nerdjon

HomeKit isnt new though, the accessories are the same accessories that have existed for years. Sure Apple has announced new ones today, but its just more options. Home Automation has always been expensive regardless of the ecosystem your in.

That idea has never really been as true about Apple has people love to claim.

The Home app launched in 2016 (HomeKit in 2014).

The Health app launched in 2014. Both apps meant to work with third party devices/apps and act as a hub of information.

What I find most surprising, is that I don't think we got any sort of timeline from Apple on this change and its very vague (which just fuels articles like this).

So did this initiative within Apple just start and we could be looking at this change coming in Mac 28?

I don't remember another time of an announcement like this from Apple of a major change with so little information, though I could be wrong or hint of when.

Regarding the concern, while I do hope that there is still a way to grant actual full disk access to some applications. Even Apple called out a non controversial need for something like that, backup software. I can also think of security scanning software, a lot of businesses have those deployed to corporate Mac's. I do also think that better controls around it, especially in this age of vibe coded apps that never actually think about security or actively hostile companies like meta.

With some of what they showed, I wish they never separated iOS and iPadOS. The duo seems to be bringing more of the iPad features and if they could position this as one device to replace both (and the price point sure reflects that) it could be interesting.

But without that, I don't see the use for myself. Though I also rock a 13" iPad Pro so even with that it would be a hard sell to replace both.

I still am not sold on the entire idea of a foldable, there is some interesting things here and I will be interested to see how they position it over the next few generations.

People did risk assessments with VMWare and we see how that turned out.

Things can change, just because you make your risk assessment doesn't mean you should ignore that there is still something in that contract that could turn on you just as easily.

Should we go back 10 years, maybe the risk would have been the same. Did Sony do any of these things then, but the policy was the same. How about 10 years from now, just because of your "risk assessment" doesn't mean that Valve is suddenly safer, just just means so far they have been safer.

I am not saying don't use Valve, but there is zero reason to believe they could not just as easily do this.

Of course, I am not arguing otherwise. But if your core problem is not the removal of content but what Sony is arguing right now. You should have just as much of an issue with Valve as you do Sony since you are signing up for the same legal risk.

Just because one has done it and the other hasn't is a technicality to me since that could change overnight.

The point that I am trying to make here is that it is insane to me that all of this is focused on Sony. And frankly I don't have a good solution here, but just arguing that one TOS is better than another because one company hasn't done the thing yet but could is not a good argument.

How many times have we seen management change, companies being bought, whatever and suddenly something really bad happens.

I am just getting really frustrated by Sony this, Sony that. Boycot sony, etc when if all we do is move to another platform with the same policies do we really expect anything to change?

Why is your knee jerk reaction to defend steam?

Sure they have said and claimed a lot of things, but their TOS says the same thing that Sony is arguing. Its suddenly this big shock now but no one cared before? Sure the way Sony is handling this is fumble after fumble but thats PR.

My problem is that Valve for some reason gets a free pass because "they are the good guys" when their own policy means they could do the exact same thing.

I own a lot of games on Steam, but I am not nieve to assume that there is not a chance that at some point I could loose all or some of those games. People are for some reason in a false sense of security about Steam and that is a problem. They have to be part of the conversation when it comes to digital ownership. Ignoring them means we can't actually solve the issue.

So its fine that they force you to agree to something when you paid for it but its not fine when they do the thing you agreed too?

Instead of actually trying to fix the issue we just hope that Valve never has to do the thing they are legally allowed to do because we agreed they could.

I honestly don't care who has done what, I don't care what company is supposedly better than another company.

Overnight Valve, Microsoft, whoever could just as easily remove access to a bunch of digital purchases.

How about instead we just don't excuse any of the companies?

I maybe should have phrased that better since I do understand their announcement around disks and removing the movies is a reason why they are the current target.

I just find it hypocritical, people keep saying they are going to move to xbox or pc next gen and its like. Their policy is exactly the same. You have the same risk and not really ownership.

And I am not defending Sony, they have a long history of getting cocky with their consoles and pulling some shit. But in this particular case they are following the trend that we allowed by going all digital on PC and buying digital games on consoles.

Sony isnt going to be the one that changes this, the only way to expect change would be targeting all of them including Valve. But everyone, like this article, just seems to gloss right over that and seem to imply its only Sony that is the problem here.

I honestly keep forgetting GoG exists but fair, maybe saying there is no choice is a bit much but if you want to play a given game it may not be available there meaning your choice is to not play it or deal with this.

I gave up long ago trying to optimize any rewards, it just ended up being stressful and not really worth it ultimately.

Now I just use my apple card everywhere, pay it off every month and get whatever rewards I get.

It feels like a weird situation, those that stand to gain the most from credit cards are also the ones that should feel a difference of under $100 in rewards the least.

The one exception I see is bonus sign up rewards since those can be fairly significant, or making sure you use an airline card at the airline since those bonuses can be fairly significant (with sometimes other benefits). But outside of those exceptions, just choose a card with good rewards and stick with that and pay it off every month.

When I saw the announcement I was kinda hoping that they were taking a magic keyboard, tearing it apart and adding the extra hardware to make having this possible.

But seems like that is not the case.