Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

NotTheFirstDaniel

Member
  • Content Count

    179
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards

This user doesn't have any awards

About NotTheFirstDaniel

  • Title
    Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    2021
  • Gender
    Male
  • Biography
    No.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. When I said "there's really no point in removing these devices" I meant that they still show a little bit of legroom and could go for a year more. It's not like it's an iPhone 4 or iPhone 4S which are quite literally unusable on their last supported OS. But my OP wasn't about "whining" about how they're losing support, it was mostly wondering/speculating why they got axed. And I believe this is news because A) almost everyone knows someone still rocking an iPhone 6S to this day, and B) we should be congratulating companies that support their products past the initial sale and warra
  2. Summary It looks like the last headphone jack iPhones are being sent out to pasture next year with the iOS 15 release. The Verifier reports that iOS 15 will only support iPhones 7 and newer. Sad day for iPhone users everywhere. Although it is important to note that dropping iOS support on a major branch ≠ no support at all. For instance, the A6 chipset (locked at iOS 10) got the iOS update 10.3.4 in 2019, despite the iOS version and the chip being discontinued 2 years prior. Something similar also occurred with the A7 and A8, where a security update to iOS 12 was released in 2
  3. But that's the point! Whenever a company shows graphs and charts, they are most likely cherry-picked results, but they (usually) aren't lies. The same could be said for the graphs and claims Apple have shown. For instance, the 5x faster graphics performance was actually 5x faster than the last generation of the MacBook Air. You should always take any keynote with a grain of salt, but at the same time since it's all you have until review units come out, you can't do anything but believe that's the case. Most companies don't intentionally lie in their graphs t
  4. What the hell does this mean? Why is the Y-axis so awful? What's between 1440p 60FPS and 4K 60FPS, and speaking of which, why isn't it to scale? Was the huge gap between 4K 60FPS and 1440p 60FPS to make the Ampere cards look so much better? How does that mean anything? And in what? The disclaimer says "multiple graphical intensive games" but what does that mean? Games that are cherrypicked to run best on Ampere but worse on Pascal? And how does this graph have any relevance? No shit Pascal tumbles when raytracing is turned on. It doesn't have any tensor cores. Why didn't they show
  5. I personally don't think the M1 "architecture" is going to make it into high-powered desktops. They most likely have a separate architecture that prefers performance over power efficiency that they will put in the iMacs and Mac Pro. I don't believe Apple would've made the announcement this year if they didn't have at least prototypes of desktop designs.
  6. I'm sorry, but why are we still talking about the graphs? They're terrible, we know that. But it's also been 2 weeks since the event and we have independent testimonials to the performance of these products. When NVIDIA announced the RTX 30 series, the graphs they used were awful. They were slightly better than the one that Apple used, but they were still horrible. But, do we look at the graphs now? No, because the cards are out and we can test them ourselves. It's literally just marketing. You have to remember that NVIDIA, AMD, and Intel do not have the same consumer-b
  7. I think this was always the case for WoA and ASi. Microsoft, for some reason, just refuses to license their ARM Operating Systems to end users. First with Windows RT, now with Windows 10. I mean, you could make the argument that before this, the only ARM devices that didn't come with Windows 10 by default were devices like the Raspberry Pi, but now that Apple is moving to ARM SOCs, there's going to be millions of these consumer-level computers, and I'd assume thousands of them would love to use Windows on their Mac. If this were to happen, though, I think Apple would take a backsea
  8. Since this entire lawsuit was about the "small developer" and not lining their pockets, I assume Epic will drop their suit now that the small developers are being benefited from this change. Right? Epic lost my support (although they never really had it in the first place) when the CEO compared not getting 30% of their profits to civil rights. Losing 30% of revenue is apparently equal to people fearing their lives or being discriminated against based purely off the color of their skin. What. The. Fuck. That's not even being tone deaf anymore, how can you even begin to equate those
  9. Tim Cook actually embraced the "Tim Apple" gag, if that's what your talking about. But yes it was a year ago and that joke is old.
  10. I don't see it that deeply. Every company in some way or another is trying to screw you over for their profit, so I just go with the product I like the best. No company is your friend TBH, they're all these "bandits".
  11. They gave Rene Ritchie access to Apple products before launch, despite him having like 180K subscribers. Then again he did come from a publication, and then left said publication.
  12. I think I mentioned that. They don't particularly care if an individual does it, but they're not going to go out of their way to support content creators that show it off. That's why they don't have a relationship with Snazzy Labs, despite him being an "Apple fanboy" or an "iSheep" as I guess the cool kids call it?
  13. I get what he was trying to say in that sentence, but his execution was awful. It made it seem like "Oh they're just iPads, why would you buy a Mac?". He walked back a little bit by saying "I didn't say iPads weren't bad" on the WAN show, but overall the tone of the original video didn't help his arguments. The tone made the connotation seem like he was saying how Macs would be locked down and harder to control, like an iPad. In many ways they are, he's technically not wrong. By default, Apple gives the ASi Macs iPhone levels of secure-boot, meaning no doing anything with it. But it can easily
  14. He talked about this on the WAN show. His response was something along the lines of "Apple doesn't like to do business with people they can't control". Hearing that, my first instinct was "You literally could not be more wrong". It literally sounded so whiny and babyish. Apple does business with many people, one of which is Dave Lee. You know, the same Dave Lee that quite literally made a video called "I'm Starting to Hate Apple..." that has over 5M views. They do business with Marques Brownlee, someone who ragged the HomePod for how terrible it is. It's definitely not because of f
  15. I really didn't think that graphical representation at the event would be the same as the real chip, but I stand corrected. Did they really just put thermal compound on the RAM chips and call it a day? I wonder how this whole Apple Silicon thing is going to work with the Mac Pro and the iMac Pro, I don't think they'll get rid of the sockets. It would be more trouble than it's worth to have it soldered to the board. But then will chips be interchangeable, or will it be locked out by software? And how will RAM work because for a fact they're not gonna be "unified". That w
×