not surprising, since in Independence Day it was proved that aliens used Apple tech when Jeff Goldblum infected a mothership with a Mac virus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
He DEVELOPED and DEPLOYED the Virus on the Mac PowerBook; it was NOT a "Mac Virus" per se. Instead, it was obviously written to target the AlienOS, which of course Jeff Goldblum was fluent in...
I'm more interested in your take on why Apple includes AptX support in their OSX products - but not in their iOS products.
Well, I don't know; but I can guess that it doesn't have anything to do with the W1 chip. More likely the (Qualcomm?) BT MODEM they used in the Lappies already had AptX support; so it came along for the ride; but the ones they spec-ed for the iOS stuff (likely a different chip than the lappies use, chosen primarily for low current consumption), probably didn't.
It might also be that the BT controller they used in the Macs was chosen because it supported AAC, and again, AptX came along for the ride. But I don't know if iOS BT supported AAC before the W1 chip; but if it did, maybe Apple just didn't care about AptX, and so just "stopped looking" when they found a chip they liked for mobile that supported AAC, but didn't happen to support AptX, which they really didn't care about (wasn't a design criteria). Afterall, the BOM is a bit more cost-consious in a mobile device than in a laptop, and an AptX-approved BT controller would likely be more expensive than one that doesn't have to include AptX Licensing Fees...
As I said, until you started harping about AptX being supported in Macs, I wasn't even aware that was the case. They really have never made a big deal about it at ALL... In fact, I had to dig a bit to even confirm that was the case. So, I figure the BT chipmaker just offered Apple a reference Driver Library, and Apple said "Sure, might as well incorporate it if it passes QA testing", but then promptly ignored the fact that it was even there.
Without being on the Mac or iOS Dev Teams, that's my best guess...
But, since I attempted to answer your question, howabout attempting to answer mine?
Quote from the fine article: The bezel is very narrow, in keeping with the XPS style. The fanless PC offers an SD card slot and two USB-C ports, and a USB-A to USB-C adapter comes in the box.
Apple, pay attention. As a convenience to their customers, Dell puts an adapter in the box.
And I agree, it is something that Apple should consider; but it isn't like it's a Grand Gesture. Those adapters cost about $2.50 RETAIL on Amazon. (I know, all the more reason Apple should include one or two).
When Apple released the USB-C Only MacBook Pros a couple of months ago, they were excoriated by lots and lots of people for "Removing all the Useful Ports" and "Forcing people to use Dongles" and "ignoring the needs of 'Pro' Users" (and variants on those themes).
So, you're saying that just because Dell has decided to include one measly $2.50 USB-C to USB-A Adapter (not even two, one for each port), they are somehow exonerated from all that unbridled Hate? Even though their USB-C ports don't even appear to support TB 3?
Yeah, the suit would make more sense if the guy that caused the accident was using e.g. youtube on a samsung phone, and one of those vendors had at some point been litigated against by Apple to prevent them from implementing the feature.
Exactly.
If Apple had actually played Dog-In-The-Manger, IOW, if Samsung or Google or any mobile device OEM had tried to market a similar feature, and either been turned-down by Apple when approached for a licensing-deal, or been sued by Apple for attempting to implement the feature, that would be one thing; but to try to hold Apple liable because of a business decision to not implement the feature of their design is patently (hehe) ridiculous.
In fact, Apple was probably advised against implementing the "driving detector-lockout" feature by their lawyers, because, if it goofed-up, and didn't properly detect that someone was driving, and then someone got into a serious accident, that lawsuit most likely would be successful.
Bluetooth 5 spec is out there. No change in latency. Meaning - you'll still have latency in the 100-600 msec range unless you do something custom (like AptX).
That must have just been ratified. I knew it was close; but last I checked (last month or so) it hadn't gotten final approval.
So what, pray tell, could AptX do to improve on the raw latency figure-of-merit (with their alleged 40 ms. low-latency protocol), and still maintain base compatibility with the standard itself? And more importantly, if AptX can do it, why do you discount that Apple can do it, too?
BTW, who in the hell ratifies an "improved" standard (BT 5) and doesn't address one of the biggest user complaints regarding audio transfer (latency)? That makes zero sense!!!
But you appear to be right; I don't know much about the BT spec (and don't have time to become an "instant expert"); but it looks like most of it remains from 2012, with some stuff update a year ago. BT5 appears to be focused on the damn IoT crap.
But you would think that "2 x the speed" would cut the latency in half, all things being equal.
Maybe, if Apple finds and fixes the cause, there would be a reason, and then we would have to see what CR says/does. But, they didn't say they would *never* re-test, as you seem to be implying. If you want to maintain that stance, provide a quote that unambiguously supports it.
Actually, I believe that we are all (to a lesser or greater extent) victims of "Slashdot Sensationalism".
What you say is correct; the use of the Present-Tense in CR's statement clearly does not preclude that they might re-test if Apple gives the word that they believe they have found, and fixed, a problem.
Given the decrease in production and sales I would say it is stuff MOST people don't care about. My wife certainly doesn't the only thing on that list she cares about is the improved camera, but that is trumped by not being able to charge and use headphone jack at same time.
So if Apple doesn't care about MFi, why even use it? All MFi does is add a layer of additional authentication over USB. You could eliminate MFi altogether and stuff would still work. It's just a way for Apple to earn $0.50 per product, and to ensure THEY have control over what accessories are offered into the market. I guess if you like handing over more money and having someone else dictate what you are allowed to buy it's a good move, but...
I think if USB-C had come out a year or two earlier, Lightning would have never existed. But it didn't and so it does.
But I really think that Apple would just as soon transition to USB-C at this point, and Lightning will likely be eliminated on new products by the iPhone 8 at the latest. Therefore, I frankly think Apple has list interest in the MFi Program in general. They certainly don't need the licensing fees, and it make little sense to be draconian about a program you are about to kill.
Even if it is a software bug, overheating the GPU like that shortens its life, and every day that they misbehave in this way significantly increases the number of devices that will fail long before the end of their expected service life.
Who said "overheated"? I said "uncomfortably warm" or words to that effect.
And as long as high-temp condition isn't TOO high, and/or doesn't go on for months and months, no permanent damage should result.
"But what about if Apple just codes to fix the issue, instead?"
Then they should:
- push out an update to all affected devices
- thank CR for finding the issue
- hope CR considers re-testing at their own discretion using the publicly-available update
But, they don't even seem to know what the real cause is yet, and AFAik haven't indicated that they have a fix yet.
Considering it has been only just a week ( and a holiday-week at that) between CR's review and now, it should not be surprising that Apple has not had time to create and test a fix yet.
"they should live up to their original offer to "re-test if Apple believes they have found and fixed a problem""
When did Apple issue a software update to fix the problem?
Well, considering there as less than a WEEK between CR's Review and their alleged refusal to Retest, no one should be surprised that Apple hasn't released a patch yet.
LOL - OK. Go off the deep end! We'll see what the latency is for iPhones with the W1 chip - my guess is it will be no better than Bluetooth 5, which is 100 msec. AptX low latency is about the fastest you'll get. And those CSR/Qualcomm AptX chips support AAC, MP3, SBC - and AptX lossless and AptX low latency.
Look, Apple must think there is SOME benefit to AptX, why else would it live in Macbooks and Apple TV? But schizophrenic Apple didn't put it into iOS devices. Maybe they couldn't figure out how to do it? Or they just wanted to make sure you couldn't use the same great CODECs in your iPhone as you can use in your Macbook.
So explain, then: is Apple wrong to include AptX in the Macbook and Apple TV, or is Apple wrong to exclude AptX from iOS devices? Because those two positions are diametrically opposed.
I don't think Apple ever pitched having AptX support in OS X. Don't exactly know why, but I didn't even know AptX support existed in OS X (or didn't exist in iOS), until you started harping about it.
Does anyone know what the min. Latency for BT 5 is, since the final standard hasn't been released? If not, then the validity of your statement about latency of the "W1 Protocol" is likely not known outside of Apple's R&D dept.
I think the bigger question is "Why wasn't the W1 chip included in the 2016 MacBook Pro?"
Can you show one that is actually Apple approved? Are you recommending that people use non-Apple-certified components for their iPhones, and to explicitly ignore Apple warnings for their products? In essence - proudly proclaiming that Apple is wrong?
Get off your high horse.
What are you? The MFi Police? Apple obviously doesn't care about minor violations of the Rules; so relax.
And it also provides technology that Apple simply refuses to provide: a stylus (I love making sketches and taking notes on my Note 5), split screen apps (two at one time on the big screen), and AptX Bluetooth (for decent audio quality, wirelessly).
Let's talk about AptX first:
Licensing fees for proprietary CODECS and Hardware. Shitty range. Connectivity Problems. MINIMUM of 40 ms. latency (even in the "low-latency" version). Sorry, the W1 chip solves ALL that, plus it supports the industry-standard AAC CODEC (which some other earphone/earbud/headset OEMs also support). So, let's scratch that one off the list.
Stylus? Ok, there are plenty for the iPhone. Just none from Apple.
Split screen? On a PHONE??? You know, sometimes just because you can do a thing...
I don't know if this is cognitive dissonance or some kind of Stockholm Syndrome, but if you are still unaware that Apple is ripping you off by forcing you to buy more of their proprietary adapters that solve no actual problems, just because they can, then it's just plain sad. With their billions and their tens of thousands of employees they could do fantastic things, but instead they just find more ways to milk their shrinking customer base. Pathetic.
No, it's pathetic that you can't be bothered to see that change requires change.
Um, the GN7 "Fireball" edition was actually MORE expensive than an iPhone 7 Plus.
And it was more of a device too having not only features that Apple removed from the iPhone line, features Apple refused to add to their devices, and features that Apple arbitrarily limit on their devices, as well as features not normally found in a phone in the first place.
How about a list. And don't bother with the headphone jack; it's a red herring.
Meanwhile the iPhone continues its slide to irrelevancy as it approaches single-digit market share (apparently accelerating, given the cut in projected production).
PS: if Apple wanted to provide "industry leading" Bluetooth, they'd support AptX (like they do on Macs and Apple TVs) in the iPhone. But they don't. So they don't provide "industry leading" Bluetooth functionality at all as they do not have a high quality, low latency, or lossless Bluetooth audio solution (all of which are available with AptX).
Along with licensing fees, short range, connectivity issues, and high-latency. You've tried this sales-pitch already. Do you really want to be embarrassed again?
Be sure not to read any of the glowing reviews of the AirPods; so you can keep up this fantasy you've created for yourself.
Well, just goes to show how important to people that headphone jack was, doesn't it?
Actually, I think it is the same thing that is plaguing the PC and tablet markets, too. That being, although the improvements are significant year-over-year, most people by this time have something that is meeting their needs "good enough". That is every OEM's dilemma; not just Apple's.
well fuck that, my wife will simply wait for something else, she was already eyeing a Galaxy 7, but wanted to wait till next version now. However rumors are that Samsung may do away with the jack as well which would also make it a non starter
Go onto Amazon. There are at least a dozen charge and listen "Y" cables. MFi rules be damned. LynwoodRoister has been crowing about this "restriction" in the MFi rules for about 3 months now. Meanwhile, thousands of Y cables have been openly sold on Amazon.
So, if that's what's the holdup, check out Amazon, and pick yourself up a cable like this one.
Note that the Apple iPhone Accessory Spec specifically prohibits you from making a cable (or small dongle - there are minimum sizes listed) that could provide charging and audio at the same time. Yes, Apple BANS 3rd parties from providing you with a solution. But you can buy a large (1/3rd the size of the phone) hub from Apple and do it. Which I guess is convenient?
Give it a rest.
Amazon sells about a dozen listen and charge "Y" cables. MFi be damned.
Slashdot Mirror
not surprising, since in Independence Day it was proved that aliens used Apple tech when Jeff Goldblum infected a mothership with a Mac virus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
He DEVELOPED and DEPLOYED the Virus on the Mac PowerBook; it was NOT a "Mac Virus" per se. Instead, it was obviously written to target the AlienOS, which of course Jeff Goldblum was fluent in...
I want a phone where I can plug in a big old Xeon to the back. And have it run my own OS and software.
I see Hardware Design is not your strong suit...
Didn't Motorola (at least in one incarnation or another) already try this a few years ago?
It was a flop then, and likely would be a flop now.
I'm more interested in your take on why Apple includes AptX support in their OSX products - but not in their iOS products.
Well, I don't know; but I can guess that it doesn't have anything to do with the W1 chip. More likely the (Qualcomm?) BT MODEM they used in the Lappies already had AptX support; so it came along for the ride; but the ones they spec-ed for the iOS stuff (likely a different chip than the lappies use, chosen primarily for low current consumption), probably didn't.
It might also be that the BT controller they used in the Macs was chosen because it supported AAC, and again, AptX came along for the ride. But I don't know if iOS BT supported AAC before the W1 chip; but if it did, maybe Apple just didn't care about AptX, and so just "stopped looking" when they found a chip they liked for mobile that supported AAC, but didn't happen to support AptX, which they really didn't care about (wasn't a design criteria). Afterall, the BOM is a bit more cost-consious in a mobile device than in a laptop, and an AptX-approved BT controller would likely be more expensive than one that doesn't have to include AptX Licensing Fees...
As I said, until you started harping about AptX being supported in Macs, I wasn't even aware that was the case. They really have never made a big deal about it at ALL... In fact, I had to dig a bit to even confirm that was the case. So, I figure the BT chipmaker just offered Apple a reference Driver Library, and Apple said "Sure, might as well incorporate it if it passes QA testing", but then promptly ignored the fact that it was even there.
Without being on the Mac or iOS Dev Teams, that's my best guess...
But, since I attempted to answer your question, howabout attempting to answer mine?
Quote from the fine article: The bezel is very narrow, in keeping with the XPS style. The fanless PC offers an SD card slot and two USB-C ports, and a USB-A to USB-C adapter comes in the box.
Apple, pay attention. As a convenience to their customers, Dell puts an adapter in the box.
And I agree, it is something that Apple should consider; but it isn't like it's a Grand Gesture. Those adapters cost about $2.50 RETAIL on Amazon. (I know, all the more reason Apple should include one or two).
When Apple released the USB-C Only MacBook Pros a couple of months ago, they were excoriated by lots and lots of people for "Removing all the Useful Ports" and "Forcing people to use Dongles" and "ignoring the needs of 'Pro' Users" (and variants on those themes).
So, you're saying that just because Dell has decided to include one measly $2.50 USB-C to USB-A Adapter (not even two, one for each port), they are somehow exonerated from all that unbridled Hate? Even though their USB-C ports don't even appear to support TB 3?
Wow. Just. Wow.
So Apple dont know how to do it. Make them give up their fraudulent patent then.
Where did that comment come from?
Oh, I know: Unbridled Apple-Hate.
Yeah, the suit would make more sense if the guy that caused the accident was using e.g. youtube on a samsung phone, and one of those vendors had at some point been litigated against by Apple to prevent them from implementing the feature.
Exactly.
If Apple had actually played Dog-In-The-Manger, IOW, if Samsung or Google or any mobile device OEM had tried to market a similar feature, and either been turned-down by Apple when approached for a licensing-deal, or been sued by Apple for attempting to implement the feature, that would be one thing; but to try to hold Apple liable because of a business decision to not implement the feature of their design is patently (hehe) ridiculous.
In fact, Apple was probably advised against implementing the "driving detector-lockout" feature by their lawyers, because, if it goofed-up, and didn't properly detect that someone was driving, and then someone got into a serious accident, that lawsuit most likely would be successful.
Bluetooth 5 spec is out there. No change in latency. Meaning - you'll still have latency in the 100-600 msec range unless you do something custom (like AptX).
That must have just been ratified. I knew it was close; but last I checked (last month or so) it hadn't gotten final approval.
So what, pray tell, could AptX do to improve on the raw latency figure-of-merit (with their alleged 40 ms. low-latency protocol), and still maintain base compatibility with the standard itself? And more importantly, if AptX can do it, why do you discount that Apple can do it, too?
BTW, who in the hell ratifies an "improved" standard (BT 5) and doesn't address one of the biggest user complaints regarding audio transfer (latency)? That makes zero sense!!!
But you appear to be right; I don't know much about the BT spec (and don't have time to become an "instant expert"); but it looks like most of it remains from 2012, with some stuff update a year ago. BT5 appears to be focused on the damn IoT crap.
But you would think that "2 x the speed" would cut the latency in half, all things being equal.
600 ms latency? Might as well not even bother...
Maybe, if Apple finds and fixes the cause, there would be a reason, and then we would have to see what CR says/does. But, they didn't say they would *never* re-test, as you seem to be implying. If you want to maintain that stance, provide a quote that unambiguously supports it.
Actually, I believe that we are all (to a lesser or greater extent) victims of "Slashdot Sensationalism".
What you say is correct; the use of the Present-Tense in CR's statement clearly does not preclude that they might re-test if Apple gives the word that they believe they have found, and fixed, a problem.
Given the decrease in production and sales I would say it is stuff MOST people don't care about. My wife certainly doesn't the only thing on that list she cares about is the improved camera, but that is trumped by not being able to charge and use headphone jack at same time.
Solved by a $6 cable.
So if Apple doesn't care about MFi, why even use it? All MFi does is add a layer of additional authentication over USB. You could eliminate MFi altogether and stuff would still work. It's just a way for Apple to earn $0.50 per product, and to ensure THEY have control over what accessories are offered into the market. I guess if you like handing over more money and having someone else dictate what you are allowed to buy it's a good move, but...
I think if USB-C had come out a year or two earlier, Lightning would have never existed. But it didn't and so it does.
But I really think that Apple would just as soon transition to USB-C at this point, and Lightning will likely be eliminated on new products by the iPhone 8 at the latest. Therefore, I frankly think Apple has list interest in the MFi Program in general. They certainly don't need the licensing fees, and it make little sense to be draconian about a program you are about to kill.
Even if it is a software bug, overheating the GPU like that shortens its life, and every day that they misbehave in this way significantly increases the number of devices that will fail long before the end of their expected service life.
Who said "overheated"? I said "uncomfortably warm" or words to that effect.
And as long as high-temp condition isn't TOO high, and/or doesn't go on for months and months, no permanent damage should result.
"But what about if Apple just codes to fix the issue, instead?"
Then they should: - push out an update to all affected devices - thank CR for finding the issue - hope CR considers re-testing at their own discretion using the publicly-available update
But, they don't even seem to know what the real cause is yet, and AFAik haven't indicated that they have a fix yet.
Considering it has been only just a week ( and a holiday-week at that) between CR's review and now, it should not be surprising that Apple has not had time to create and test a fix yet.
"they should live up to their original offer to "re-test if Apple believes they have found and fixed a problem""
When did Apple issue a software update to fix the problem?
Well, considering there as less than a WEEK between CR's Review and their alleged refusal to Retest, no one should be surprised that Apple hasn't released a patch yet.
LOL - OK. Go off the deep end! We'll see what the latency is for iPhones with the W1 chip - my guess is it will be no better than Bluetooth 5, which is 100 msec. AptX low latency is about the fastest you'll get. And those CSR/Qualcomm AptX chips support AAC, MP3, SBC - and AptX lossless and AptX low latency.
Look, Apple must think there is SOME benefit to AptX, why else would it live in Macbooks and Apple TV? But schizophrenic Apple didn't put it into iOS devices. Maybe they couldn't figure out how to do it? Or they just wanted to make sure you couldn't use the same great CODECs in your iPhone as you can use in your Macbook.
So explain, then: is Apple wrong to include AptX in the Macbook and Apple TV, or is Apple wrong to exclude AptX from iOS devices? Because those two positions are diametrically opposed.
I don't think Apple ever pitched having AptX support in OS X. Don't exactly know why, but I didn't even know AptX support existed in OS X (or didn't exist in iOS), until you started harping about it.
Does anyone know what the min. Latency for BT 5 is, since the final standard hasn't been released? If not, then the validity of your statement about latency of the "W1 Protocol" is likely not known outside of Apple's R&D dept.
I think the bigger question is "Why wasn't the W1 chip included in the 2016 MacBook Pro?"
Can you show one that is actually Apple approved? Are you recommending that people use non-Apple-certified components for their iPhones, and to explicitly ignore Apple warnings for their products? In essence - proudly proclaiming that Apple is wrong?
Get off your high horse.
What are you? The MFi Police? Apple obviously doesn't care about minor violations of the Rules; so relax.
Why so Butthurt over this?
Solidworks and Altium. Used for mechanical and electrical design inside Apple. Runs on Windows only - not OSX. Yes, Macs are designed on Windows...
So what? That's not Apple's fault. Has nothing to do with the power, stability, or viability of the platform.
And it also provides technology that Apple simply refuses to provide: a stylus (I love making sketches and taking notes on my Note 5), split screen apps (two at one time on the big screen), and AptX Bluetooth (for decent audio quality, wirelessly).
Let's talk about AptX first: Licensing fees for proprietary CODECS and Hardware. Shitty range. Connectivity Problems. MINIMUM of 40 ms. latency (even in the "low-latency" version). Sorry, the W1 chip solves ALL that, plus it supports the industry-standard AAC CODEC (which some other earphone/earbud/headset OEMs also support). So, let's scratch that one off the list.
Stylus? Ok, there are plenty for the iPhone. Just none from Apple.
Split screen? On a PHONE??? You know, sometimes just because you can do a thing...
I don't know if this is cognitive dissonance or some kind of Stockholm Syndrome, but if you are still unaware that Apple is ripping you off by forcing you to buy more of their proprietary adapters that solve no actual problems, just because they can, then it's just plain sad. With their billions and their tens of thousands of employees they could do fantastic things, but instead they just find more ways to milk their shrinking customer base. Pathetic.
No, it's pathetic that you can't be bothered to see that change requires change.
Um, the GN7 "Fireball" edition was actually MORE expensive than an iPhone 7 Plus.
And it was more of a device too having not only features that Apple removed from the iPhone line, features Apple refused to add to their devices, and features that Apple arbitrarily limit on their devices, as well as features not normally found in a phone in the first place.
How about a list. And don't bother with the headphone jack; it's a red herring.
Meanwhile the iPhone continues its slide to irrelevancy as it approaches single-digit market share (apparently accelerating, given the cut in projected production).
PS: if Apple wanted to provide "industry leading" Bluetooth, they'd support AptX (like they do on Macs and Apple TVs) in the iPhone. But they don't. So they don't provide "industry leading" Bluetooth functionality at all as they do not have a high quality, low latency, or lossless Bluetooth audio solution (all of which are available with AptX).
Along with licensing fees, short range, connectivity issues, and high-latency. You've tried this sales-pitch already. Do you really want to be embarrassed again?
Be sure not to read any of the glowing reviews of the AirPods; so you can keep up this fantasy you've created for yourself.
Well, just goes to show how important to people that headphone jack was, doesn't it?
Actually, I think it is the same thing that is plaguing the PC and tablet markets, too. That being, although the improvements are significant year-over-year, most people by this time have something that is meeting their needs "good enough". That is every OEM's dilemma; not just Apple's.
well fuck that, my wife will simply wait for something else, she was already eyeing a Galaxy 7, but wanted to wait till next version now. However rumors are that Samsung may do away with the jack as well which would also make it a non starter
Go onto Amazon. There are at least a dozen charge and listen "Y" cables. MFi rules be damned. LynwoodRoister has been crowing about this "restriction" in the MFi rules for about 3 months now. Meanwhile, thousands of Y cables have been openly sold on Amazon.
So, if that's what's the holdup, check out Amazon, and pick yourself up a cable like this one.
Note that the Apple iPhone Accessory Spec specifically prohibits you from making a cable (or small dongle - there are minimum sizes listed) that could provide charging and audio at the same time. Yes, Apple BANS 3rd parties from providing you with a solution. But you can buy a large (1/3rd the size of the phone) hub from Apple and do it. Which I guess is convenient?
Give it a rest.
Amazon sells about a dozen listen and charge "Y" cables. MFi be damned.