361–370 of 479 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're proving the parent commenter's point that "this is about availability of special features which require a dedicated driver non-Apple devices are not expected to have", because there is no standard way in BLE to report more than one battery value. Wireless earbuds are a device pair, each with its own battery. Apple, like every other vendor, does not have a choice but to implement this as a proprietary character…
> Apple, like every other vendor, does not have a choice but to implement this as a proprietary characteristic. Pre-BLE, other vendors copied Apple's de-facto `HFP They could publish the details, and not block other manufacturer details, so that it is easier for other platforms to develop drivers for them. Or develop a new standard that works for their earbuds.
companies actually can build and ship stuff that isn't inter-operable with the world, this is Actually Good for user experience
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No there isn’t. I’ve said this a million times before, but usually just downvoted: this is about reducing support costs, not increasing revenue from lock-in. This is not a theory, I’ve sat in meetings at Cupertino and been told first hand. Support is very expensive. Say what you want about Apple, but they provide absolutely stellar support, especially with the stupidly inexpensive Apple Care insurance. This is only c…
That's tautological. Everything that is not supported is so because supporting it has a cost. The question is what is the cost? It seems quite obvious that the marginal revenue from airpods would be overshadowed by the revenue of getting a user in the ecosystem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whatever is reported to iPhones. It's not an excuse to block non Apple devices from reading battery level
All three get reported to iphones.
Cool project, not cool that it needs to exist. Apple isn’t only content to leech off OSS software, they have to force the existence of more of it to workaround what they closed off.
It’s exactly the same to try to use pixel buds on an Apple phone too. I don’t blame Apple or Google so much as the ridiculous pissing matches of a society that refuses to find ways to cooperate efficiently. So much energy is wasted in the name of vendor lock-in and related. Would it take more energy for Google and Apple to share in expanding into the Bluetooth capabilities in a shared way? Sure for their developers,…
Is it? You have to link me to the iOS patches that iPhone users have written to enable Pixel Buds on iOS.
Or maybe it's not exactly the same.
No. They want to sell more i-devices so this is just punishment for not fully participating.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple, like every other vendor, does not have a choice but to implement this as a proprietary characteristic. Pre-BLE, other vendors copied Apple's de-facto `HFP They could publish the details, and not block other manufacturer details, so that it is easier for other platforms to develop drivers for them. Or develop a new standard that works for their earbuds.
why would apple do this? it's all cost and no benefit. companies actually can build and ship stuff that isn't inter-operable with the world, this is Actually Good for user experience
Imagine if every human on the planet would operate like this.
We'd be back in the Stone Ages.
> companies actually can build and ship stuff that isn't inter-operable with the world, this is Actually Good for user experience
...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just take apple to small claims court. If everyone who is scammed by Apple takes them to small claims they will have an incentive to change. Without this they have -0.00000000000 incentive to do anything. Even a class action suit won't help. The fundamental question is whether Apple should be able to sell products with lock in. Since there is lockin on all Apple products it is not accidental. In my humble opinion onl…
> Just take apple to small claims court. You can't do that, you certainly agreed to binding arbitration with apple at some point.
A cool project, when you want to use AirPods outside of Apples ecosystem. Sadly, you have to use a rooted android device with a small patch due to a bug in the Android Bluetooth implementation. https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/371713238
Any idea how much latency there is between the beginning of audio being played in an app, and it then coming out the headset? I use wired headphones to study with Anki (AnkiDroid) because I've found most (inexpensive) Bluetooth headphones require a second or two to begin playing. As I'm dealing with short audio clips, this use case necessitates restarting the "audio playing" situation every few seconds. Maybe the app…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you pair AirPods with a non-Apple bluetooth device, you lose the automatic device switching is all. You can still "enter and exit" the Apple ecosystem with them by just going into Bluetooth settings and tapping on the AirPods and they'll reconnect to Apple-land and start switching again, and vice versa. Once paired with, say, Windows, it'll auto-connect or you can manually trigger it by just tapping them in Blue…
I mean ya, if they couldn't do that, then you couldn't even call it Bluetooth. I was asking about multi-device connectivity, which is a slightly more advanced feature that lots of other earbuds can do in a cross-platform way.