You are missing the point. Changing the file system 'in-situ' without offering an opt-out is flat out fucking stupid on Apple's part.
No, you're missing the point.
This is an Apple device. It's master is Apple. Therefore, it does what Apple wants. The dirty unwashed user be damned. The unholy shalt not reject what Jobs has been gracious enough to have given them from beyond the grave. They will embrace APFS with open arms.
That or expect the device to stop working once Apple's code removes the HPFS+ filesystem driver support from system startup as a "security" measure.
Is it wrong to upgrade a production system like that without an opt-out (better opt-in) option? Yes. Does Apple care? No. But that's what you get when it must "just work" you get system upgrades that "just happen" and you have to hope that everything else keeps working.
You're a sick, Apple-Hating, two-faced punk; who would ABSOLUTELY post in another thread that HFS+ is a shit, 20 year old FS that is far beyond the point of needing replacement.
Don't lie. I KNOW you would do EXACTLY that.
Oh, and it will be at least a DECADE before Apple even Deprecates HFS+, if ever. HISTORY (rather than Histrionics) has repeadtedly shown THAT's actually the way they roll.
Anecdote: I've been running the public beta for a while now and it's been great. APFS is noticeably faster on my aging (early-2011) MacBook Pro, and it's been at least as good as Sierra in every way. I think it's shaping up to be Snow Leopard 2.
Especially since it is essentially the Swan's Song for 32 bit Applications...;-)
Which totally doesn't negate your point: no one has to upgrade to the new OS release, especially on launch day. But if you were ever going to do such a thing, in my experience this seems like a good release to try it on.
Time Machine. Time Machine. Time Machine. And no, NEVER install a new OS from ANYONE on day one. That's just stupid.
Which doesn't say very much about their interaction with the filesystem, especially when you consider that the most complex filesystem interactions on macOS come from system services that are shared with iOS, not from third party apps.
That's simply ridiculous, and just proves you are an idiot.
Hundreds of thousands of 3rd party iOS Apps (literally!) make use of Apple's FS. It's actually kind of required if you save any Preferences, etc. And that's not to mention all the "database-y" Apps, the DAW-Apps, etc, etc. that make HEAVY use of Apple's FS.
The one thing I might worry about is Time Machine, which is by far the most complex FS user (and has permissions that normal user code doesn't have for precisely this reason) and has been largely rewritten for APFS (fortunately, simplifying a lot of what it does and reusing code paths in the FS that are well tested in iOS).
And that's why Time Machine, just like every other non-boot-volume Drive, is NOT being converted. In fact, Apple has acknowledged that they pretty much have to rewrite TM from the ground-up for APFS, and they haven't gotten to that point. Plus, APFS is currently optimized for SSD/Flash storage; so, while you can format a spinning-rust drive (like one that would typically be used for TM) with APFS, the advantages are less obvious.
You are comparing a 'toy OS' to workstation systems with heavy use of user scripting and programming.. iOS and OSX are not the same thing. Why do you hate choice?
iOS and macOS are EXACTLY the same at the FS-level, and share the same Darwin Core.
The same thing that makes Android users claim that Linux is the most popular OS because Linux and Android are the same at their core, is the same thing that would support my argument above.
You are missing the point. Changing the file system 'in-situ' without offering an opt-out is flat out fucking stupid on Apple's part. It should be offered as an option, not jammed down your throat on production systems.
SSDs will be automatically converted to APFS, HDDs and fusion drives won't.
I think you can still also opt-out with SSD boot volumes, too.
And it is only Boot-Volumes that are automatically converted under any circumstances.
And a zillion iOS users running iOS 10.3.3 have been rockin' APFS for months, with NO horror-stories; so I think Apple is being quite responsible here.
But it ISN'T the same product; it has an ADDITIONAL COST. The Inclusion of an "Extended Warranty" (AppleCare+), which Apple would typically charge $129 for in the U.S.
This damn article has been making the rounds all over the internet and every single time people immediately point out that the headline is garbage yet no "editor" ever has the balls to fix it. This is what is wrong with modern journalism.
That's why Apple's prices in Europe and Australia are a rip-off. It doesn't cost them what AppleCare costs to extend the warranty, unless the failure rate is insane... Oh, wait.
Your logic is faulty though. If they have to factor the price of an extended warranty into the retail price because their quality control is crap, it will reduce their sales. They pick the sales price not on manufacturing cost + margin, but on what they calculate will maximize profit. Being forced to move away from the maximum profit sweet spot is clearly going to result in less than maximum profit.
OMFG!!!
If you think APPLE's QC is "crap", you OBVIOUSLY haven't bought ANY Android phone, or have been unusually "lucky".
And in the case of the "touch disease", Apple is striking a compromise; since it seems like the issue only happens with phones that are dropped onto a hard surface:
This is also called "conformity guarantee" and makes the seller legally bound, regardless of what the manufacturer states. the manufacturer could say "we offer one year guarantee" but the seller MUST offer a two year guarantee regardless. If the manufacturer is also the seller (e.g. sells the product directly to end-users through a webshop), then they need to offer a two year guarantee anyway.
And did you ever stop to think that that is EXACTLY one of the reasons that certain products are more expensive in the EU?
Android phones are no better. They are obsolete at 18 months and get no further updates except under threat of lawsuit. Apple devices from 2012 were the last ones made obsolete.
It's semantics, few electronics have a warranty over one year, and that is by design. If people replace phones every year, then why bother making the claim they last one year. Hell you are lucky if the warranty is longer than 90 days.
Exactly.
My previous (and first) iPhone was a 4s, It came out in 2011, virtually the same day as Steve Jobs left this plane of existence.
It received iOS Updates until LAST SEPTEMBER (i.e., for 5 years). And still sits in a desk drawer, fully functional, but forgotten...
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.
"Guaranteed to last only" =/= "Only guaranteed to last"
"the highest quality and most durable devices" =/= "Reality"
Bullshit semantics are bullshit when their claims of durability cannot stand up to a longer warranty, which is more than justified when most people are forced into a 2-year cellular contract.
And, no replacing a phone every year isn't the fucking answer either.
Since a "warranty" is essentially another BOM component with an associated "cost", do you really think that Apple should withstand the burden of DOUBLE the potential cost of warranty work for no additional increase in the product's MSRP?
Thankfully, there is already a solution: AppleCare+. It provides a relatively low-cost solution to doubling the warranty period, and even provides reduced/flat-fee coverage for CUSTOMER-INDUCED damage, such as $29 for screen repair, or $99 for ANYTHING else. Run over your iPhone X 512 GB with a tank? $99. And of course, if the failure is due to defects in materials or workmanship, those repairs/replacements are at no charge to the customer.
And Apple, unlike so many other companies, gives you "concierge" service when your have AppleCare, rather than fighting tooth-and-nail to find ways out of honoring the extended warranty. There are a googolplex of examples all over the intarwebs of Apple going above-and-beyond for their AppleCare-protected users.
OLED suffers from burn-in -- which means a "ghost image" gets permanently imprinted if the same image is displayed for too long. That's because OLED color pixels degrade disproportionately over time. An issue last seen in the 1990s CRT monitors. It's not a good technology if you want your phone to last a few years. Hopefully Micro LED will be along soon if they can work out its mass production issues. I am waiting on that.
Just how long are you planning on having a static image displayed on your phone before you either change it yourself, or you ignore it and it goes back into sleep?
Honestly, some of these ballyhooed features are a big yawn. Edge-to-edge display? Why? Your hand will be covering some of it. Wireless charging? Meh. Until it can charge from across the room, it's not that important. Dual cameras? What are you doing with them? The magic is in the software. OLED should have been ubiquitous by now. I saw OLED displays 10+ years ago. Make me one for my MacBook Pro (and make it 17 inches, please).
I will agree with you on the Edge to Edge display. Samsung started it (I think), and everyone has to be at least as good as everyone else, feature for feature.
Wireless charging? I don't really care; but a lot of people seem to.
Dual cameras? Well, you are wrong that it is all software on the pseudo-Bokeh stuff. To do it right, you still need some depth information that only a multiple-lens system will provide.
OLEDs? The problem with them being cheap is, well, they aren't. Samsung has the corner on the patents and the manufacturing, so they can charge what they want. And they do.
Slashdot Mirror
No, you're missing the point.
This is an Apple device. It's master is Apple. Therefore, it does what Apple wants. The dirty unwashed user be damned. The unholy shalt not reject what Jobs has been gracious enough to have given them from beyond the grave. They will embrace APFS with open arms.
That or expect the device to stop working once Apple's code removes the HPFS+ filesystem driver support from system startup as a "security" measure.
Is it wrong to upgrade a production system like that without an opt-out (better opt-in) option? Yes. Does Apple care? No. But that's what you get when it must "just work" you get system upgrades that "just happen" and you have to hope that everything else keeps working.
You're a sick, Apple-Hating, two-faced punk; who would ABSOLUTELY post in another thread that HFS+ is a shit, 20 year old FS that is far beyond the point of needing replacement.
Don't lie. I KNOW you would do EXACTLY that.
Oh, and it will be at least a DECADE before Apple even Deprecates HFS+, if ever. HISTORY (rather than Histrionics) has repeadtedly shown THAT's actually the way they roll.
Anecdote: I've been running the public beta for a while now and it's been great. APFS is noticeably faster on my aging (early-2011) MacBook Pro, and it's been at least as good as Sierra in every way. I think it's shaping up to be Snow Leopard 2.
Especially since it is essentially the Swan's Song for 32 bit Applications... ;-)
Which totally doesn't negate your point: no one has to upgrade to the new OS release, especially on launch day. But if you were ever going to do such a thing, in my experience this seems like a good release to try it on.
Time Machine. Time Machine. Time Machine. And no, NEVER install a new OS from ANYONE on day one. That's just stupid.
That is all.
The fact that they didn't offer an opt out likely means there's no reason not to change over.
If you feel squeamish, now's the time to invest in a Time Machine drive, FFS.
If you can't be bothered to spend $100 for that, then you don't really care, or you really DO trust Apple...
The FUCKING End!
Don't deploy till you test it on a spare machine.
Because everyone can afford a spare machine. FUCK YOU.
You don't need a spare machine. Just a spare drive with a Time Machine backup.
If you can't afford $100 for a 4 TB external, then you have no business having ANY computer.
Or, just don't upgrade your computer with High Sierra until you find out whether there are "horror stories".
Jeezus people are stupid!
Which doesn't say very much about their interaction with the filesystem, especially when you consider that the most complex filesystem interactions on macOS come from system services that are shared with iOS, not from third party apps.
That's simply ridiculous, and just proves you are an idiot.
Hundreds of thousands of 3rd party iOS Apps (literally!) make use of Apple's FS. It's actually kind of required if you save any Preferences, etc. And that's not to mention all the "database-y" Apps, the DAW-Apps, etc, etc. that make HEAVY use of Apple's FS.
The one thing I might worry about is Time Machine, which is by far the most complex FS user (and has permissions that normal user code doesn't have for precisely this reason) and has been largely rewritten for APFS (fortunately, simplifying a lot of what it does and reusing code paths in the FS that are well tested in iOS).
And that's why Time Machine, just like every other non-boot-volume Drive, is NOT being converted. In fact, Apple has acknowledged that they pretty much have to rewrite TM from the ground-up for APFS, and they haven't gotten to that point. Plus, APFS is currently optimized for SSD/Flash storage; so, while you can format a spinning-rust drive (like one that would typically be used for TM) with APFS, the advantages are less obvious.
You are comparing a 'toy OS' to workstation systems with heavy use of user scripting and programming.. iOS and OSX are not the same thing. Why do you hate choice?
iOS and macOS are EXACTLY the same at the FS-level, and share the same Darwin Core.
The same thing that makes Android users claim that Linux is the most popular OS because Linux and Android are the same at their core, is the same thing that would support my argument above.
You are missing the point. Changing the file system 'in-situ' without offering an opt-out is flat out fucking stupid on Apple's part. It should be offered as an option, not jammed down your throat on production systems.
Two words: Time Machine.
SSDs will be automatically converted to APFS, HDDs and fusion drives won't.
I think you can still also opt-out with SSD boot volumes, too.
And it is only Boot-Volumes that are automatically converted under any circumstances.
And a zillion iOS users running iOS 10.3.3 have been rockin' APFS for months, with NO horror-stories; so I think Apple is being quite responsible here.
Does Mac OS still have spyware and forced updates?
Since it never had either to begin with; I'd say "No", it doesn't.
Oh, and when did you stop beating your wife/girlfriend/husband/boyfriend?
Not when it is exactly the same product, no.
But it ISN'T the same product; it has an ADDITIONAL COST. The Inclusion of an "Extended Warranty" (AppleCare+), which Apple would typically charge $129 for in the U.S.
Are you REALLY that stupid. Wait, don't answer...
"The only good phone is a land line and the phone should be made out of Bakelite!"
Even landline phones have been made of ABS, not Bakelite, since the 1950s, at least.
This damn article has been making the rounds all over the internet and every single time people immediately point out that the headline is garbage yet no "editor" ever has the balls to fix it. This is what is wrong with modern journalism.
Exactly!
That's why Apple's prices in Europe and Australia are a rip-off. It doesn't cost them what AppleCare costs to extend the warranty, unless the failure rate is insane... Oh, wait.
Your logic is faulty though. If they have to factor the price of an extended warranty into the retail price because their quality control is crap, it will reduce their sales. They pick the sales price not on manufacturing cost + margin, but on what they calculate will maximize profit. Being forced to move away from the maximum profit sweet spot is clearly going to result in less than maximum profit.
OMFG!!!
If you think APPLE's QC is "crap", you OBVIOUSLY haven't bought ANY Android phone, or have been unusually "lucky".
No but they did make defective iPhone 6 and 6s models
And I believe they "made good" on that, too, like they have on other occasions.
https://www.apple.com/support/...
https://www.apple.com/support/...
And in the case of the "touch disease", Apple is striking a compromise; since it seems like the issue only happens with phones that are dropped onto a hard surface:
https://www.apple.com/support/...
So, what's your point again? Or did you even have one?
What was that? You say NO manufacturer offers a warranty longer than 1 year in the USA? Hmph, imagine that.
FTFY.
The EU enforces a two year guarantee for sold consumer goods.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal...
This is also called "conformity guarantee" and makes the seller legally bound, regardless of what the manufacturer states. the manufacturer could say "we offer one year guarantee" but the seller MUST offer a two year guarantee regardless.
If the manufacturer is also the seller (e.g. sells the product directly to end-users through a webshop), then they need to offer a two year guarantee anyway.
And did you ever stop to think that that is EXACTLY one of the reasons that certain products are more expensive in the EU?
Android phones are no better. They are obsolete at 18 months and get no further updates except under threat of lawsuit. Apple devices from 2012 were the last ones made obsolete.
It's semantics, few electronics have a warranty over one year, and that is by design. If people replace phones every year, then why bother making the claim they last one year. Hell you are lucky if the warranty is longer than 90 days.
Exactly.
My previous (and first) iPhone was a 4s, It came out in 2011, virtually the same day as Steve Jobs left this plane of existence.
It received iOS Updates until LAST SEPTEMBER (i.e., for 5 years). And still sits in a desk drawer, fully functional, but forgotten...
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.
"Guaranteed to last only" =/= "Only guaranteed to last"
"the highest quality and most durable devices" =/= "Reality"
Bullshit semantics are bullshit when their claims of durability cannot stand up to a longer warranty, which is more than justified when most people are forced into a 2-year cellular contract.
And, no replacing a phone every year isn't the fucking answer either.
Since a "warranty" is essentially another BOM component with an associated "cost", do you really think that Apple should withstand the burden of DOUBLE the potential cost of warranty work for no additional increase in the product's MSRP?
Thankfully, there is already a solution: AppleCare+. It provides a relatively low-cost solution to doubling the warranty period, and even provides reduced/flat-fee coverage for CUSTOMER-INDUCED damage, such as $29 for screen repair, or $99 for ANYTHING else. Run over your iPhone X 512 GB with a tank? $99. And of course, if the failure is due to defects in materials or workmanship, those repairs/replacements are at no charge to the customer.
And Apple, unlike so many other companies, gives you "concierge" service when your have AppleCare, rather than fighting tooth-and-nail to find ways out of honoring the extended warranty. There are a googolplex of examples all over the intarwebs of Apple going above-and-beyond for their AppleCare-protected users.
"Guaranteed to last only" =/= "Only guaranteed to last"
+100 Informative.
+1 this. This headline is a lie. People will stop reading this website.
Unfortunately not.
Sigh...
Yeah, it will be interesting to see what adding a watch onto your [insert carrier name here] account will be.
If it is reasonable, I might seriously consider this....the iWatch looks nice as a time piece and good as a fitness tracker.
The only think I can't find, is if it will now function as a sleep tracker.
If it does that, and the additional cellular charges are reasonable, I think I might finally get one.
My fitbit has the rubber peeling away from the face, looks pretty ratty and I'd like something a bit nicer going forward.
Don't know about built-in Sleep-Tracking (I haven't watched the KeyNote yet), but there are a number of 3rd Party WatchOS Apps that do Sleep Tracking:
https://www.wareable.com/apple...
Hope this helps!
Basically you will pay for the watch again every year because of the added device charge. Do not want.
Then do not get, dumbass.
OLED suffers from burn-in -- which means a "ghost image" gets permanently imprinted if the same image is displayed for too long. That's because OLED color pixels degrade disproportionately over time. An issue last seen in the 1990s CRT monitors. It's not a good technology if you want your phone to last a few years. Hopefully Micro LED will be along soon if they can work out its mass production issues. I am waiting on that.
Just how long are you planning on having a static image displayed on your phone before you either change it yourself, or you ignore it and it goes back into sleep?
OLED uses more power that's probably why they haven't been used in portables.
Depends on what you are displaying; but you're right; they can use more power than LCDs plus an LED backlight.
Honestly, some of these ballyhooed features are a big yawn. Edge-to-edge display? Why? Your hand will be covering some of it. Wireless charging? Meh. Until it can charge from across the room, it's not that important. Dual cameras? What are you doing with them? The magic is in the software. OLED should have been ubiquitous by now. I saw OLED displays 10+ years ago. Make me one for my MacBook Pro (and make it 17 inches, please).
I will agree with you on the Edge to Edge display. Samsung started it (I think), and everyone has to be at least as good as everyone else, feature for feature.
Wireless charging? I don't really care; but a lot of people seem to.
Dual cameras? Well, you are wrong that it is all software on the pseudo-Bokeh stuff. To do it right, you still need some depth information that only a multiple-lens system will provide.
OLEDs? The problem with them being cheap is, well, they aren't. Samsung has the corner on the patents and the manufacturing, so they can charge what they want. And they do.
Who but an Apple fan would actually brag about the fact that his 1.5 year-old phone is still "working fine"?
My 6 Plus is still working fine, as is my 4s before it.
Difference is, my 6 Plus will be able to run iOS 11 when it drops in a few days, and my 4s only stopped receiving OS updates last September.