These problems exist on MacOS too. I was recently handed a MacBook for compatibility testing of a web site with Safari. Only problem? How the FUCK do I launch Safari? It wasnt in the launch bar at the bottom. Literally had to go to another machine just to Google how to do it, because there is apparently no way to just have a simply listing of all available installed applications to launch from the main OS UI. It is inside of Finder apparently, under some Applications menu inside of there. This honestly reminded me of all the bullshit in Windows 3.1 that was needed to get simple things done.
Most Mac users think of the Finder AS the "Main OS UI". Not sure where you were; but since you can't (generally) Quit Finder, you had to stumble on it eventually. And just like nearly every other filesystem in the past 30 years or so, you can find the Applications (including Safari) on the Boot Volume under a Folder called... (Wait for it)... Applications.
There are several other ways to get to Applications; but that's the most "universal" one, and should be readily discoverable to anyone who has used any GUI OS.
In fact, you most often see semicolons used before a "therefore,...", "however,...", "but,..." or "because,..."
In the linked-to authority, this would be analogous to their example: " I like cows; however, I hate the way they smell."
"However" essentially == "Therefore" in this application. one is like an OUTER JOIN of two ideas or phrases, and the other is like an INNER JOIN, if my limited knowledge of SQL syntax serves... (pardon if I botched that analogy).
If I would have used a COMMA in my original comment, like I (assume) you wanted (since you didn't favor me with "corrected" version of my comment; but rather, just a snarky (and incorrect) remark), that would have been a "comma splice".
Don't fuck with me on semicolons. I use them often, and use them for good grammar; not evil.
Okay Microsoft, we get the point. You really wanna be like Apple. You can stop copying Apple now, thx.
Having one major computer vendor with a user-hostile hardware division is more than enough. We should be DIScouraging this behaviour, not encouraging it!
Incidentally, has there been any progress on those 'right to repair' lawsuits I've read about?
That's far beyond anything Apple has done, or likely will ever do. In fact, it's just plain stupid. They have literally turned a pseudo-laptop into a disposable lighter!
For one thing, if nothing else, APPLE wants to be able to repair their own stuff, and that ridiculous industrial packaging design would preclude even that!
Nice job, Microsoft! Hope you are handing out lifetime warranties with that POS.
We ended up with machines with connectors on inexpensive and easily-replaced daughterboards, with modular storage, and with inexpensive replacement plastic housings. I
And the best thing is, it's only 4 inches thick, and 16 inches wide for a 13 inch version!
Surprised you could find any laptop with such antediluvian packaging. Do you realize just how much extra labor those are to build, and how much less of a computer you get, because it still have to be reasonably-priced with an assembly cost of $20 per unit?
Just like having a TPM and Intel's management engine, right?
OMFG!!!
If Apple did this, there would be nothing but screeching and moaning from the death of a thousand ACs, as they fell over themselves in a big internet pile, trying to one-up each other about how HORRIBLE it was, and "Typical Apple" and "See? No Third-Party Repairs NOW", blah, blah, blah.
I don't know about anyone else's phone; but my iPhone allows me to connect to the internet via cellular data.
No, it doesn't, not when there's insufficient signal strength because the nearest tower is too far away and you're in a big giant metal box which works as an effective Faraday shield. This is one of the main reasons large stores and malls offer free WiFi in the first place.
So depending on the particular store's location, which network your phone uses, and also your exact location within the store, you may have a choice between in-store WiFi or no data at all.
Yes, I know that; but I can usually get a cell signal SOMEWHERE in the store, like near the front windows.
I was just looking at my mother-in-law's full iPhone yesterday and at the top of the list was Facebook at 650mb. I can't even download hardly any apps over cellular anymore because of the limit the appstore puts on them.
That's like TRIPLE the size of Windows 98... The WHOLE OS!!!!
I hope other stores do too and I hope this is actively mentioned in the news.
They could use the same technique to block all news mentioning it.
Only if you're trying to load the news story while connected to the store's wi-fi. Not connecting to the store's wi-fi seems like it would solve this issue pretty well.
Exactly.
I don't know about anyone else's phone; but my iPhone allows me to connect to the internet via cellular data. This neatly bypasses that whole "in-store-WiFi" bit.
Transformers usually have an iron core, wireless charging is effectively an air core (much less efficient), plus there is the potential for misalignment which will reduce efficiency.
We're talking "ideal systems" here. Misalignments need not apply.
And I'm not sure if the core material has much effect, depending on the frequencies involved. And I believe that wireless chargers generally operate in the high kiloHertz up to low GigaHertz regions. I'm not sure iron-core transformers work very well at those frequencies.
1) It operates in the near field where the inverse square law doesn't apply.
2) The electric and magnetic forces are uncoupled and it's not streaming radiation out like a light bulb. The energy oscillates between the antenna and the near field.
I'm not sure what the definition of "near" is. But I am pretty sure that, anytime there isn't a "direct" (wired) connection, inverse-square applies.
what about if you want to use the voice assistant to do things like play music from any service that isnt Apple's? Siri isnt capable of doing this and despite Google offering its own music service like Apple does its voice assistant is much better and can play music from other services like spotify or pandora.
Who cares?
With Apple Music, I have access to nearly the whole iTunes catalog of music for $10/month. No ads, no bullshit. Home or car, WiFi or cell data, I have relatively unfettered access to play what I want, when I want. I don't use "curated channels", no copying my music to the cloud. Just a big, fat jukebox in the sky. Perfect for listening at work or in the car.
I say "Play Album Brian Eno Taking Tiger Mountain" to Siri, and a couple of seconds later, it launches the Music App, sees that the album isn't in my local Music library on the phone, contacts Apple, and starts streaming it from their servers. No muss, no fuss, no smell of burning hair. Just a nearly limitless well of music that YOU pick; not some algorithm. Apple Music has those, too; but I choose not to use it that way.
What's not to like?
When "freedom" is a simply the power to use inferior options, how is that a worthwhile thing in real life? And siince every music service has limits, aren't you just trading one "walled garden" for another?
Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy OWNING music; I still buy 90% of my music on optical discs. But for the times when I just want access to a music library a million times larger than any one user could afford to purchase, to listen to that song or album I like but never will get around to buying, or to "try before buying" (which is really handy!), Apple Music is cheap, completely legal, and easy to use. Oh, and the sound quality is very good for a streaming service, too. 128k AAC isn't QUITE "golden ears" audiophile quality, but it is more than adequate for anything but the most critical of applications.
So, in short, I personally couldn't give a rat's ass if Siri can only interface with Apple Music; particularly since it in no way keeps me from using another streaming service in my iPhone. So, where's the "lock-in"? Where are the "walls"?
It has been a long, long time since university. But, I seem to recall that distance is also a factor - and that even seemingly small distances add up quickly. Inverse square, I think?
Which means I'm not willing to speculate on how efficient this will be in real-world use.
Wireless charging is what, 20% efficient. So ra ra on the windmills and solar energy, but we're gonna charge our phones at a worse efficiency than Edison's light bulbs cuz it's too hard to plug in a cable.
Sounds about right for all the right thinking SJWs that seem to be running things now.
Transformers are typically above 90% efficient; so why would wireless charging be so abysmally Inefficient?
I'm betting that it is nothing but a pad that you lay your phone on instead of having to plug it in... Something that My Samsung Note 4 can already do if you have the right third party equipment. Trust me, this will only make chargers a whole lot more expensive.
Where I welcome the water proof part, I wonder what this means to how you sync your phone now? Are they removing the lighting connector or just adding the necessary elements to capture power from a magnetic field....
Even Apple fanatics would be a bit slow to adopt if you MSRP a device > $900. I own one only because I was able to combine several discounts and reward systems together to bring the price down drastically. I know a few other colleagues have them as well, and yes it's good. However it's only marginally better than the competitors. The main selling point to me is the security updates aren't being held hostage to force buying another device.
My iPhone 6 Plus was around $950.
And my iPhone 6 Plus still smokes a brand new Pixel phone.
It's not a big number. But when you are thinking about that it's only sold in "Australia, Canada, Germany, Puerto Rico, United Kingdom, United States" then its not that bad.
If Google really wanted it to be a big seller then they would sell it world wide as pretty mutch any other phones.
Oh, please. Quit making excuses.
In Q1 of 2017, Apple sold $31.97 BILLION in iPhones in "the Americas" alone (I assume that means North, Central and South America). If each iPhone costs $1000, that equates to 31.79 MILLION iPhones...
That is just Android. Yes, it is powerful, yes, it is configurable in great detail, but it never was and never will be particularly stable. Reboots, crashes, random battery drain, those are just part of the package.
And so who the HELL wants THAT on something they need to depend on, with a dead car in the middle of the dark, snowy night?
Slashdot Mirror
Click on Spotlight. Start typing name of Application.
See? That wasn't hard...
It used to be. But recent versions of OSX have gotten pretty bad. I think 10.5 was when most of that happened.
Apple changed when Steve got cancer and started worrying about his legacy. Up until recent times the Mac UI was usually better.
Well except for those stupid one button mouses.
The "stupid" one-button mice went away long before OS X. So, time to put that meme to rest, shall we?
These problems exist on MacOS too. I was recently handed a MacBook for compatibility testing of a web site with Safari. Only problem? How the FUCK do I launch Safari? It wasnt in the launch bar at the bottom. Literally had to go to another machine just to Google how to do it, because there is apparently no way to just have a simply listing of all available installed applications to launch from the main OS UI. It is inside of Finder apparently, under some Applications menu inside of there. This honestly reminded me of all the bullshit in Windows 3.1 that was needed to get simple things done.
Most Mac users think of the Finder AS the "Main OS UI". Not sure where you were; but since you can't (generally) Quit Finder, you had to stumble on it eventually. And just like nearly every other filesystem in the past 30 years or so, you can find the Applications (including Safari) on the Boot Volume under a Folder called... (Wait for it)... Applications.
There are several other ways to get to Applications; but that's the most "universal" one, and should be readily discoverable to anyone who has used any GUI OS.
Still better at crap-removal than the textureless paper they put in most public restrooms.
And the sharp corners are good at cleaning out those Diverticulitis-Pockets in your lower intestine...
Dont try using semicolons; you don't know how.
Actually, I do.
https://writing.wisc.edu/Handb...
Clause 1: "You're not an AC"
Clause 2; "therefore, you are disqualified".
In fact, you most often see semicolons used before a "therefore, ...", "however, ...", "but, ..." or "because, ..."
In the linked-to authority, this would be analogous to their example: " I like cows; however, I hate the way they smell."
"However" essentially == "Therefore" in this application. one is like an OUTER JOIN of two ideas or phrases, and the other is like an INNER JOIN, if my limited knowledge of SQL syntax serves... (pardon if I botched that analogy).
If I would have used a COMMA in my original comment, like I (assume) you wanted (since you didn't favor me with "corrected" version of my comment; but rather, just a snarky (and incorrect) remark), that would have been a "comma splice".
Don't fuck with me on semicolons. I use them often, and use them for good grammar; not evil.
I wouldn't. My reaction to this would be no different if Apple did it: I won't buy it, and I'll recommend against others buying it.
You're not an AC; therefore, you are disqualified! ;-)
M$ is not stupid. They read the apple playbook and took a page out of it.
No they didn't.
This is what is called "Conspicuous Consumption". Like disposable lighters.
Apple would never do this; because they wouldn't want to TRASH that much hardware when a unit comes in for warranty repair.
So no, NOT out of Apple's playbook. More like out of Bic's.
But like a I said, great for taking a shit.
Okay Microsoft, we get the point. You really wanna be like Apple. You can stop copying Apple now, thx.
Having one major computer vendor with a user-hostile hardware division is more than enough. We should be DIScouraging this behaviour, not encouraging it!
Incidentally, has there been any progress on those 'right to repair' lawsuits I've read about?
That's far beyond anything Apple has done, or likely will ever do. In fact, it's just plain stupid. They have literally turned a pseudo-laptop into a disposable lighter!
For one thing, if nothing else, APPLE wants to be able to repair their own stuff, and that ridiculous industrial packaging design would preclude even that!
Nice job, Microsoft! Hope you are handing out lifetime warranties with that POS.
We ended up with machines with connectors on inexpensive and easily-replaced daughterboards, with modular storage, and with inexpensive replacement plastic housings. I
And the best thing is, it's only 4 inches thick, and 16 inches wide for a 13 inch version!
Surprised you could find any laptop with such antediluvian packaging. Do you realize just how much extra labor those are to build, and how much less of a computer you get, because it still have to be reasonably-priced with an assembly cost of $20 per unit?
Does it have a 486 in it, too?
good first step.
Just like having a TPM and Intel's management engine, right?
OMFG!!!
If Apple did this, there would be nothing but screeching and moaning from the death of a thousand ACs, as they fell over themselves in a big internet pile, trying to one-up each other about how HORRIBLE it was, and "Typical Apple" and "See? No Third-Party Repairs NOW", blah, blah, blah.
Tell me you wouldn't.
I don't know about anyone else's phone; but my iPhone allows me to connect to the internet via cellular data.
No, it doesn't, not when there's insufficient signal strength because the nearest tower is too far away and you're in a big giant metal box which works as an effective Faraday shield. This is one of the main reasons large stores and malls offer free WiFi in the first place.
So depending on the particular store's location, which network your phone uses, and also your exact location within the store, you may have a choice between in-store WiFi or no data at all.
Yes, I know that; but I can usually get a cell signal SOMEWHERE in the store, like near the front windows.
I was just looking at my mother-in-law's full iPhone yesterday and at the top of the list was Facebook at 650mb. I can't even download hardly any apps over cellular anymore because of the limit the appstore puts on them.
That's like TRIPLE the size of Windows 98... The WHOLE OS!!!!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
WTF?!?
I hope other stores do too and I hope this is actively mentioned in the news.
They could use the same technique to block all news mentioning it.
Only if you're trying to load the news story while connected to the store's wi-fi. Not connecting to the store's wi-fi seems like it would solve this issue pretty well.
Exactly.
I don't know about anyone else's phone; but my iPhone allows me to connect to the internet via cellular data. This neatly bypasses that whole "in-store-WiFi" bit.
Transformers usually have an iron core, wireless charging is effectively an air core (much less efficient), plus there is the potential for misalignment which will reduce efficiency.
We're talking "ideal systems" here. Misalignments need not apply.
And I'm not sure if the core material has much effect, depending on the frequencies involved. And I believe that wireless chargers generally operate in the high kiloHertz up to low GigaHertz regions. I'm not sure iron-core transformers work very well at those frequencies.
That not true for wireless phone charging:
1) It operates in the near field where the inverse square law doesn't apply.
2) The electric and magnetic forces are uncoupled and it's not streaming radiation out like a light bulb. The energy oscillates between the antenna and the near field.
I'm not sure what the definition of "near" is. But I am pretty sure that, anytime there isn't a "direct" (wired) connection, inverse-square applies.
Prove me wrong. Show me a cite.
what about if you want to use the voice assistant to do things like play music from any service that isnt Apple's? Siri isnt capable of doing this and despite Google offering its own music service like Apple does its voice assistant is much better and can play music from other services like spotify or pandora.
Who cares?
With Apple Music, I have access to nearly the whole iTunes catalog of music for $10/month. No ads, no bullshit. Home or car, WiFi or cell data, I have relatively unfettered access to play what I want, when I want. I don't use "curated channels", no copying my music to the cloud. Just a big, fat jukebox in the sky. Perfect for listening at work or in the car.
I say "Play Album Brian Eno Taking Tiger Mountain" to Siri, and a couple of seconds later, it launches the Music App, sees that the album isn't in my local Music library on the phone, contacts Apple, and starts streaming it from their servers. No muss, no fuss, no smell of burning hair. Just a nearly limitless well of music that YOU pick; not some algorithm. Apple Music has those, too; but I choose not to use it that way.
What's not to like?
When "freedom" is a simply the power to use inferior options, how is that a worthwhile thing in real life? And siince every music service has limits, aren't you just trading one "walled garden" for another?
Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy OWNING music; I still buy 90% of my music on optical discs. But for the times when I just want access to a music library a million times larger than any one user could afford to purchase, to listen to that song or album I like but never will get around to buying, or to "try before buying" (which is really handy!), Apple Music is cheap, completely legal, and easy to use. Oh, and the sound quality is very good for a streaming service, too. 128k AAC isn't QUITE "golden ears" audiophile quality, but it is more than adequate for anything but the most critical of applications.
So, in short, I personally couldn't give a rat's ass if Siri can only interface with Apple Music; particularly since it in no way keeps me from using another streaming service in my iPhone. So, where's the "lock-in"? Where are the "walls"?
It has been a long, long time since university. But, I seem to recall that distance is also a factor - and that even seemingly small distances add up quickly. Inverse square, I think?
Which means I'm not willing to speculate on how efficient this will be in real-world use.
Yes. Inverse-square law.
Wireless charging is what, 20% efficient. So ra ra on the windmills and solar energy, but we're gonna charge our phones at a worse efficiency than Edison's light bulbs cuz it's too hard to plug in a cable.
Sounds about right for all the right thinking SJWs that seem to be running things now.
Transformers are typically above 90% efficient; so why would wireless charging be so abysmally Inefficient?
Does wireless charging offer any advantage at all over wired charging, besides looking cool?
Not wearing out a connector.
I'm betting that it is nothing but a pad that you lay your phone on instead of having to plug it in... Something that My Samsung Note 4 can already do if you have the right third party equipment. Trust me, this will only make chargers a whole lot more expensive.
Where I welcome the water proof part, I wonder what this means to how you sync your phone now? Are they removing the lighting connector or just adding the necessary elements to capture power from a magnetic field....
Most people sync over WiFi.
Even Apple fanatics would be a bit slow to adopt if you MSRP a device > $900. I own one only because I was able to combine several discounts and reward systems together to bring the price down drastically. I know a few other colleagues have them as well, and yes it's good. However it's only marginally better than the competitors. The main selling point to me is the security updates aren't being held hostage to force buying another device.
My iPhone 6 Plus was around $950.
And my iPhone 6 Plus still smokes a brand new Pixel phone.
It's not a big number. But when you are thinking about that it's only sold in "Australia, Canada, Germany, Puerto Rico, United Kingdom, United States" then its not that bad.
If Google really wanted it to be a big seller then they would sell it world wide as pretty mutch any other phones.
Oh, please. Quit making excuses.
In Q1 of 2017, Apple sold $31.97 BILLION in iPhones in "the Americas" alone (I assume that means North, Central and South America). If each iPhone costs $1000, that equates to 31.79 MILLION iPhones...
in "the Americas" alone.
In one quarter.
That is just Android. Yes, it is powerful, yes, it is configurable in great detail, but it never was and never will be particularly stable. Reboots, crashes, random battery drain, those are just part of the package.
And so who the HELL wants THAT on something they need to depend on, with a dead car in the middle of the dark, snowy night?
Surface's revenue is around $1 billion per quarter, not per year. Anyone who brushes this off is delusional.
Hahahahaha!
And THIS is the worst of the two 2017 Quarters so far:
https://9to5mac.com/2017/05/02...