#31
|
|||
|
|||
I have noticed that
I have noticed that recently
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Appleās built-in podcast app has always been quirky, I use Overcast which has been much, much better..
Quote:
|
#33
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
A good explanation:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/21/t...-article-click A new battery, not a new phone, is a solution. |
#35
|
||||
|
||||
iFixit has kits: https://www.ifixit.com/Kits/iPhone-Battery-Kits
|
#36
|
||||
|
||||
The batteries used in phones, like any battery, eventually fail. It's a chemistry problem. As they age, their voltage becomes somewhat unpredictable. The battery level indicator becomes something of a black magic scale, and your phone, which likes a consistent power source, can simply shut off, even if it appears to have plenty of power. The battery indicator says its ok, but its not.
There appear to be three options. -Get a new battery installed; not a cheap option. -Operate the phone at full power, knowing that it will likely shut off unpredictably. - Slow down the operation of the phone so the battery will last longer. Arguably, in a phone, the last is the right choice. Its a phone. You might have an emergency, god forbid, and need to reach someone. The problem Apple created for itself was in a) setting expectations and b) making the choice for the owner. But Apple is a notably secretive company, so this decision fit their culture, and became a PR problem. I really don't thing they did anything 'wrong', but they certainly didn't think it through very well. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Doesn't matter, two lawsuits already filed asking for class action status.
It will follow on the back of Apple slowing Facetime on older phone class action suit. I see a pattern. They already had their hand held in the fire once, you'd think they learn. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
It's probably not technically possible, but it would be nice if Apple said, hey if you want, revert to an older version of the iOS to unimprove our 'improvements'.
What should at least be possible (and helpful and transparent) is when they send out an iOS update, state clearly and simply any downsides to installing the update. Let us know the trade-offs. While it's hard to pass up security updates and bug fixes, if we as users knew the downsides, we could at least choose. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#40
|
||||
|
||||
I've been a casual observer of the free and open software movement for a number of years. At some point, I think this becomes a related question.
You buy a piece of hardware and there is a legal question about whether you control what happens on that piece of hardware, or even if you have a right to know. If we view apple as a paternalistic force, their actions could be described as "working to protect the hardware against inevitable degradation". On the other hand, if I view it as a property rights issue, namely that if I paid for the phone, and I want it to run at a speed that was advertised, I should have that ability -- even if it is detrimental to the battery life and the phone itself. Transparency, disclosure, and opt-in are probably most of the solution. Hiding this kind of thing from consumers is not really in the spirit of competition. And that goes for Apple, Android, Samsung, .... whoever. There is an interesting case out there about seeking public access to the computer code used in DNA sequencing machines. Namely, that if citizens/consumers cannot audit the code, how can we trust that it is doing what it says it is doing. Interesting times.
__________________
And we have just one world, But we live in different ones |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Given that iPhones comprise nearly 70% of Apple's revenue, you'd think they might want to treat those users with greater transparency and care. Granted, the Apple universe is awfully 'sticky' so maybe outright defections might be low but deferred upgrades feel pretty real, says the guy still using his 5S phone.
|
#42
|
||||
|
||||
Except for the blip surrounding the iPhone 7, the iPhone has been steadily losing market share for at least the last five years.
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Jeff |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Competition and reproducibility is your best defense here. Although Theranos was not a NGS company, the lack of reproducibility sunk the system. For NGS, Illumina has dominate market share, but it is not the only supplier. Everyone is constantly benchmarking. If Oxford Nanopore or Pacific Biosciences found any inconsistencies in data from Illumina , you can bet they'd be publishing those results everywhere. If you go a step higher into the software of deNovo assembly of full genomes , or looking at subsets of data, most research is required to keep the raw data files from the NGS machines, so subsequent researchers can reproduce to verify the results. Software systems like GATK from Broad is open source and available on the cloud. Again, it is not the only game in town, and researchers are constantly running comparison tests of different software systems. Where it gets really hard is when Google who supports Broad Institute on its cloud platform takes the data a step farther and turns it into a picture and then trains its Machine Learning Vision system to recognize images. Because the software is just weights in a neural net, how it gets it's answer is anyones guess. (BTW, Google and Broad just released a paper on this system as superior to GATK) So again the only verification is reproducibility and comparing to other existing systems. At the end of the day, this is just not a data science problem, it is a real science problem with verifiable answers. Thankfully, a lot of the research has been gov sponsored and the software programs are often open sourced. I think a harder problem is private software making arbitrary recommendations. A case I heard about last year concerned a Prisoner Parole System produced by consultants is used for parole or sentencing recommendations by judges. The algorithm is tagged proprietary by the firm who wrote it and black boxed. This system comes with all the built in biases with no checks or balances. This is the bigger problem. You take something that isn't scientific but more subjective, make it into an algorithm and all of a sudden it is written in stone. Last edited by verticaldoug; 12-22-2017 at 12:05 PM. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...-quarter-2007/ As does their market cap. |
|
|