So many questions:

Does that $1k ticket guarantee the opportunity to buy?
Can you get a refund if you don't buy?
Does the $1k toward your GPU purchase?

Or is this all just $1k price for a ticket to even go to GTC, and lucky you, you can buy a card at MSRP?

Known VPN services have identifiable server addresses that can be blocked. Instead, you can set up a cheap raspberry pi (or other) at your home and use an encrypted SSH connection to that [raspberry pi] from far away. Then turn on your SOCKS proxy (part of WiFi Details on Macintosh) and check to see that your IP address shows to the world you access as that of your raspberry pi. I do this all the time, including right now. It also helps to watch sports events.

Being pedantic, it is not. The original examples you gave were from an era of Apple long ago. I concede that the examples you gave in your last comment are more recent examples of "open" products/platforms.

Forgive me, I never intended to lie. But those old examples (BSD, Webkit, Darwin, CUPS) were from 20+ years ago, correct? (Being pedantic again, sorry.)

I was unaware of Apache Cassandra. I see it's a NoSQL implementation... it seems Apple is really into the NoSQL.

Apple is like many larger companies (like Microsoft, Oracle) with developers contributing to FOSS projects. This is a good thing. And I'm happy to be wrong that they are creating new open projects for the world... but the original conversation is about platforms and how Apple is/isn't making it easy to switch.

Okay, a few things here: 1) ARM is open to anyone who wants to purchase access to it. It's not fully open, but that's not too far off. 2) Apple's ARM Implementation isn't my issue. Arm is great for the mobile sector! More of these high-performance, low cost, cool and efficient processors, please! 3) And? Apple's various products that are "open" (Let's take two dramatically different examples; software like Swift and hardware like the Apple Watch for examples) still bring you back to Apple hardware. If you're going to be developing something in Swift, you're probably targeting Apple first. If you're using an Apple Watch, your only choice is to get an iPhone.

The last thing I wanted to do is practice denialism. That's unhealthy for everybody.

You last that LONG!? Sm:)e.

All the examples you just gave were the OLD apple. None of the projects you mentioned were instigated in the last 20 years? The current apple does want you to lock-in with their ecosystem.

Sure, they have new "open" platforms... but those are all tied back to Apple hardware.

The only thing they have done recently that is "open" is the new acceptance of RCS... And they didn't want to do that.

I truly believe that Steve Jobs would have had Apple be a more open platform. He would have still done whatever he could to have dominated whatever market they are in, but he would have also been adopting more open standards as they came up. The old apple would be partnering with the other major companies in these fields to adopt and enhance the existing standards. They could have done this in VR, AI, etc. Instead, they look to do it all themselves so they can own it. That's how I see it, anyways.

You are correct on all accounts here. Apple makes GREAT hardware. AND, they support it for a significant amount of time. This makes the used/refurbished iPhone market VERY GOOD and inexpensive for the consumer.

Not many other phone makers have that mix of high quality hardware, long term support, and enough market adoption to make a healthy used market.

You're happy where you are. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm happy for you, and I hope everybody else is too.

But moving from Apple to Android isn't as hard as it used to be. For a while it was a PAIN. On the reverse side, it was EASY to switch to iPhone.

Because it was HARD to go one way and EASY to go the other... guess which side is usually what most people choose?

And, remember... that's fine! Good on Apple making the transition to their phone easy.

New UI isn't the problem. Even Apple has changed their UI enough that it doesn't look much like the original iPhone/iPad... It looks more like Android's Material Design with every one of their updates.

The App lock in is the next big thing to be fixed here.
  - Apps must be purchased multiple times if you have both devices (like me, I own an Android phone and an iPad.)
  - Many apps are not on both platforms. There are many reasons for this, but I don't like it when Apple Arcade makes games exclusive to Apple Devices, when they could be on Android as well. Sometimes the "development costs vs return" equation makes a port not worth the investment... I don't like that argument, but that doesn't mean it's a false argument.

I'm reminded that this Vendor Lock-in issue was resolved recently in an adjacent market segment: Purchased videos are (mostly) cross platform thanks to Movies Anywhere. But I don't know how this came to be... did all parties volunteer to join this program? Were they required to? My understanding is that not all videos (Lionsgate, if memory serves) are on that cross-platform gateway. But something like Movies Anywhere (Apps Everywhere) that made it easy to access your apps no mater which platform you're on would be a huge re-balancing of the mobile computing market.

And now that we have RCS finally effectively removing the iMessage stranglehold, who knows what might come in the future. Bring back Firefox OS!

I have lots of thoughts... Since you're taking my [snark] seriously, I'll discuss:

Apple on Foldables - Apple might never make a foldable iPhone. They like their glass screens too much, and all the foldable phones are still basically plastic screens. Now, they might make a "Foldable" that has two glass screens that perfectly line up for a "One Screen" experience. (Two screens that when the device opens, the screens are perceptively a single screen. No seam.) That's something I could see them doing.

Why My Snark - I was mostly teasing the idea that "Apple isn't as big a deal as everybody thinks they are" assumption the headline of the article is projecting. Apple makes amazing hardware. They really do. And with the current iPhone marketplace, if you want a cheap phone, a good used/refurbished iPhone can be a good option for a user. It's hard for Android (or any other phone) to compete.

The Vendor Lock-In Problem - __This is the problem.__ But it cannot be fixed easily. The only fix is a standard that allows me with my Android purchases to access them on an iPhone, and vice versa... but that'll not be easy... the app makers like the fact that they essentially get to double dip... Want that copy of "Mini Metro" on your iPad to work on your Android phone? Be prepared to pay twice.

How fix this with standards - There are only two ways to create a standard: Top Down or Bottom Up. Top Down is an authority of some kind requiring that all parties comply. So something like US or EU laws... Bottom Up is something that everybody naturally adopts... like how PDFs are now a standard. I'm thinking that Top Down would be the only way we could get rid of Vendor Lock-in on these devices.

[snark]
What? iPhone purchasers upgrade their iPhones? It's not all Android users converting over? No way!

Also, it's obvious that Android has 90% of the marketshare in the US. Right? Apple is the little guy here...

Don't forget, they invented Apple Intelligence. All those other AI things are imitators. Apple's Geniuses are such amazing innovators!

Maybe next year they'll release a foldable device... And a round smartwatch... and less expensive AR glasses... and the M4 Chip!
[/snark]

Oh, oops. Sorry, I left the snark on too long.

Thanks.

"Shrink to Fit"

Some quick math here:

Assuming it's all laptops, if $20m was lost, and it was 77,505 Laptops, that's an average of $258.05 per lost laptop. That's about the price of a decent Chromebook with licensing.

According to public records, Chicago Public Schools has about 330,000 students. That's a 23.5% loss rate, if each student has 1 laptop. That's not good.

---Switching hats to give my opinion---

The 1:1 Laptop idea has it's pros and cons.

The biggest pro is that teachers can use the technology to reach students in the new digital mediums such as online testing, remote classes, specialized software for specific courses. And the teacher will know that every student has access to the tech.

The biggest con is the cost. Other cons, like training, poor implementation, and configuration are an issue as well, but the cost of fixing/replacing devices is huge.

My suggested solutions: Either A) return to a non-1:1 model. Doing this is to abandon the benefits. or B) reduce the costs somehow. Students will always be hard on equipment. It would take a real culture of taking care of the equipment to reduce the loss, but if the devices were $100 or less, it would be easier to handle. Seeing how Chromebooks haven't really improved much in the past decade, I don't see why they can't be made cheaper. No Touchscreens. No fancy cameras. Keep it bare-bones and somewhat rugged.

This is the answer.

Aren't Bards "Jacks of all trades but masters of none?"

That sounds like an AI chatbot to me.