Making privacy some end-goal that PMs cut to meet targets is how you end up with Google redefining privacy to mean "only we have access to every aspect of your life, now and in the future".
If Apple takes the position that the UX has to fit in around the privacy requirements, so what? Privacy is a core pillar of their product identity—a built-in hallucinating compliments machine isn't.
> nominally "selling" plots to people but with terms of service attached that restrict what you can do with the land you bought and that allow the company to change the terms at any time.
Yeah, but it's specifically testing things that implement against a posix API (because generally that's what "native" apis do (omiting libc and other os specific foundation libraries that are pulled in at runtime or otherwise) I would suspect that if the applications that linked against some wasi like runtime it might be a better metric (native wasi as a lib/vs a was runtime that also links) mind you that still wouldn't help the browser runtime... But would be a better metric for wasm (to native) performance comaparison.
But as already mentioned we have gone through this all before. Maybe we'll see wasm bytecodes pushed through silicon like we did the Jvm... Although perhaps this time it might stick or move up into server hardware (which might have happened, but I only recall embedded devices supporting hardware level Jvm bytecodes).
In short the web browser bit is omitted from the title.
There is absolutely no way you successfully adjust two knobs at the same time on a multitouch display, let alone while doing live music. They are barely usable one by one.
There is a reason people serious about doing music keep using physical knobs to change values in their software. I’m entirely convinced the sole reason DAWs use virtual knobs despite them being such a poor UX element is because people will map them to MIDI knobs anyway and that keeps the software and physical world looking the same.
It is impossible to configure recent ipads in any other way. There are no established 3rd party OSes that you can install, even with great effort. IOS does not respect user freedom. As an example, see the restrictions on running code that Apple didn't approve of (directly, or, in the EU, indirectly).
> assistive access only works for the standard apps
Other apps can offer a proper Assistive Access mode [0], but when most developers these days put writing a real app in the ‘too hard’ basket, getting them to actually use platform features feels like an impossibly long shot.
Thanks, that is good to know! Sad to learn that even the most mainstream of apps with incredible profit margins don't seem to find this worth implementing. This would have been a reason to switch some of my family onto Apple
Glad to know I was correct. They didn’t claim it was new or “never thought of before” at all—they even specifically pointed out how they already did it on their other products.
I’m pretty sure they almost spent more time talking about the colours of the phone.
Repair State isn’t a feature that you need to know about unless you’re having your phone repaired or traded in, at which point you’ll learn about it.
It’s a perfect example of a feature being surfaced exactly as it should be, when needed. Quite a bit of mental gymnastics to twist that into being an ‘issue’.
I disagree. If I take my phone in, I'm going to wipe it first. If someone asks me, I'd say they should do the same.
Now that I know it's a feature, I won't suggest that for iPhone users as backup+restore just sucks. (I know restore is easy, but bank apps, Signal, etc don't get backed up, so it is an annoyance)
If Apple takes the position that the UX has to fit in around the privacy requirements, so what? Privacy is a core pillar of their product identity—a built-in hallucinating compliments machine isn't.