Can you share studies that show they’re “identical”?
You’re not going to overdose from using your phone too much, or die from withdrawal if you suddenly stop using your phone, so that seems like a stretch.
I have a 8GB M1 that still worked great, until macOS 26 severely degraded its performance. Thankfully the macOS 27 beta somewhat improved things (although Xcode is more of a slog than it used to be).
I’d like to not upgrade until they offer OLED on the Air (I use it solely as a travel machine), but I might be waiting for a while…
> society at large will benefit from the infrastructure
Data centers as infrastructure are very different from DSL rollout though. Much, much more expensive to maintain, with a much much shorter timespan.
If the bubble pops and data centers get shut down because there’s no one to pay the bills, there won’t be much left 5-10 years later in terms of infrastructure.
> I think every one of those animations are system-supplied ones. Some are likely SwiftUI ones
Yes, this is a major factor for the regression in overall UI quality and consistency on Apple platforms. SwiftUI aims to make all those fancy animations transitions a single line view modifier rather than 30 lines of manually specified CoreAnimation easing curves and manual animation blocks, but it results in a lot of things just feeling janky, because one-size-fits-all rule and precise polish are fundamentally at odds.
A bit fallacious because if you've been supporting the proper size classes API and not hardcoding assumptions about windows/orientation/etc. (as Apple has been telling you to do every WWDC for like 10 years now), there's basically 0 work to do.
Yes, those tools are extremely good at reverse engineering. With a bit of know how, it is now trivial to reverse engineer any protocol or crack any software, often in a matter of hours or less.
A lot of people in the industry have vested interests in this not being discussed openly so you don't hear too much about it, but the implications are huge.
If your definition of machine is "purely physical object behaving according to rules"[0], then one could argue that everything in the universe is a machine, which is not a very useful definition.
[0] where I assume you mean rules = "laws of physics", because if we were to choose the more conventional definition of rule = "an accepted principle or instruction that states the way things are or should be done", then your own definition doesn't apply to cells or other biological entities
Yes again, ribosomes have nothing in common with machines, that are built and designed by humans.
The ball is in your camp to provide solid reasons to believe why they should be grouped together, when one is a deeply complex interrelated dynamic system (in fact, arguably the most complex system we know of) evolved bottom up over billions of years that we only very partially understand and cannot fully explain or document, and the other something entirely planned, designed, and produced by humans in which every component is finite and accounted for.
The argument boils down to “well the vibes kind of match to my taste, and it’s the best analogy I have in my analogy toolkit”, which is just not serious reasoning.
> Do you disagree with the assumption that cells are machines?
Yes? Literally no machine ever built by humans is capable of (or even hinting at beginnings of capability for) replication or novel synthesis like cells are, let alone autonomously, it’s quite unconceivable that anyone would take this to be a reasonable assumption in the first place.
> Who could have known that people wanted quality AND affordability?
If you have spent any time in those gigantic corporations, you know that there is effectively no one there who can actually speak sense and effect change.
No one can say "our laptops are too crappy and too expensive, let's fix it" and actually make it happen.
The people in the marketing department who wrote "Apple's MacBook Neo is a capable machine, and its arrival confirms that there's real appetite for premium quality at accessible prices" probably don't give much of a shit about Dell and its products, other than the fact that they get a paycheck from the company every 2 weeks; many of them probably have MacBooks at home, and many of them won't even be at Dell 18 months from now as they chase the next step in their career.
It's kind of shocking to many people too that even the C-suite execs don't have the power to change much there either. Remember that email from Bill Gates where he suddenly realized that the Windows install experience was shit and asked his underlings to fix it? Of course, nothing got better, and Windows is still a giant turd many years later.
What is a real miracle is that a company the size of Apple has managed to still give a shit after all these years and insane growth. There's plenty of missteps in Cupertino for sure, but compared to the competition it's night and day. Who knows how much longer it'll last.
The voiceover in this video is in a weird uncanny valley where I don't think it's purely AI generated, but it doesn't sound 100% human either. Some sort of AI processing filter maybe? I'm not familiar with what tools are common those days.
Eg at 00:30, for a few seconds there's a marked difference in how the speech sounds - like the filter is turned off or something.
I think the video also mixes things up a bit. For example it compares the skeuomorphism of "Find my Friends" with that of a car maintenance training program - but the latter isn't an example of a skeuomorph ("a derivative object that retains ornamental design cues (attributes) from structures that were necessary in the original"), it merely adopts a realistic graphic design style to mirror the operation it's depicting.
Yes, you get to the heart of the problem - we turned what started of as a document viewer into a general purpose application platform.
Features paramount in a document viewer (broadly, "respect the user's local document viewing preferences") aren't desirable in a general purpose application platform.
A large number of companies/web developers don't think of themselves as offering the user a document to view on their own terms, but rather an "experience" that they want full control over (which means, most of the time: show ads and record user behavior).
If you're offering me a game, fair enough.
But if you're showing me my hotel reservation or electric bill, I want a document, not an ""experience"".
It’s funny how anytime an article gets called out for being AI slop on HN, the author’s reaction is something like that: “oh yeah sorry I used AI but just for proofreading I swear, I should’ve done just a tiny bit less”.
No one seems to get the message that relying on AI at all is what makes writing shit. Good writers have confidence in what they produce. The fact that you’re willing to incorporate any AI suggestion at all means you’ve already lost the battle.