Comment HGST FTW! (Score 1, Informative) 66
HGST still continues to be the overall winner.
Even WD hasn't seemed to be able to ruin them... yet.
HGST still continues to be the overall winner.
Even WD hasn't seemed to be able to ruin them... yet.
This should be simplistic, if they do move that way, but ARM is hardly fast.. and if things go south, they'd be stuck in a powerpc like place again... right after a move...
Except for one very major difference: Apple has some of the best, if not THE best, ARM CPU designers on the planet. Add to that the fact that pretty much no one has more ARM experience than Apple, and I very much doubt that a move to ARM would leave Apple in ANY way "stuck".
What Apple DOES need to do is to purchase ARM from that ridiculous Chinese Investment Group, and bring the entire ARCHITECTURE "in-house".
THAT would be a REAL Game-Changer, both for Apple, and for pretty much everyone using ARM technology.
However, as the iPad and iPhone grow constantly and the Mac it is someway frozen (as a machine), could be possible that the "Mac" concept has a dead end.
Anybody who thinks that Macs are somehow "frozen" hasn't looked beyond a quick glance at the overall case designs. On the inside, Macs continue to evolve, get faster, employ new interface standards, and (despite the whining of Apple-Haters), generally improve, both in hardware and in software.
That isn't fanboy talk; that's merely observation.
This has been INFURIATING to me as there is absolutely zero reason for Apple to drop 32bit app support.
64bit processors still support 32bit instruction sets hence why Windows doesn't plan on eliminating 32bit app support. Apple doing this doesn't make any sense other than potentially eliminating old and antiquated software. I absolutely refuse to upgrade Office. I paid for my copy of 2016 and I am NOT paying a subscription fee for the privilege of using it.
I'm willing to bet that this might be the death knell for Apple for most of the normies. The only people still using Macs and "liking" the newer models are die hard fanboys and people who don't know any better.
I hope to GOD that 32bit support can be enabled via the 3rd party of terminal tomfoolery.
It's such a shame what has become of Apple. Jobs is clearly spinning in the grave.
Apple is eliminating 32 bit support for the same reasons it already did so on iOS: Tighter, smaller OS and App Designs, plus the very real advantage of Apple (and third-party Developers) not having to duplicate regression testing for 64 and 32 bit systems every time a new version of the OS comes out.
And it isn't like this is a new idea, just sprung on the Developer and User communities. Apple has been discussing this with Developers for quite some time, and has been pretty overt in its warnings to Users for a couple of major OS releases now. At this point, NO ONE should be surprised.
And as far as old Applications are concerned, if it wasn't the wholesale removal of 32 bit support that kills your favorite Ancient Application, it would be the deprecation of some random Library. So, welcome to the world. As far as we can tell, time only moves in one direction...
And BTW, refusal to say goodbye to old libraries is the main reason Windows has been, and continues to be, such a shit show.
Easier to use. Faster. More secure. Protects your privacy. Most actual creative production is done today on mac because it's simply a better platform for better people.
Easier to use if you're already used to it maybe. Faster? With its underclocked processor and limit on ram, ok. More secure? From what? Protects your privacy? Isn't that the same thing? Better ask all those people that have had all their icloud stuff leak. Mac isn't a better platform at all and mac users aren't better. Maybe it has the advantage of less hardware variations still but it macs are still very happy to crash plus then you have to deal with being on a mac. No avi. No cut and paste. The apple button to do anything down to a wireless mouse that charges from the bottom for fucks sake. Macs are crap and expensive, get over it.
1. Easier to use if you are used to it: Ridiculous, non-responsive "Response".
2. Underclocked Processor and limit on RAM: Are we talking about a specific product, or in general? Because if the latter, that's a bald-faced lie.
3. More secure from what?: From malware. And you bloody-well know that.
4. Protects your Privacy the same thing as "more secure"?: They are related, of course; but the "Privacy" the OP was speaking-of was relating to how Apple treats user data. And you bloody-well know that.
5. Happy to crash. Can't speak for everyone here; but since OS X/macOS came on the scene, I personally have only had one Kernel Panic, and that was caused by a bad 3rd Party RAM DIMM. All OSes have occasional APPLICATION crashes; but I personally have never had one of those bring-down OS X/macOS since I first installed the Developer Preview of OS X 10.0.0.0 in 1999.
6. Have to deal with it being on a Mac: Don't even know what that means. But, for a person familiar with a Mac, that is an advantage, not a detriment.
7. No AVI: Really? I have been playing AVIs on my Macs since the mid-1990s. Go troll somewhere else.
8. No cut and paste: This one is especially laughable; since it was the Apple LISA that INTRODUCED Cut/Copy/Paste/Undo to the planet in 1983. Cut/Copy/Paste/Undo have been available on both Mac OSes since the very first Macs in 1984. Perhaps you are speaking of the first couple of versions of the iPhone OS (it wasn't even called iOS yet). But that is ancient history, and in any case, certainly off-topic to this thread. Desperate much?
9. The Apple button: WTF? That doesn't even make sense? Are we talking about Macs having a superior set of Modifier Keys to Windows, then yes, they do.
10. Wireless mouse that charges from the bottom: You got me there. That was a dumb industrial design decision, IMHO. But I submit that Apple commits FAR fewer of those "usability gaffes" than most, if not all, other computer/tech brands.
1. Macs are crap and expensive: Macs may be generally more expensive than plastic Chinese crap, simply because they are NOT crap. And that why, when people need to RELY on their computer for REAL work, where the beginning and end of the decision-process is not "how cheap can I get something that resembles a computer?", the gold-standard continues to be the Macintosh. Every. Single. Time.
Get over it.
There isn't much reason why it cannot run on the web.
The Modern Web Browser is a thin client solution. Even traditional CPU intensive programs, can run on the web now. Because the the heavy CPU stuff is happening in the Cloud, shared with others All the browser and you normally just need a way to input the data into the system, and get the output back.
As Application Front-Ends, Web Browsers make, well, good Web Browsers.
That is all.
Web Apps are horrible, and are doing nothing more than contributing to the technologies that are making so many websites are so script-ridden that they are seriously ruining the World Wide Web's main use: Viewing Hypertext Web Pages.
Seriously, a lot of web-pages these days don't stop dancing around and reformatting themselves for well over a MINUTE.
Nauseating.
You daughter will be a Comfort Woman for rich Chinese Tourists who visit the Museums called EU and USA.
Because there will soon be no jobs for stupid white people left. At least if they don't wake up from your fever.
Tell me why it is that all Communists are the most brutally-Capitalistic people on the planet?
is using all apples stealing tactics to steal from apple. Look goods on apple. Why should apple be the only tech company to lie, cheat and steal.
You honestly think they are?
How cute.
of developer real-world identity (corportate and/or personal) for each developer id.
And a requirement that developers buy into an insurance plan so that if their developer id is used for malware, end-users can file a class-action lawsuit against the developer and recover damages via the insurance pool.
Or better yet, rather than a cumbersome class-action, have a pre-setup mediation service administered by Apple.
That's actually not the worst idea in the world.
The problem would be getting the Devs. to buy into it (no pun).
But I'm still in agreement that no practical Security system can prevent a User with Admin privileges from allowing Malware to be installed using Social Engineering trickery.
I don't know the details regarding how "code-signing" verification actually works; but it would seem like GateKeeper could verify a computed-at-install-time Hash against an Online Database (maintained by Apple), and simply refuse (at ANY "Permissions"-level) to Install a Package that doesn't verify. That way, even if the User is an Admin, GateKeeper would save them from themselves, by disallowing the installation of "Altered" code. That way, you're not only validating against a "legit" DevID; but also against the actual contents of the Package itself.
Even if you allowed a User "bypass", a set of "We detected that the CONTENTS of this Package does not match our Records, and there is a great probability that this Package has been altered to contain Malware..." would likely prevent all but the most brain-dead Users from getting hosed.
The only way to defeat such a system would be to hack GateKeeper itself. This could be made fairly impossible on T2-equipped Macs, and even on systems without the T2, it could be made extremely difficult.
Where's the flaw in my logic?
This is the SECOND story about this subject.
The EAC program has existed since at LEAST iOS 8.0, and there have been abuses thereof since shortly after that.
Yes, these Developers are certainly violating the TOS of their EAC Agreement; but since their Apps are never available in the App Store, IMHO, in addition to its stated purpose of allowing "In-House" Apps to be distributed by companies, this has a secondary (perhaps unintended, perhaps not) function that serves as a nudge and a wink by Apple that can allow some "prohibited" Apps to be Side-Loaded onto iOS devices, without Apple having to have those types of Apps published in their App Store.
In short, what we have here is a rather large hole in the Walls of the Garden, and one that I am pretty sure Apple really doesn't mind, much like the Hackintosh Community, which Apple could have lowered the boom on over a decade ago, and yet, chooses not to.
See how stupid this headline is? That's how stupid apple is for not allowing anyone to run whatever they damn well please on hardware they own and paid for.
So let me get this straight:
First, Apple has an App Store with "Rules". Slashtards hate that. Conveniently ignoring the fact that anyone with a Mac is free to Download XCode for free, and Develop to their heart's content for the "hardware they own and paid for." (no Dev. License Needed to Develop Apps for your OWN iOS Devices).
Next, Apple provides an "Enterprise App Certificate" Program (which is designed to allow Companies to Develop custom iOS Apps for In-House Distribution), and then, since those Apps aren't available in the App Store, and thus are not subject to any "Approval Process", sort of looks the other way when certain Devs. abuse the intent of that program. So now the Slashtards are Triggered about THAT!
Please tell me: How can those two completely opposite Points-of-View both be correct?
Not only is the Headline stupid; but so is the entire article.
Why? Because Enterprise Apps, by (correct) Design, are intended to be a "Closed" Distribution system, for Companies to Distribute their own Private, Internal Apps.
As such, Apple never sees these Apps. They are not part of any "Approval" or "Policing" process, simply because the Apps are never Available in the App Store.
So, the entire article is nothing but Yellow Journalistic Clickbait Doggerel, and the "author", MsMash, should be terminated (hopefully with Extreme Prejudice!), immediately.
I've worked for a company that uses an enterprise account for internal testing. Apps signed with enterprise profiles are never seen by Apple.
THIS!!!!
Mods: Mod Parent WAY Up. This simple, truthful Post neatly explains why the entire article's premise is unmitigated BULLSHIT!
Apple doesn't "Police" Enterprise Apps, simply because They never appear in the App Store, and thus by (proper) design, are never submitted to an App Approval Process of any kind...
But that doesn't make for breathless "reporting" that generates da Clicks, now, does it?
According to an Update to this article in MacRumors.com, AT&T has "clarified" that the 5GE showing up on the Status Bar of iPhones running iOS 12.2 beta 2, simply means that the customer is in an area where 5G MIGHT be available...
Still kinda smarmy, IMHO.
Sure it is a big deal security lapse from Apple. So the received/found the problem, analysis the scope of it, stopped the service, sent out communication about the problem. Now they are applying a fix.
It seems like a responsible course of action.
I am sure people who hate Apple, because they were beaten up by a hipster a few years ago, will still fault Apple, and make them seem like a pile of idiots who cannot code themselves out of a paper bag. But these things happen, I am actually surprised it doesn't happen more often.
I am sure all you programmers out there who are smug that their code never got hacked. But is it really skill, or just being lucky, or your program isn't just that popular enough. It can often just be a bad day where your code has a security flaw in it, and coded so it would be difficult for the QC to find it. However within weeks of it being public it was was found as a problem. I myself never had my coded hacked, however this isn't a reason to pat myself on the back, or be smug and judgemental, as I have fixed things in my own code that could had been bad if I didn't catch it. And I never know what else I may have open.
This is Slashdot. You can't apply LOGIC or FACTS here when the subject is "Apple".
I figured they would fix this Server-Side.
Makes sense, since the bug was obviously in the Group FaceTime code running on Apple's Servers.
The best thing about this is that no change/update to iOS should be necessary. So no problems with "You must Update your iOS to use Group FaceTime", or any other annoying User experiences.
Work continues in this area. -- DEC's SPR-Answering-Automaton
