What is unacceptable is how these technology companies steal the IP of collective humanity, gate keep it and force us to pay a subscription service to use it against each other in a perverted downward spiral powered by capitalist game theory.
The neoluddite revolution is forming, have no doubts about that.
Im convinced its all planned to force users to upgrade. The “7 years of updates” selling point is just a trojan horse to install a newer iOS that makes the product run like garbage.
Id honestly prefer never to update than get these bogus “security updates, features and fixes”
Maybe they can fix Messages from bugging out all the time. Apple software has gone down the drain. I don’t want a million new features I just want the ones that make a phone a phone actually work 99.5% of the time
I ended up having to "delete messages from icloud" on all devices, escalate to support after they weren't deleted 45 days later (the UI shows -15 days in that scenario), reenable sync and then see it still failing to complete a Sync Now, redisable sync and re-delete messages in cloud, wait another 45 days, and then ask them to escalate to the iCloud backend team to run a purge on their end of just my messages in icloud records. It worked, but I don't know if they've had enough time for whatever corruption they found to be patched into their automated ops-repair/cleanup processes (and they wouldn't tell me if I asked), it's only been a couple months.
Germany never thought it would be in the current situation - decaying health care, pension system, cornerstone industry in decline, lack of digitalization, the list goes on. Massive reforms are needed, action is needed, but there is too much inertia in the system to change anything quickly.
Smaller countries like Estonia have the ability to be much more nimble.
Fun fact, the Bundestag is one of the most representative parliaments in the world thanks to MMP. Is the executive dysfunctional? Is it the federal split into 16 tiny states causing this?
If it was just a matter of size, similar/larger countries would be in the same state, and at least one of your smaller states would get ahead right?
Yes somehow they believed the 90s continue despite zero public investment. They talk about the dangers of debt for future generations, but they are silent about the infrastructure debt they are saddling their children with by not investing on any serious scale.
> This is a moral failure of the highest order and it underscores, for me at least, that most of these faux-progressives' activism is purely performative.
It is worse than that. Faux-progressives will also play into antisemitic conspiratorial tropes that this was all perfectly and precisely planned.
I switched to a T480 from a crappy macbook pro 2017. I enjoyed the switch to use linux fulltime but ultimately I was let down by the Intel processor that would throttle very badly. Compiling code was a nightmare. Ive since switched back to the M1 macbook pro which I plan to keep as long as possible and probably switch to linux when macos inevitably decides my hardware is too old to support. I would love to have a non-apple future, though.
Agreed although it's getting to the point that other companies are now using Starlink to provide other services so I've often used Starlink (even if indirectly) without realising it.
For example I go tramping and pretty much every remote accomodation I've stayed at use Starlink. My mobile provider uses Starlink for direct-to-cell services. My national airline uses Starlink as backhaul for their in-flight WiFi.
I know there are other competitors coming who aim to provide alternatives to Starlink -- this should mean at some point accomodation providers, mobile networks, airlines, etc can switch to them.
Apple software has noticeably declined from my experience, both iOS and macOS. I find the lifecycle of Apple products to be offensively short, also.
If I buy a product and the hardware is good for 10 years (because I looked after it), I expect the software to also run just as well as when I purchased it - that is the case with Linux, why isn't it the case with macOS?
Every year the software upgrades invariably degrade system performance. Outrageous.
I personally hold Swift and SwiftUI responsible, as Apple has increasingly adopted them in its own products. Moreover, by introducing frameworks that are exclusive to Swift, the company effectively compels developers to use this rather mediocre language.
I have a fully functional iPad mini for my kids that only supports iOS 12. I can barely install or use any software though because it's not supported on such an old OS.
> I find the lifecycle of Apple products to be offensively short, also.
Apple is miles ahead of Android when it comes to phones and tablets, most in the Android ecosystem is e-waste four or five years in, while Apple stuff can still be re-sold for actual money at that time assuming you didn't bust your screen.
For laptops, Apple is so far ahead it can't even be described. Most Windows laptops physically break apart before macOS ceases to support any Apple laptop.
Only thing we can maybe talk about is desktop PCs ever since the switch to M that basically made meaningful upgrades impossible, but eh, in my attic there's a 2009 Mac Pro still chugging along as my homelab server + gaming rig.
I'm using a MacBook Pro 2016 for dev still works great, and its still better than every windows laptop available now. The touchpad itself is still superior - its crazy when you think about it. I know people on their 3rd or 4th windows laptop since I've been using mine. I tried a M4 recently and its battery life is fantastic, and its faster so I'll probably upgrade when this one dies, but it still works well.
Edit: just did a google and it seems I can still sell it for about $600AUD, I don't know how anyone is buying a non apple lap top.
The hardware is very good, it can absolutely last 10 years and is miles ahead of competition - which pains me even more that the software degrades. I will eventually install linux on my M1 but I shouldn’t have to.
> Apple is miles ahead of Android when it comes to phones and tablets, most in the Android ecosystem is e-waste four or five years in
I have a very old android tablet (Nexus 7, 2013). I can install Linux on it and it works just fine. I can convert it into a full screen kiosk mode thing that displays photo albums, put it next to my tv as a song controller, etc etc.
Older iPads no longer get updates, and I can't install linux on them. Apple is wildly behind a lot of other hardware in terms of software-support since I can install linux on a lot of other stuff. Apple devices turn into useless e-waste bricks, other devices can get a second life running linux.
> I have a very old android tablet (Nexus 7, 2013).
Yeah, Nexus and being old, that's the thing. Everyone else other than Nexus, you gotta be lucky if you even get kernel sources and device trees that you can compile, but the code quality will usually be so rotten there's no hope of mainstreaming it to the Linux kernel.
> Apple devices turn into useless e-waste bricks
Only the iDevice lineup though. The Intel and M series devices all can be made to run Linux.
I've yet to spot a full aluminum frame in any Windows laptop even matching Apple's price point. And I've yet to come across to a touchpad comparable in size, feel (Apple's is virtually flush with the case, most Windows touchpads are recessed, every one I came across was plastic while Apple's is glass) and gesture behavior either.
> Anything comparable in price to a MacBook?
The current MacBook Air is at ~1100€ here in Germany. That's not that expensive, particularly as even the entry models still blow away the competition for CPU.
I bought an Asus Zenbook UX303 a decade ago that had a full aluminium body, a dedicated Nvidia GPU, and cost like 800€. A sibling still uses it today. I've upgraded to an Asus ROG Zephyrus that has a fancy plastic body that doesn't leave sweat and fingerprint traces like my work MacBook Pro does.
> Apple is miles ahead of Android when it comes to phones and tablets
Eh, I had to use a variety of iPhones for work recently, don't remember which models, from probably the last ~7 years though, and they really felt limited and frustrating on the software side. My already years old Pixel 7 feels miles ahead, and so did my Pixel 4a, even with the worse hardware of the latter. They just feel more capable.
I've been a mac guy for work for at least 15 years though, now with an M4 on Sequoia, and definitely won't be buying anything else (windows for most gaming), but Tahoe is not looking promising.
And Mussolini wasn't nearly as bad as Hitler. A relative measure like this sets an artificially low bar. If these devices had replaceable screens and batteries, they would be good until the mobile standards stopped being supported.
Damn, I haven't seen an instance of Godwin's law outside of political threads for years in the wild.
> If these devices had replaceable screens and batteries, they would be good until the mobile standards stopped being supported.
The problem is, even replaceable components don't matter when the OS support drops and the device becomes a bad netizen as a result. And no, there is no viable FOSS competition to Android and iOS, many including giants such as Mozilla learned that lesson the hard way.
And that's before getting into the whole issue with BSPs, horrible code quality (good luck trying to get any SoC BSP upstreamed to u-boot or god forbid the Linux kernel), or the rapid evolution in mobile SoC performance.
I'm not calling anyone Hitler, though, just pointing out the flaws that can come with relative comparisons. A known, extreme example here is useful as it's well known and illustrative.
Anyhow, Apple & Android should just support old hardware for longer.
> Anyhow, Apple & Android should just support old hardware for longer.
Apple already does. The iPhone 6s, released 2015, got a security update just a few months ago [1]. That's ten years worth of security updates, I'm amazed that people are still using such old phones.
If we go by the metric of "app developers can still publish app updates", the minimum target version is iOS 18 [2], which means you can still target the iPhone XS from 2018, that's a 7 year old phone.
The true catastrophe is Android, and that's actually not Android's fault. That's the fault of Qualcomm, MTK, Samsung and other more obscure SoC vendors - only in 2023, with the Pixel 8 [3], came the first SoC with seven years of support. As said: most BSPs are utter dogshit, and so are the firmwares for all the tiny chips and IP cores. The Linux kernel is a very fast moving target and it's (by intent) a gargantuan effort to keep forked kernels up to date. And it's made even worse by the embedded industry's trend of continuously "improving" their chips/IP cores without changing model numbers, making it sometimes outright impossible for a kernel module to deal with two different steppings and respective quirks on its own.
Apple in contrast insists on writing everything themselves - that's why they fell out of love with NVIDIA a decade ago, NVIDIA refused to give Apple that level of access. That allows Apple to keep even very outdated stuff supplied at least with critical security fixes.
Google could do something here, say by adding a requirement to the Play Store license that BSPs must be actually accessible open source and vendors have to commit reasonable effort in upstreaming their kernel level drivers, but I guess Google is too afraid of getting hit by anti-trust issues.
Safer in what sense? We have no idea whether this hypothetical code is in a userspace application that can exit safely at any time or a hard real time system where panicking could destroy hardware.
A lot of important programs (like the Linux kernel) don't operate strictly on the exact letter of the standard's UB semantics. They do things like add compiler flags to specify certain behaviors, or assume implementation details.
I will never understand how C developers can catastrophize over Rust panics, a language that has a panicless "_try" version of every panic causing function that returns a Result instead, while simultaneously accepting the infinite growth of ever harder to avoid UB in C/C++ and telling people to never have undefined behavior in their code.
If you think dealing with undefined behavior is easy and you assume that people have verified that their software triggers no undefined behavior at runtime is fair game, then you should grant that assumption in favor of Rust developers having done the same with their panics, because avoiding panics is child's play in comparison to avoiding UB.
I don't know what it is about panics that triggers some mania in people. UB does not interrupt the program and therefore allows memory corrupt and complete takeover of a program and the entire system as a consequence. C developers are like "this is fine", while sitting in a house that is burning down.
There used to be a pretty blatant hibernation bug with AMD GPUs on Linux that essentially crashes your desktop session upon turning your computer on from hibernation. I've also had a wifi driver segfault on login that forcibly logged you out so you couldn't login like 9 years ago. C doesn't magically fix these problems by not having an explicit concept of panics. You still need to write software that is correct and doesn't crash before you push an update.
There is no meaningful difference between a correctness bug and a panic triggering condition with the exception that the panic forces you to acknowledge the error during development, meaning it is more likely that the correctness bug gets caught in the first place.
Can we refrain from strawmen? I haven't made any of the points you're harpooning and vehemently disagree with all of them.
What I said was that panics aren't always appropriate and the context to determine this doesn't exist at the language level.
I didn't say managing UB was easy and in fact I've argued diagnosing it is impossible directly with members of both language committees. I didn't say panics are never appropriate. They usually are appropriate. I didn't say I don't use rust because X, Y, Z. I write rust. Etc.
There is no meaningful difference between a correctness bug and a panic triggering condition with the exception that the panic forces you to acknowledge the error during development, meaning it is more likely that the correctness bug gets caught in the first place.
More likely, but not guaranteed. I don't want to engage more with you, but there was a specific incident I was thinking of when I wrote the prior post that involved an assert improperly placed in a real time control loop that burnt out a very expensive motor.
We removed 30% of UB in the core language already for C2y and are in progress of removing more, so there is no "infinite growth of ever hard to avoid UB". For many UB the right way is indeed to panic and in C you can often achieve this with the UB sanitizer (but not for all).
reply