotta blow it all on bluetooth DACs mounted in cheaparse headsets.
Apple supports AAC? Fantastic. Wake me when they stop supporting gluing bits of metal into their plastic headphones simply to make them feel heavier and higher quality than they are.
I actually agree that 320 bps AptX and 256 bps AAC likely sound indistinguishable, and great. However, it is also true that most Slashdotters hate single-owner "proprietary", and that AptX fails that test, while AAC does not (being an IEC standard and all...)
However, I disagree wholeheartedly that when you are paying $80 and up for BT earbuds/headphones that there isn't room in the product design budget for a decent DAC and amplifier. Sure, just like if you pay $20 for analog phones/buds you shouldn't expect the same performance as if you pay $99, the same can be said of BT phones/buds. If you pay $20 to $30, expect mediocre sound. But if I spend $125 for some Sony BT phones, or $160 for Apple EarPods, I expect a fairly satisfying experience. And I am pretty sure I would get exactly that, based on my experience with the analog versions of the Sony phones that they have BT-ized, and the many reviews of the EarPods.
As for Apple putting weight into their earbuds (I note that you didn't specify EarPods), there is another possible explanation: Retention in the ear, and/or balance. I find it much less than plausible that the company with a reputation for slimmer/lighter at every turn, suddenly wants to take an item like an earbud, that people EXPECT to be pretty light, and stick lead weights in it just to make it feel "hefty". Rather, I will bet that the mass is there to balance the weight of the battery, so the earbud doesn't tend to rotate/flip-out-of-the-ear if the user does something like a backflip on their skateboard, or, more likely, bends down to tie their shoes, pick up something off the floor, or just look down at their keyboard. Such behavior would be incredibly annoying, and would have resulted in an Internet chock-full of "They were great, and seemed to fit perfectly, until I bent over to pick up the cat, then they spun right out of my ears!" Types of reports...
According to Apple's documentation they seem to be using AAC at 256kb/sec. That's considerably lower than aptX at around 360kb/sec.
Of course you can argue over which sounds better but since most headphones don't support AAC it's really more of a choice of do you want shitty Beats/Earpods, or do you want some good headphones in which case the lack of aptX support in iOS is a bit of a problem.
I doubt it, but I wasn't really commenting on AAC. I was just surprised at seeing Beats mentioned as being something superior.
Actually, I agree. I was just trying to think (quickly) of BT earbuds/headphones that I KNEW supported AAC.
Someone else commented that some Sony earbuds do, too, and there may be others (see below). For example, these are half the price of Apple BT buds, and support AAC:
The promise of the Apple eco-system was that everything worked together without fiddling, and there were no headaches. That promise is less and less true. More and more the damn things have gotten more buggy, and behaviors change (or get buried) for no obvious reason ("Courage" my ass).
Most recently the Apple router has occasionally stopped talking to the Apple TV when my Apple iPad is talking to the interwebs. Turn off WiFi (while I still can, since I am still on iOS10) and the Apple TV springs back to life for an hour or so.
You have something configured incorrectly. My iPad doesn't mess with anything on my Apple TV, or anything else for that matter. And yes, I am running an Apple router, too.
For me this actually reflects the way I always used that button: to disconnect from a wifi network and get a faster connection through cellular, only to forget to switch it back on when better wifi is available.
I will second that. Occasionally, I have had reason to turn off WiFi to check out connectivity from the "outside point-of-view". And I inevitably forget to turn it back on until hours later.
If the off switch on a radio doesnâ(TM)t actually turn it off that sounds like something that should be filed as a complaint with the fcc. Ralf regulation is a serious matter.
There IS an "Off". That is more akin to a "Standby".
The original Steve, who actually did all the initial design at Apple, is still living. One can't blame him for not being much inclined to get involved in the company at this point in time.
And to be fair it was a 'right time to be there' situation that got the Woz his fame. There are thousands of other nice, adept nerds in the world who could do what he did.
But in stark contrast with those other "nice, adept nerds", Woz actually DID do it.
Mic is always hot on an iPhone ever since they added "hey Siri" support and all audio recorded is almost certainly sent to Apple to help them train their voice AI. We know that with the iPhone X, the camera will also always be active and scanning for faces.
Ever wondered why the battery life in new iPhones is so abysmal? Because it's always spying.
Same thing for the FaceID. ALL done ON CHIP, in the Secure Enclave IC. NOTHING sent to Apple.
NOTHING. Not even during "Enrollment". And no FaceID Data available outside of the Secure Enclave chip. They provide a low-res "face tracker" mesh to the outside for Apps to use; but nothing that approaches the resolution of the FaceID data.
Mic is always hot on an iPhone ever since they added "hey Siri" support and all audio recorded is almost certainly sent to Apple to help them train their voice AI. We know that with the iPhone X, the camera will also always be active and scanning for faces.
Ever wondered why the battery life in new iPhones is so abysmal? Because it's always spying.
You're dead wrong on the "Hey, Siri" thing. That is decoded ON-CHIP. That's why it required a new model iPhone (with a new SoC) when it was first announced.
Apple's paternalistic approach to their users results in a 'we know better than you how to protect you' attitude.
It's unfortunate for Apple, because it means that only the duller customers will continue to trust Apple's judgement.
It has nothing to do with being "paternalistic". They just didn't want a gazillion support calls when people turned off those services and then tried to use any of the following:
AirDrop AirPlay Apple Pencil Apple Watch Continuity features, like Handoff and Instant Hotspot Instant Hotspot Location Services
So, they made the Control Panel a "Soft Turn-Off", which disconnects from WiFi networks and temporarily stops trying to re-join them, and does a similar thing with BT (don't know much about those specifics). But when you try to use the abovementioned features, the radio(s) power up and make it happen.
And besides, Airplane Mode as well as the "Switches" in the Settings App for WiFi and BT DO actually turn OFF that stuff, both in SW and HW. And the Control Panel Icons then get a Slash through them as a reminder.
Since the battery can't be removed, I'm beginning to wonder if there is any way to turn off wifi AT ALL.
Yes. Going to "Settings", WiFi , and flipping the "switch" will Turn it off (same with BT); and putting the phone in "Airplane Mode" does, too.
The only place that it does a "Warm shut-off" is in the Control Panel. And Apple has an (IMHO quite reasonable) explanation as to why that is the case:
The reason why Apple (and Beats, and some other Mfgs) BT earbuds/headphones are superior is not dependent on Bluetooth 5.0; it is because they support a far-superior CODEC, namely AAC, than typical shitbox BT 'phones/'buds.
Mind you, stuff like Apple's W1/W2 chips helps; but the main improvement is due to AAC.
And no, the proprietary aptX is NOT an equivalent. And did I mention "proprietary" (owned by Qualcomm)?
Slashdot Mirror
Is that true? I've had Android phone for 6+ years and can't ever remember a 'system' popup asking for a password. There's no equivalent to an iTunes account. If I'm asked for my Google Play account password I'm very wary. I'm genuinely curious if this sort of phishing has been tried on Android?
No. On Android, they just pull the stuff out WITHOUT User Intervention...
Well, normally I would agree, but this one is not quite phishing anymore, it is more an OS dialog impersonation attack, and the user cannot really see what is going on. Make this dialog appear when it is reasonable to expect, and the user really does not have much of a chance.
Again, why is this even news?
Impersonation of a Login Dialog can be done on ANY OS, period. And with stuff like Text Substitutions in a Dialog, pretty much no amount of App-Scanning by %APP_APPROVER%
is going to discover a cleverly-obsfucated Dialog creation function.
What Apple (and others) could POSSIBLY do, is to make a "Credentials" Dialog appear COMPLETELY different from any-other-Dialog, using baked-in UI elements that are simply not accessible to Apps. Kind of like building holograms and micro-printed ribbons into Currency.
Or, Apple can just change their policy and REQUIRE Biometric Authentication (TouchID/FaceID) if it available on-device, which just returns a "Pass/Fail" to the Application, rather than ever asking for something like an AppleID login.
My bank's App displays a screen at Launch that offers two options: TouchID or my BANK's PIN. Could it be spoofed? I guess; but there would not likely be enough people that would use the PIN to make it worthwhile, especially since they would have to repeat that engineering for multiple Banks (all with varying login processes), thus making their detection (and banning) a virtual certainty.
Yep, I read that. I also read the article that it links to. That's still not a reason why.
Maybe I can clarify. When someone asks, "Why doesn't the wifi and bluetooth shut off when I tell the wifi and bluetooth to shut off?"
An answer to that question is not, "When you tell the wifi and bluetooth to shut off, it disables wifi and bluetooth to non-Apple services."
That's a description of what happens. It is how that order is executed. It is not an explanation of why.
An explanation would look something like, "Because Larry goofed up when he wrote that bit and it's easier to pretend that it's on purpose than it is to fix it." or "Because we have decided that you never really want to turn off Apple services, despite whatever you might say." or even "Because Apple knows best, trust in Apple. There there, shhh. It'll all be okay."
Those are explanations.
So, you want some sort of "admission of guilt" for something that was CLEARLY a design decision?
YOU ARE FUCKING SICK!
And News Flash: Every single OS and Application on every single platform and device makes dozens of "assumptions" (what engineers call "design decisions"), based on what their best guess (perhaps in conjunction with independent research and/or alpha testing/focus-groups) as to what would result in a more "useful", "less-confusing", and/or "pleasant" experience for the user.
If you want to spin that into some negative "Because Apple knows better than you" concept (which you so obviously do), then you'd better start railing about EVERY design decision, control, and UI element in EVERY single OS and Application ON THE FUCKING PLANET. Because that's exactly where your illogical diatribe has led you.
And BTW, Apple didn't DECIDE to remove CHOICE; they just provide MORE CHOICE: Control Panel = "Soft" Disable; Settings Switches/ Airplane Mode = O-F-F
Got it? I sure hope so; but since continued social intercourse with you is likely fruitless, this will be the last attempt at communication with you on this subject.
That link only explained WHAT it does, which TFA already did, so the link was worthless. It did not explain WHY it is doing what it does.
The WHY is simple: As the linked article says: So you can continue to have access to the listded Apple-specific, mostly PEER TO PEER services, without having to:
1. Try to use them
2. Get an Error
3. Turn WiFi/BT BACK ON
4. Try the Service again
5. Remember to turn WiFi/BT BACK OFF ...for EACH AND EVERY time you want to use one of the listed Services.
Yeah, that sounds like a User Experience I (or any sane individual) would want... NOT!!!
If that doesn't help you understand, then just go to Settings and flip the little Switch on WiFi and BT to "OFF" and guess what?
IT'S ***OFF***
Simple as that. It even puts a slash through the WiFi and BT Symbols in the Control Panel to remind the user that those Subsytems are actually O-F-F.
And Apple has an (IMHO quite reasonable) explanation as to why that is the case:
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2...
That link does NOT provide any explanation about why I'd still want to use those specific features after disabling Wi-Fi, nor does it explain what constitutes a "new location" or what's so special about 5 am.
If you thought the explanation were confusing or incomplete, Then you are simply too stupid to drive a Smartphone.
Better go back to Android, where the reasoning and ramifications of every control setting are clearly and thoroughly explained...[/sarcasm]
You say that your linked article explains why iOS doesn't shut off WiFi or bluetooth when you tell it to shut off WiFi and Bluetooth. And the title of the article you link is: "Apple clarifies why iOS 11 Control Center toggles don’t fully disable Bluetooth and Wi-Fi" but... the article does not offer a reason why iOS does this. It only describes how iOS does this.
That's good information to have too, but it's pretty far from a reasonable explanation. It's not any explanation.
I'm not sure what you would consider a "reasonable explanation"; but the first paragraph of the article makes it pretty clear to those that can read:
"In a support document published today on its website, Apple explains that toggling off Wi-Fi and Bluetooth by tapping their corresponding icons in the new Control Center still leaves the radios on for features like AirDrop, AirPlay, Handoff, Instant Hotspot, Apple Pencil, Apple Watch and Location Services."
I don't know about you, but, IMHO, a paragraph with the phrase "Apple explains..." Is a pretty good place to start looking for an explanation...
Remember: Reading is FUNdamental!
However, it is also true that most Slashdotters hate single-owner "proprietary", and that AptX fails that test
Only when it affects them. They hate being limited in software options, they hate being drawn into licensing agreements, they hate the proprietary lock-in being used for pesky shit like DRM etc. For the most part people (including most slashdot users) don't give two shits about something buried deep in a communications protocol unless it a) has a negative affect on quality or b) doesn't work.
As for Apple putting weight into their earbuds (I note that you didn't specify EarPods), there is another possible explanation: Retention in the ear, and/or balance.
They didn't do it on Earpods, that would be stupid. They would fall out of your ears. But then we were also talking about high quality audio here. Apple doesn't pitch their Earpods as their top quality audio product.
TL;dr Give it a rest, Hater.
To be fair I'm an equal opportunity hater and a bit of an arse online. I don't care if it's Windows chewing up your dataplan, Samsung phones bursting into flames for shithouse quality control, or Apple blowing marking gas out their arse attempting to do something different while also justifying the highest markup in the audio industry, hating is a hobby of mine, and slashdot ... well the amount of cannon fodder I get here makes I like my crack dealer.
If you think Apple has the highest markup in the audio industry, you simply haven't purchased any real audiophile gear.
$20,000 speaker systems with no more than $150 worth of components in them, $3500 35W amplifiers that look like a science fair experiment inside, $2000 preamps with $0.85 op amps and 11 cent 5% resistors and +/- 20% aluminum electrolytic capacitors in the audio path, $1500 disc players with about $50 worth of components, including the "audiophile-quality Burr-Brown DACs" (that you can buy from DigiKey for $2.85 in single-unit quantities)... The list goes on and on.
Does Apple make good coin on their products? Yes, and they aren't trying to hide that fact. But:
1. Their products are almost universally well designed, and use high-quality components.
2. There are a LOT of "audio industry" OEMs that have MUCH higher margins on their products than does Apple.
He's completely correct. Most do not support AAC. That does not mean AAC supporting ones are difficult to find. I'm sure you can understand that nuance.
To demonstrate this phenomenon using your highly scientific method, replace AAC in your amazon search with aptX, or leave it out altogether.
The compare count of product listings. :)
Apparently, you didn't understand the nuance of his sarcastic connotation, that being that AAC choices were restricted to Apple and Beats.
And no, the proprietary aptX is NOT an equivalent. And did I mention "proprietary" (owned by Qualcomm)?
By contrast, AAC is an industry-standard (not Apple-proprietary, as many believe).
If I wanted to sit around the fireplace and sing Kum ba yah while ranting against corporate ownership, I too would support AAC. In the meantime I'll happily say that apt-x and AAC sound no different, offer no real benefits over one another to the end user who really doesn't give a shit as long as it works, and yet we still get average quality sound many thanks to sub-standard use as little power as possible because we gotta blow it all on bluetooth DACs mounted in cheaparse headsets.
Apple supports AAC? Fantastic. Wake me when they stop supporting gluing bits of metal into their plastic headphones simply to make them feel heavier and higher quality than they are.
I actually agree that 320 bps AptX and 256 bps AAC likely sound indistinguishable, and great. However, it is also true that most Slashdotters hate single-owner "proprietary", and that AptX fails that test, while AAC does not (being an IEC standard and all...)
However, I disagree wholeheartedly that when you are paying $80 and up for BT earbuds/headphones that there isn't room in the product design budget for a decent DAC and amplifier. Sure, just like if you pay $20 for analog phones/buds you shouldn't expect the same performance as if you pay $99, the same can be said of BT phones/buds. If you pay $20 to $30, expect mediocre sound. But if I spend $125 for some Sony BT phones, or $160 for Apple EarPods, I expect a fairly satisfying experience. And I am pretty sure I would get exactly that, based on my experience with the analog versions of the Sony phones that they have BT-ized, and the many reviews of the EarPods.
As for Apple putting weight into their earbuds (I note that you didn't specify EarPods), there is another possible explanation: Retention in the ear, and/or balance. I find it much less than plausible that the company with a reputation for slimmer/lighter at every turn, suddenly wants to take an item like an earbud, that people EXPECT to be pretty light, and stick lead weights in it just to make it feel "hefty". Rather, I will bet that the mass is there to balance the weight of the battery, so the earbud doesn't tend to rotate/flip-out-of-the-ear if the user does something like a backflip on their skateboard, or, more likely, bends down to tie their shoes, pick up something off the floor, or just look down at their keyboard. Such behavior would be incredibly annoying, and would have resulted in an Internet chock-full of "They were great, and seemed to fit perfectly, until I bent over to pick up the cat, then they spun right out of my ears!" Types of reports...
TL;dr Give it a rest, Hater.
According to Apple's documentation they seem to be using AAC at 256kb/sec. That's considerably lower than aptX at around 360kb/sec.
Of course you can argue over which sounds better but since most headphones don't support AAC it's really more of a choice of do you want shitty Beats/Earpods, or do you want some good headphones in which case the lack of aptX support in iOS is a bit of a problem.
ORLY? Amazon would beg to differ:
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=n...
and for the headphones:
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=s...
That took all of about 10 seconds, including typing in the amazon url and the search-term.
I doubt it, but I wasn't really commenting on AAC. I was just surprised at seeing Beats mentioned as being something superior.
Actually, I agree. I was just trying to think (quickly) of BT earbuds/headphones that I KNEW supported AAC.
Someone else commented that some Sony earbuds do, too, and there may be others (see below). For example, these are half the price of Apple BT buds, and support AAC:
https://www.amazon.com/NuForce...
Another pair of $80 BT earbuds supporting AAC:
https://www.amazon.com/MEE-aud...
And these AAC compat. earbuds are downright cheap at $30:
https://www.amazon.com/JPRiDE-...
$50. Claim 10 hour battery life. AAC Support:
https://www.amazon.com/NuForce...
And if you want DOWNRIGHT CHEAP AAC Earbuds, howabout these for $18.88??? :
https://www.amazon.com/BlueAnt...
That was 5 minutes on the Amazon site. So, not so hard to find AAC-compatible BT buds/phones at almost ANY quality, and price, level.
The promise of the Apple eco-system was that everything worked together without fiddling, and there were no headaches. That promise is less and less true. More and more the damn things have gotten more buggy, and behaviors change (or get buried) for no obvious reason ("Courage" my ass).
Most recently the Apple router has occasionally stopped talking to the Apple TV when my Apple iPad is talking to the interwebs. Turn off WiFi (while I still can, since I am still on iOS10) and the Apple TV springs back to life for an hour or so.
You have something configured incorrectly. My iPad doesn't mess with anything on my Apple TV, or anything else for that matter. And yes, I am running an Apple router, too.
Airplane Mode... it doesn't turn off Wifi anymore. It re-enables Bluetooth when turned on again. It doesn't really work like it should.
Why not just save the state of the cellular/wifi/bluetooth settings and toggle them on/off? Why is this such a difficult thing?
You're talking about Samsung now, right?
For me this actually reflects the way I always used that button: to disconnect from a wifi network and get a faster connection through cellular, only to forget to switch it back on when better wifi is available.
I will second that. Occasionally, I have had reason to turn off WiFi to check out connectivity from the "outside point-of-view". And I inevitably forget to turn it back on until hours later.
If the off switch on a radio doesnâ(TM)t actually turn it off that sounds like something that should be filed as a complaint with the fcc. Ralf regulation is a serious matter.
There IS an "Off". That is more akin to a "Standby".
Nothing to see here; move along.
Of course, Android isn't any better.
FTFY.
The original Steve, who actually did all the initial design at Apple, is still living. One can't blame him for not being much inclined to get involved in the company at this point in time.
And to be fair it was a 'right time to be there' situation that got the Woz his fame. There are thousands of other nice, adept nerds in the world who could do what he did.
But in stark contrast with those other "nice, adept nerds", Woz actually DID do it.
There is no way of verifying this information. We simply have to trust apple that its true. Did we forget 'Trust, but Verify'?
Really? NO way to use a Packet Sniffer to see a burst of data when you say "Hey, Siri"?
But you won't; because it DOESN'T.
Mic is always hot on an iPhone ever since they added "hey Siri" support and all audio recorded is almost certainly sent to Apple to help them train their voice AI. We know that with the iPhone X, the camera will also always be active and scanning for faces.
Ever wondered why the battery life in new iPhones is so abysmal? Because it's always spying.
Same thing for the FaceID. ALL done ON CHIP, in the Secure Enclave IC. NOTHING sent to Apple.
NOTHING. Not even during "Enrollment". And no FaceID Data available outside of the Secure Enclave chip. They provide a low-res "face tracker" mesh to the outside for Apps to use; but nothing that approaches the resolution of the FaceID data.
Mic is always hot on an iPhone ever since they added "hey Siri" support and all audio recorded is almost certainly sent to Apple to help them train their voice AI. We know that with the iPhone X, the camera will also always be active and scanning for faces.
Ever wondered why the battery life in new iPhones is so abysmal? Because it's always spying.
You're dead wrong on the "Hey, Siri" thing. That is decoded ON-CHIP. That's why it required a new model iPhone (with a new SoC) when it was first announced.
It's unfortunate for Apple, because it means that only the duller customers will continue to trust Apple's judgment.
And thus the perception of anyone using Apple products is "Oh, an Apple user. Here, take my handicapped parking spot, you poor thing."
Would you like a list of all the 2, 3 and 4-digit Slashdot UID owners are also rocking Apple computers and other devices?
Apple's paternalistic approach to their users results in a 'we know better than you how to protect you' attitude.
It's unfortunate for Apple, because it means that only the duller customers will continue to trust Apple's judgement.
It has nothing to do with being "paternalistic". They just didn't want a gazillion support calls when people turned off those services and then tried to use any of the following:
AirDrop
AirPlay
Apple Pencil
Apple Watch
Continuity features, like Handoff and Instant Hotspot
Instant Hotspot
Location Services
So, they made the Control Panel a "Soft Turn-Off", which disconnects from WiFi networks and temporarily stops trying to re-join them, and does a similar thing with BT (don't know much about those specifics). But when you try to use the abovementioned features, the radio(s) power up and make it happen.
And besides, Airplane Mode as well as the "Switches" in the Settings App for WiFi and BT DO actually turn OFF that stuff, both in SW and HW. And the Control Panel Icons then get a Slash through them as a reminder.
But I guess the Slash is "paternalistic", too...
Since the battery can't be removed, I'm beginning to wonder if there is any way to turn off wifi AT ALL.
Yes. Going to "Settings", WiFi , and flipping the "switch" will Turn it off (same with BT); and putting the phone in "Airplane Mode" does, too.
The only place that it does a "Warm shut-off" is in the Control Panel. And Apple has an (IMHO quite reasonable) explanation as to why that is the case:
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2...
The reason why Apple (and Beats, and some other Mfgs) BT earbuds/headphones are superior is not dependent on Bluetooth 5.0; it is because they support a far-superior CODEC, namely AAC, than typical shitbox BT 'phones/'buds.
Mind you, stuff like Apple's W1/W2 chips helps; but the main improvement is due to AAC.
And no, the proprietary aptX is NOT an equivalent. And did I mention "proprietary" (owned by Qualcomm)?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
By contrast, AAC is an industry-standard (not Apple-proprietary, as many believe).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Look into it.
By the time the music starts its path across Bluetooth (or a headphone jack) it's already decoded.
Definitely true of WIRED connections (analog or digital); but for BT, AFAIK, notsomuch. Why else would they have certain audio CODECS listed?
(and Beats, and some other Mfgs) BT earbuds/headphones are superior
Beats? Superior??
Beats is downright terrible. They're one of, if not the, worst-sounding in their price range.
Ok, but I don't think that is due to their use of AAC, do you?