Well. Apple reuses the branding. The MagSafe chargers for Mac do have indicator lights, while the MagSafe chargers for iPhone do not.
The magnetic chargers for Apple Watch also do not have lights. Neither do the USB-C cables for iPads and AirPods. I assume the newest AirPod cases still have charging lights though.
Ooh, “Your Apple Watch is fully charged.” notification on iPhone, that’s nice too. (Can sometimes just charge while showering/etc. and not think about it though.)
It's hard to discuss things online because the dumb people will make stuff up, then when you correct it they disappear but leave the wrong info up, confusing even more dumb people. Like an idiot-tsunami growing ever larger
I've found the "Copy text from image" menu command to be useful from time to time, and the features I'm not interested in seemed easy to turn off/dismiss/ignore?
> It’s not a big enough slice for them to want to chase.
Typical strat for them is not to be first with an innovation, but to wait and work out the kinks enough that they can convince people that the tradeoffs are well worth making. Apple wouldn't be chasing that existing slice, they'd be trying to entice a larger share of their customers to upgrade faster.
It's really difficult because many of the task types we use AI for are those that are linguistically tied to concepts of human actions and cognition. Most of our convenient language use implies that AI are thinking people.
If the closed fork functionality is superior enough to make the original de facto obsolete then the users have already collectively decided that the tradeoff is worth it.
And if the original can't compete it means the additional functionality was only going to exist because the financial model of the closed fork could pay for it.
> And if the original can't compete it means the additional functionality was only going to exist because the financial model of the closed fork could pay for it.
This completely disregards the fact that the "financial model of the closed fork" explicitly chose to build upon the permissively licensed original.
If the company chooses to build upon free software, they should be obligated to give back to the community from which they leech. Otherwise, they should just build their own thing from scratch with all the money they've hoarded, and keep it closed.
> If the closed fork functionality is superior enough to make the original de facto obsolete then the users have already collectively decided that the tradeoff is worth it.
Users cannot be trusted to make their own decisions about these kinds of things for the same reason that corporations cannot be trusted to be environmental stewards and children cannot be trusted to select a dinner menu or file taxes.
> If the closed fork functionality is superior enough to make the original de facto obsolete then the users have already collectively decided that the tradeoff is worth it.
I'm afraid you did. Users are lazy, and IE and Java on Windows are great examples.
If I am reading their financial statement correctly, they have about 3 years of runway.
$500M/year expenses, $65M/year revenue other than search deals, $45M/year interest on savings and $1300M assets.
The magnetic chargers for Apple Watch also do not have lights. Neither do the USB-C cables for iPads and AirPods. I assume the newest AirPod cases still have charging lights though.
reply