The dotus reaffirming that regulating business is bad.

FaceID seems like a big fucking failure. The disastrous demo notwithstanding, they are actually making unlocking more annoying. You need the phone pointed at your face just so then you need to swipe up. That's assuming it works the first time, so far its failing quite a bit in press demos and the actual presentation by Apple themselves was a shitshow. Some people check their phone constantly throughout the day, they are going to get annoyed by this pretty quickly. To use Apple Pay or etc there are now 2 additional steps.

Fingerprint sensors work pretty damned well and are faster. I understand they were working on TouchID without a fingerprint sensor but couldn't get it ready in time, hopefully they manage this down the road.

Anyways $999 for a 64GB model is a fucking awful joke, they already had lavish profit margins on the iPhones.

Yep, I agree that face identifying stuff is more gimmick than useful. I just do not mind typing in the passcode because that means only I can unlock it!

Verno wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 11:40:
Anyways $999 for a 64GB model is a fucking awful joke, they already had lavish profit margins on the iPhones.

what's your proof /s https://9to5mac.com/2017/05/01/aapl-cash-reserves-amount-value/

Verno wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 11:40:

Anyways $999 for a 64GB model is a fucking awful joke, they already had lavish profit margins on the iPhones.

Yup, I'd rather have a $200 Moto X and an $800 laptop. $800 can get you a pretty sweet laptop these days.

Ozmodan wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 13:09:
Yep, I agree that face identifying stuff is more gimmick than useful. I just do not mind typing in the passcode because that means only I can unlock it!

You must be some kind of criminal. Obviously.

Trump’s self-driving car strategy: Don’t regulate self-driving cars.

I mean, really, what could go wrong?

Up next: deregulate the airline industry entirely, because "free market."

jdreyer wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 14:25:

Verno wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 11:40:

Anyways $999 for a 64GB model is a fucking awful joke, they already had lavish profit margins on the iPhones.

Yup, I'd rather have a $200 Moto X and an $800 laptop. $800 can get you a pretty sweet laptop these days.

Replace the 5400 rpm hdd with an SSD and boost the ram up to 8GB and you will have an awesome machine.

Don't regulate self-driving cars.

Yeah, let's just not even worry. Who cares if a bad line of code slams a self-driving car into a bus and kills 30 people? It's not going to bother Trump, he's safe in the White House Mar-A-Lago.


Kidding about Trump aside, the thought of 100000 test cars driving around with no regulation to prohibit anything is fucking terrifying.

This comment was edited on Sep 13, 2017, 15:43.

Verno wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 11:40:
FaceID seems like a big fucking failure. The disastrous demo notwithstanding, they are actually making unlocking more annoying. You need the phone pointed at your face just so then you need to swipe up. That's assuming it works the first time, so far its failing quite a bit in press demos and the actual presentation by Apple themselves was a shitshow. Some people check their phone constantly throughout the day, they are going to get annoyed by this pretty quickly. To use Apple Pay or etc there are now 2 additional steps.

I get the idea behind it. Most people bring their phone up to a certain position in front of their face when they use it, so why not use that position to then also automatically unlock it?

The reality I found on my Galaxy S8 is that you have to be REALLY FREAKING PRECISE with the location of your phone on setup, and then again when trying to unlock it, for it to work. You can't set it up at 3 feet away from your face and then try to unlock it 2.5 feet away, because it won't work.

I finally have it set up now where it works reasonably consistently, but it was a huge (YUUUUUUUUUUUGE!) pain in the ass to get it there. And even so, anything less than optimal light conditions, and it doesn't work.

It's a gimmick for gimmicks' sake. It gives little to no functionality improvements.

There are too many situations where you want to unlock your phone quickly but don't want it directly in front of your face. Apple says its fine, it works on angles too. OK but so far they have failed to demonstrate that reliably. More importantly they haven't shown exactly what the benefit is here. TouchID is fast and efficient. What is the big improvement over that system? "IT KNOWS YOUR FACE!" Ok wonderful, so fucking what? Who cares? Why is this better? It's change for the sake of change, so they can justify a fat price increase.

Same thing with the removal of the home button, whether software or hardware. Anything other than extremely simple gestures is just lazy fucking UX and good luck training boomers on multitasking. Say what you will about Apple and lord knows I've said plenty of bad but they used to innovate from time to time. This is not one of those times.

Verno wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 16:04:
It's change for the sake of change, so they can justify a fat price increase.

Yep. The sheeple are eating it up. If I was Apple, I would have called it the iPhone Xclusive, and charged it at 2 grand. The mongrels will buy it.

Verno wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 16:04:
TouchID is fast and efficient. What is the big improvement over that system?

Same thing with the removal of the home button, whether software or hardware.

I believe the rationale in both cases is to free up space on the front of the phone for an edge to edge screen. If I remember correctly, they were working on some sort of TouchID sensor embedded in the screen itself, but couldn't get it working well enough in time for launch, and as a result they fell back on face sensing as a compromise.

RedEye9 wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 14:43:

jdreyer wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 14:25:

Verno wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 11:40:

Anyways $999 for a 64GB model is a fucking awful joke, they already had lavish profit margins on the iPhones.

Yup, I'd rather have a $200 Moto X and an $800 laptop. $800 can get you a pretty sweet laptop these days.

Replace the 5400 rpm hdd with an SSD and boost the ram up to 8GB and you will have an awesome machine.

Yeah, my six year old HP laptop has 8gb of RAM already, I really got to get an SSD for it.

Creston wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 15:31:
Don't regulate self-driving cars.

Yeah, let's just not even worry. Who cares if a bad line of code slams a self-driving car into a bus and kills 30 people? It's not going to bother Trump, he's safe in the White House Mar-A-Lago.


Kidding about Trump aside, the thought of 100000 test cars driving around with no regulation to prohibit anything is fucking terrifying.

Won't happen anyway, since these US companies might wanna sell their cars not just in the USA And so the cars would always be regulated, by the EU, by Canada etc.

eRe4s3r wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 17:52:
Won't happen anyway, since these US companies might wanna sell their cars not just in the USA And so the cars would always be regulated, by the EU, by Canada etc.

Possible, but I'd never underestimate the companies capacity to cut corners everywhere they can to siphon even mere nickles and dimes. Intrinsic obsolescence as well as programmed obsolescence proved this without the shadow of a doubt.

All they need to do is have the assembly line "skip" a few steps here and there for the cars shipped to Canada VS those shipped to the US, or Europe VS America, which they already do since the regulations are far more stringent in EU VS CA/US right now and there ARE differences in the same models found in EU VS those in CA/US.

Heck since they'll be self-driving cars they can even remove a few lines of codes and/or disable a few features and voilà! Much more dangerous cars on US roads all to save a few nickles and dimes here and there on the cars.

eRe4s3r wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 17:52:

Creston wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 15:31:
Don't regulate self-driving cars.

Yeah, let's just not even worry. Who cares if a bad line of code slams a self-driving car into a bus and kills 30 people? It's not going to bother Trump, he's safe in the White House Mar-A-Lago.


Kidding about Trump aside, the thought of 100000 test cars driving around with no regulation to prohibit anything is fucking terrifying.

Won't happen anyway, since these US companies might wanna sell their cars not just in the USA And so the cars would always be regulated, by the EU, by Canada etc.

That's not where they're testing, though. They're testing HERE in the US. I mean, even the Germans are testing their self-driving cars here.

Creston wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 22:33:

eRe4s3r wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 17:52:

Creston wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 15:31:
Don't regulate self-driving cars.

Yeah, let's just not even worry. Who cares if a bad line of code slams a self-driving car into a bus and kills 30 people? It's not going to bother Trump, he's safe in the White House Mar-A-Lago.


Kidding about Trump aside, the thought of 100000 test cars driving around with no regulation to prohibit anything is fucking terrifying.

Won't happen anyway, since these US companies might wanna sell their cars not just in the USA And so the cars would always be regulated, by the EU, by Canada etc.

That's not where they're testing, though. They're testing HERE in the US. I mean, even the Germans are testing their self-driving cars here.

The Germans are being allowed to test here on the stipulation that all of their self-driving vehicles are housed at one of Trump's parking garages, for a nice fee, of course.

Simon Says wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 21:57:

eRe4s3r wrote on Sep 13, 2017, 17:52:
Won't happen anyway, since these US companies might wanna sell their cars not just in the USA And so the cars would always be regulated, by the EU, by Canada etc.

Possible, but I'd never underestimate the companies capacity to cut corners everywhere they can to siphon even mere nickles and dimes. Intrinsic obsolescence as well as programmed obsolescence proved this without the shadow of a doubt.

All they need to do is have the assembly line "skip" a few steps here and there for the cars shipped to Canada VS those shipped to the US, or Europe VS America, which they already do since the regulations are far more stringent in EU VS CA/US right now and there ARE differences in the same models found in EU VS those in CA/US.

Heck since they'll be self-driving cars they can even remove a few lines of codes and/or disable a few features and voilà! Much more dangerous cars on US roads all to save a few nickles and dimes here and there on the cars.

Well, before the diesel scandal I would have laughed at that idea, but I can't deny that it's possible they actually do that. But will they really do it and suffer the other car makers from rubbing salt in that wound always and everywhere?