ksk

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.

I'm not a fan of Gucci products either. ;)

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.

You're about 30 years too late. Manufacturing is not coming back to the US. We've been migrating towards a service economy for several decades now. The rise of automation has only accelerated this trend. What kind of manufacturing jobs would you like to see come back? The notion of property and property rights is obviously very very different under communism, but even so, their domestic economic policies have been beneficial to the average Chinese citizen. China has successfully brought tens of millions of their own citizens out of poverty - without being involved in stupid wars to 'stimulate the economy'. IP theft aside, that deserves to be commended.

Isn't it ironic that you're doing the same thing hes afraid Google might - Using someones opinions on social media for punitive purposes. For double irony, it also mirrors China's social credit system in-part.

You're disagreeing with the OP, but presenting a completely different argument. By all accounts, the M1 mini seems to be a neat little machine, and I've placed an order myself to replace a super old machine at home. However, the OP's argument that the M1 (at present) does nothing to challenge top-end processing power is accurate.

>- Make the device last longer before it needs repair (reliability, longevity)

If Apple makes devices that last so long, then how come Apple's own extended warranty program generates billions of dollars of revenue? Note that this doesn't include third party repair shops. To me, this indicates a large industry dedicated to repairing Apple products - hardly a niche industry. To me, this indicates that a large amount of Apple devices need repair, something that Apple is hostile to.

Also while AppleCare is easy and convenient for the customer, Apple's "geniuses" do not do board-repair, they simply replace and throw away broken logic boards (which sometimes all they might need is a simple 10 cent capacitor). If that wasn't as bad, they actively prevent other businesses from performing component level repair by blocking access to spare parts.

> I'm guessing big old servers running 24x7 are in this category: Recycling the materials into new computers takes a lot of energy, but just running the old server takes a huge amount of energy over its life compared with the newer, faster, more efficient ones you could make from the same materials. I would be surprised if not recycling was less harmful than recycling.

If that was the case, then of course, we should recycle. Maybe we should have a case-by-case approach depending on specific products? I'm totally willing to go wherever the evidence leads us. As of now pretty much every single environmental organization promotes reuse over recycling for electronics.

>When saying Apple should change they way they manufacture to be more like other manufacturers for environmental benefit, Apple being rated number 1 tells you that the advice is probably incorrect,

I merely accepted the "number one" in good faith at face value. Digging further with a cursory Google search, things seem a lot more nuanced. That being said, I have no idea what "number one" even means without context.

https://www.fastcompany.com/40561811/greenpeace-to-apple-for...

Promoting reuse and repair is environmentalism. Preventing repair (as Apple does) generates more e-waste. There really is no way around that fact.

>What matters environmentally is aggregate device lifetime, so you get the most use out of the materials. Apple devices use a minimum of materials and have industry leading usable lifetimes. They are also designed to be highly recyclable.

Reuse and repair is FAR superior to recycle - which actually wastes a lot of energy, in addition to generating e-waste for the parts which are not recycled.

>Greenpeace rated Apple the number 1 most environmentally friendly of the big technology companies.

What good does it do? They are still harming the environment.

Hermes handbags also have high resale value. That tells us nothing. Apple's anti-repair approach absolutely harms the environment. Certainly they are not alone in this, many/most electronics these days are irreparable. But Apple is actively hostile to the repair industry, which makes them more deserving of criticism.

Apple's (and everyone elses') anti-repair stance (both in terms of design and in policy) is harming the environment and generating tons of e-waste. Whats wrong with expressing a view that helps the planet?

Components have flaws, or they break down over time, and soldering components hampers repair and reuse.

I'll let you have the last word. Have a nice day :)

Exactly right. It is important to understand why things are designed the way they are before we go about challenging established engineering principles.

https://www.electronics-cooling.com/2016/09/surface-temperat...

> I would expect a $4,000 camera to be able to do 8k reliably...

It already is reliable for it's stated goals. Unlimited 8k recording is neither a stated feature nor a goal of this camera. If you peg a smartphone CPU at 100% the system firmware will throttle it down to a safe limit. This is no different. The R5 is a tiny full-frame weather-sealed camera that's designed to be hand held. Which other camera that is comparable does things better?

>Why provide any education at all then? As a society it is our responsibility to skill the next generation with the skills they need to operate in our society. I believe critical thinking skills is one of these required skills.

There are several views on education. It used to be that you went to school/college to be educated, but lately it seems like the schools are just places where you get trained so that you can get a job. Would parents send their kids to school if primary goal was education, and getting a job was just incidental?

Personally, I don't think critical thinking skills can be taught in a school via a curriculum en-masse. It requires a personal approach tailored to each individual's needs based on their upbringing and cultural context.

>We really are fucked then aren't we. I kind of like living in a liberal democracy. If we throw our current system out due to ignorance I am very confident what comes next will not be superior. I'm not willing to accept that as path we take.

Yes, we might very well be fucked in the near-term. But I'm not saying we throw everything out, I'm saying we have to trust people more than systems. How many people are willing to earnestly engage with the other side? We have to do our part to foster safe-zones where people can express any and all ideas without fear of being ridiculed or shamed. We're all responsible in some way for the decline in public trust in several pillars of democracy - especially the news media. To make it personal, several of my family members are Trump voters, and I do not think they're racist or evil. I understand them, and they hold varying beliefs with varying degrees of certitude but they feel trapped where they cannot even express an opinion without being shouted down and ridiculed.

What is the old line, people get the government they deserve, they elect people that they like and/or agree with? Even here on HN most people only upvote comments they like or otherwise agree with. Its the same everywhere. Massive massive echo chambers on the left and right with propaganda being retweeted and shared to millions.

>We must bring the security to each individual endpoint.

Why? Why must we treat adults as children that we have been entrusted with, and that it is our responsibility to give them 'mental medicine'? What makes our thinking superior to others' that we need to lord over them in this way?

>Some will argue that we should shutdown the internet or censor it. But is that the world we want to live in? That would stifle economic growth and i do not believe it is compatible with the ideals of liberal democracies.

I believe that these ideals are bottom-up. We form governments that align with the ideals of the people, not the other way around. If the people out of choice or ignorance no longer care about the ideals of liberal democracy, who are we to force them onto others?

>when children don't question what they're told.

That doesn't mean they accept everything as fact. They may simply not choose to question because of fear of punishment, or for any other number of reasons.

>Then when they're adults they lack any kind of critical thinking skills because they've been miseducated and they're easy targets for disinformation.

That is a giant leap of logic.. or faith. Case in point :- I went to a religious school (though, it was more of a hippie religious school), and many of my classmates became atheists later in life. :)

I think there a large room for even further nuance about how humans develop and all the factors that shape our thinking. Simply forcing a 'critical thinking' class into the curriculum won't give them any benefit any more than attending an entrepreneurship class will make you an entrepreneur.

Software developers are a tiny fraction of business users. In our industry - vaccines - most people use Windows laptops to get work done. Execs do use Apple stuff, but they're not doing the actual ground-level work, so its probably the same everywhere. Apple hardware is expensive to buy, expensive to maintain, and difficult to service due to its flawed design (everything is soldered, no easy access to components, no third party repair, no access to parts, generates lots of e-waste, etc). The OS also is not capable enough to be easily administered by IT.

Maybe its only clear to you. I don't see what is "clearly inferior" about Microsoft tech. It is reliable and rock solid and has worked for our industry very well (vaccines).

How do other retailers compare? Are there any metrics?

Your comment is unfair, and if I'm being honest sounds very disingenuous if you've really spoken to people in the right to repair movement.

If a business is willing to invest time, learn board repair, and offer it as a service without demanding Apple or anyone else change their design, what right does Apple have to block that?

Apple prohibits sale of spare parts (by third-parties) to anyone but themselves, they outright ban people from accessing schematics, and other tools that repair shops need to fix boards. They are extremely hostile to the repair industry.

Its one thing to demand Apple change their design (as if anyone can do that), its quite another to politely request that maybe perhaps Apple shouldn't focus their energy on crushing the repair industry. Its laughable that Apple happily certifies their own products as "green" when they are so hell bent against repair. Apple's (and others') anti-repair policies generate a ton of e-waste.

But calling it a Chinese backdoor drives more clicks ;)

>They're particular to the modern conservative party.

Many of my liberal friends believe in crazy stuff like russiagate or defending BLM looters/rioters or proudly voting for a political candidate that supported bombings in the middle east that lead to the death of countless civilians (including kids) while simultaneously villainizing Dubya for being a war mongering criminal.

You'll have to excuse me for not seeing your "clear delineation" - whatever that means.

I'm taking everything that is being proposed in good faith. There is a legal manner in which a country controls who gets to come in. Whether they have to modify treaties or not, I don't know - I'm not an expert on international jurisprudence.

>Whatever your political views are, my point was that there is a clear delineation between parties.

It doesn't help your case when you lump arguable, but sane positions with denying climate change.

The unfairness of the system you describe, also happens to other men who don't get promoted or don't have time for side projects, or comment on HN, and aren't in the same clique, etc. Maybe we should target the core problem, instead of making it about gender.

What exactly is wacky about limiting legal immigration and/or asylum if that is what the citizens want? IMHO, Those don't seem like insane ideas when there is crazy amounts of unemployment in the country.

Please propose a solution too!

For most international retail products, local pricing is based in-part on the cost of service centers/staff that are required to maintain local operations.

How does it work with musical instruments?