If you listen to the Woodstock soundtrack it is clear that Hendrix was on a completely different musical level than anyone else in that scene. Ravi Shankar was probably the only person there above him from a chops perspective and possibly in the expressivity department as well. But when it came to sheer inventiveness no one was close to Hendrix. I cannot imagine what it must have been like to see and hear him. It must have felt like an alien was performing.
I have come around to the idea of guitars being electronic instruments. Strings are the original oscillators. Once they become electrical signals it isn't clear to me how they differ categorically from any other electric instrument. There are an almost infinite number of pedals, many of which offer things like filters, LFOs, and other synthesis stalwarts. You could even make the guitar a controller for more traditional synthesis work.
JRiver is an advanced media player that works cross platform including Linux. It isn’t the prettiest thing around and understanding everything that it can do can be frustrating but it will do just about anything you’d like a media player to do.
I rarely interact with it directly. I usually use JRemote on my iPad or iPhone to control it. There is also an incredibly fast web front end you can use in whatever device you want.
Does the old Logitech music server (or whatever it is called these days) work on Linux? There have been a bunch of front end programs to use those servers.
The problem with that is that things like remasters, special editions, etc. screw up the timeline. Those are listed when they came out but that means they are not in original releases order any longer.
I don't think it is possible to have a locked down development machine. You have to be able to run arbitrary code on a development machine so they can never lock it down like iOS is.
There are plenty of other ways they can be less open and hackable than Linux but it can never get to the point of the iPhone.
That’s a reasonable take. The never part seems strong though.
If I may offer a slight consideration? “arbitrary code vs arbitrary signed code”.
What’s realistically stopping Apple from requiring all code and processes be signed? Including on device dev code with a trust chain going back to Apple and TPU / Secure Enclave enforcement
Abortion is currently too divisive in the US to get a national health care system going. One side will absolutely refuse to include it and the other will absolutely require it. If one side brute forces it there will be immense backlash.
Along similar lines it isn't clear that having the federal government controlling healthcare at a more fundamental level is a good idea. Many (most?) would shudder at the thought of this administration controlling healthcare.
They are prioritizing safety both personal and litigious. Apple markets it as a way to find lost things, not stolen things. There are trackers you can buy for tracking stolen things. I'm only familiar with ones designed for cars but I'm sure there are others as well.
Apple cannot lockdown the Mac. You can’t have a development machine that is incapable of running arbitrary code. Back when they still did WWDC live they said that software development was the biggest professional bloc of Mac users. I’m certain that these days development is the biggest driver of the expensive Macs. No one has ever made a decent argument as to why Apple would lock down the Mac that would also explain why they haven’t done it yet.
Passivity isn’t hostility. There isn’t any evidence that Apple is considering locking down the Mac. They could have easily done that with the transition to their own silicon but they didn’t despite the endless conspiracy theories.
Apple can lockdown the Mac. You might not think it is likely, but without UEFI there is no path of recourse if Apple decides to update iBoot. How do you launch Asahi if Apple quits reading the EFI from the secure partition?
> They could have easily done that with the transition to their own silicon
They already did, that's what my last comment just outlined. Macs do not ship with UEFI anymore, you are wholly at the mercy of a proprietary bootloader that can be changed at any time.
Again, why haven't they done it yet? It's because you cannot lock down a development platform. Yes, they could do it but it doesn't make any sense. You haven't articulated why they would do it only that they could.
Why people continue to think Apple will treat the Mac like the iPhone I have no idea. Will Microsoft take the same approach with Windows as they did with Xbox? Different product, different strategy.
App.net was a wonderful experience with great developer buy in. It is also my understanding that it was operating at break even when it was mothballed. The VC backing it wanted Facebook returns. It was an amazing experience because it didn’t depend on advertisers. I have no idea how it would have fared through Covid and election dramas but it remains my platonic ideal for a social network.
It isn’t clear to me that Apple will ever pursue their own chatbot like Gemini, ChatGPT, etc. There’s lots of potential for on device AI functions without it ever being a general purpose agent that tries to do everything. AI and LLMs are not synonymous.
reply