Oh dear
And I had read that Foxconn had really made a decent iPhone this time too. Ah well. The Apple Reality Distortion Field will prevent this from becoming an issue.
Apple's $1,000 iPhone X may have trouble operating in the winter weather. This is according to multiple complaints from owners and an admission from the Cupertino idiot-tax operation itself that, in cold temperatures, the OLED touchscreen on the shiny new handsets can become temporarily unresponsive. We're told that, when …
Actually I'm far more concerned about El Reg using the term "W!nter !s Com!ng" given how DCMA happy HBO appear to be over the phrase happened happened https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/08/winter_is_coming_hbo_dmca_trademark/
Early signals are not good. massive channel stuffing for iphone8, with nobody buying and mothballed production lines at P* F* and G*. Apple were hoping to unmothball those lines for iPhone X production, but actual sales (not shipments) are massively under forecast.
Seems the theory that nobody wanted the iphone8 because the X was coming turns out to be totally untrue, how long before investors grasp this, who knows.. (but then Microsoft share price keeps going up whilst their products tank)
Rather than release a pesky software update - always a risky move - or get Foxconn to fix the hardware - already enough suicides there, all Apple needs to do is convert their data centres to run purely on diesel and thereby raise the Earth's temperature by a few degrees.
Everyone wins! iPhone X users get to use their phones outside, we all get nicer weather, dogs no longer need those odd little padded winter coats, and we can turn down the heating a few notches. A shame about the Great Barrier reef and all that, but I went there in 2007, so I've already seen it, and for the rest of you there's always Blue Planet II. It looks fantastic on a 4K TV. Of course it used to look much better in real life, but so did Angelina Jolie. That's progress, folks.
B, b, bu, bu, but it's so beautiful, it must be perfect, mustn't it?????
Nope, but this illustrates with perfection why I never buy new hardware concepts* unless they have been in the field for at least 6 months. Besides, it saves queueing :).
* Not that I was planning to buy the X - not a fan of the whole facial thing.
You have to wonder where aPple got their design ideas for a notched screen from don't you. https://masaryk.tv/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/vertu-constellation-2.jpg
And now it's : You're touching it wrong ?
Please. PLEASE. Let me go! I need to go to work to earn some money to pay for all this crack-cocaine-tech.
Your reasoning is sound. You may leave, but don't forget your Geek-Bar appointment next Saturday at 11am. Failure to show up will result in forfeiture of your kidneys. Have a nice day.
This post has been deleted by its author
The actual visual display technology is irrelevant, because that doesn't register touch. It will be the digitiser and or the capacitive overlayer. I accept the vendor is probably the same company for all, but this is a tech web site isn't it?
...........
Oh, alright, it was a tech web site.
Curious. The digitiser is not related to the display type (OLED vs LCD)… though it's possible that Apple have implemented their digitiser differently on the X (maybe to bring the pixels closer to the glass or somesuch).
There's mentions going back years of capacitive touchscreen losing sensitivity in cold weather. The following mentions it:
https://www.ruggedtabletpc.com/blog/bid/95373/Things-To-Know-About-Rugged-And-Non-Rugged-Touch-Screens
Was 20F when I left the house, and mine did not have any issues when I stepped outside. Then I put the gloves on, because 20 is ridiculous for this time of year when I'm not properly acclimated...yikes! It was in the 80s less than three weeks ago, I want that back!!
"The bright side, said Apple, is that among its younger ranks – employees under 30 – women have better representation at 36 per cent and underrepresented minorities 31 per cent, including half of all new hires."
I get emailed tech newsletters and scan them for interesting topics. Each newletter will have 12-20 topics. Twice now I've been struck by the obvious 'placement' of articles, reports by summer interns at Google, where the placements made certain you would notice "lookee, lookee, females!"
Two in one newsletter, three in another. I'd not noticed articles about Google interns a year ago. Somehow it wasn't important before? With all being women, somehow the importance seems to be just... appearances? These were all interns, and the work was valid and useful, but somehow the work didn't seem to match the importance these were given most ostentatiously.
The motivation here was oh so obvious, and done so ham-handedly. Question is, the women here - are they the hammers or the nails? Hey, no objectification here, right?
A few years ago there was an article on ElReg on UK university engineering course which commented that the brochures invariably featured 3 example students of which 1 would be female - but the article went on to explain that prospective applicants should not assume that 33% of students would be female! When I took my son to an open day we experienced this first hand ... applicants to several different courses all attended a single presentation from Vice Chancellor etc before splitting off for per subject sessions. We'd already seen applicant for the mid-wifery course (100% female) going to a seperate session then at end of main presentation courses were called out and people went off ... one course was "Media relations" (or somethinng like that - anyway was 90-95% female) and at end it was engineering applicants left ... 90% male!
Twice now I've been struck by the obvious 'placement' of articles, reports by summer interns at Google, where the placements made certain you would notice "lookee, lookee, females!"
Here in the UK, the BBC has a royal charter to do that "painfully obvious prioritisation of an almost but not quite irrelevant article involving women/transgender/minorities" stuff.
Which is faintly amusing, given that the BBC is clearly fingered for being ageist, sexist, classist, politically biased, nepotistic, and willing to sweep all dirt under the carpet about its own "stars" behaviour.
Having looked at both the article and the report itself, I can see no sign anywhere of the proportions of the various racial groups amongst the population base from which they recruit. Without that, the figures have no bearing whatsoever on fairness. e.g. (for a simplified 2 race model) an employee ratio of 55% black, 45% white might look good until you realised that the local population was 80% black (or visa versa).
Yes, there are issues with defining the recruitment area, and that might even vary by job (senior management and technical staff recruited worldwide, and cleaners more locally), but without such figures, they might as well not bother with the figures they do provide.
45% white might look good until you realised that the local population was 80% black (or visa versa)
Almost all populations are roughly 50:50 male:female so if only 10% of your local midwives are male, that looks bad, right? Men are clearly underrepresented and likely being discriminated against? Wrong. Only 0.3% of qualified midwives are male so a 10% figure would be far too high and indicative of rampant sex discrimination against women.
The sex and ethnic breakdown of the population is irrelevant unless it precisely mirrors the breakdown of qualified candidates (which it doesn't). Current "IT" graduation rates (USA) are about 25% Female and the percentage drops to less than 5% for over 50s or ethnic minority women. Those are the relevant benchmarks and any significant departure from those ratios is likely to be indicative of illegal (I'm pivoting to UK law) discriminatory practices.
"The sex and ethnic breakdown of the population is irrelevant unless it precisely mirrors the breakdown of qualified candidates"
This.
Couldn't agree more. The expectation of all jobs to reflect the POPULATION is bonkers. At a minimum we should be starting with the demographics of the local workforce, which will then at least take into account the bias of having more women being a housewife than men being a househusband. I'm no expert, but I would assume there are more potential male candidates generally than female across the board for this reason.
Your ideal of going further and basing 'diversity targets' on the total potential eligible candidates for each specific role sounds incredibly sensible.
So I doubt it'll happen.
Just to be clear - I agree! When I wrote "population" I was really meaning "eligible, qualified, employable etc." population - rather than what's on the census! I hinted at this with the second half of my comment, but others have put it more clearly.
So yes, I agree with all those who added more precision to my concern.
Some of the point isn't to just represent the industry it is to change gender stereotypes. So if 90% of engineers are men then 90% of engineer employees are men and it trends that engineers are normally men and less women are inclined towards that field. Also employers start to look at engineering candidates expecting them to be men and a female candidate may be subject to extra scrutiny. Unless you believe that women are not capable engineers and that men are genetically better (I suggest you use reddit to argue that one) then to correct this imbalance then employers can slowly take proactive measures to help redress this.
Similar with midwifes - may be a start to remove the gender tag from the job title for a start. Then if you were just as likely to see a male midwife as a female then you might get more male applicants - although I would say that this may have a legitimate gender association due to the intimate nature of the job and the fact that 100% of those receiving the main part of their services will have female organs.
Sometimes you do have to have a little bit of positive discrimination or else the roles become self-fulfilling gender proportional.
the midwife that delivered me (back in 1975) was male.he was also apparently quite annoyed because I took my time to appear causing him to miss the home game at coventry that afternoon
Very impressive! To have done your first good deed while still in the womb.
then to correct this imbalance then employers can slowly take proactive measures to help redress this.
Not if they want to stay on the right side of the (UK) law they can't. Sex (or racial) discrimination is illegal unless those factors constitute a genuine occupational qualification in the individually specific case (i.e. social engineering the overall population isn't a valid excuse). There is no provision for "affirmative action" schemes.
although I would say that this may have a legitimate gender association due to the intimate nature of the job and the fact that 100% of those receiving the main part of their services will have female organs
Most gynaecologists are male and they always have been. To make such an argument remotely coherent you would have to discriminate against anyone who had not personally had a baby, regardless of sex, and you would still end up losing in court on the grounds of constructive discrimination.
Sometimes you do have to have a little bit of positive discrimination or else the roles become self-fulfilling gender proportional.
See above. Social engineering via sex or race discrimination isn't legal in the UK.
"Not if they want to stay on the right side of the (UK) law they can't. Sex (or racial) discrimination is illegal unless those factors constitute a genuine occupational qualification in the individually specific case (i.e. social engineering the overall population isn't a valid excuse). There is no provision for "affirmative action" schemes."
Whilst this is technically true, in practice there is no enforcement at all. Companies openly trumpet their discriminative recruitment policies and no action is taken.
"then to correct this imbalance then employers can slowly take proactive measures to help redress this.
Not if they want to stay on the right side of the (UK) law they can't. Sex (or racial) discrimination is illegal"
It's called Positive Action and is legal and is written in to law.
"Section 159 of the Equality Act 2010 allows an employer to treat an applicant or employee with a protected characteristic (eg race, sex or age) more favourably in connection with recruitment or promotion than someone without that characteristic who is as qualified for the role. The employer must reasonably think that people with the protected characteristic suffer a disadvantage or are under-represented in that particular activity. Taking the positive action must be a proportionate means of enabling or encouraging people to overcome the disadvantage or to take part in the activity."
"Most gynaecologists are male and they always have been"
See you are falling into a statistic trap. Many gynaecologists are male because most consultants are male and in the UK you don't get proper choice over your consultant. However if you look at GP level nearly all requests for gynaecological appointments request a female doctor and within a surgery it is usually the female doctors who are given that training and take up that role.
"See above. Social engineering via sex or race discrimination isn't legal in the UK."
See above, yes it is.
It's called Positive Action and is legal and is written in to law.
Positive action only permits an employer to choose one candidate over another on grounds of group under representation when all other factors are equal and the decision is otherwise a coin toss between two equally qualified candidates. Positive discrimination (meaning hiring someone specifically because they are a member of an under represented group or to meet a quota) remains illegal. Reference from the Bar Council if you want to verify that.
See you are falling into a statistic trap. Many gynaecologists are male because most consultants are male and in the UK you don't get proper choice over your consultant.
Are you sure you want to go there? You're one step away from advocating that people receiving NHS care should be able to refuse to be treated by "darkies" or "jews". You've always been able to make choices rooted in sexism or racism, but as a matter of public policy the state isn't going to pander to such bigotry by funding it.
"
Sometimes you do have to have a little bit of positive discrimination or else the roles become self-fulfilling gender proportional.
"
I have yet to see any rational argument that explains *why* having all jobs done by an equally proportionate number of males, females, blacks, whites, eskimos etc. is in principle beneficial.
I have also not seen any huge outcry about the fact that AFAICS there are far more men filling the roles of dustbin collector and street sweeper than there are women.
I have yet to see any rational argument that explains *why* having all jobs done by an equally proportionate number of males, females, blacks, whites, eskimos etc. is in principle beneficial.
The issue wasn't having "appropriate proportions", but that people had difficulties getting into jobs for various reasons NOT related to their skills. For a long time well qualified and well-able women could not advance much past the "typing pool" and breaking into senior roles could not be done. This of course led to various pay-parity issues, eg a woman who worked hard, learned her industry etc would never be more than a typist at $20k/yr whereas a much less capable man could become her boss on $150k/a. Women who actually wanted to get into other roles (construction. mechanics, physics and so forth) would find they often got laughed out of the interview room. Same goes for blacks, jews, gays etc etc etc (not equating these btw, before anyone takes offence) - black people were often treated as being a lower class of human, sometimes even more like a despised animal.
The idea behind the quotas was to force companies to bring in people from other sexes/races/sexualities/beliefs etc. Unfortunately while some things have improved, there's still a lot of odd issues (eg still often pay rate gaps between people of comparable skill and length of service, largely based on gender), and this tokenism won't help much any more.
Hire those who want to work for you, pay them what they earn, and if you can make your work more interesting to those who normally wouldn't be then do so, else forget about it. Pay more for more work, less for less work, more for more skill, less for less skill, same for same work and same skill. Don't pay me less because you think I'm gay and somehow feel threatened, pay me less if I skive off more often, get sick more often etc, pay me more if I spend more time at work and am more productive.
I have also not seen any huge outcry about the fact that AFAICS there are far more men filling the roles of dustbin collector and street sweeper than there are women.
Oh yeah, demands for "more X in Y" only come about for the "glamorous" jobs. But Shhhh! You're not supposed to talk about that!
Only 0.3% of qualified midwives are male so a 10% figure would be far too high and indicative of rampant sex discrimination against women.
Nope.
Enumerating the mistaken assumptions in your comment is left as an exercise for the reader.
"Almost all populations are roughly 50:50 male:female so if only 10% of your local midwives are male, that looks bad, right? Men are clearly underrepresented and likely being discriminated against? Wrong. Only 0.3% of qualified midwives are male so a 10% figure would be far too high and indicative of rampant sex discrimination against women."
Or it indicates that men are massively discriminated against in the selection for training...
Or there is some other reason that it is a female dominated industry...
"Yes, there are issues with defining the recruitment area, and that might even vary by job (senior management and technical staff recruited worldwide, and cleaners more locally),"
And in terms of "world wide" recruitment, all those primarily "white" senior managers and Cxx are the racial minority.
And in terms of "world wide" recruitment, all those primarily "white" senior managers and Cxx are the racial minority.
Not really relevant, IMHO. I think you'll find that the directors and senior managers of (say) India's 100 largest international companies are largely Indian. And of China's largest international businesses, they'll be largely Chinese. Even within Europe, take any German or French multinational, and the boards are largely from the home nation (sometimes there's a bit of token variety).
Mainly based on the educational requirements of the job.
No point hiring art & humanities people for technical or scientific jobs - the gender difference in many instances.
On the colour front it's mainly the educational opportunities the people had or didn't have. Many didn't have decent schools to go to, came under peer pressure to become a gang member and drop out, or suffered from some societal norms limiting education.
In South Africa the ANC's old mantra of "no education without liberation" has come back to bite their affirmative action. Since '94 the endemic corruption has left many schools with no books or other teaching supplies so the kids don't even get a halfway decent chance. Currently the only decent job available to uneducated people there is being president and that is only for one person at a time. "Cry the Beloved Country" does not quite cover it.
White and yellow privilege. Obviously.
Check it. I think there are buzzfeed quizzes to solve the problem of the legacy of slavery and the systemic oppression of lgbt, darker than yellow people and women, in that order.
The oppressed people are not only oppressed, but righteous and pure. Spacey isn’t gay, because (as Matt Lucas pointed out) being gay isn’t about same-sex attraction. That was a surprise to me, but apparently it’s about particular social values. (Plus, we can’t have pervert or abuser and gay in the same category - bviously only heterosexuals can be abusers.) So if we hold those values, we can all be feminists, or gay, or socially constructed black. Or something.
If we are going to support arbitrary categories of people, I’m with the Kekistanis.
Apple said that, over the past year, its overall percentage of women employees was flat at 32 per cent, while underrepresented minority employee levels were only up one per cent, at 23 per cent overall.
What an eldritch horror. Can't something BE DONE to attain those activist-imposed musrt-have pewrcentages?
But then, you know, when the bottom line is on the line,. Social Justice Bullshit and their retarded defenders can go f*ck themself and one actually wants to hire people good in tech...
I am so sick of this new found diversity persecution. Make cool products. Period. Where did that go?
The last couple decades have shown repeatedly the ability of people to be disruptive. I have not noticed there is an "advantage" or "privilege" to the disrupting groups. If you don't like where you're at, go be disruptive.
And maybe go read Kurt Vonnegutt's Harrison Bergeron (http://www.tnellen.com/westside/harrison.pdf). Got to be one of the most prescient short stories ever written.
You missed something,
"as the autumn weather turns to winter for much of the world"
Lets see, around the equator, (a large part of the worlds surface), there is no real winter.
SOUTH of that, Spring is turning into summer.
Apparently, the writer failed geography, and lives in a secluded hut with limited internet access, because they have never seen or heard of 2 thirds of the world.
Probably based on the Southern Hemisphere having 20% / 80% land/water ratio.
Therefore the part that is not the equator or Antarctica is even smaller.
Whilst Winter is applicable to the whole non-equatorial Southern Hemisphere, we can assume that the bulk of iPhone X users are on land (as indeed for the Northern Hemisphere), and not in Antarctica.
Therefore as far as iPhone X users go the statement is likely to be accurate.
Geographically however - what you said.
"Whilst Winter is applicable to the whole non-equatorial Southern Hemisphere, we can assume that the bulk of iPhone X users are on land .... Therefore as far as iPhone X users go the statement is likely to be accurate"
But surely owning an iPhone X gives you the ability to walk on water?
"As autumn weather turns to winter" speaks of countries that are busy having an autumn. In Australia, autumn also turns to winter -- it just does it six months differently than the northern hemisphere. Nearer the equator, things like "rainy season" get their chance to strut.
"Much of the world," I'd say, means "a pretty decent percentage." If they'd said "most", I could go with you. Remember, also, that the northern hemisphere has almost twice the land surface as the southern hemisphere does -- and that "winter" means different things to different people. I was in Thailand during their cold season, happily wearing short-sleeve shirts, but saw the occasional Thai going past in a light parka or heavy hoodie.
My goodness. I attempted to open this article on a Pixel- C 3 times and Chrome closed itself.
I say "itself" but given the content of the article the Apple Underground were probably hard at work protecting all right-thinking members of society from renegade lick-spittle fifth columnists.
Many of Apple's problems could have been avoided or at least mitigated, if Apple had focused on hiring the most competent people for the job, instead of obsessing about diversity for diversity's sake.
No, liberals, diversity is not our 'strength', and an enforced social objective is usually at odds with meritocracy. Things move at a rapid pace in the tech world, and I hope you do not get left behind while playing your frivolous virtue-signalling games.
No, liberals, diversity is not our 'strength', and an enforced social objective is usually at odds with meritocracy.
If we (the Western world) had a meritocracy in the first place, you'd have a valid point. But in the big corporate world, there's little evidence of the best people getting to the top, more like dull corporate wafflers who then recruit like-minded dullards (Tim Cook, the boards of HP and its spawn, IBM etc).
If you don't fit the mould, you're not getting in. That isn't directly about colour or gender, its just that lack of alikeness. Try speaking out of turn, and no matter how correct you are, no matter how white or male you are, if you're off message in a big corporation then you'll be shown the door, or no be promoted.
The question then becomes, should anything be done about this? I think the answer is a resolute no in non-monopoly markets. If a company recruits weaker management than it could, it will suffer the consequences. For monopolies like utilities, I can see that you might want to break up the cosy elitism, but in that scenario appointments are often political patronage rather than the old boys club, so not self-perpetuating as such.
Companies can only work with what they are given as input.
STEM graduates are still predominately male, not necessarily white male, but more likely white male or Asian male than any other. I base that on personal experience so no Wikipedia reference, but it seems to be true to me.
We need to fix things at a lower lever (AKA younger age) to make a long term difference.
Successful companies are a meritocracy (at least at the lower levels, I'll exclude the likes of Jony Ive and Tim Cook) so you can't just push people who aren't qualified or experienced up the ladder.
My personal experience of the few women and people of colour I work with is that their talents are largely in line with the general expectations. So neither better or worse, just equally valuable if the opportunities and motivation align to get them in to the job.
But still, the OLED isn't to blame here and I'm struggling to see how a an OS update is going to fix that problem.
Quote:
so you can't just push people who aren't qualified or experienced up the ladder.
ROFL
I am sure that many of us oldies have seen manager after manager come, fuck things up and get promoted out the way. How else did the term PHB originate then?
I was interviewed for a job once and almost the first question was
"What Golf Clubs do you belong to and what is your handicap?"
My answer was "None and don't have one."
Needless to say, I didn't get the job. Probably a good thing too.
When I was in a position to add more staff, I would have liked to even consider a woman but none applied for the job. Most of the Asian applicants lied through their teeth on their CV's so it is little wonder that I employed a White Male?
My daughter was one of 7 females that started her programming degree in a class of 76 students. She was one of three females and 18 males that graduated.
Surely it's not about meeting these so called diversity targets but more of equal pay for equal work and equal respect. No point having 50/50 male / female workforce if the female half are get paid 30 - 40% less then their male counterparts who are doing the same or even lesser work. Even 5% less for the same work is wrong!
@TRT
I don't know where JJKing's daughter went to school but here in Atlantic Canada that's quite typical of Engineering/CS courses at Community Colleges have about a 50% or lower graduation rate and Universities are lower than that I believe.
I don't know if that says good things about the expectations of the Instructor's and Professor's or bad things about the education that the students have received prior to enrollment in those programs. I suspect the latter.
Hmmm... an observation. A young female who has picked up a passion for engineering outside of school may have picked it up from a family member. Children of professionals may have an advantage over children of people whose life opportunities were more limited. There are patterns of advantageous upbringing passed down the generations.
I liked the pattern in The Fastest Indian in the World, about a boy chooses to hang out with the cranky old local motorcycle enthusiast. It requires hound people to have freedom and older people to have time, issues social and economic.
Fragments.
Why is it that we have devices right now which won't be able to operate on items from the past yet still fail to give us any significantly better performance or experience?
Sure, don't get me wrong: some features we have now are better than what we had before, but at what costs I ask? See.. this isn't something solely applicable to Apple here but it happens all over the place. Companies try to feed us with less options for the same (if not higher!) prices.
Windows 2008 / 2010 "modern look" everyone? A dull, flat and almost colorless interface which would remind anyone who lived it of Windows 2 with the major difference that we actually had resizeable windows (not so much with Metro though). And guess what: you can't run that on your 286 hardware even though functionality-wise the two weren't that much different.
Before you go at me: yes, things changed. Yes, we can do more. But... In most cases we can't do more, we can only do so easier. Generally speaking several features have become easier to use but that doesn't mean the feature was new nor was it some new functionality change.
This is no different. I had an old Samsung Jet which had this awesome touchpad interface, a small square which would display different icons based on the function. Of course, in the end all it registered was up/down/left/right but heck: it was cool because it was new.
... yet that never failed me with -20degrees celcius.
Newer isn't always better.
Oddly enough, while I've never run into it with any other Android device, I've discovered that my Moto e4's touchscreen & fingerprint reader similarly fail if I attempt to use it when my hands are overly warm. I have to wait a good 3-4 minutes before I can use it after getting out of the shower or washing my hands in warm water, for example — a bit problematic when somebody's calling me, an urgent notification arrives, or I need to pause my music.
... when mobile phones were designed for use in the wintery depths of the Swedish or Finnish countryside
Never heard of a Nokia screen that didn't work in the cold.. they were the first to bring out a phone you could use while wearing thick gloves, something I'm not sure if iPhones can do even now (the use of fingerprint unlocking forces you to de-glove anyway)
Does the facial recognition still work with billowing clouds of water vapour coming out of your mouth, whilst icicles hang off your nose and even your eyebrows have got frostbite?
Or do we hang onto out iPhone Xs until global warming really kicks in?
My Nokia 6210 screen (monochrome LCD dot matrix) would be slow in cold conditions (in a rucksack in the snow). The phone remained usable, but pixels took around 0.5 to 1 second to change state.
Had the phone been in my jacket pocket it would have been warmer (I was snowboarding, so didn't want a lumpy hard thing to fall on).
I'm left wondering if there's a way to turn that face-recognition shit off permanently. Nothing nefarious in wanting the option, but without the option your device dies with you. Otherwise, you might just want the benefits to be accelerometer-triggered. Or passcode-protected.
From TFA
"This is according to multiple complaints from owners and an admission from the Cupertino idiot-tax operation"
Cupertino's operation certainly does not have idiots managing its tax policy. On HIGNFY last night it was described as a large tax avoidance company with a small mobile phone division.
Given the display, which seems according to Displaymate to be the chief feature, is designed and made by Samsung, it would be interesting to know how may Apple engineers worked on the X versus the number in their suppliers.
Cupertino's operation certainly does not have idiots managing its tax policy. On HIGNFY last night it was described as a large tax avoidance company with a small mobile phone division.
I know a fanboy who is all over Apple like a cheap rash suit who has balked so far at the cost of an X. I remember when the 1st iPhone came out he said it was a nice touch computer with lousy mobile phone capability thrown in for good measure. Sounds similar.
Given the absence of information here (what temperatures, 100% of phones or just some, &c.), I note that the one Reddit post that did include temperatures noted it was -4 F (-20 C), which was way outside of Apple’s tech specs:
• Operating ambient temperature: 32° to 95° F (0° to 35° C)
• Nonoperating temperature: −4° to 113° F (−20° to 45° C)
And hopefully, way outside of any temperatures most punters will be experiencing in the UK this winter.
FWIW, the temperature ranges above are identical to those for the iPhone 8/8+, so I suspect there’s less here than meets the eye. Unless, of course, you live on Svalbard or in Minnesota.
"... as the autumn weather turns to winter for much of the world and temperatures drop."
<pedantry>Shurely that ought to be roughly 50% of the world, not taking into account equatorial regions and... Never mind, I'll get my coat...</pedantry>
Edit: Oh cock, I've just seen that this point has been raised much more-eloquently above by several people. Ignore this nonsense from me. Move along, etc. Sorry...
We are all meatbags, we all bleed red, we are all kinda trapped in the same gravity well. Did anyone ever figure out why forcing such homogenization into higher and higher social structures is an objectively Good Thing™? Is there something like a religious tract that I should read? Because it seems like a religion to me... an' I already got one.
[quietly] I told them we've already got one. :D
More childish guff from the Register. When are you going to grow up and do sensible reporting on Apple?
From the headline, it sounded like iPhone X would be completely inoperable in slightly cold weather. But the admission half-way down:
"After several seconds the screen will become fully responsive again."
Before that though, the inclusion of your typical cliche "idiot-tax". Oh, all those other profit-making companies like Samsung are so noble - as if!
From the headline, it sounded like iPhone X would be completely inoperable in slightly cold weather. But the admission half-way down:"After several seconds the screen will become fully responsive again."
Right. Because after spending nearly $3k on a phone it's perfectly acceptable for the bloody thing not to work after a change of environment. Another area my $20 dumbphone outperforms the crapple (when they stop making crap products, they stop getting called "crapple" - don't like the name "crapple" then get them to make non-crap products!)
Before that though, the inclusion of your typical cliche "idiot-tax". Oh, all those other profit-making companies like Samsung are so noble - as if!
When people defend behaviour like this, well, they deserve to at least be called idiots.
And at least the Samsung phones work, and generally have far more features for far less cost.
"as the autumn weather turns to winter for much of the world and temperatures drop."
Technically, it's for 50% of the world, but the Tropics and a fair bit north won't be too affected by temperature drops. The southern hemisphere will see the temperature rise as they're heading into summer.
Technically, it's for 50% of the world, but the Tropics and a fair bit north won't be too affected by temperature drops. The southern hemisphere will see the temperature rise as they're heading into summer.
#1 "Much of" does not mean "all of" or necessarily even "most of". "What did you do at work today hon?" "Well, much of the time I spent waiting for IT to get the damned network back up" - could mean "hon" had a 10 minute or 7hr outage.
#2 Much of the world's population is in the Northern Hemisphere, which is heading into Winter. Much of the Southern Hemisphere is ocean, as has been pointed out here.
#3 If you were to visit where I live, you'd be a little worried that we're not going to see summer this year - couple of weeks out and we've got a cold snap that has people using heaters, lighting fires inside etc when we should be out enjoying the weather. There is a significant risk of brass monkeys losing their marbles.
"The Silicon Valley giant's latest diversity report, out this week, shows efforts to integrate women and underrepresented ethnic groups – ie, not white or Asian – are stalling"
This isn't surprising. Most women don't want to work in tech. (Lucky I don't work for Google or that would get me fired) They largely go for hairdressing and beauty, reception and book keeping work, nursing, teaching, etc.
Eventually the left pushing this agenda will have to admit that you can't force people into jobs they don't want. Even with the barriers removed some people will never do this. Most men won't go into hairdressing and beauty jobs, women won't go into the construction trade or tech.
This is only seen as a problem when it's the women underrepresented though. Fuck the men...
Downvote away...Just look at your female friends and the jobs they do, or better yet ask them why they won't do these jobs. Personal friends include: Avon Lady, Supermarket checkout worker, housewife (multiple), Shop assistant, Uni student, hairdresser (x2), and that's the majority. If you notice a lot of these are part-time or flexible hours for family time.
You can't get an exact matching diversity in every job. It doesn't happen because people have minds and personalities. (generally) Men work for money, women work for home/life balance. Even paying women £10,000 each to go into STEM fields has failed, and that's a blatanlty discriminatory bung.
Yeah ask that Uni Student why she chose that job eh?
Seriously, your first point "Most women don't want to work in tech" may be correct, although I'd prefer to see some stats before stating it categorically, but your second "They largely go for hairdressing and beauty, reception and book keeping work, nursing, teaching, etc." is just a stereotype based on your limited experience.
The real situation is more complex than simply "employ more women" as the positive action people would like, but it's also not as simple as you seem to think.
Seriously, your first point "Most women don't want to work in tech" may be correct, although I'd prefer to see some stats before stating it categorically, but your second "They largely go for hairdressing and beauty, reception and book keeping work, nursing, teaching, etc." is just a stereotype based on your limited experience.
There's an easy way to deal with that. Go to the ladies you know, and (politely) ask them what sort of work they'd prefer to do and why.
If you know women enough, you'll find a lot want to go into part-time work to increase "work/home/life balances", you'll find some who go for "traditional female roles" because they don't wish to put up with perceived1 issues in male-dominated roles.
You'll find there's a number of reasons, but mostly they fall into "women just don't want to do those roles", and much of that is not because of issues around "male dominance" but simply that the type of work does not interest them.
Sometimes stereotypes exist for a good reason. A large number of beneficiaries are lazy and don't want to work, a large number of homeless people are alcoholics and/or have mental health issues, a large number of women don't want to work in construction, a large number of men don't want to become princesses (despite the number we have in world politics and social media forums these days!)
Oh, and until you actually do something like this, your experience (in this area at least) is more limited than Tigra 07's..
1 Not all of these issues are as bad as some think, and not all are as good as some think, and sometimes the issues they expect (eg physically hard work than they can do)2 aren't realistic, but other issues they never considered (sexual harassment, stupid office politics) might be worse than they imagined.
2 See a lady when she makes the move from city folk to farmer('s wife) - see in her first weeks how she fears even some of the smaller animals, how even a week-old calf can scare her. See her a few years later when she puts an aggressive bull in its place without giving a thought to the size/strength disparity, and simply how the bull knows it'd better hurry up and damned well do what it's been told!
I think this is just Apple making a statement about how Global Warming is coming and therefore it doesn't matter if the screen is unusable in the cold. According to Al Gore, by the time the things ship all ice everywhere will have melted and it'll be like 100 degrees (F) everywhere anyway.
I'm not a big fan of iHype launches but I wonder about these reports. The screen tech isn't novel or unique and I've had issues using various manufacturers touch screens in very cold weather and in rain.
I think I'll just wait a few weeks before drawing any conclusions.
I find Apple draws both unhinged positive and negative reporting.