What is your point? MacDonalds make the best hamburgers because they sell so many of them? Windows is the best OS because billions of people use it?
>Do your "solved problem" bluetooth headphones allow EASY audio sharing when the kid is sleeping and you want to watch something with your wife? These are two bluetooth devices on same audio stream.
So in your mind, 'solving' a problem is buying not one, but TWO $500 headphones instead of $10 earbuds and a $5 Y connector? Oh wait, you also believe that the headphone jack is stupid. Yeah, sure, sell people a $1000 solution for a problem you created. Great job!
>It's amazing to me how many folks seem to have no clue about what folks value in the apple ecosystem.
Only some of Apple is quality, the rest is quality with quotes. The Apple's extended warranty program is worth billions, so is the repair industry fixing all the broken apple products. Heck they have yet to design a charging cable that doesn't fray. How is that quality?
Audio (gear) is nowhere near to being a solved problem. One open problem is to match your own personal HRTF to your gear. Audio (production) is also not a solved problem. Your experience is decided by the recording/mixing engineer, and there may be multiple renderings possible of the same content. In much the same way, different conductors of the same orchestra can produce different flavors of the same composition. Then there is the spatial localization for games and movies, which is still not quite solved.
>And there's nothing wrong with that, it just annoys me when audiophiles try to justify their fashion statements with pseudo-science.
Yes, those people can get nutty, ignore them! Audio is much bigger than Audiophile :)
Having said that, with no pressure from consumers, why would anyone invest money in new headphone designs? I recently purchased a pair of planar magnetic headphones which used to be crummy when I tried them a few years back. The newer design is very efficient, the manufacturing process is also pretty solid, and the sound is fantastic.
It seems you you are a huge fan of Apple, but you haven't explained what Apple is doing here that is interesting or unique.You can have any opinion you want, but I don't think you understand what the audiophile market or community is. There is nothing "deeply troubling" about buying a Sennheiser HD600 or an AKG K702 or buying a DAC or an AMP to listen to audio if you enjoy doing that.
> I would't usually have problem with such things but they often slide into extremism and quickly pushing you on the money-spend-for-audio-performance scale where you are simply supposed to check you bank account to see what sound quality you are about to get.
You can say that about anything. CPUs, GPUs, Expensive low latency memory Memory, high performance cars, etc, etc, etc. If you chase high-end performance you end up paying a lot for diminishing returns.
I'm due for an upgrade and the mini seems to be a really nice option. As an aside, does anyone know what the current limitations are in making a completely sealed weather-proof phone?
Apple chokes the repair shops by banning other companies from selling them parts. Even if Apple devices are more repairable (companies find other ways to source parts, schematics), Apple is actively working against the right to repair movement.
Yep.. our oral cavity has a ton of ACE2 receptors (much more than the lungs). Apart from eating it, in a round about way, I think people do recognize that its a vector, as the food container/packaging still qualifies as a surface that you can catch it off of.
Did FB really give out personal data? In any case, do we even have an understanding of what is meant by anonymized data (when applied to specific datasets) anyway? I sometimes wonder if any of these firms could call it anonymized by changing the name on the profile to somebody's initials.
>Among the announcements was the launch of a new effort to share user data with publishers and introduce more machine learning into Google’s publisher products.
Haha, it never crossed my mind that someone would implement this purposely. I don't have a W10 laptop so I've only noticed this on other peoples machines.
Speaking of W10, there was another annoying W10 bug where if you started typing immediately after using the touchpad there was a random delay. If you care about latency and responsiveness, it makes you want to scream at the people who implement these features.
>Not at all. A start would be a proof of concept device with barely working software.
And anyone can already do that. Creating a prototype is like 5% of the work. Nobody really cares about it unless you can ACTUALLY use it for ACTUAL stuff. I work in industrial automation and I have several hacked-together prototypes where I'm running some scripts or software on a micro-controller. And those protypes do "cool" stuff for a fraction of the cost. But there is absolutely no way my customers would ever ever consider using a prototype PLC for anything, not even testing. So I don't think you're getting it. This isn't Linux where your end users are mostly software/technical people. Normal laypeople are not interested in testing experimental stuff like this.
>Why does everybody assume you'd want to replace the medical devices? Did we even read the same article? The authors even say that
Because it would be unethical to produce medical diagnostic devices (or even call them that) without proper code review, validation, and so on.
>Except for sports training, do we need medical certification or perfect accuracy? No. So why is it so hard to believe that one person couldn't knock something together in a weekend if the transducers were available?
Okay so yeah I totally believe you can put together a janky POS that barely works and is unreliable. But without proper validation the results such systems produce are entirely useless.
> You know, for fun, out of curiosity?
Yes, I agree. You can do _ANYTHING_ for your own amusement, fun or curiosity. BUT... if you want to make something that is useful to other people you have to do a bit more work. And that work doesn't come cheap.
You're changing the topic. We're not talking about a general open source project with a potentially large userbase. So what you're essentially advocating is that we have to wait till a few hundred people serendipitously have enough time to dedicate to their hobby of writing control software for medical devices. And after that they have to validate the code, test it and ensure its correctness.
All the popular open source projects succeeded because developers got paid. This fantasy of large scale complex projects with unpaid experts writing code, developing tests, and creating documentation, etc is just that, a fantasy.
>I see no evidence that there would be any economic benefit for any company opening the source of their very specialized, very expensive software here.
Hmm maybe if you can find a way to lock-in users so they have to always come to you for the hardware. So, one way to do that is on a project that sees a lot of source code churn, you can tightly couple it with your services/hardware. Any competition that's downstream will find it hard to keep up with your commits in addition to having to patch in support for different hardware/services.
>Do your "solved problem" bluetooth headphones allow EASY audio sharing when the kid is sleeping and you want to watch something with your wife? These are two bluetooth devices on same audio stream.
So in your mind, 'solving' a problem is buying not one, but TWO $500 headphones instead of $10 earbuds and a $5 Y connector? Oh wait, you also believe that the headphone jack is stupid. Yeah, sure, sell people a $1000 solution for a problem you created. Great job!
>It's amazing to me how many folks seem to have no clue about what folks value in the apple ecosystem.
I'm not a fan of Gucci products either. ;)