"+1. Everything I ever needed to know about unions I learned the first time I helped my employer set up a convention booth at Moscone Center."
So you're extrapolating about all unions from your experience with a single union in a single facility in a single state? I think maybe your sample size is too small.
TRWTF is using Apples presentation software. Sure, it works, but it's got nothing on PowerPoint or compatibles, such as Open/Libre/Whateveritisnow Office.
It's like trying to crack a nut with a hammer. Sure, it'll get the job done, but you still should use a nutcracker.
I'm sorry; but Keynote (Apple's Presentation Software) wipes the floor with PowerPoint (and the Open/LibreOffice crap).
Apple created Keynote years ago specifically for Steve Jobs to create, well, Keynote Addresses, and it's gorgeous transitions and animations are still head and shoulders above everyone else, and make the other guys' attempts look like the amateur hour they are.
THAT's why they not only Presented, but CREATED their Presentations on Keynote.
Huh? Regardless of what carriers and OEMs do later, it's still "starting over". I think it's pretty safe to say that Google has learned quite a bit.
Maybe so; but have the OEMs and Carriers?
I have argued several times on this site (mostly with nitwit AC's, I'll admit), that, if Google wanted to exert control over the distribution of Android, all they would have to do is place stipulations in their Agreements with those OEMs, (and Carriers, much like Apple does with iOS), NOT to mess with Android, and to IMMEDIATELY pass-along Updates after simply recompiling their BaseBand Libraries (and NOTHING more!) into them, if necessary.
But, then the typical Fandroid (to use the purorative term for convenience's sake), immediately comes back and says things like "There can't be any "Agreements", because Android is F/OSS (which has only ever been at most, partially true, at least in a practical sense), and that "There is NO WAY That Google can exert ANY Control over it, after they Publish it (again, NOT TRUE).
So, please square that VERY common Slashtard thinking with the thought that Google can now somehow exert control over "Fuchia" (or whatever it's called), without making it "Closed Source", and therefore no different in their minds than the Evilz Apple, with it's Closed Architecture.
Wow, that's a very superficial article. The article states: 'ARM is founded as a spin-off from Acorn and Apple, after the two companies started collaborating on the ARM processor as part of the development of Apple's new Newton computer system.' Apple wanted to use ARM chips, but didn't want to buy them from Acorn, because Acorn's core product was a direct competitor for the Mac. They insisted that ARM be spun off and provided a lot of the initial capital, but it wasn't just a joint venture, the third partner was VLSI Technology, who don't seem to be mentioned at all. Apple had very little input into the designs, they just bought the cores.
After Steve Jobs returned and killed the Newton, most of the people with ARM experience left Apple. Apple didn't start re-hiring people with this kind of expertise until they decided to stop licensing PortalPlayer SoCs for the iPod and move the design in-house. There are a lot of companies that have been ARM architecture licensees for a lot longer than Apple (including Intel) and there are quite a few that have been actively designing ARM chips for longer.
Sorry about the article. I was at work, and only had about a minute to "research a cite".
The only thing I was trying to point out was that Apple was involved in the earliest days of ARM history.
There aren't a whole lot of companies with ARM Architecture Licenses, period, and please tell me exactly what most of them, including Intel, have even been doing with theirs?
At this point, at a guess, I's say that pretty-much only Apple, Qualcomm and Samsung are doing much with their Architecture licenses. All the rest, e.g. Atmel, ST, etc. are just doing cut-n-paste "engineering" out of the ARM building-blocks "catalog".
There's a crack on the short trace from the M1 ball, and the pad will frequently lift away when you remove the Meson chip to perform the task. Sure, there's a lot of 6+ units out there which aren't suffering it but for each that is suffering the classic touch disease the M1 trace is at fault. Classic M1 touch-disease failure will have the flickering grey bars at the top associated with it.
I don't care if people call it a design fault or what ever, it doesn't change the actuality that that particular trace fails. As mentioned, it does *not* require the phone to be dropped, normal thermal cycling and daily use alone can cause the failure. It's also not a highly visible break in the track, even at 30~40X magnification you really cannot notably see it. To me it would appear that the combination of parts in the location along with the layout of the trace for what ever reason causes the trace to eventually suffer the micro-tear.
For quite some time we were trying to just replace the meson chip and there'd be some levels of success, but almost always the phone would end up back in the shop within a month or two with the same classic touch disease issue. Where the "penny dropped" was that we started to notice that for every phone we did the meson replacement attempt that lost the M1 pad during the rework forcing us to put in a replacement trace in, we weren't seeing those ones come back later, and thus the classic touch-disease cause and repair was finally found.
You're welcome to visit and I'll gladly show you.
If what you say is true, then that is a good "find"; however, Unless the part do the trace that breaks is under the Meson chip, and with the crack being so vanishingly small, why aren't you just scraping off the solder mask over the affected part of the trace and employing the "blob of solder" patch technique, instead of messing with what I assume is a "wire-wrap wire" patch?
1 year is a pretty short warranty for a $50 handsaw, much less a $500+ phone with only a handful of mechanical components that could easily be made extremely durable.
And if the electronics are made well, they'll still be going strong a decade from now.
The battery is pretty much the only thing that has an unavoidably short lifespan, and it would be easy to exclude from a more respectable warranty.
Well, I can only speak from experience; but none of my iOS devices have had any failures whatsoever. That includes my iPad 2 that I am typing this on, my iPhone 4s that served me flawlessly until being replaced by my current iPhone 6 Plus, which has also served me flawlessly. By the way, my iPhone 4s still sits in quiet repose on my workbench at home. I charge it once in awhile, just to keep the battery from dying; but it seems to be still working just fine.
So, IMHO, I think Apple does a bangup job with both their electrical and mechanical component design/selection; so I don't think in their case, there is a correlation between warranty period and component quality; but I think that, for nearly 50 years, ever since the Apple 1, Apple has just always offered a 1 year warranty period for every single one of their products, and so, that is exactly how much thought they put into he warranty period for their mobile products, too.
By the way, it is important to note that Apple offers that exact same 1 year warranty, including the ability to purchase AppleCare, on their REFURBISHED Products. That's important; because in most cases, most, if not all, of the mechanical portions of those refurb-units are probably NOT replaced. Almost every other company that offers refurbs, whether it be for computers, hard drives, smartphones, or chainsaws, offers a 90 day, or sometimes even less, warranty.
That suggests to me that Apple really does have "faith" in their product-longevity.
And Apple has already addressed the issue of the battery, by offering a reasonably-priced (around $100 incl. parts and labor) battery replacement service. Not free; but, as you said, that is a "wear out" component, which should be reasonably excluded from a long warranty.
BTW, I am not sure, but I would imagine that battery replacements are covered in the AppleCare+ extended warranty; because I can't imagine an iPhone/iPad/Mac battery "wearing out" in 2 years without being defective.
And actually, there is very little reason for an electronic device to have a warranty period over 90 days. After that, you are past the 92% point of the "infant mortality" period of defects in materials and workmanship, and after that, it's either excessive wear, or more often than not, customer-induced failures, neither of which should be covered under a standard warranty.
The complaint is that over time many of the devices are suffering touchscreen issues as a result of poor design or component choices. Some might be just fine while others that use a different batch of components suffer the issue. If this is the minority and, as you say they, this would be an outlier case then there's no reason they couldn't offer even a 5 year warranty.
If you are referring to the "Touch Disease" issue, that was not a Design problem, nor a Component-Choice problem; but rather a Contract Manufacturing issue, and/or a PCB/Touch-Controller "Coplanarity" issue (i.e. Warped PCBs), exacerbated by RoHS soldering.
Other phones/tablets have suffered the same issues; but they don't get catchy names attached to their problems; just random internet-forum posts, so they don't come to enough people's attention.
BTW, I have an iPhone 6 Plus that suffered a drop onto its back from about 5 ft onto a hardwood floor about 2 years ago. The impact was so severe that it actually knocked the entire display/digitizer loose from the aluminum "tub" that forms the back and sides of that iPhone. Digitizer works, Display works. lNever fixed it. Use it to this day.
It worked, then Apple changed how it works and broke it.
So you think it's perfectly fine to blame the non-paid OSS developers? Jesus fucking Christ you're a dick.
Just STFU and stop spamming us.
LOL! That's a laugh!
Who's following Who around, spewing bile over every one of my Posts?
And I believe that Apple fixed the issue in Mail. It just took the GPG maintainers a bit to respond to that, from what I read. TRULY Sorry if I was incorrect.
The touch-disease happens even without a strike / drop.
The fault manifests as an extremely fine crack in the PCB track leading to the M1 ball on the touch controller IC. The proper way to fix this is the run a small jumper of wire from the touch IC BGA ball to further up the PCB track.
The phone does not need to be dropped for this to fail, just general thermal cycling and daily use is enough to develop the issues. Apple's little "addition" about requiring a drop is an attempt to try get some distance between the fault and themselves.
Sounds fishy to me.
PCB trace-cracks are almost always more random than what you describe. I don't buy that its ALWAYS a crack in the trace to the M1 Ball, as you allege. I don't doubt that this failure has happened on SOME units; but not ALL, that have exhibited the "Touch Disease" syndrome. For one thing, the symptoms are too varied to be traced (haha) to ONE ball/trace.
BTW, my iPhone 6 Plus has been dropped repeatedly, once from about 5 ft. onto a hardwood floor onto its back. Hard enough that it actually dislodged the display/digitizer assembly from the case and shattered the glass. Never fixed it. Still that way after 2 years. Works perfectly. If anything was going to crack a PCB trace, that should have done it!
IMHO, It's a reflow soldering issue, and/or PCB/BGA-component coplanarity issue. Some PCBs are naturally more warped than others, and that damned RoHS solder doesn't help.
Tell that to nerds like Linus Torvalds, Bruce Schneier, and the several 3 and 4-digit UIDs here on Slashdot that use Apple exclusively, or as often as possible.
How many professional uses do you use your Android for?
Every one that an Iphone is capable of and more.
Lets face it, Iphones have no special business use either, but are more limited than Android. If you've flown on a recently designed airliner, one thing you should notice is that the IFE's are now Android based. Android is actually getting quite big in the embedded device space. How's IOS doing there?
Apple has traditionally eschewed brand-dilution by allowing their stuff to be hacked into mincemeat by some half-assed Chinese embedded Devs.
You're stuck working within whatever apps you can find that can interconnect. But you're not allowed access to the filesystem. Google has been doing some horky business in recent Android releases with regard to filesystem access, but they've not yet gotten even close to the prohibitiveness that Apple has enforced all along.
That wasn't much of a problem before, with third-party Apps like GoodReader, and Apple's "Sharing" capabilities.
But in iOS 11, due to be out in just a couple of days (September 19), there is a "Files" App, which exposes the filesystem, very similar to the macOS "Finder".
You're on the train on the way to work and get an email from a colleague. Attached is a zip or 7z archive. Save the file and extract it to your handset. There is multiple docx files in the zip, you are looking through the document and then see a typo and edit the typo and save back the file. Now you arrive in the office and transfer that same edited document onto the work file server over SMB.
On Android it is as easy as doing it on any desktop, you just save the file from your email. Open your file explorer app to the downloads folder and extract the zip then tap the document and open it in one of the many office apps available. Save the file then go back to the file explorer and transfer the file directly onto the SMB share.
On iOS you just stare at the fact the email has a compressed file and cannot proceed.
Zip files unarchive just fine in iOS. You might bone-up on subjects before you make an ass out of your self in a public forum. Especially a Tech forum. Or even Slashdot...
Also, before you bash not having native support for common filetypes, remember that Windows STILL doesn't have NATIVE support for PDF. Nor does it NATIVELY support many Archive formats, such as RAR, tar, gzip, etc.
And as a matter of fact, I can't seem to find a list of Archive file Formats that Android NATIVELY supports.
Hell for that matter apple compiles its apps on llvm, guess what android compiles its apps on nowadays... llvm
Nope. The initial versions of ART used LLVM, but the Google folk couldn't get the resource requirements down enough to run on the phone (no idea why they don't do the compilation on the app store and cache the results, rather than warming the planet), so they moved to a completely different infrastructure. Modern ART has two compilers (that they're trying really hard to unify). There's a JIT that runs when you first start an app. This collects profiling information, but doesn't do much optimisation initially. It will then generate optimised code for some of the hot paths. The profiling information is recorded and overnight (or at any period when the phone is plugged in but not used) the AOT compiler starts in the background and will generate optimised binaries. Unfortunately, the AOT compiler doesn't allow on-stack replacement and so the JIT can occasionally give better code for hot loops (it can perform speculative optimisations that are correct 99.9% of the time and then deoptimise in the case where they're incorrect, whereas the AOT compiler has to do the slower optimisation that's correct 100% of the time).
I think there's also an interpreter for fast start, but I lose track (the ART team keeps changing their mind about whether an interpreter is a good idea).
Wow!
As I said above, Android is a Dumpster Fire. That just proves it!
Time to throw it out and start afresh...
But isn't that what Google was doing about a year ago? Why is there still an Android, anyway?
Except wherein my iPhone usually creams my wife's nexus on everything practical, including being able to make it 2 years without completely breaking. I used to love android, but this thing were google writes software and lets a million other people implement hardware in a million ways and use/abuse that software infinitely just isn't working. Hardware is not commodity, it really matters how things are implemented. It's not just about being cheap.
I'm not sure I agree with that, although Apple do release a new phone with 'next generation' internals, and often buy a monopoly on the production run.
You are an idiot.
Apple doesn't "buy a monopoly on a production-run." That would imply that they are buying commodity SoCs, like the Qualcomm stuff, which they are NOT. They design their own SoCs from the ground-up (including the GPU subsystem), and then contract with a Fab-House, like TSMC or Samsung, to handle the chip production. That is VERY different from what you stated.
The reality though is that Apple software designers focus on user perception of performance, and that supplements the underlying hardware to make a material difference in how users think a device performs.
There is no "perception of performance" that affects benchmarks; nor that allows for the glassy-smooth tracking and animation in ARKit.
So all those people jailbreaking their iPhones weren't using root exploits?
Not to mention the relative ease of securing a very constrained number of devices with a very constrained environment and a very constrained and controlled driver base?
Wow! You Haters are like a dog with a bone! HOW long ago was that Jailbreak-Exploit thing?
And your excuse about "constrained this, and constrained that" sounds JUST like the Windows fanbois trying to explain-away bad Security on that platform, too!
Probably because people on here look beyond the shiny marketing and explore things in more depth, and despise shallow shits that tell people how innovative Apple, or refuse to accept any criticism of their great god Jobs.
Wrong.
The definition of "shallow" is someone who sees a brand-name on a product and REFLEXIVELY dismisses it, without applying the first little bit of examination or critical thinking.
Even I praise some things in Windows (don't know enough about Linux to comment, so I DON'T), and if Android wasn't such a dumpster-fire from top to bottom, I would probably find some things to like in it, too.
But to just REFLEXIVELY disregard an entire company and all of its software and hardware products, especially one with such insanely-high customer-satisfaction ratings and insanely-high sales, year after year, shows nothing but a nearly unbelievable lack of insight, masking itself, as it often does, as transparently childish hubris.
For anyone paying attention, Apple is famous for selling overpriced gear. Also, for anyone paying attention, Apple is the go to brand for people wanting a status statement instead of just a computer or a phone. Also, if anyone have been paying attention, people with no clue about computers tend to prefer Apple products. There you go some justification for the supposed hate you see... if you are paying attention.
Funny. Many, many, many Developers use Apple computers (and likely their mobile devices, too). Even St. Linus used/uses a MacBook Air:
So, I guess Linus Fucking Torvalds has "no clue about computers", too, eh?
And I have conversed with a number of 3 and 4 digit UIDs here on Slashdot that use and prefer Macs. Oh, and I have decades of experience as an embedded Developer, and have used Macs for Development, even way back in the day, when it was REALLY hard to find a decent toolchain that ran on Macs.
So, in short: You have NO FUCKING CLUE what you are talking about, fucktard; so STFU and GTFO...
Slashdot Mirror
"+1. Everything I ever needed to know about unions I learned the first time I helped my employer set up a convention booth at Moscone Center."
So you're extrapolating about all unions from your experience with a single union in a single facility in a single state? I think maybe your sample size is too small.
And maybe not.
TRWTF is using Apples presentation software. Sure, it works, but it's got nothing on PowerPoint or compatibles, such as Open/Libre/Whateveritisnow Office.
It's like trying to crack a nut with a hammer. Sure, it'll get the job done, but you still should use a nutcracker.
I'm sorry; but Keynote (Apple's Presentation Software) wipes the floor with PowerPoint (and the Open/LibreOffice crap).
https://www.apple.com/keynote/
Apple created Keynote years ago specifically for Steve Jobs to create, well, Keynote Addresses, and it's gorgeous transitions and animations are still head and shoulders above everyone else, and make the other guys' attempts look like the amateur hour they are.
THAT's why they not only Presented, but CREATED their Presentations on Keynote.
Huh? Regardless of what carriers and OEMs do later, it's still "starting over". I think it's pretty safe to say that Google has learned quite a bit.
Maybe so; but have the OEMs and Carriers?
I have argued several times on this site (mostly with nitwit AC's, I'll admit), that, if Google wanted to exert control over the distribution of Android, all they would have to do is place stipulations in their Agreements with those OEMs, (and Carriers, much like Apple does with iOS), NOT to mess with Android, and to IMMEDIATELY pass-along Updates after simply recompiling their BaseBand Libraries (and NOTHING more!) into them, if necessary.
But, then the typical Fandroid (to use the purorative term for convenience's sake), immediately comes back and says things like "There can't be any "Agreements", because Android is F/OSS (which has only ever been at most, partially true, at least in a practical sense), and that "There is NO WAY That Google can exert ANY Control over it, after they Publish it (again, NOT TRUE).
So, please square that VERY common Slashtard thinking with the thought that Google can now somehow exert control over "Fuchia" (or whatever it's called), without making it "Closed Source", and therefore no different in their minds than the Evilz Apple, with it's Closed Architecture.
Exactly what I assume Google Fuchsia will be.
If history is any indicator, Not once the OEMs and the Carriers get ahold of it...
Wow, that's a very superficial article. The article states: 'ARM is founded as a spin-off from Acorn and Apple, after the two companies started collaborating on the ARM processor as part of the development of Apple's new Newton computer system.' Apple wanted to use ARM chips, but didn't want to buy them from Acorn, because Acorn's core product was a direct competitor for the Mac. They insisted that ARM be spun off and provided a lot of the initial capital, but it wasn't just a joint venture, the third partner was VLSI Technology, who don't seem to be mentioned at all. Apple had very little input into the designs, they just bought the cores.
After Steve Jobs returned and killed the Newton, most of the people with ARM experience left Apple. Apple didn't start re-hiring people with this kind of expertise until they decided to stop licensing PortalPlayer SoCs for the iPod and move the design in-house. There are a lot of companies that have been ARM architecture licensees for a lot longer than Apple (including Intel) and there are quite a few that have been actively designing ARM chips for longer.
Sorry about the article. I was at work, and only had about a minute to "research a cite".
The only thing I was trying to point out was that Apple was involved in the earliest days of ARM history.
There aren't a whole lot of companies with ARM Architecture Licenses, period, and please tell me exactly what most of them, including Intel, have even been doing with theirs?
At this point, at a guess, I's say that pretty-much only Apple, Qualcomm and Samsung are doing much with their Architecture licenses. All the rest, e.g. Atmel, ST, etc. are just doing cut-n-paste "engineering" out of the ARM building-blocks "catalog".
There's a crack on the short trace from the M1 ball, and the pad will frequently lift away when you remove the Meson chip to perform the task. Sure, there's a lot of 6+ units out there which aren't suffering it but for each that is suffering the classic touch disease the M1 trace is at fault. Classic M1 touch-disease failure will have the flickering grey bars at the top associated with it.
I don't care if people call it a design fault or what ever, it doesn't change the actuality that that particular trace fails. As mentioned, it does *not* require the phone to be dropped, normal thermal cycling and daily use alone can cause the failure. It's also not a highly visible break in the track, even at 30~40X magnification you really cannot notably see it. To me it would appear that the combination of parts in the location along with the layout of the trace for what ever reason causes the trace to eventually suffer the micro-tear.
For quite some time we were trying to just replace the meson chip and there'd be some levels of success, but almost always the phone would end up back in the shop within a month or two with the same classic touch disease issue. Where the "penny dropped" was that we started to notice that for every phone we did the meson replacement attempt that lost the M1 pad during the rework forcing us to put in a replacement trace in, we weren't seeing those ones come back later, and thus the classic touch-disease cause and repair was finally found.
You're welcome to visit and I'll gladly show you.
If what you say is true, then that is a good "find"; however, Unless the part do the trace that breaks is under the Meson chip, and with the crack being so vanishingly small, why aren't you just scraping off the solder mask over the affected part of the trace and employing the "blob of solder" patch technique, instead of messing with what I assume is a "wire-wrap wire" patch?
1 year is a pretty short warranty for a $50 handsaw, much less a $500+ phone with only a handful of mechanical components that could easily be made extremely durable.
And if the electronics are made well, they'll still be going strong a decade from now.
The battery is pretty much the only thing that has an unavoidably short lifespan, and it would be easy to exclude from a more respectable warranty.
Well, I can only speak from experience; but none of my iOS devices have had any failures whatsoever. That includes my iPad 2 that I am typing this on, my iPhone 4s that served me flawlessly until being replaced by my current iPhone 6 Plus, which has also served me flawlessly. By the way, my iPhone 4s still sits in quiet repose on my workbench at home. I charge it once in awhile, just to keep the battery from dying; but it seems to be still working just fine.
So, IMHO, I think Apple does a bangup job with both their electrical and mechanical component design/selection; so I don't think in their case, there is a correlation between warranty period and component quality; but I think that, for nearly 50 years, ever since the Apple 1, Apple has just always offered a 1 year warranty period for every single one of their products, and so, that is exactly how much thought they put into he warranty period for their mobile products, too.
By the way, it is important to note that Apple offers that exact same 1 year warranty, including the ability to purchase AppleCare, on their REFURBISHED Products. That's important; because in most cases, most, if not all, of the mechanical portions of those refurb-units are probably NOT replaced. Almost every other company that offers refurbs, whether it be for computers, hard drives, smartphones, or chainsaws, offers a 90 day, or sometimes even less, warranty.
That suggests to me that Apple really does have "faith" in their product-longevity.
And Apple has already addressed the issue of the battery, by offering a reasonably-priced (around $100 incl. parts and labor) battery replacement service. Not free; but, as you said, that is a "wear out" component, which should be reasonably excluded from a long warranty.
BTW, I am not sure, but I would imagine that battery replacements are covered in the AppleCare+ extended warranty; because I can't imagine an iPhone/iPad/Mac battery "wearing out" in 2 years without being defective.
And actually, there is very little reason for an electronic device to have a warranty period over 90 days. After that, you are past the 92% point of the "infant mortality" period of defects in materials and workmanship, and after that, it's either excessive wear, or more often than not, customer-induced failures, neither of which should be covered under a standard warranty.
The complaint is that over time many of the devices are suffering touchscreen issues as a result of poor design or component choices. Some might be just fine while others that use a different batch of components suffer the issue. If this is the minority and, as you say they, this would be an outlier case then there's no reason they couldn't offer even a 5 year warranty.
If you are referring to the "Touch Disease" issue, that was not a Design problem, nor a Component-Choice problem; but rather a Contract Manufacturing issue, and/or a PCB/Touch-Controller "Coplanarity" issue (i.e. Warped PCBs), exacerbated by RoHS soldering.
Other phones/tablets have suffered the same issues; but they don't get catchy names attached to their problems; just random internet-forum posts, so they don't come to enough people's attention.
BTW, I have an iPhone 6 Plus that suffered a drop onto its back from about 5 ft onto a hardwood floor about 2 years ago. The impact was so severe that it actually knocked the entire display/digitizer loose from the aluminum "tub" that forms the back and sides of that iPhone. Digitizer works, Display works. lNever fixed it. Use it to this day.
It worked, then Apple changed how it works and broke it.
So you think it's perfectly fine to blame the non-paid OSS developers? Jesus fucking Christ you're a dick.
Just STFU and stop spamming us.
LOL! That's a laugh!
Who's following Who around, spewing bile over every one of my Posts?
And I believe that Apple fixed the issue in Mail. It just took the GPG maintainers a bit to respond to that, from what I read. TRULY Sorry if I was incorrect.
You're the new apk... so I wouldn't throw rocks if I were you.
Topic is new OS. New features or lack thereof is on topic.
Now fuck off.
So you really think that a rant against Safari in a Thread discussing APFS isn't off-topic?
If you can't afford an external 4TB drive, you shouldn't have a computer?
I've always known you were an asshole, but that is the most cuntish thing I recall you saying.
You're such a Jobs wannabe, fucking asshole and all. Fucking douche.
Ok, then let's mitigate it a bit:
If you don't have a backup, you shouldn't own a computer, or at least you shouldn't whine about data-loss when it happens.
And BTW, I don't have a backup for my computer, either.
The touch-disease happens even without a strike / drop.
The fault manifests as an extremely fine crack in the PCB track leading to the M1 ball on the touch controller IC. The proper way to fix this is the run a small jumper of wire from the touch IC BGA ball to further up the PCB track.
The phone does not need to be dropped for this to fail, just general thermal cycling and daily use is enough to develop the issues. Apple's little "addition" about requiring a drop is an attempt to try get some distance between the fault and themselves.
Sounds fishy to me.
PCB trace-cracks are almost always more random than what you describe. I don't buy that its ALWAYS a crack in the trace to the M1 Ball, as you allege. I don't doubt that this failure has happened on SOME units; but not ALL, that have exhibited the "Touch Disease" syndrome. For one thing, the symptoms are too varied to be traced (haha) to ONE ball/trace.
BTW, my iPhone 6 Plus has been dropped repeatedly, once from about 5 ft. onto a hardwood floor onto its back. Hard enough that it actually dislodged the display/digitizer assembly from the case and shattered the glass. Never fixed it. Still that way after 2 years. Works perfectly. If anything was going to crack a PCB trace, that should have done it!
IMHO, It's a reflow soldering issue, and/or PCB/BGA-component coplanarity issue. Some PCBs are naturally more warped than others, and that damned RoHS solder doesn't help.
But one thing it is NOT, is a "Design Issue".
Nice try, though.
No nerd buys Apple.
Tell that to nerds like Linus Torvalds, Bruce Schneier, and the several 3 and 4-digit UIDs here on Slashdot that use Apple exclusively, or as often as possible.
So it copied from Microsoft Kinect. Got ya
More like, they both researched the same academic papers.
I'm going to have great fun every time my boss put his iphone down, quick couple of looks at it and he'll be back to typing in his pass code.
I'm sure the novelty, will wear off quite quickly for him.
And I'm sure your employment will quickly wear off, once your boss catches you messing with his phone...
Except in facial recognition I think Samsung actually bagged that one first
Um, not so much...
http://www.businessinsider.com...
How many professional uses do you use your Android for?
Every one that an Iphone is capable of and more.
Lets face it, Iphones have no special business use either, but are more limited than Android. If you've flown on a recently designed airliner, one thing you should notice is that the IFE's are now Android based. Android is actually getting quite big in the embedded device space. How's IOS doing there?
Apple has traditionally eschewed brand-dilution by allowing their stuff to be hacked into mincemeat by some half-assed Chinese embedded Devs.
Google, OTOH, has no shame.
Target's Sales Floors Are Switching From Apple To Android Devices
https://thenextweb.com/apple/2...
So, what's your point?
Enjoy your false sense of security.
Really?
After 10 years of iOS, and nearly zero exploits, you have the unmitigated gall to call iOS' demonstrable track-record "false"?
Talk about delusional!
You're stuck working within whatever apps you can find that can interconnect. But you're not allowed access to the filesystem. Google has been doing some horky business in recent Android releases with regard to filesystem access, but they've not yet gotten even close to the prohibitiveness that Apple has enforced all along.
That wasn't much of a problem before, with third-party Apps like GoodReader, and Apple's "Sharing" capabilities.
But in iOS 11, due to be out in just a couple of days (September 19), there is a "Files" App, which exposes the filesystem, very similar to the macOS "Finder".
https://www.cultofmac.com/4859...
So, suck it.
Try this scenario.
You're on the train on the way to work and get an email from a colleague. Attached is a zip or 7z archive. Save the file and extract it to your handset. There is multiple docx files in the zip, you are looking through the document and then see a typo and edit the typo and save back the file. Now you arrive in the office and transfer that same edited document onto the work file server over SMB.
On Android it is as easy as doing it on any desktop, you just save the file from your email. Open your file explorer app to the downloads folder and extract the zip then tap the document and open it in one of the many office apps available. Save the file then go back to the file explorer and transfer the file directly onto the SMB share.
On iOS you just stare at the fact the email has a compressed file and cannot proceed.
Zip files unarchive just fine in iOS. You might bone-up on subjects before you make an ass out of your self in a public forum. Especially a Tech forum. Or even Slashdot...
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/o...
Also, before you bash not having native support for common filetypes, remember that Windows STILL doesn't have NATIVE support for PDF. Nor does it NATIVELY support many Archive formats, such as RAR, tar, gzip, etc.
And as a matter of fact, I can't seem to find a list of Archive file Formats that Android NATIVELY supports.
So, what was your point again?
Hell for that matter apple compiles its apps on llvm, guess what android compiles its apps on nowadays... llvm
Nope. The initial versions of ART used LLVM, but the Google folk couldn't get the resource requirements down enough to run on the phone (no idea why they don't do the compilation on the app store and cache the results, rather than warming the planet), so they moved to a completely different infrastructure. Modern ART has two compilers (that they're trying really hard to unify). There's a JIT that runs when you first start an app. This collects profiling information, but doesn't do much optimisation initially. It will then generate optimised code for some of the hot paths. The profiling information is recorded and overnight (or at any period when the phone is plugged in but not used) the AOT compiler starts in the background and will generate optimised binaries. Unfortunately, the AOT compiler doesn't allow on-stack replacement and so the JIT can occasionally give better code for hot loops (it can perform speculative optimisations that are correct 99.9% of the time and then deoptimise in the case where they're incorrect, whereas the AOT compiler has to do the slower optimisation that's correct 100% of the time).
I think there's also an interpreter for fast start, but I lose track (the ART team keeps changing their mind about whether an interpreter is a good idea).
Wow!
As I said above, Android is a Dumpster Fire. That just proves it!
Time to throw it out and start afresh...
But isn't that what Google was doing about a year ago? Why is there still an Android, anyway?
Except wherein my iPhone usually creams my wife's nexus on everything practical, including being able to make it 2 years without completely breaking. I used to love android, but this thing were google writes software and lets a million other people implement hardware in a million ways and use/abuse that software infinitely just isn't working. Hardware is not commodity, it really matters how things are implemented. It's not just about being cheap.
Tru Dat!
I'm not sure I agree with that, although Apple do release a new phone with 'next generation' internals, and often buy a monopoly on the production run.
You are an idiot.
Apple doesn't "buy a monopoly on a production-run." That would imply that they are buying commodity SoCs, like the Qualcomm stuff, which they are NOT. They design their own SoCs from the ground-up (including the GPU subsystem), and then contract with a Fab-House, like TSMC or Samsung, to handle the chip production. That is VERY different from what you stated.
The reality though is that Apple software designers focus on user perception of performance, and that supplements the underlying hardware to make a material difference in how users think a device performs.
There is no "perception of performance" that affects benchmarks; nor that allows for the glassy-smooth tracking and animation in ARKit.
So all those people jailbreaking their iPhones weren't using root exploits?
Not to mention the relative ease of securing a very constrained number of devices with a very constrained environment and a very constrained and controlled driver base?
Wow! You Haters are like a dog with a bone! HOW long ago was that Jailbreak-Exploit thing?
And your excuse about "constrained this, and constrained that" sounds JUST like the Windows fanbois trying to explain-away bad Security on that platform, too!
Probably because people on here look beyond the shiny marketing and explore things in more depth, and despise shallow shits that tell people how innovative Apple, or refuse to accept any criticism of their great god Jobs.
Wrong.
The definition of "shallow" is someone who sees a brand-name on a product and REFLEXIVELY dismisses it, without applying the first little bit of examination or critical thinking.
Even I praise some things in Windows (don't know enough about Linux to comment, so I DON'T), and if Android wasn't such a dumpster-fire from top to bottom, I would probably find some things to like in it, too.
But to just REFLEXIVELY disregard an entire company and all of its software and hardware products, especially one with such insanely-high customer-satisfaction ratings and insanely-high sales, year after year, shows nothing but a nearly unbelievable lack of insight, masking itself, as it often does, as transparently childish hubris.
For anyone paying attention, Apple is famous for selling overpriced gear. Also, for anyone paying attention, Apple is the go to brand for people wanting a status statement instead of just a computer or a phone. Also, if anyone have been paying attention, people with no clue about computers tend to prefer Apple products. There you go some justification for the supposed hate you see... if you are paying attention.
Funny. Many, many, many Developers use Apple computers (and likely their mobile devices, too). Even St. Linus used/uses a MacBook Air:
https://www.cultofmac.com/1628...
So, I guess Linus Fucking Torvalds has "no clue about computers", too, eh?
And I have conversed with a number of 3 and 4 digit UIDs here on Slashdot that use and prefer Macs. Oh, and I have decades of experience as an embedded Developer, and have used Macs for Development, even way back in the day, when it was REALLY hard to find a decent toolchain that ran on Macs.
So, in short: You have NO FUCKING CLUE what you are talking about, fucktard; so STFU and GTFO...