It makes you think that intelligent people like intelligent birds?

Vulkan works fine on Windows 7 with Nvidia, up to a certain version anyway when they stopped support. There is no technological reason why it couldn't continue working, only logistical.

That isn't what's happening. They're deciding what purposes the software is fit for. They aren't doing anything to actually prevent them doing it — They're not Apple — but they are stating that doing so is a violation of the license and therefore they can wash their hands of the liability.

China shined on WTO rules in nationalistically anticompetitive ways from day one. If you won't stand for it from Apple, why would you support it from China?

The very fact that they're able to do that, rather than having to sell the app outright, is prima facie proof of an unhealthy ecosystem with inadequate competition.

I've used Logic on the Mac, but I prefer Digital Performer. Others prefer Cubase. Only one of these three exists in its full form on iOS. The same is true across a wide range of products.

The problem is that there's no advantage to using an iPad over a computer for any of this stuff and a giant pile of huge disadvantages (limited screen size, limited storage, limited connectivity, etc.), so most users don't really want to use these apps on an iPad, so the developers mostly don't bother to port their full apps to iPad. And realistically, I don't see that changing any time soon.

As for the whole "App Store Only" on Mac thing not happening, if Apple thought they could get away with it, I'm pretty sure they would, but they couldn't, so they won't. They would have to go back in time and build the platform that way back in 1984, so that people wouldn't have thousands of dollars in software that can't be readily shoehorned into that distribution model.

But the App-Store-only model definitely holds back the iOS platform. If you could run actual Mac apps on iOS, all of those limitations would go away, and the iPad would be a viable second computer for a lot of people while traveling, and could replace the computer for a much larger percentage of people than it currently can. And the fact that Apple still hasn't recognized this and opened up the iOS platform is what makes me so certain that if Apple could somehow make Mac users stomach the idea of not allowing direct distribution, they would. Fortunately for everyone, there's zero chance of their users accepting it.

Apple or Amazon would also be decent homes for Paramount, IMO, for the same reason as Netflix.

Sony, IMO, is already way too big in the content industry. Antitrust regulators should absolutely step in and block any consolidation like this.

Wireless printers with AirPrint are to printers as Ford Fiestas are to cars. Let me know when it natively supports sending PostScript (including duplexing options, paper tray routing options, paper thickness options, etc.) to my large-format Konica Minolta color laser without having to run an AirPrint server on my Mac and without everything being scaled down to 80% page coverage, and then I'll start to take iOS printing seriously.

The iPad is for people who need an office suite and/or a web browser — the same sorts of people for whom a Chromebook would be effective. It is way too limited to be a good general-purpose computer replacement, and will continue to be way too limited until you can either run macOS or Windows on it (whether directly or in a virtualization environment).

Tablets are great as web browsers or for consuming video content. They're downright miserable for everything else. It's all about the apps, and even now, 14 years after the iPad came out, the rich app ecosystem still just isn't there.

And all of the Mac users will switch to Windows. Right now, at least the Mac is useful. iOS is a toy that can only replace about 1% of what I use my laptop for, because approximately none of the software I have to use exists on iOS. There's no Finale, no KiCad, no OpenSCAD, no Snapmaker Luban, no Xcode, etc. A large percentage of the apps I run are licensed under licenses that are incompatible with Apple's App Store, and most of the others are unlikely to get ported to UIKit ever.

Careful, if you can't spell then your salary may be reduced below fifty cents.

Both things are converging on the same point, an inadequately cooled shiny slab with ARM cores that are crippled by a case design that doesn't adequately radiate heat and a battery that doesn't last the useful life of the device.

" This is outside Microsoft's decision making IMHO"

It isn't.

Dollars to doughnuts that this is however just a ploy to get more money.

Not enough weight to meaningfully affect range, though. A few extra ounces is margin-of-error stuff when the car weighs two tons.

Sure. Anything you do will consume more power. But a more complicated radio circuit with a differential amplifier that probably draws just milliwatts more power would once again be completely lost in the noise when compared with a self-driving computer that consumes two or three hundred watts continuously, and adding a couple more loop antennas right next to the drive motors would likely add just ounces to the vehicle's weight.

The point is that this doesn't necessarily have to involve some thick metal shield that adds a hundred pounds, and nobody is going to complain because the vehicle's maximum range drops by ten or fifteen feet.

No, they're actually in the middle underneath the car, typically. EVs almost always have two electric drive motors, not four. (CyberTruck has an option for three motors.) With antennas on top, that's a heck of a lot of metal between you and the noise source.

Facts could upset me if they were upsetting facts, but you're not working with any so the question is irrelevant.

Making the radio easily replaceable means requiring a specific form factor. But the trend has been towards devices with big screens and little depth, freeing up a considerable space behind the dash front and center. This makes it much easier to design the HVAC system.