Just like Microsoft did in the 90's and 00's (and possibly still does now), Apple now uses paying customers to do the last round of testing for them. After they purchase the iGadgets.
The recent MBP/iPhone port removal shenanigans will sure keep me riding my hardware to their last breath.
It couldn't just be a minor, unforeseen compatibility issue between a non W1-equipped phone and the W1-equipped AirPods. No, if course not.
Keep in mind that the problem is apparently NEVER exhibited when the W1-equipped AirPods are used with the W1-equipped iPhone 7. So, perhaps it is the PHONE that is having the issue (hopefully fixable in software), rather than in the AirPods themselves.
Mostly it was pretty easy, if you knew what you were doing. It didn't turn nasty until plug-and-play began emerging. It's very reassuring to strap hardware into a proper configuration with hardware jumpers.
The only one who should be fired for this is the chief clown Tim Cook.
He should be fired for the shitty sales of the iPhone 7 and MBP. as well. Shitty is a relative term here, FYI.
Apple's latest generation of shit has been a failure in the eyes of the media, the industry, the public, and the shareholders. The current batch of iThings only serve as a reminder that Jobs is dead and what Apple without Jobs was. (For the record, I think Apple with Jobs was shit through and through, but I won't deny that people bought ever-increasing quantities of whatever turd he held on a stage..)
That's why Apple stock just posted (yet another) all-time high about a week ago.
Actually I agree... 98% of patents are in fact not innovative inventions noteworthy for patenting. And our patent system is fundamentally broken and largely just a means of large companies maintaining dominance.
But I couldn't fit all that in the original satire.
Actually, you could have; but it would have seriously ruined the "meter" of your ridiculously oversimplified, Apple-Hating rant.
The thing that disappoints me is that Samsung squandered an opportunity to kill Apple. If the Note 7 had not had the battery issue it would have eclipsed and possibly wiped out the Apple Phone 7.
And if you read the second linked-to article, you will note that it is the employees that decide whether they want a Mac, and if so, they receive a new, shrink-wrapped Mac and a URL, and with that, and only that, are able to do 100% of the setup entirely without involving IBM's IT department. This is one of the many reasons that IBM has stated that every Mac they deploy, regardless of the higher price of the Mac hardware, actually saves IBM money.
There are dozens of similar articles regarding IBM's highly successful Mac program. Just Google "IBM deploying macs" and you'll soon see what the corporate desktop is soon going to look like, at least for forward-thinking companies like IBM.
Apple's highly innovative inventions, namely flat rectangle with a screen on it, and an arrangement of icons in a grid clearly constitute innovations of incalculable value. Where as Qualcomm's patents simply involve leading edge telecommunication developments that far surpass most of their rivals in performance. Obviously, nothing special. Surely not noteworthy enough for their extensive paten portfolio, one of the largest in the wireless world, to justify 5x the royalty rates.
Qualcomm's highly innovative inventions, namely minor improvements to original work by Tesla, Marconi, et al,...
Tesla and Marconi's highly original work? Surely you mean those simple expansions of work originally done by Thales of Miletus, Ben Franklyn, and Faraday.
Give me a break. Next think you know, they will be claiming Alexander Graham Bell did something innovative by connecting wires and coils with magnets in them. Losers
Seriously! Not sure why a company that big and rich can't roll out updated hardware every year or so. The lineup of desktop stuff is quite sad and embarrassing.
The last MacBook Pro was 2015. The new one is 2016. Sounds like "about a year" to me...
The last iMac was late 2014. The new one was supposed to be about the same time in 2016, but, from what I have read, Intel is behind in releasing the CPUs they want to use. Look for a mid 2017 release. Hopefully, that will tricke-down to a new Mac mini...
As for the Mac Pro, again, it is Intel that has been holding up the works. There have been new Xeons released; but, not only are they not significantly faster, a lot of the variants are simply not suitable for use in the MAC Pro. FORTUNATELY, that is no longer the case, because the Skylake-based Xeons that would allow the Mac Pro to move to the highly-desirable USB-C/TB3 for all I/O are (finally) scheduled for early 2017 production, which means that Apple has probably had Engineering Samples for a few months now. Hopefully, that will translate into an updated Pro around the same time as the new iMac and mini.
Apple's highly innovative inventions, namely flat rectangle with a screen on it, and an arrangement of icons in a grid clearly constitute innovations of incalculable value. Where as Qualcomm's patents simply involve leading edge telecommunication developments that far surpass most of their rivals in performance. Obviously, nothing special. Surely not noteworthy enough for their extensive paten portfolio, one of the largest in the wireless world, to justify 5x the royalty rates.
Qualcomm's highly innovative inventions, namely minor improvements to original work by Tesla, Marconi, et al,...
I'm not a millennial so I'm behind the times when it comes to apps. I've never heard of this Chinese Communist selfie app but it doesn't take an app to do a selfie. You've got an Android or iPhone builtin app to do it for you. It even lets you easily share it to Facebook. Who the hell really needs an add-on selfie app?
because of filters and stickers and editing stuff
IOW, stuff that should only be of interest to anyone 12 years old and under, and then, only for about a week.
It's worth pointing out that iOS doesn't allow apps to access the MAC, IMEI or any other persistent unique ID field (for just this reason). There is a unique ID field designed for apps to use for device identification but it is generated by the device on a per application basis, so it cannot be correlated with other apps. It also changes if you reinstall the app. Both of these facts make it fairly useless for nefarious purposes.
Get Little Snitch and watch as ** every ** app sends data to anywhere and everywhere. Adobe and Autodesk manage to try to talk to more than a dozen servers each. Some are needed for authorization (it is 2017 after all, can't just sell the software) and some are needed for who-the-hell-knows.
Even good ol Apple itself wants to talk to your little un-PC.
How is Apple responsible for what Adobe, AutoDesk, et al, do?
And I notice that you are, of course, quite vague with regard to Apple's activities in this area, as you cannot actually cite verifiable examples, instead just disparaging them with a ridiculous, snarky little comment at the end.
Perl and Java were good choice since they are on all Apple machines and are resistant to library compatibility issues.
Java hasn't been part of the default Mac system install for quite a few years.
If you run a program which requires Java, you'll see a pop up telling you Java isn't installed and asking if you want to download the legacy Java runtime. If you say "yes", you'll be directed to an Apple web page where you can download it.
And wasn't the possibility of stuff like this partly why Apple deprecated Java in XCode?
The USB-C dock comes complete with terrible reviews...
And if you read them, you will see that they almost all fall into four categories:
1. People who didn't know you had to download a driver from the mfg. website to make certain features work with macOS, due to a documentation oversight by that mfg, and the fact that, in modern OSes, people are (fortunately) getting out of the habit of thinking "maybe there's a driver I need to install".
2. People that didn't know you have to adjust "Control Panel"/"System Preferences" settings in the OS to use certain features, like the audio port.
3. People that had (unrealistic?) expectations from the multiple video outputs. Unlike most of these docks, this one actually allows you to use up to TWO (most only allow ONE) of the THREE video outputs (HDMI, VGA, MiniDP) simultaneously; but there are some resolution restrictions when using more than one at a time. But you can certainly do at least 1080p resolution or a little greater on both "used" video ports under those conditions, IIRC.
4. Those who have a laptop with a crappy USB-C/TB3 implementation. They are out there. TB3 is still kinda new, and there are still occasional, but fortunately rare, compatibility issues. As far as 2016 MacBook Pros, once you load that driver, things are good to go. YMMV. Also, there are some displays that require a "display mode" that is not supported by TB3. But I can't remember if those people can achieve joy by using the MiniDP port with or without an additional dedicated MiniDP to ? Adapter.
So, as you can see, a little reading would have saved you an unnecessary post.;-)
Ah, thanks, bookmarked the dock for future. I've got a couple different ones.
I'm glad there is a market and several companies making them.
Yeah. I like the fact that it has HDMI, VGA AND a MiniDP Port. If it had a FW800 Port, it'd be perfect!
In fact, IIRC, that's the only real difference between that dock and the $279 OWC TB3 Dock. I'm pretty sure they are both using the same chipset, since the capabilities are so similar.
Yeah, the Haters that say that "Apple just did this to trap people into buying DONNNN-GLES!!!" never perused the Amazon site with "USB-C" as a search term (for example, I think Dell has more USB-C "dongles" than Apple does!), or looked at THIS list of Laptops with TB3, most of which are NOT made by Apple...
And typical Microsoft. Some of the limits appear to be utterly capricious and designed for the sole purpose of limiting the usefulness of "economy" versions of their various OSes.
For example, Windows 10 Home x64 has aN upper RAM limit of a paltry 128 GB, yet Windows 10 Pro and above have upper RAM limits of (a still paltry, but much more reasonable) 2 TB.
Why? They're undoubtedly the same codebase. So why, other than to deliberately limit the usefulness of the cheaper "Home" edition?
I can't find a definitive answer as to whether the physical RAM is limited in macOS to less than 18 exabytes; but at least 128 GB of physical RAM seems to be well-documented.
You won't find the limit on physical RAM because that limit is directly related to Intel CPUs RAM limitations, which for most OSes is going to be below what they can support. It will likely be a while before RAM speed, size, and memory controllers get to a point that most current OSes will need to be concerned about whether they support all physical memory on a machine.
All "thin and light" laptops are like this. The RAM is soldered directly to the motherboard and is not upgradable unless you have a reflow oven. Apple is nowhere near alone on this point. I think the last machine I've seen that was field-upgradable in RAM is the Acer C710 or V5 (same time frame, just Chromebook vs. Windows). The next couple generations still had mSATA or M.2 slots, but even those are going away in favor of permanently attached eMMC. I think the upgrade to my C720 will be... a Core i3 motherboard to replace the Celeron that I have now. (They're about $100.) And maybe the touchscreen to convert it into a C720P. But the base unit is one I expect to have for a few years because everything since (save for the C740) has been shittier and non-upgradable.
So don't single out Apple. Everyone is shipping non-serviceable laptops now.
To squeeze in the extra RAM, they might decide they need to remove the few ports which were left. #courage
The "few ports" they left are actually WORTH much, much more than a dumbass couple of "legacy" USB-A ports, or an HDMI port, or even worse, some SD card slot that 10% of users use more than once per year.
Slashdot Mirror
... not only should these not have connection problems, they should transcribe all conversations to a file for you.
Many, many BT headsets, e.g. Samsung's, are much more expensive.
It all comes to power output. Wires feed power to drivers using a source which is capable of supplying much higher current over longer period.
These airpods are a joke, the battery discharges lower currents and having an internal impedance it causes all sorts of distortion.
You need to just stop writing about things you think you know about.
You're just embarrassing yourself with that ignorant word-salad.
Just like Microsoft did in the 90's and 00's (and possibly still does now), Apple now uses paying customers to do the last round of testing for them. After they purchase the iGadgets. The recent MBP/iPhone port removal shenanigans will sure keep me riding my hardware to their last breath.
It couldn't just be a minor, unforeseen compatibility issue between a non W1-equipped phone and the W1-equipped AirPods. No, if course not.
Keep in mind that the problem is apparently NEVER exhibited when the W1-equipped AirPods are used with the W1-equipped iPhone 7. So, perhaps it is the PHONE that is having the issue (hopefully fixable in software), rather than in the AirPods themselves.
You've got a low enough ID so this is probably part of your joke, but there's lots of others around here that won't follow:
COM1 and COM3 both shared IRQ4.
Stop it! I'm getting chills!!!
Mostly it was pretty easy, if you knew what you were doing. It didn't turn nasty until plug-and-play began emerging. It's very reassuring to strap hardware into a proper configuration with hardware jumpers.
Oh, how quickly they forget...
The only one who should be fired for this is the chief clown Tim Cook. He should be fired for the shitty sales of the iPhone 7 and MBP. as well. Shitty is a relative term here, FYI.
Apple's latest generation of shit has been a failure in the eyes of the media, the industry, the public, and the shareholders. The current batch of iThings only serve as a reminder that Jobs is dead and what Apple without Jobs was. (For the record, I think Apple with Jobs was shit through and through, but I won't deny that people bought ever-increasing quantities of whatever turd he held on a stage..)
That's why Apple stock just posted (yet another) all-time high about a week ago.
Actually I agree... 98% of patents are in fact not innovative inventions noteworthy for patenting. And our patent system is fundamentally broken and largely just a means of large companies maintaining dominance.
But I couldn't fit all that in the original satire.
Actually, you could have; but it would have seriously ruined the "meter" of your ridiculously oversimplified, Apple-Hating rant.
The thing that disappoints me is that Samsung squandered an opportunity to kill Apple. If the Note 7 had not had the battery issue it would have eclipsed and possibly wiped out the Apple Phone 7.
Yeahrightsure.
do you see businesses switching all their workstations to OSX or Linux? Nope.
Um, that's not entirely correct.
.
Remember that little corporation, IBM, you were talking about? They are busily deploying Macs (running MacOS, in case you wondered) at the rate of 1,300 new installs per week (now actually 1,900), and to the tune of 90,000 as of October, 2016, and projected to be 100,000 units by the end of last year (now actually 130,000).
And if you read the second linked-to article, you will note that it is the employees that decide whether they want a Mac, and if so, they receive a new, shrink-wrapped Mac and a URL, and with that, and only that, are able to do 100% of the setup entirely without involving IBM's IT department. This is one of the many reasons that IBM has stated that every Mac they deploy, regardless of the higher price of the Mac hardware, actually saves IBM money
There are dozens of similar articles regarding IBM's highly successful Mac program. Just Google "IBM deploying macs" and you'll soon see what the corporate desktop is soon going to look like, at least for forward-thinking companies like IBM.
Apple's highly innovative inventions, namely flat rectangle with a screen on it, and an arrangement of icons in a grid clearly constitute innovations of incalculable value. Where as Qualcomm's patents simply involve leading edge telecommunication developments that far surpass most of their rivals in performance. Obviously, nothing special. Surely not noteworthy enough for their extensive paten portfolio, one of the largest in the wireless world, to justify 5x the royalty rates.
Qualcomm's highly innovative inventions, namely minor improvements to original work by Tesla, Marconi, et al, ...
Tesla and Marconi's highly original work? Surely you mean those simple expansions of work originally done by Thales of Miletus, Ben Franklyn, and Faraday. Give me a break. Next think you know, they will be claiming Alexander Graham Bell did something innovative by connecting wires and coils with magnets in them. Losers
Touché, mine Hair!
Seriously! Not sure why a company that big and rich can't roll out updated hardware every year or so. The lineup of desktop stuff is quite sad and embarrassing.
The last MacBook Pro was 2015. The new one is 2016. Sounds like "about a year" to me...
The last iMac was late 2014. The new one was supposed to be about the same time in 2016, but, from what I have read, Intel is behind in releasing the CPUs they want to use. Look for a mid 2017 release. Hopefully, that will tricke-down to a new Mac mini...
As for the Mac Pro, again, it is Intel that has been holding up the works. There have been new Xeons released; but, not only are they not significantly faster, a lot of the variants are simply not suitable for use in the MAC Pro. FORTUNATELY, that is no longer the case, because the Skylake-based Xeons that would allow the Mac Pro to move to the highly-desirable USB-C/TB3 for all I/O are (finally) scheduled for early 2017 production, which means that Apple has probably had Engineering Samples for a few months now. Hopefully, that will translate into an updated Pro around the same time as the new iMac and mini.
Apple's highly innovative inventions, namely flat rectangle with a screen on it, and an arrangement of icons in a grid clearly constitute innovations of incalculable value. Where as Qualcomm's patents simply involve leading edge telecommunication developments that far surpass most of their rivals in performance. Obviously, nothing special. Surely not noteworthy enough for their extensive paten portfolio, one of the largest in the wireless world, to justify 5x the royalty rates.
Qualcomm's highly innovative inventions, namely minor improvements to original work by Tesla, Marconi, et al, ...
I'm not a millennial so I'm behind the times when it comes to apps. I've never heard of this Chinese Communist selfie app but it doesn't take an app to do a selfie. You've got an Android or iPhone builtin app to do it for you. It even lets you easily share it to Facebook. Who the hell really needs an add-on selfie app?
because of filters and stickers and editing stuff
IOW, stuff that should only be of interest to anyone 12 years old and under, and then, only for about a week.
It's worth pointing out that iOS doesn't allow apps to access the MAC, IMEI or any other persistent unique ID field (for just this reason). There is a unique ID field designed for apps to use for device identification but it is generated by the device on a per application basis, so it cannot be correlated with other apps. It also changes if you reinstall the app. Both of these facts make it fairly useless for nefarious purposes.
Good point!
Get Little Snitch and watch as ** every ** app sends data to anywhere and everywhere. Adobe and Autodesk manage to try to talk to more than a dozen servers each. Some are needed for authorization (it is 2017 after all, can't just sell the software) and some are needed for who-the-hell-knows.
Even good ol Apple itself wants to talk to your little un-PC.
How is Apple responsible for what Adobe, AutoDesk, et al, do?
And I notice that you are, of course, quite vague with regard to Apple's activities in this area, as you cannot actually cite verifiable examples, instead just disparaging them with a ridiculous, snarky little comment at the end.
Be amazed that MS upped it to 128GB. Take a look at previous versions. Before Win8, it was downright tiny.
Oh, I did look. You're right.
Perl and Java were good choice since they are on all Apple machines and are resistant to library compatibility issues.
Java hasn't been part of the default Mac system install for quite a few years.
If you run a program which requires Java, you'll see a pop up telling you Java isn't installed and asking if you want to download the legacy Java runtime. If you say "yes", you'll be directed to an Apple web page where you can download it.
And wasn't the possibility of stuff like this partly why Apple deprecated Java in XCode?
The USB-C dock comes complete with terrible reviews...
And if you read them, you will see that they almost all fall into four categories:
;-)
1. People who didn't know you had to download a driver from the mfg. website to make certain features work with macOS, due to a documentation oversight by that mfg, and the fact that, in modern OSes, people are (fortunately) getting out of the habit of thinking "maybe there's a driver I need to install".
2. People that didn't know you have to adjust "Control Panel"/"System Preferences" settings in the OS to use certain features, like the audio port.
3. People that had (unrealistic?) expectations from the multiple video outputs. Unlike most of these docks, this one actually allows you to use up to TWO (most only allow ONE) of the THREE video outputs (HDMI, VGA, MiniDP) simultaneously; but there are some resolution restrictions when using more than one at a time. But you can certainly do at least 1080p resolution or a little greater on both "used" video ports under those conditions, IIRC.
4. Those who have a laptop with a crappy USB-C/TB3 implementation. They are out there. TB3 is still kinda new, and there are still occasional, but fortunately rare, compatibility issues. As far as 2016 MacBook Pros, once you load that driver, things are good to go. YMMV. Also, there are some displays that require a "display mode" that is not supported by TB3. But I can't remember if those people can achieve joy by using the MiniDP port with or without an additional dedicated MiniDP to ? Adapter.
So, as you can see, a little reading would have saved you an unnecessary post.
...Your Tax Dollars At Work!
This oughta be FUN!!!
Redmond, Start Your Copiers!!! Again...
True then, true now.
Ah, thanks, bookmarked the dock for future. I've got a couple different ones. I'm glad there is a market and several companies making them.
Yeah. I like the fact that it has HDMI, VGA AND a MiniDP Port. If it had a FW800 Port, it'd be perfect!
In fact, IIRC, that's the only real difference between that dock and the $279 OWC TB3 Dock. I'm pretty sure they are both using the same chipset, since the capabilities are so similar.
Yeah, the Haters that say that "Apple just did this to trap people into buying DONNNN-GLES!!!" never perused the Amazon site with "USB-C" as a search term (for example, I think Dell has more USB-C "dongles" than Apple does!), or looked at THIS list of Laptops with TB3, most of which are NOT made by Apple...
Note I said most. There is one....
Nice. Thanks for the info!
And typical Microsoft. Some of the limits appear to be utterly capricious and designed for the sole purpose of limiting the usefulness of "economy" versions of their various OSes.
For example, Windows 10 Home x64 has aN upper RAM limit of a paltry 128 GB, yet Windows 10 Pro and above have upper RAM limits of (a still paltry, but much more reasonable) 2 TB.
Why? They're undoubtedly the same codebase. So why, other than to deliberately limit the usefulness of the cheaper "Home" edition?
I can't find a definitive answer as to whether the physical RAM is limited in macOS to less than 18 exabytes; but at least 128 GB of physical RAM seems to be well-documented.
You won't find the limit on physical RAM because that limit is directly related to Intel CPUs RAM limitations, which for most OSes is going to be below what they can support. It will likely be a while before RAM speed, size, and memory controllers get to a point that most current OSes will need to be concerned about whether they support all physical memory on a machine.
Thanks. I wondered...
All "thin and light" laptops are like this. The RAM is soldered directly to the motherboard and is not upgradable unless you have a reflow oven. Apple is nowhere near alone on this point. I think the last machine I've seen that was field-upgradable in RAM is the Acer C710 or V5 (same time frame, just Chromebook vs. Windows). The next couple generations still had mSATA or M.2 slots, but even those are going away in favor of permanently attached eMMC. I think the upgrade to my C720 will be... a Core i3 motherboard to replace the Celeron that I have now. (They're about $100.) And maybe the touchscreen to convert it into a C720P. But the base unit is one I expect to have for a few years because everything since (save for the C740) has been shittier and non-upgradable.
So don't single out Apple. Everyone is shipping non-serviceable laptops now.
Exactly.
To squeeze in the extra RAM, they might decide they need to remove the few ports which were left. #courage
The "few ports" they left are actually WORTH much, much more than a dumbass couple of "legacy" USB-A ports, or an HDMI port, or even worse, some SD card slot that 10% of users use more than once per year.
Oh, and HERE's what you can do with just ONE of those "few ports".
And after that, you still have THREE identical Ports left...