Kirby64

34 ms·

691.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Generally speaking since DC charging is so fast, you need to have very tight control over the cooling and performance of the cells or you’ll have issues with longevity. Lots of retrofits just kind of stuff batteries wherever they fit… so co
692.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Well, but it’s not both. It has a physical travel, that was the question. Whether there’s additional functionality beyond that done by cap/force was pretty clearly a yes based on the keynote.
693.
by Kirby64 2y ago
If you’re using the phone to shoot ProRes video, it uses something absurd like 1GB/min of video… so, offloading that video via USB2 would be agonizing.
694.
by Kirby64 2y ago
You can buy AppleCare+ monthly indefinitely (until they EOL the device) at a monthly rate. You can even renew it after the 2 year length into a monthly plan.
695.
by Kirby64 2y ago
In the side shot cutaways you could see an actual physical micro switch. Their cutaway shots tend to be accurate, so it looks to be an actual physical switch.
696.
by Kirby64 2y ago
On the 15 series it was since they used different chip generations. No idea on the new 16 series, we’ll have to wait for die shots from teardown groups.
697.
by Kirby64 2y ago
15 and 15 Pro both had USB-C. The 15 pro just has USB3 capable USB-C (15 regular was USB2 only). Seems like they're keeping that differentiation, which I suppose makes sense given the USB3 PHY is a considerable die cost.
698.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Single press and swipe right on the iPhone seems intuitive enough to me. The issue I have with the current shortcuts (using buttons) for photos in every phone I've tested is that the pressing of the button is 'stiff' enough i
699.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Presumably you're joking, but even assuming perfect articulation of a mortar and pestle, the inherent uncertainty with how coffee breaks when cracked is going to lead to inconsistent particle size. The reason burrs actually work for pr
700.
by Kirby64 2y ago
The not-so-secret truth is that espresso isn't an 'upgrade' from pour overs, it's just a fork in the coffee road. They're different beverages altogether. Pour overs/drip/brewed coffee is not necessarily wo
701.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Are you ignoring the cost of coffee and milk? Even modestly priced coffee ($14/12oz) ends with each shot being roughly $0.75 in just ground coffee. No idea what milk costs for you since pricing can be so variable, but in actual raw com
702.
by Kirby64 2y ago
$600 on "real espresso" really is a pretty appropriate bar. It might be a bit lower nowadays thanks to some cheaper offerings, but getting that number below $400 is quite difficult barring used gear, incredible sales, or compromis
703.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Something like this if we’re sticking with TI parts: https://www.ti.com/product/TAS2574 Also, there can be many reasons for removing the headphone jack. I personally think the theory that the primary motivator was to d
704.
by Kirby64 2y ago
It’s not complicated, it’s just a more powerful amplifier which costs more money, area, etc. it’s not in most phones because very few people have 300 ohm headphones. That’s the only reason.
705.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Nobody is using a part like that for any speaker output in a cell phone, let alone a laptop. Modern speaker drivers are closer to 8-12W (even in cell phones) so the wimpy 400mW of that device is worthless. It’s also in a package completely
706.
by Kirby64 2y ago
It’s much easier to make a headphone output that is tailored to a very specific driver than it is to make a generic headphone driver that can drive any conceivable headphone plugged in.
707.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Nobody uses the same DAC for headphone output as they do for speakers. There’s dedicated devices for each of these in every system, as it’s just more efficient. Also, most devices allow simultaneous output on headphone and speakers (think,
708.
by Kirby64 2y ago
As a non audiophile who designs this stuff for a living, you’re correct it’s not difficult or even particularly expensive. But it’s also surprisingly common to do it poorly.
709.
by Kirby64 2y ago
It’s always been a problem for any higher impedance headphones. Being able to drive 300 or 600 ohm headphones is quite difficult, and many headphone drivers are not capable of doing it at sufficient volume. Not technically hard, mind you, j
710.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Not true, modern BT codecs can be essentially transparent, and cheap 3.5mm jacks can have all sorts of issues. Bad noise performance, bad interchannel isolation, pop click issues, etc. don’t underestimate how badly you can design a 3.5mm ja
711.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Why would you optimize for quick changing something that needs to be changed, pessimistically, every 2 years? You can swap the batteries in the newer models, it’s not that hard. In every other way the newer models are superior. Far better A
712.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Modern ANC headphones (over ear) have plenty of battery life for any flight. Most are north of 30 hours, some reaching 50 hours even with ANC on. For planes there’s just nothing better than over ear headphones for noise canceling.
713.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Not headsets, but Bose ANC headphones have used a 2.5mm jacks for years (and still do). They give you a 2.5 to 3.5mm cable, though. I imagine this is likely just to drive cable sales, though, as there isn’t any real reason you need the 2.5m
714.
by Kirby64 2y ago
Did you even read the article? The author points out both of those points are essentially just excuses. Phones haven’t been made thinner, and you can still fit 3.5mm jacks in most phones, and there are plenty of waterproof phones with a 3.5
715.
by Kirby64 2y ago
That’s fine if you want it to be a hobby. Admirable even. But not everyone wants yet another hobby. If you could get the benefits then the vast majority of folks I don’t think would miss anything meaningful. You’ve got to enjoy the tertiary
716.
by Kirby64 2y ago
As someone that exercises a lot, that’s just cope. Sure, it has side benefits, but the primary overwhelming benefit is improving health and improving aesthetics. You can build mental discipline in plenty of other ways. You can build grit in
717.
by Kirby64 2y ago
There's a difference between your framing of "gorging and binging" on food and the fact being that portion sizes in American are just not sustainable for many people. If a meal at a restaurant is 1000 calories, and drinks are
718.
by Kirby64 2y ago
I don't really see the issue with unfortunately in either example 1 or 3. 2 is a moral judgment which is unrelated. If you could take a pill to make yourself grow muscles without downsides, it would be great. There's nothing &#x27
719.
by Kirby64 2y ago
What's your quibble here? The use of the word unfortunately? My point is that it's not some quick fix, it requires dedication to unlearn bad habits and commit to changing for the better. It cannot be a one-and-done approach, as fa
720.
by Kirby64 2y ago
It seems like you're taking a personal anecdote and generalizing it to everyone. Some people will need to ignore hunger pangs, because the alternative is eating too many calories. Also, it may be the compromise between eating the food

More ›