|
In 1984 Gordon R Dickson published "the Final Encyclopedia" a science fiction book in which the Final Encyclopedia was envisioned as a repository of the totality of human knowledge that was housed in an orbital station hundreds of years in the future, it was a project that took generations to imagine, conceptualize and construct. In our world of 2016 I carry a link to the loving thing in my pocket through a device that serves as a multimedia communications, navigation and entertainment device. Through it I have access to the what is essentially the collective knowledge of our entire species. If I need to find the recipe for a meal I can look it up. Last night my wife was irritated about the shower diverter on our shower, She did a quick search on her phone and found detailed instructions on how to repair it. Change the radiator on my car? Someone has a youtube video on how to do it. need a specialized part to repair a refrigerator, you guessed it quick internet search for the part order and it's on my door step a few days later, and I'll be able to find instructions on how to install it properly. That's just a small sample of the kinds of things we can do today thanks to this technology that would have been unimaginable even a decade ago. Technological advances are always iterative and always derivative, it's just how poo poo works. you have to make fire before you can smelt metals, you have to have rudimentary metallurgy before you can even conceptualize advanced alloys. each advance builds on the past discoveries and developments. The thing about revolutionary technological changes is that they are seldom predictable, nor are they immediately obvious to those who are living through them. As far as the value of technology. Take our technology away and we're weak hairless apes scrabbling out a subsistence existence of grubs and berries. All of our social advances are due to our technology, remove our technology and see how rapidly women are relegated back to chattel, how rapidly racism and tribalism re-surges as the primary mode of thinking. When I was in my 20s mobile phones were the size of a small suit case and were typically wired into a car's electrical system. They had poor and basic voice capabilities only and were billed per minute and were mostly a novelty. that's the 1990s. I used to carry around a small spiral bound notebook for keeping phone numbers and contact information. If you needed to contact someone you had to call their land line and hope they were home, or you left a message on their answering machine and hoped they got your message. Even as recently as 2004 most cell phones could do voice calls and rudimentary texts, they didn't have camera's, or global positioning or any of the advanced capabilities they have now. Today even the poorest people carry a supercomputer in their pockets, one that dwarfs the capabilities of the most advanced multimillion dollar computers of the 80s and even 90s. In our loving pockets! How anyone can pretend for an instant that this is not a significant and revolutionary change is beyond my comprehension. The amount of willful ignorance required to even make that argument defies belief and suggests a severe lack of basic understanding of human history and awareness of events outside of their own immediate bubble of interest. When I was a kid If we wanted to research a subject of interest we had to go to a library at which point the quality of the resources available to you was limited to what your particular library had at hand. That created a serious disparity between what was available in major metropolitan centers versus small rural towns. Today that same wealth of information is available to anyone with an internet connection which thanks to those pocket supercomputers includes pretty loving much everyone. That change is in and of itself is revolutionary in ways that are readily apparently today and I suspect will be ever more profound when looked back on them in the future. Now something interesting from an economic perspective. The companies that pioneered mobile computing for the most part aren't even players in the market anymore. Palm went the way of the Dodo and Microsoft is barely holding on to any market share in the mobile market. Yet they were the ones who took the big risks and created the devices and concepts that eventually evolved into the devices we all rely on today. The Iphone itself (and frankly everything Apple does) is derivative, that's their business model. take an idea and polish it then market it. That's what Apple did with the Iphone. they took a concept that Palm and Microsoft did most of the ground work on and refined it to the point where it was a viable consumer product. Android moved into the niche that Microsoft abandoned when they dropped Windows Mobile/CE by giving the tech heads an open standard they could customize on. Personally I've always hated Apple, not because of their products but because of their philosophy, If Apple had won the PC wars tech would be half (or even less) as fast as it is today and cost 10x as much. For all the grief people give Microsoft their model enabled hundreds of smaller hardware and software developers and companies develop products to operate on an open standard. Google/s model is similar with Android upping Microsoft's ante by making the OS's source code open source. I think that the reason Microsoft has floundered so much in the mobile market is because they tried to emulate the Apple approach rather than staying true to their roots as an open platform leaving this huge gaping hole in the market that Google was happy to jump into with Android. They tried to out apple Apple and let Android out MS themselves.
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 12:18 |
|
|
Skex posted:When I was a kid If we wanted to research a subject of interest we had to go to a library at which point the quality of the resources available to you was limited to what your particular library had at hand. That created a serious disparity between what was available in major metropolitan centers versus small rural towns. Today that same wealth of information is available to anyone with an internet connection which thanks to those pocket supercomputers includes pretty loving much everyone. So true. When I was a kid, in a small town, I was doing a school project on steam engines that I was really enthusiastic about. I actually got my parents to drive me 2 hours to the big city so that I could research the topic in a larger library. I could have requested a book through inter-library loan but it would have taken 6 weeks to come and I wouldn't have known if it was relevant until it got there. I just googled "steam engine" and the Wikipedia article was more complete and better written than the books I ended up with from the big city library.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Crying about apple using USB-C is pretty much a nonsense complaint. Like I said, iphones don't have any specific functionality you get from physically plugging it into a mac except for like obscure stuff like using the mac configurator to prestage enrollments in an MDM or something and even that you can just link an apple account and that all happens magically at the factory. Totally obscure stuff like making an encrypted backup for your phone
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
call to action posted:Totally obscure stuff like making an encrypted backup for your phone That's over wifi now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
that was a cool and uplifting post skex, thanks for making it 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Crying about apple using USB-C is pretty much a nonsense complaint. Like I said, iphones don't have any specific functionality you get from physically plugging it into a mac except for like obscure stuff like using the mac configurator to prestage enrollments in an MDM or something and even that you can just link an apple account and that all happens magically at the factory. I think you're missing why people, especially investors, think this is such a big deal. When Jobs came back to Apple, the single biggest change he made to get the company profitable again was an obsessive re-focus on user experience and creating a seamless ecosystem between devices. Under Sculley, the Powermac line was still housed in minorly redesigned Quadra and Centris cases from days past. They were only marginally better integrated and attractive than any other beige PC you could buy. Sculley even licensed the reference design to clone manufacturers. Jobs came in, swept everything off the table and made the iMac and Bondi G3. Everyone freaked the gently caress out. No more clones. No more floppy drives or SCSI, just optical and USB. Just two models, consumer and pro. As few cords as possible, and you didn't have to disassemble the thing and cut yourself on EMI shields to upgrade the RAM. That basic, minimal, obsessively user-focused mentality is what turned the Apple of 1995 into the Apple of 2016. As long as you stay in the ecosystem, everything is guaranteed to work perfectly together. It's the major advantage Apple has as the only company with a lock on both the software and hardware of its devices. Right now, you can walk out of an Apple store with a brand new iPhone and a brand new Macbook Pro, and have no way to plug one into the other. From a usability standpoint, this is not a huge deal, but looking at the history of the company and what made it successful, this is a gigantic, sirens blaring, red flag waving problem.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I think you're missing why people, especially investors, think this is such a big deal. apple r&d meeting:  : sales are down 0.5% and we have to plan for the next but one product cycle, what should we do in the face of increasing anroid and dell and microsoft (lol that it has come to that) competition : none of us are as smart as stebe was at product design so the question is what would stebe do: i know it! i know it! he deleted ports and buttons because consumers didn't actually have important use cases for them and introduced one new device line as he anticipated potential for future market growth in that direction!: yup you got it, let's delete all the ports and buttons and introduce new device lines equivalent to any that exist as anroid or dell and microsoft devices. don't bother checking for use cases and market potential because stebe already did it for the last idevice generation.
suck my woke dick fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 23:01
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Skex posted:I think that the reason Microsoft has floundered so much in the mobile market is because they tried to emulate the Apple approach rather than staying true to their roots as an open platform leaving this huge gaping hole in the market that Google was happy to jump into with Android. They tried to out apple Apple and let Android out MS themselves. I agree with everything in your wonderful post except maybe this. Microsoft has never made an open platform out of anything. They've made closed platforms with expensive licenses. They got away with it because they would assume a shitload of risk by getting in first and dominating markets. What they did with mobile wasn't outside their usual MO at all, they just couldn't get their poo poo together with their hardware partners before Google showed up and handed everyone a better alternative for practically no cost. I think MS has finally realized they're too slow for their business model to work properly anymore. Google ate their lunch both by being faster to market and by making everything infinitely easier for developers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Right now, you can walk out of an Apple store with a brand new iPhone and a brand new Macbook Pro, and have no way to plug one into the other. From a usability standpoint, this is not a huge deal, but looking at the history of the company and what made it successful, this is a gigantic, sirens blaring, red flag waving problem. How do you plug your ipad into an apple tv? how do you plug an apple watch into a iphone? You don't. That is absurd, that isn't what connectivity is in 2016. Apple isn't working on letting you string wires between devices, they are working on making sure you don't. You bring home all the apple devices and the whole point is that by magic your iphone pairs with your iwatch, it detects all your apple tvs by network and bluetooth, all your phone stuff connects automatically by continuity and icloud, you never have to even click buttons or set this stuff up. It's all based on user accounts, and wifi magic. Requiring you plug stuff together is a step BACKWARDS. Using the laptop as a battery is literally the only use case this doesn't support and in that case, yeah, you need to spend 4 dollars to get a port converter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Using the laptop as a battery is literally the only use case this doesn't support and in that case, yeah, you need to spend 4 dollars to get a port converter. I wonder what proportion of apple users who are 1) travelling and 2) don't want to lug around excessive amounts of power bricks would qualify for this use case.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
I feel like you're purposefully misunderstanding my point and doubling down on your own. There's no need to get defensive. Again, the actual use case is not the point. The optics are the point. Apple customers are going to get home, try to plug one device into the other, realize they can't, and think "this is stupid". If you're at a coffee shop and you need to charge your iPhone, and you have your laptop, you're going to try and plug it in, realize you can't, and think "this is stupid". Of course there are easy third party solutions, but the entire point of the Apple experience is not to need any.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I think MS has finally realized they're too slow for their business model to work properly anymore. Google ate their lunch both by being faster to market and by making everything infinitely easier for developers. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I feel like you're purposefully misunderstanding my point and doubling down on your own. There's no need to get defensive. By the way, this would've been extremely easy to solve by just bundling a usbc to lightning cable instead of the usba to lightning cable such as the one that apple sells in its store. Apple could've at least had enough forethought to realise this, and though obviously people would then bitch about how they can't connect their 2012 macbook airs to 2016 ipones without a dongle instead of how they can't connect their 2016 macbook pros to their 2016 ipones without a dongle, change would in this case at least be in the name of getting everyone to the newer more smoothly operating standard that any self respecting apple user should want. suck my woke dick fucked around with this message at 23:39 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
blowfish posted:By the way, this would've been extremely easy to solve by just bundling a usbc to lightning cable instead of or in addition to the usba to lightning cable such as the one that apple sells in its store. Yeah that really underscores the problem. When Apple dropped the 30 pin connector, they did it simultaneously across the entire product line in a single day. They even rushed out a new iPad model only 4 months after the release of the previous one for this exact reason. Mixing standards like this is extremely un-Apple, and it being such an easy fix just erodes any sense that they obsess about detail anymore. They already make a USB-C charger for the 12" macbook for god's sake, how hard is it to make a smaller one and bundle it with the iPhone?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Yeah that really underscores the problem. When Apple dropped the 30 pin connector, they did it simultaneously across the entire product line in a single day. They even rushed out a new iPad model only 4 months after the release of the previous one for this exact reason. Mixing standards like this is extremely un-Apple, and it being such an easy fix just erodes any sense that they obsess about detail anymore. They already make a USB-C charger for the 12" macbook for god's sake, how hard is it to make a smaller one and bundle it with the iPhone? Got to think of the pc-using apple users and legacy compatibility. No wait, that's microsoft.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I agree with everything in your wonderful post except maybe this. Microsoft has never made an open platform out of anything. They've made closed platforms with expensive licenses. They got away with it because they would assume a shitload of risk by getting in first and dominating markets. What they did with mobile wasn't outside their usual MO at all, they just couldn't get their poo poo together with their hardware partners before Google showed up and handed everyone a better alternative for practically no cost. When I say open in this respect I mean open to run on any hardware and software from any developer as long as they built it to function with their product. Not open as in open source. With Apple the OS was bundled as a part of the hardware, in fact you couldn't even get their OS save for on their hardware (oh look things haven't changed a bit). You didn't have the option to slap together a frankenbox by picking different components from manufactures you like and loading an Apple operating system. Noop if you wanted an Apple OS you had to buy and Apple computer and pay a hefty premium for the privilege. For Microsoft they cared nothing about the hardware they were a software company so they developed their their product to work on a wide variety of products and systems. And say what you want about any anti-competitive aspects of their licensing model they didn't dictate (beyond basic minimum specifications) what you could install Windows on. You are looking at this question from the perspective of the modern computer landscape. While the situation in the late 80's early 90s were nothing like it. There was no Linux back then and while the concept of open source and GNU was around it was hardly mainstream and the CEO's and bean counters in the enterprise space were sure as hell not ready to invest in something as decentralized and wild as open source and shareware. By providing a common OS that worked on multiple platforms Microsoft essentially took the PC from a boring office tool and glorified word processor and turned into an something that most people couldn't imagine living their life without. It's been 25 years since Linux was first published, and with the exception of Android it's really only used by super nerds and in some specialized business applications. No where near the level of adoption of Windows even though it's "Free". There is a reason for that, and it's not because of Microsoft being some monopolistic monstrosity . It's that Linux doesn't have the support to be used by those who are not extremely technical. The thing about "Free" when it comes to software is that "Free" means no formal quality control, no support process, no stakeholders who can drive focused innovation and no one who's focused on making it usable for the masses. And it shows. . Microsoft provided a single platform to which hardware manufacturers and software developers could design for. Since it wasn't tied to a particular hardware manufacturer or software developer the PC platform was able to leverage the competitive market between the various hardware and software companies who were trying to find a way to profit in this new business space. This drove prices down and performance up. You had multiple processor manufacturers competing, multiple video card makers , you do realize that there was a time when there were more than two choices in video chip-set makers right? and at the time the licensing was the only effective means to generate revenue. And it's not like there weren't competing operating systems at the time such as Dr Dos and OS/2. That people could build systems to run. Yes they built some somewhat shady agreements with OEMs to make Windows the defacto OS. But they actually included a fair financial incentive to do so because you weren't paying full price for the operating system on a machine that came pre-loaded with Windows. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that MS was perfect or entirely ethical in everything they did, I'm just making the point that compared to Apple's business model they are wide open. Bach in the early 2000s Microsoft attempted to use the same business model in the mobile market that they used so well in the PC market, And they were initially dominant (admittedly of a far smaller market at the time) XDA was originally created as a site for people to mod and tweak primarily windows mobile OS. Windows mobile already had all the things people griped about Apple lacking when the Iphone came out. Cut and paste, Flash capability., multi-tasking. Then instead of capitalizing and building on the work they had already done, for some inexplicable reason they pulled out of the mobile OS market and changed to an Apple inspired locked down design which while a good design (I still miss my windows phone) ended up hopelessly chasing a market that didn't exist. When they did this they left this giant hole in the market of people who didn't want Steve Jobs dictating what functionality and capabilities they needed that Android moved in to fill.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Again, the actual use case is not the point. The optics are the point. Apple customers are going to get home, try to plug one device into the other, realize they can't, and think "this is stupid". The point is that you can't plug them together because that isn't how that works. They are hoping grandpas like you will stop thinking you NEED to plug things together, it's all wireless man. Stop buying wires. They worked real hard to make it all magic. They primarily release products that only work through wireless connections. You open the box and your stuff is already connected by the time the phone hits the home screen. If you don't have internet it goes through the local network, if you don't have a local network it auto falls over to bluetooth. Apple products all have a super robust set of auto negotiations to make everything connect with zero setup. The apple experience is that you buy a computer and they buy a phone and by the time you turn them both on they are both magically connected. You aren't running cables between them like a neanderthal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:The point is that you can't plug them together because that isn't how that works. They are hoping grandpas like you will stop thinking you NEED to plug things together, it's all wireless man. Stop buying wires. They worked real hard to make it all magic. They primarily release products that only work through wireless connections. You open the box and your stuff is already connected by the time the phone hits the home screen. If you don't have internet it goes through the local network, if you don't have a local network it auto falls over to bluetooth. Apple products all have a super robust set of auto negotiations to make everything connect with zero setup. If that's true, then they should have left MagSafe in place, since the main reason you need to put a wire in the laptop is to charge it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:The point is that you can't plug them together because that isn't how that works. They are hoping grandpas like you will stop thinking you NEED to plug things together, it's all wireless man. Stop buying wires. They worked real hard to make it all magic. They primarily release products that only work through wireless connections. You open the box and your stuff is already connected by the time the phone hits the home screen. If you don't have internet it goes through the local network, if you don't have a local network it auto falls over to bluetooth. Apple products all have a super robust set of auto negotiations to make everything connect with zero setup. I don't think you're reading my posts. You seem to be looking at them and thinking "this guy disagrees with me. I should reiterate my point with slightly different language." I was an Apple tech for close to a decade, I know how the products work. I'm not going to repeat myself, unless you'd like to actually think about and address what I'm saying.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 00:53
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:If that's true, then they should have left MagSafe in place, since the main reason you need to put a wire in the laptop is to charge it. I do agree with this somewhat. It very much feels like they want things to be purely wireless but have settled on the idea that since they can't be yet they will give each device exactly one type of wire that can be plugged in to do everything else. Even in situations that doesn't make perfect sense. It honestly feels like a half step towards a design to have contact charging or wireless charging or something rather than cords, but they just weren't there yet this generation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
Haven't seen this in the forums yet. This seemed like most reasonable thread to put it in. Tangential to some of the topics discussed. http://www.seattletimes.com/life/pets/your-grocery-bill-may-help-king-county-track-unlicensed-pets/
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I don't think you're reading my posts. You seem to be looking at them and thinking "this guy disagrees with me. I should reiterate my point with slightly different language." Because you are wrong. You are saying that in the old days apple stuff used to work together but now it doesn't because the wire is wrong. But that isn't how apple stuff works now. You don't plug apple devices together. The whole modern apple experience is auto negotiating every possible thing between devices secretly so it's all done by the time the user hits the home screen. You buy a new apple tv and plug it in and by the time it's booted you can connect to it from your iphone, you get a macbook and it basically forces you to enter an apple id before you even hit the desktop and already has reached out with bonjour and bluetooth to already pre-populate your phone into continuity and airdrop. Even the iwatch syncs by the phone asking you to take a photo of the watch while it secretly does the negotiation through bluetooth. They don't WANT you to plug their devices together, not being able to isn't some sign apple devices used to work together but now they don't, it's the entire design philosophy that everything needs to work together so seamlessly that if two devices even ever touch the whole thing has failed. Every apple device connects to every other apple device before you even reach the desktop. The apple seamless idea has extended to apple devices being forbidden from there even being a configuration screen or any configuration steps before the thing works, every apple device turns on already connected to your other stuff and you get to turn it off or change it later. They don't WANT you plugging your ipad into your iphone, they don't want you plugging your apple tv into your imac and they don't want you plugging the iphone into a computer, not ever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Because you are wrong. You are saying that in the old days apple stuff used to work together but now it doesn't because the wire is wrong. But that isn't how apple stuff works now. You don't plug apple devices together. The whole modern apple experience is auto negotiating every possible thing between devices secretly so it's all done by the time the user hits the home screen. You buy a new apple tv and plug it in and by the time it's booted you can connect to it from your iphone, you get a macbook and it basically forces you to enter an apple id before you even hit the desktop and already has reached out with bonjour and bluetooth to already pre-populate your phone into continuity and airdrop. Even the iwatch syncs by the phone asking you to take a photo of the watch while it secretly does the negotiation through bluetooth. Which is so Apple and a large part of why a significant portion of the market doesn't like or buy their products. Apple isn't just "hey this is a better way and you should use it" they are "You are stupid if you don't do it our way so we're not giving you a choice".
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
Skex posted:Which is so Apple and a large part of why a significant portion of the market doesn't like or buy their products. Apple isn't just "hey this is a better way and you should use it" they are "You are stupid if you don't do it our way so we're not giving you a choice". I don't think that portion of the market is that significant. Most people don't really care about customizing their computer and just want it to be easy to use and Apple's strategy works well for them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Skex posted:Which is so Apple and a large part of why a significant portion of the market doesn't like or buy their products. Apple isn't just "hey this is a better way and you should use it" they are "You are stupid if you don't do it our way so we're not giving you a choice". Have you met most people? Reducing their choice is probably for the best.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 16:56
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:They don't WANT you to plug their devices together, not being able to isn't some sign apple devices used to work together but now they don't, it's the entire design philosophy that everything needs to work together so seamlessly that if two devices even ever touch the whole thing has failed. ahh yes that explains the dearth of adapters and connectors they sell to make their products function like any other in this day and age oh poo poo you wanted to use a monitor other than the one attatched to your laptop? why didn't you just use wireless hdmi! also loling at "why are you so angry they are adopting new standards" like the problem is that they have a USB-C port and not that they didn't put a single USB 3 port on it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Because you are wrong. You are saying that in the old days apple stuff used to work together but now it doesn't because the wire is wrong. But that isn't how apple stuff works now. You don't plug apple devices together. That's absolutely not what I'm saying, go read my posts again. Particularly the multiple times I said "the usability issue is minimal" "the use case doesn't matter" and "the optics are what matter" or, don't and just reiterate the same post again for the fifth time. also if you know anyone with a macbook pro and an iphone who doesn't charge one with the other, let me know so I can tell my friends I saw a unicorn. Dr. Fishopolis fucked around with this message at 17:41 on Nov 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 17:35
|
|
|
That Old Tree posted:Of all the things Apple does wrong, trying to give new standards a boost isn't really one of them. i too love firewire
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:i too love firewire Firewire was a legit good technology and I'm sad it didn't take off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I don't think you're reading my posts. You seem to be looking at them and thinking "this guy disagrees with me. I should reiterate my point with slightly different language." fyi Owlofcreamcheese is a well-known contrarian who only wants to argue for the fun of it just go ahead and put him on ignore like everyone else eventually does
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Firewire was a legit good technology and I'm sad it didn't take off. i think i kept my firewire card through three iterations of my desktop pc just b/c it was so much faster than usb at the time i legit miss it e: wikipedia says that it's still produced? crazy
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
Google is the new Microsoft. It's big, slow, bureaucratic, resting on its laurels, and throwing tons of money at and failing to create products in new markets.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:That's absolutely not what I'm saying, go read my posts again. Particularly the multiple times I said "the usability issue is minimal" "the use case doesn't matter" and "the optics are what matter" The optics are that apple no longer releases products that you plug together with wires and don't even want to be seen touching wires or implying wires are needed or useful. You can actually plug an apple tv into a mac laptop too for diagnostics. But apple documentation won't even mention that, and there absolutely isn't a cable in the box to let you do it. The apple watch has a dock port that is hidden under the wristband and not even labeled in tech documentation. It's not a mistake, "cables don't exist" is a thing apple has done for a while across all their products. That is apple's optics, that wires are bad, wireless is good, there is no configuration steps, everything is configured before you hit the home screen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure repeating the same sentence over and over is usually a sign of some sort of mental collapse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I'm pretty sure repeating the same sentence over and over is usually a sign of some sort of mental collapse. You keep repeating that it doesn't hurt the functionality but it hurts the optics, but you are wrong. "wires don't exist" is the optics apple wants. They want you to not even know that it's possible to plug two apple devices together with a wire. They want to physically hide and mislabel the ports to keep you from even knowing it's an option. Like I think you are failing to realize how hard apple has gone towards making it so you don't plug devices together with cables. And how elaborate solutions they come up with just to stop you from ever needing to do that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
That's a fascinating opinion that you can't substantiate. edit: Of the two people in this argument, only one has actually worked at Apple, and it isn't you. I understand what you're saying and agree with it to some extent, but you do not know how the company thinks. Neither do I, in fact. The culture is so segmented and secretive that almost nobody knows the master plan or if there is one. In my experience, the connector disparity between the ports on the MBP and the cable included with the iPhone is not part of some grand scheme to make cables disappear. It's upper management not coordinating two departments that absolutely do not talk to each other unless absolutely necessary and directed by executive action. If it doesn't matter whether you plug your phone into a computer, then there is no reason not to use USB-C for the charging cable and make this whole thing a non-issue. The idea that Apple is purposefully making products with built-in USB ports that can't connect with each other is idiotic. Dr. Fishopolis fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Nov 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Apples wants you to plug iPhone in to a power adapter, not another mac.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/03/elon-musk-impersonator-tesla-secrets-todd-katz-lawsuit Seems like a bit of an overreaction to this really lovely phishing attempt: "why you so cautious w Q3/4 gm guidance on call? also what are your thoughts on disclosing M3 res#? Pros/cons from ir pov? what is your best guess as to where we actually come in on q3/4 deliverables. honest guess? no bs. thx 4 hard work prepping 4 today em”
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:That's a fascinating opinion that you can't substantiate. Apple tvs can not be pluged into apple watches, ipads or iphones. They can be plugged into computers but that function is not called out in the documentation and in fact the port is mislabeled in places to hide the fact it can be plugged in. It can preform all features wirelessly to macs,iphones and ipads through automatic configuration. Apple watches can not be connected with a wire from ipads, iphones, apple tvs or macs. They have a secret port that is unlabeled entirely and has not even have public specifications that could plug it into a computer at apple for diagnostics of some kind. It does have an automatic configuration with iphones (and ipads but don't) Ipads can not plug into iphones, iwatches or apple tvs. It can plug into macs but by default the itunes menu to interact with the ipad is hidden. You need to go through a menu to see it and the only functionality it provides is tech support things like system restore. All other connections are through auto configured wireless. Iphones can not plug into apple tvs, iwatches, or ipads. similar to ipads they can be plugged into a mac but the mac will no longer even register the plug in by default. (I think it might still open "photos" but this is redundant since the wireless photostream function already duplicates the functionality). likewise they have licenced airplay technology to speaker companies then removed headphone jacks from iphones. As well as providing standard bluetooth audio. They have like 5 products and none of the plug together with wires, yet all of them communicate with every single other device. They clearly are very intentionally building a brand around wireless. Most of them even allow for multiple different TYPES of wireless. your iphone will talk to your apple tv through the internet, through your network and through nonstandard bluetooth before failing, yet there exists no wire to connect them directly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 12:18 |
|
|
The ability to plug iThings into Macs is mostly there for development purposes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 19:47
|
|