I honestly don’t think it’s that big a deal. When the leather cases got marked people called it “patina” and said it was a good thing. I always thought it was pretty disgusting.
I think these new cases are fine, and that Apple blogs love a good outrage story.
Maybe I'm entirely wrong: isn't this the forced obsolescence that Apple is famous for?
Apple does not and never has practiced forced obsolescence. In fact, quite the opposite, as iOS is supported in iPhones for much longer than any version of Android ever is.
The "famous" story is about Apple keeping your phone alive by (necessarily) throttling the CPU when your battery was worn out, so that it wouldn't shut down due to lack of power.
If they did anything wrong, it was not explaining this well enough.
The satellites operate in an extremely low orbit. At the end of their life they are manually de-orbited. If they fail, they will naturally de-orbit themselves in just a few years. They contribute to "space junk" in no way.
The precise position of all the Starlink satellites is known, and space is much bigger than you appear to be imagining, so the network will in no way impede lauching rockets.
There is no need to simply make stuff up about Starlink. There are plenty of reasons to hate Elon without inventing things.
Apple only provides usb 3.1 speeds on iPhone Pro and only if you buy a new cable from Apple.
You don't have to keep repeating this made-up lie. While it's true that it only comes with a USB 2.0 cable, you don't have to buy a USB 3 cable from Apple. Any USB 3 cable will work just fine.
This is asinine. Apple has shown a strong commitment to supporting particular standards for extended periods. For example, the iPhone's 30-pin connector was maintained for over 10 years. Similarly, the Lightning port, its successor, has also been around for about a decade. (And, it should be noticed, started being used two years BEFORE USB-C existed.) Additionally, Apple has supported the Thunderbolt standard throughout its life cycle.
Apple has always been judicious about the ports it adopts. The company is not known for having a plethora of ports catering to multiple generations of connector technologies. Instead, when Apple picks a standard, it tends to go all in. Take the case of USB-A: Apple was one of the early adopters of this technology and supported it for approximately 20 years before making the switch to USB-C. To put this in perspective, the time between the USB Mini to Micro switch and the Micro to USB-C transition was shorter than the lifespan of Apple's 30-pin and Lightning connectors.
It's unreasonable to assume that Apple would restrict the cables that can be used in a standard USB-C port. The USB-C standard is built on the principle of universal compatibility. Restricting this would not only break with the standard but also limit the very advantages that have made USB-C popular among consumers and manufacturers alike.
This is a common misconception, and it’s funny that people still believe it all these years later.
While it's true that Windows 95 relied on MS-DOS for bootstrapping and provided a DOS-like interface for running legacy applications, it wasn't "just a shell" on top of DOS. Windows 95 introduced a 32-bit multitasking environment, a completely new user interface, and a separate set of APIs for software development (Win32). It had its own kernel that provided services like memory management and hardware abstraction, separate from DOS.
The integration with DOS was mainly for backward compatibility, allowing users to run older software. But once you were in the Windows 95 environment, DOS was essentially sidelined, and Windows 95's own features and architecture took over.
DavidGA @ DavidGA @lemmy.world Posts 0Comments 125Joined 2 yr. ago
I honestly don’t think it’s that big a deal. When the leather cases got marked people called it “patina” and said it was a good thing. I always thought it was pretty disgusting.
I think these new cases are fine, and that Apple blogs love a good outrage story.