I wore my original beloved AirPods Max for a walk one Edmonton winter day and they became a brick.
I found out quickly that it’s a well known design flaw with internal moisture build up, exacerbated by fluctuations in temperature.
Did they fix this known flaw that has ruined hundreds of people’s very expensive headphones? Nope.
Should have gotten AppleCare, but I didn’t know walking with them in the cold for 15 minutes would destroy them so easily.
I use wireless headphones most of every day. I used to buy IEMs with detachable cables so I could replace them when they inevitably broke. I don’t feel I was being careless at all. I don’t break anything else in my life. But my cables broke every 6 months or so.
I absolutely don’t miss wired headphones. The idea that wireless headphones aren’t superior is insane to me.
I think the one thing is battery degradation, but honestly, buying a new pair every 5 years is well worth the convenience of no cables in my mind. Especially headphones that switch well between devices are a big QoL upgrade.
I do wish all wireless headphones had a little jack for wired playback though, for one reason: instrument playback. Latency is absolutely unacceptable there; and it’s a shame I can’t plug my AirPods in. But I’m not surprised or angry at their omission; but on over-ear phones, it’s inexcusable.
This is the most counter-intuitive, user-unfriendly, confusing piece of software that I’ve used in my life.
Insane hyperbole in my opinion. Most of his complaints are that of a power user, and because it’s missing something he liked from Gnome.
Fair enough I guess, the stuff he talks about does sound nice.
I’m immediately reminded of John Siracusa’s rant about Wikipedia on his old Hypercritical podcast. This is a lengthy rebuttal from (presumably) a Wikipedia lover that includes a link and timestamp to the original podcast segment [0]
I agree, verifiability makes sense, and truth can’t really be claimed without verification, and so it’s a confusing argument to say: truth should be above verifiability; but I must admit: I find it very strange that some people have information about them on their Wikipedia pages that they’re not able to correct despite _being the person_ because one can only cite a source.
The problem of circular citations exists as well, where an article is cited which itself only cites another article, and it might loop back on itself.
This might be genuinely the first time I can remember hearing someone say they don’t want to commit piracy. No offence, but who cares?
Especially for something from 1939.