In article <t3gu3g$r7r$1@dont-email.me>, Jan Panteltje
<pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Apple was fake from the beginning, buying the name 'Apple' from the Beatles

the name apple came from steve jobs having lived on an apple orchard
and it was alphabetically before atari, his previous employer.

the beatles sued because of apple records, however, apple was not in
the music business, thus no conflict.

however, several years later, macs were being used for music (and
video), so the beatles sued again, this time with a settlement.

> Steve Jobs went on (later) about Apple's superior processors used for nuclear
> research testing.

and?

> I demonstrated to someone that a x86 was faster... they went Intel
> Jobs then also changed to Intel

not quite.

powerpc was faster than intel, however motorola/ibm's long term goals
were not where apple wanted to go. intel was, so they switched.

intel has had a *lot* of problems in recent years, a major reason why
apple is transitioning to their own processors, which are both faster
and vastly more power-efficient than intel.

> He was a very good salesman.

yes, he was.

> But if you take the trouble to google a bit, then you will see, that even
> recently, Apple does a lot of dirty tricks

no they don't. the battery issue was to address unexpected sudden
shutdowns due to aging batteries that were unable to supply the same
current they could when new, something that affects all batteries.

what apple did was limit only peak demands (not the same as throttling)
to avoid such shutdowns, *extending* the useful life of the device, the
very opposite of what the lawsuits claim. unfortunately, sometimes it's
cheaper to settle a lawsuit than litigate it.

android device makers have the same battery issue, also with sudden
shutdowns, resulting in numerous lawsuits.

<https://9to5google.com/2021/06/28/more-settlements-are-being-paid-out-i
n-nexus-6p-lawsuit/>
The Nexus 6P was ultimately a flawed device that helped pave the way
for the Google Pixel line. The problems mounted with severe battery
issues plaguing owners (myself included), which fueled a class-action
lawsuit against Google and Huawei filed back in 2017. Settlements
from this lawsuit have slowly trickled through, with the first round
of payments being sent to Nexus 6P owners in early 2020.

In article <t3h9rd$c3j$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> What makes no difference is whether the A/D and D/A for wired headphones
> are inside the phone or inside the Lightning or USB-C dongle.

goalpost movement. the location isn't the issue. it's the *quality* of
the audio and also the reliability from a more robust connector.

> There is
> no difference in sound quality (unless you've purchased a junky
> after-market dongle).

or more commonly, a *better* d/a converter than whatever fits inside a
phone.

> But there are multiple differences in sound quality between wired
> headphones and Bluetooth headphones, depending on the phone and the
> headphones.

there is no difference in sound quality. the limiting factor are the
transducers in the headphones, not the method it's connected.

> When using Bluetooth headphones and watching video, there is often a
> perceptible delay between the video and the audio, depending on both the
> phone and the headphones. For music, a few milliseconds of delay doesn't
> matter but when watching videos it does.

no, because apple synchronizes the audio and video so that doesn't
happen.

> On Android devices, you can use the higher quality aptX HD or aptX
> Adaptive codecs to mostly solve this issue.

with ios devices, the multiple conversions can be skipped by sending
aac from the sound file directly to the headphones, with one single
conversion to uncompressed audio done in the headphones themselves.

In article <t3hbfe$npc$1@dont-email.me>, AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:

>
> Ditto my recent Chrome OS tablet purchase. It too has only one port
> (USB-C). No power supply, no earphone, and no dongle included.

yet you don't hear anyone complaining. only when apple does it.

> Welcome
> to the new world... (Though I didn't miss the PS since I've got a bag of
> them.)

exactly why they're no longer included.

On 2022-04-17 1:37 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 16/04/2022 18:53, Alan wrote:
>> On 2022-04-16 3:55 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 16/04/2022 11:41, nospam wrote:
>>>> In article <t3ds8l$1bvi$1@gioia.aioe.org>, alister
>>>> <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
>>>>> technology
>>>>> company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change
>>>>> every 6
>>>>> months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
>>>>> simply
>>>>> must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
>>>>
>>>> that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
>>>
>>> Its demonstrably true.
>>>
>>> As it is of all consumer product companies. Sales are everything, no
>>> matter what the reason for them, and consumers are by their very
>>> nature less sophisticated buyers, for whom brand image is usually far
>>> more relevant than performance or total lifetime cost.
>>
>> Is that all consumers...
>>
>> ...except you?
>>
>> You're clever enough to see through it, right?
>>
> Yes. I was lucky enough to spend most of my life selling and making
> products for professional and industrial users.
>
> I learnt to see the difference.
>
>
>
>

Riiiiiiight.

You're SPECIAL!

On 2022-04-17 1:38 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 16/04/2022 19:31, Alan wrote:
>> On 2022-04-16 12:46 a.m., alister wrote:
>>> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:36:37 +0100, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real I/O on a
>>>>> PC.
>>>>> Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> Apple is overpriced crap.
>>>>
>>>> I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation...
>>>>
>>>> The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer
>>>> electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer
>>>> electronics)
>>>> gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
>>>>
>>>> It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which don't
>>>> get
>>>> (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
>>>>
>>>> HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet
>>>> Apple's
>>>> marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none).
>>>>
>>>> HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more and more
>>>> functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive over
>>>> time?
>>>
>>> the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a technology
>>> company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change every 6
>>> months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
>>> simply
>>> must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
>>
>> What utterly, patent bullshit.
>>
>> They are clearly a technology company...
>>
>> ...and a very successful one.
>
> Who told you that, then?

I learned it from years and years of experience.

On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
>> Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the way
>> we say you will use it.
>
> And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
>
> No apple based brower supports webm for example
>
>
>

Wow.

Utterly wrong.

Using Safari on my Mac, went here:

<https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>

'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of
playing WebM Videos.'

The video played fine.

On 2022-04-17 4:34 a.m., Jan Panteltje wrote:
> On a sunny day (Sun, 17 Apr 2022 06:53:53 -0400) it happened nospam
> <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in <170420220653534903%nospam@nospam.invalid>:
>
>> In article <t3go74$sa$1@gioia.aioe.org>, alister
>> <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> What specific parts of the "mentality & ethos" do you find
>>>>>> objectionable?
>>>>> Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the
>>>>> way we say you will use it.
>>>>
>>>> So you mean like literally thousands of other companies?
>>> No
>>> Must other companies don't give a f**k what you do with a product once you
>>> have purchased it (unless you try to claim under warranty for damage you
>>> have caused of course)
>>
>> apple doesn't care what you do with a product once it's been purchased.
>>
>> also, they will sometimes repair customer damage for free. it's not
>> always going to happen, but it's certainly a possibility.
>>
>> i know someone who bought an iphone and dropped it shortly after,
>> causing the display to crack. he went to the apple store and told them
>> what happened, that he was a clumsy oaf and it was entirely his fault,
>> wanting to know how much it would cost to fix it. they said 'no
>> charge'.
>
> Apple was fake from the beginning, buying the name 'Apple' from the Beatles

Wrong. Apple was chosen for the company name and only much, much later,
when Apple developed technology to play and make music did Apple Records
object.

> Steve Jobs went on (later) about Apple's superior processors used for nuclear research testing.
> I demonstrated to someone that a x86 was faster... they went Intel

When PowerPC development slowed, they decided to change to Intel.

But you ignore the technical wizardry that let Motorola 68XXX software
run on PowerPC and then later PowerPC software run on Intel...

....and then designing their own processors which are orders of magnitude
more efficient than Intel.

> Jobs then also changed to Intel
> He was a very good salesman.
> But if you take the trouble to google a bit, then you will see, that even recently, Apple does a lot of dirty tricks
> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/11/apple-settles-with-states-for-113m-over-iphone-battery-throttling/
>
> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/03/apple-fixes-ios-15-4-battery-drain-issue-with-software-update/?comments=1
> read the comments

On 2022-04-16 3:11 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> alister wrote:
>
>> Yep it is not just apple, others have seen that it can generate an
>> additional revenue stream & have adopted the same strategy
>
> What the iTrolls (Alan Baker) and iKooks (nospam) won't tell you is that
> Apple is perhaps the finest marketing organization on the planet.
>
> The iTrolls (Alan) & iKooks (nospam) blindly defend everything Apple does.
> To the death.
>
> Apple spends almost nothing in R&D compared to similarly sized companies in
> high tech, but boy oh boy does Apple outspend everyone else on marketing.

Apple spends more than only 4 or 5 other companies.

>
> Hence any company would _love_ to be able to follow in Apple's
> footsteps, as you astutely noted.
>
> To your point, notice recent estimates showed Apple made tens of
> billions of
> dollars by removing the accessories from the iPhone 12 & iPhone 13 boxes.
>
> <https://www.gizmochina.com/2022/03/14/apple-reportedly-6-billion-removing-charger-earpods-box/>
>
> <https://www.phonearena.com/news/apple-saved-billions-removing-accessories-from-boxes_id139005>
>
> <https://techstory.in/apple-reportedly-saved-in-billions-with-removing-chargers-earpods-from-box/>
>
> <https://screenrant.com/apple-saved-billions-removing-chargers-boxes/>
> etc.
>
> Who wouldn't want a piece of that pie which Apple pioneered for them?

Which is all just echo chambering an article that actually only says
they could have made that much if they sold absolutely everyone who
bought a phone a pair of earbuds and a charger.

On 2022-04-16 3:59 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
>>> the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
>>> technology company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of
>>> change every 6 months & your customer base will buy everything again
>>> because they simply must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
>>
>> that's nothing more than the usual bashing, and is demonstrably false.
>
> While you iKooks defend everything Apple does to the death, he's right.
>
> The facts show Apple is a MARKETING powerhouse. Not an R&D powerhouse.
>
> *Does it surprise you Apple spends less in R&D than anyone in high tech?*
> <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/STrAkx09VYk/m/4Qr_Iuq5AwAJ>
>

It doesn't surprise me that you'll repeat that lie.

On 2022-04-17, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> there is no difference in sound quality. the limiting factor are the
> transducers in the headphones, not the method it's connected.

There's an interesting point to raise here. Cheap bluetooth headphones
are going to be worse than cheap wired headphones. Many cheap
Bluetooth implementations have terrible jitter on the transceiver and
offer no way to compensate for transmission latency. These days as
Bluetooth stacks mature and there's simple and cheap IP to
"copy-paste" into designs, this is less of an issue, but for a good
while the bottom of the market in wired headphones was a lot better
than the bottom of the market in bluetooth headphones because of
jitter and dropped packets.

I realize this is a pedantic comparison as we're basically comparing
crap with crap. Unfortunately anyone who has been cursed with cheap
bluetooth headphones in the past may think that issues with cheap
bluetooth headphones plague more expensive/more recent bluetooth
headphone designs which is where this sentiment comes from.

I had a Bluetooth to magnetic casette adapter in a car years ago and
any time the car got too hot the thing would stutter like no
tomorrow. But I was young, I didn't have much money, and I bought the
cheapest thing I could find.

In article <XR37K.597859$mF2.288980@fx11.iad>, meff <email@example.com>
wrote:

> > there is no difference in sound quality. the limiting factor are the
> > transducers in the headphones, not the method it's connected.
>
> There's an interesting point to raise here. Cheap bluetooth headphones
> are going to be worse than cheap wired headphones. Many cheap
> Bluetooth implementations have terrible jitter on the transceiver and
> offer no way to compensate for transmission latency. These days as
> Bluetooth stacks mature and there's simple and cheap IP to
> "copy-paste" into designs, this is less of an issue, but for a good
> while the bottom of the market in wired headphones was a lot better
> than the bottom of the market in bluetooth headphones because of
> jitter and dropped packets.
>
> I realize this is a pedantic comparison as we're basically comparing
> crap with crap. Unfortunately anyone who has been cursed with cheap
> bluetooth headphones in the past may think that issues with cheap
> bluetooth headphones plague more expensive/more recent bluetooth
> headphone designs which is where this sentiment comes from.

it's not pedantic. there definitely are problems with cheap bluetooth
headphones, but that's because they're cheap, not because it's
bluetooth.

high end bluetooth headphones are comparable to wired solutions. there
might be minor differences seen in lab measurements but it's nothing
anyone is going to hear.

a bigger factor is the quality of the source material, which is not
always the best quality.

> I had a Bluetooth to magnetic casette adapter in a car years ago and
> any time the car got too hot the thing would stutter like no
> tomorrow. But I was young, I didn't have much money, and I bought the
> cheapest thing I could find.

you're not alone in that.

On 17/04/2022 21:15, Alan wrote:
> On 2022-04-17 1:38 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 16/04/2022 19:31, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2022-04-16 12:46 a.m., alister wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:36:37 +0100, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real I/O
>>>>>> on a
>>>>>> PC.
>>>>>> Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apple is overpriced crap.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation...
>>>>>
>>>>> The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer
>>>>> electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer
>>>>> electronics)
>>>>> gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which
>>>>> don't get
>>>>> (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
>>>>>
>>>>> HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet
>>>>> Apple's
>>>>> marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none).
>>>>>
>>>>> HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more and more
>>>>> functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive over
>>>>> time?
>>>>
>>>> the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
>>>> technology
>>>> company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change
>>>> every 6
>>>> months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
>>>> simply
>>>> must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
>>>
>>> What utterly, patent bullshit.
>>>
>>> They are clearly a technology company...
>>>
>>> ...and a very successful one.
>>
>> Who told you that, then?
>
> I learned it from years and years of experience.

Experience of what?
Apple marketing?

--
"A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight
and understanding".

Marshall McLuhan

On 17/04/2022 21:20, Alan wrote:
> On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
>>> Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the
>>> way
>>> we say you will use it.
>>
>> And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
>>
>> No apple based brower supports webm for example
>>
>>
>>
>
> Wow.
>
> Utterly wrong.
>
> Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
>
> <https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
>
> 'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of
> playing WebM Videos.'
>
>
> The video played fine.

no chance with vorbis/VP8

--
"A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight
and understanding".

Marshall McLuhan

On 17/04/2022 21:20, Alan wrote:
> On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
>>> Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product the
>>> way
>>> we say you will use it.
>>
>> And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
>>
>> No apple based brower supports webm for example
>>
>>
>>
>
> Wow.
>
> Utterly wrong.
>
> Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
>
> <https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
>
> 'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of
> playing WebM Videos.'
>
>
I see that it only took them 11 year to add Vorbis/VP8 and it became
available at the end of last year.

> The video played fine.

--
Karl Marx said religion is the opium of the people.
But Marxism is the crack cocaine.

On 18/04/2022 10:42, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 17/04/2022 21:20, Alan wrote:
>> On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
>>>> Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product
>>>> the way
>>>> we say you will use it.
>>>
>>> And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
>>>
>>> No apple based brower supports webm for example
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Wow.
>>
>> Utterly wrong.
>>
>> Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
>>
>> <https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
>>
>> 'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of
>> playing WebM Videos.'
>>
>>
> I see that it only took them 11 year to add Vorbis/VP8 and it became
> available at  the end of last year.
>
>> The video played fine.
>
>
FYI

"Currently available as an option in the Experimental WebKit Features
section of Safari's advanced settings, WebM Web Audio and the related
WebM MSE parser are two parts of the wider WebM audiovisual media file
format developed by Google.

An open-source initiative, WebM presents a royalty-free alternative to
common web video streaming technology and serves as a container for the
VP8 and VP9 video codecs. As it relates to Safari, WebM Web Audio
provides support for the Vorbis and Opus audio codecs.

Code uncovered by 9to5Mac reveals the WebM audio codec should be enabled
by default going forward, suggesting that Apple will officially adopt
the standard when iOS 15 sees release.

Apple added support for the WebM video codec on Mac when a second macOS
Big Sur 11.3 beta was issued in February. The video portion of WebM has
yet to see implementation on iOS, but that could soon change with the
adoption of WebM's audio assets.

WebM dates back to 2010, but Apple has been reluctant to bake the format
into its flagship operating systems. Late co-founder Steve Jobs once
called the format "a mess" that "wasn't ready for prime time."

As AppleInsider noted when WebM hit macOS, Apple might be angling to
support high-resolution playback from certain streaming services like
YouTube, which rely on VP9 to stream 4K content. The validation of WebM
Web Audio is a step in that direction.

Apple is expected to launch iOS 15 this fall alongside a slate of new
iPhone and Apple Watch models.

Read on AppleInsider"

https://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/223312/apple-adds-webm-web-audio-support-to-safari-in-latest-ios-15-beta

So you can only view webm video using the uber latest experimental
version of IOS/MacOS

--
"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social
conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the
windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) "

Alan Sokal

In article <t3jbq9$8hn$5@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> I see that it only took them 11 year to add Vorbis/VP8 and it became
> available at the end of last year.

because there literally is no demand for it. the number of web sites
that offer content in obscure formats is almost zero.

there are many other features to be done that are *much* higher on the
list.

In article <t3jcar$8hn$6@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>
> "Currently available as an option in the Experimental WebKit Features
> section of Safari's advanced settings, WebM Web Audio and the related
> WebM MSE parser are two parts of the wider WebM audiovisual media file
> format developed by Google.
>
> An open-source initiative, WebM presents a royalty-free alternative to
> common web video streaming technology and serves as a container for the
> VP8 and VP9 video codecs. As it relates to Safari, WebM Web Audio
> provides support for the Vorbis and Opus audio codecs.
>
> Code uncovered by 9to5Mac reveals the WebM audio codec should be enabled
> by default going forward, suggesting that Apple will officially adopt
> the standard when iOS 15 sees release.
>
> Apple added support for the WebM video codec on Mac when a second macOS
> Big Sur 11.3 beta was issued in February. The video portion of WebM has
> yet to see implementation on iOS, but that could soon change with the
> adoption of WebM's audio assets.
>
> WebM dates back to 2010, but Apple has been reluctant to bake the format
> into its flagship operating systems. Late co-founder Steve Jobs once
> called the format "a mess" that "wasn't ready for prime time."
>
> As AppleInsider noted when WebM hit macOS, Apple might be angling to
> support high-resolution playback from certain streaming services like
> YouTube, which rely on VP9 to stream 4K content. The validation of WebM
> Web Audio is a step in that direction.
>
> Apple is expected to launch iOS 15 this fall alongside a slate of new
> iPhone and Apple Watch models.
>
> Read on AppleInsider"
>
>
> https://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/223312/apple-adds-webm-web-audio-support-to-safari-in-latest-ios-15-beta
>
> So you can only view webm video using the uber latest experimental
> version of IOS/MacOS

read it again.

from your link:
Apple added support for the WebM video codec on Mac when a second
macOS Big Sur 11.3 beta was issued in February.

big sur was released in 2020.

In article <t3jbld$8hn$4@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> >>
> >> No apple based brower supports webm for example
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Wow.
> >
> > Utterly wrong.
> >
> > Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
> >
> > <https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
> >
> > 'Just try it below ­ if you see the video, your browser is capable of
> > playing WebM Videos.'
> >
> >
> > The video played fine.
>
> no chance with vorbis/VP8

there the number of web sites that offer content in any of those
obscure formats is almost zero. there is literally no demand for it.

there is no reason to add functionality that few people want when there
are numerous other features on the list that are in much greater demand
and will benefit far more people.

no product can do everything, nor is that even a desirable goal.

On 2022-04-18 2:39 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 17/04/2022 21:15, Alan wrote:
>> On 2022-04-17 1:38 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 16/04/2022 19:31, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2022-04-16 12:46 a.m., alister wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:36:37 +0100, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real I/O
>>>>>>> on a
>>>>>>> PC.
>>>>>>> Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apple is overpriced crap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer
>>>>>> electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer
>>>>>> electronics)
>>>>>> gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which
>>>>>> don't get
>>>>>> (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet
>>>>>> Apple's
>>>>>> marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more and
>>>>>> more
>>>>>> functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive over
>>>>>> time?
>>>>>
>>>>> the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
>>>>> technology
>>>>> company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change
>>>>> every 6
>>>>> months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
>>>>> simply
>>>>> must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
>>>>
>>>> What utterly, patent bullshit.
>>>>
>>>> They are clearly a technology company...
>>>>
>>>> ...and a very successful one.
>>>
>>> Who told you that, then?
>>
>> I learned it from years and years of experience.
>
> Experience of what?

Working, selling, supporting Macs and PCs for more than 30 years.

On 2022-04-18 2:39 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 17/04/2022 21:20, Alan wrote:
>> On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
>>>> Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product
>>>> the way
>>>> we say you will use it.
>>>
>>> And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
>>>
>>> No apple based brower supports webm for example
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Wow.
>>
>> Utterly wrong.
>>
>> Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
>>
>> <https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
>>
>> 'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of
>> playing WebM Videos.'
>>
>>
>> The video played fine.
>
> no chance with vorbis/VP8

And the goalposts move!

On 2022-04-18 2:42 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 17/04/2022 21:20, Alan wrote:
>> On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
>>>> Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product
>>>> the way
>>>> we say you will use it.
>>>
>>> And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
>>>
>>> No apple based brower supports webm for example
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Wow.
>>
>> Utterly wrong.
>>
>> Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
>>
>> <https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
>>
>> 'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of
>> playing WebM Videos.'
>>
>>
> I see that it only took them 11 year to add Vorbis/VP8 and it became
> available at  the end of last year.

So your first post was just your ignorance!

>
>> The video played fine.
>
>

On 2022-04-18 2:51 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 18/04/2022 10:42, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 17/04/2022 21:20, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2022-04-17 1:41 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 16/04/2022 20:28, alister wrote:
>>>>> Apple have very much an attitude of you will only use our product
>>>>> the way
>>>>> we say you will use it.
>>>>
>>>> And only on the protocols they sell themselves.
>>>>
>>>> No apple based brower supports webm for example
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wow.
>>>
>>> Utterly wrong.
>>>
>>> Using Safari on my Mac, went here:
>>>
>>> <https://www.webmfiles.org/demo-files/>
>>>
>>> 'Just try it below – if you see the video, your browser is capable of
>>> playing WebM Videos.'
>>>
>>>
>> I see that it only took them 11 year to add Vorbis/VP8 and it became
>> available at  the end of last year.
>>
>>> The video played fine.
>>
>>
> FYI
>
> "Currently available as an option in the Experimental WebKit Features
> section of Safari's advanced settings, WebM Web Audio and the related
> WebM MSE parser are two parts of the wider WebM audiovisual media file
> format developed by Google.
>
> An open-source initiative, WebM presents a royalty-free alternative to
> common web video streaming technology and serves as a container for the
> VP8 and VP9 video codecs. As it relates to Safari, WebM Web Audio
> provides support for the Vorbis and Opus audio codecs.
>
> Code uncovered by 9to5Mac reveals the WebM audio codec should be enabled
> by default going forward, suggesting that Apple will officially adopt
> the standard when iOS 15 sees release.
>
> Apple added support for the WebM video codec on Mac when a second macOS
> Big Sur 11.3 beta was issued in February. The video portion of WebM has
> yet to see implementation on iOS, but that could soon change with the
> adoption of WebM's audio assets.
>
> WebM dates back to 2010, but Apple has been reluctant to bake the format
> into its flagship operating systems. Late co-founder Steve Jobs once
> called the format "a mess" that "wasn't ready for prime time."
>
> As AppleInsider noted when WebM hit macOS, Apple might be angling to
> support high-resolution playback from certain streaming services like
> YouTube, which rely on VP9 to stream 4K content. The validation of WebM
> Web Audio is a step in that direction.
>
> Apple is expected to launch iOS 15 this fall alongside a slate of new
> iPhone and Apple Watch models.
>
> Read on AppleInsider"
>
>
> https://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/223312/apple-adds-webm-web-audio-support-to-safari-in-latest-ios-15-beta
>
>
> So you can only view webm video using the uber latest experimental
> version of IOS/MacOS
>
>

'August 10, 2021 9:22PM'

On 18/04/2022 18:20, Alan wrote:
> On 2022-04-18 2:39 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 17/04/2022 21:15, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2022-04-17 1:38 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 16/04/2022 19:31, Alan wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-04-16 12:46 a.m., alister wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 08:36:37 +0100, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a PCI par port card in one of my PCs its the only real
>>>>>>>> I/O on a
>>>>>>>> PC.
>>>>>>>> Now with raspi we have GPIO, a BIG win!!!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Apple is overpriced crap.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree, and, more to the point of an educated astute observation...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The commonality of the raspi with almost _all_ other common consumer
>>>>>>> electronics is that every year the raspi (and most consumer
>>>>>>> electronics)
>>>>>>> gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's only the immensely hugely marketed electronic items which
>>>>>>> don't get
>>>>>>> (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> HINT #1: Apple spends the lowest of all of high tech in R&D, yet
>>>>>>> Apple's
>>>>>>> marketing budget is likely the largest of all high tech (bar none).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> HINT #2: Guess why Apple products (which every year lose more and
>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>> functionality) get (a) worse, (b) faster, and (c) more expensive
>>>>>>> over
>>>>>>> time?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the reason is actually quite simple Apple are NOT primarily a
>>>>>> technology
>>>>>> company, they are a fashion house. change for the sake of change
>>>>>> every 6
>>>>>> months & your customer base will buy everything again because they
>>>>>> simply
>>>>>> must have the latest model or die of embarrassment
>>>>>
>>>>> What utterly, patent bullshit.
>>>>>
>>>>> They are clearly a technology company...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and a very successful one.
>>>>
>>>> Who told you that, then?
>>>
>>> I learned it from years and years of experience.
>>
>> Experience of what?
>
> Working, selling, supporting Macs and PCs for more than 30 years.

So what?

--
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the
urge to rule it.”
– H. L. Mencken

nospam wrote:

> then get usb-c or lightning headphones, such as the ones that were
> included in the box of the iphone you supposedly have.

The intelligent people here will note that Apple removed basic functionality
in three phases so as to hide the facts from the ignorati like nospam is.

1. First the iPhone had the industry standard 3.5mm jack on the device.
2. Then Apple _removed_ the functionality - but supplanted it in the box.
3. Then Apple removed that crutch so that you'd now have to buy it back.

Clever Apple, steadily removing functionality so you have to buy it back.
--
You can't make those ungodly profit margins off an intelligent customer.

nospam wrote:

>> And the waterproof argument is a bit far fetched listen with phone upside down in the shower?
>> Dive with it listening underwater to the earplugs?
>
> it's not far fetched at all.

It's a stretch to claim that all phones with the industry standard 3.5mm
jack can't have the same water resistance ratings of phones that lack it.

> an analog headphone jack is literally a hole in the phone where liquid
> and dirt can ingress.

While that's true, what Apple did was remove industry standard basic 3.5mm
hardware functionality solely for the purpose of making you buy it back.

> although it's possible to make it water resistant, that is a lot more
> difficult than if there was no hole at all, which should be obvious.

Tell us nospam, did Apple pass on savings to the customer that you speak of?

In reality, what you're claiming is Apple's design team sucks at design.
--
We knew that. Apple isn't an R&D powerhouse. Apple is all MARKETING.