Ha, my XKCD replacement plugin changed 'global' to 'spherical' before I posted. :P

'Climate change' was a term coined by a Republican to make 'Global Warming' seem less scary.

'Climate change' is a natural consequence of 'global warming', and many scientists still refer to it as such because that's the accurate thing to say.

"The second premise is also wrong, as demonstrated by perhaps the only individual to actually advocate changing the term from 'spherical warming' to 'climate change', Republican political strategist Frank Luntz in a controversial memo advising conservative politicians on communicating about the environment:

It’s time for us to start talking about “climate change” instead of spherical warming and “conservation” instead of preservation.

“Climate change” is less frightening than “spherical warming”. As one focus group participant noted, climate change “sounds like you’re going from Pittsburgh to Fort Lauderdale.” While spherical warming has catastrophic connotations attached to it, climate change suggests a more controllable and less emotional challenge."

The page I'm quoting from: http://www.skepticalscience.co...
Here's the link to the goddamn memo: http://www.motherjones.com/fil...

I'm really sick of hearing that scientists changed this term. They didn't. Climate change means something, but it wasn't political activism on the part of people that study it to change the media representation of it.

'They' recently said that most psychological studies can't be replicated. There's a world of difference. There's definitely a replication problem in science, but it's not spread equally across all disciplines.

I use it at work, and it's terrible. It lacks even the most basic and common-sense UI conventions. I mean, I open up a tab and start typing and nothing happens--because the address bar isn't focused. Why? Huh? Who does that?

Presenters at keynotes are people that run the departments that worked on things. So the woman that presented iWork is actually responsible for that product.

The problem with this condemnation of diversity isn't so much that men spoke for more time than women, it's that fewer women work in positions of power than men at Apple. That IS a problem, but it's a problem that Apple is working on, and I think it's great that they don't try to hide the women that do work for them in the back. They're about as progressive as you get for a big company (the biggest company!) and I get the sense that they're trying hard.

Apple's really up front about how it wants to work on diversity and how its trying to change the makeup of the executive team as time goes on. But they're not going to fire Schiller just to change the representation. But when he retires, you can bet they'll hunt around the company and consider women very strongly to take his place.

Apple is the classic big ship turning slowly, but it's turning a lot faster than I would've thought possible.

What is there to compromise if I don't share you veneration of dead bone?

No, but they WON'T. You're asking for a tradeoff that Apple isn't willing to make.

They will never include a memory card slot. They're trying to REDUCE the number of things in the phone so they have more space for other stuff. They don't want a mechanical home button because there are too many failures after people press them for a million times. They've made some choices, and all of them are antithetical to adding a memory card slot.

256GB of storage on the base model? That's a bit of a pipe dream. I'd love it too, but there are precious few devices from any manufacturer that offer it at any tier.

They won't make a removable battery. Not ever. Don't ask for it, don't expect it. It takes up space, and is fundamentally against their design principles. Especially after today, it would make it a lot harder to waterproof (not impossible; I have waterproof cameras that have removable batteries--but it takes up a lot more space).

Their priorities are thin, light phones with as few ports as possible and an extremely locked down configuration that's easier to support. Anything that you ask for that runs counter to those priorities is doomed forever, and that's what I mean when I say Apple doesn't care about you. Your priorities are completely orthogonal to theirs. You want versatility and expandability, and those are perfectly good things to want, but you're barking up the wrong tree.

That's what OTHER people said. Phil Schiller clearly said that they removed it because it takes up space that they can use for other stuff, and the lightning port can carry audio. So they've removed the audio jack to provide more space for other components.

Waterproofing was the thing that pundits and /. commentators speculated it was about.

Apple doesn't care about you.

That's fine, they don't have to. Stop asking Apple for things if you don't want to buy their devices. The fact that YOU don't want their devices doesn't mean that other people don't. That the devices don't have these features doesn't mean that they're bad or deficient, merely that they don't meet your requirements. Your requirements are fine, and their phones are fine.

What I don't understand is how every post on /. about Apple's phones becomes a free for all for people to talk about all the things Apple has never done and will never do. Just accept that you're not in their target market and move on.

Or is it that you really ACTUALLY want to buy an Apple phone and be seen with an Apple phone, but you can't because of these sticking points? Like, you really wish that Tim Cook was the guy you were buying stuff from, and not Sundar Pichai?

Just give up and commit to Android. I'm sure you have one now, but none of us that follow Apple care what you think is important on an iPhone. I'm not saying this to be offensive, but seriously, your comments are just taking up space and I can't even filter you out by your score because some other Android user that has the same opinion of Apple is voting you up.

What do you mean 'pretend capitalism'? This is EXACTLY capitalism. They put out a product, and you buy it or don't. Someone will either service your need because they can make money at it or they won't. That's the PROBLEM with capitalism. People on the margins always get screwed.

Anyway, you don't have to buy earbuds or keep the ones in the box. You'll probably be able to sell them, and over-the-ear headphones will be sold that work with lightning/usb-c in short order, I'm sure. There are already bluetooth ones.

Basically, Apple's change shouldn't mean much to you. The headphone market is still going to be quite robust.

In June, wireless headphones started outselling wired ones. http://gizmodo.com/bluetooth-h...

The reality is that the writing is already on the wall. People don't like wires if they can help it. I switched to bluetooth headphones for training because it's a lot easier to do basically anything without a cable flopping around attaching my ears to a pocket.

Bluetooth has its own problems, though. It's easily disrupted by a sweaty body (ironically, since obviously I'm sweating most in the instance where I want them most), and I've had to come up with small hacks when I've got my phone tucked in my cycling jersey pocket, like bundling up some arm warmers so they've got a big gap to my body.

So if Apple has a new wireless standard that they want to throw at me, I'm all for it.

The only time I use wired headphones is at my desk, when my phone is on a dock with an audio out. So that even solves the charging and listening problem.

I get that wired headphones are cheap, but I reckon we'll see bargain-basement headphones being sold for lightning/usb-c ports any day now, or they'll come with 3 connectors in the box.

Aaaaand now there's a global recall on every single one.

I think it's a bit early to call the S7 or Note 7 the most rock solid phones--when I talk about durability, I mean that over a 2-4 year period, and these've only been out a few months/weeks. You may yet be right, but I still think you might be jumping the gun a little.

"When I'm not actually USING it" is what that should read. Sigh. :/

In this case, form is function--part of the function of a mobile phone is to be portable. I'm not saying that they shouldn't have been more careful with it--supposedly the 6s is less bendable, which means they could design it to be strong AND skinny, if they want--but part of what I want in my phone is for it to be as invisible to me as possible when I'm not actually carrying it.

Whether or not that meets your goal for 'function' is another question. I can easily see other people wanting a phone that's considerably more robust. With the thinnest case I could find, I've had my 6 for two years, dropped it many times and not had any breakage problems. (I do have a faint blue streak in the middle of my screen which Apple tells me may be due to excessive pressure on that spot, but as its cosmetic and not a functional problem, they won't do anything about it.)

We don't all have the same functionality goals. It's part of your job as a consumer to decide if your idea of function lines up with the manufacturer's.

(It's worth noting that sometimes form is exactly the function--jewellery and other fashion items and ornaments are a good example of this. Do not denigrate people that carry phones for a reason that also has to do with fashion; for them, that's ALSO part of its function. It's not up to anyone else to decide if that's a worthwhile use or not. Even nerds carry things for 'fashion' reasons--sometimes we pick something that's objectively the ugliest, bulkiest, whateverest item to telegraph that we're the nerdiest kid on the block to all the other nerds. There's nothing wrong with that either.)