184 replies to this topic

[mmmcurry]

Apple vs Windoze:

Old workplace laptop, Win7, then Win 10 in 2021, over time both slowed down even though they were locked down, had to run a VM to do any work testing as everything in prod / dev was linux

Wife's laptop 2 year old laptop that gets used for occasional browsing and docs in Libra Office (I refuse to pay for office), slow, ok it wasn't a gaming machine, but we're not asking much of it. Came with win10, I see no reason to upgrade. Noticeably slower than when we first got it. I update it, the mrs doesn't.

Current work, MacBook Pro, nice bit of kit, no slowdown that I've noticed after 1.5 years, as it's unix based it means I can do all testing on the local machine without VMs

My laptop, nearly 7 year old laptop running Ubuntu 22.04 LTS, mostly browsing / radio, bought when I left a previous job to learn tech (after failing to do the same on another windows PC), Done video editing on it, was a bit painful, but it wasn't  powerful when I bought it, seems faster than the current Win laptop even though it's older and less powerful.

 

Windows is the main reason why I have a PS5, no faf with drivers, bloatware, it just works, even after 5 years no slow down, for the fraction of a price of a gaming PC. But it depends what you're after, for me Linux laptop does everything I want.

 

As for Apple and F1, I ditched Sky recently and have Disney and Netflix, unless Channel 4 lose their highlights I'll not get another streaming service and to be honest if I want to watch a full race I'll just go to the local pub with Sky (and Apple if they have that for F1).

 

Edit - I know the PS5 isn't years old, but after 5 years the PS4, 3, 2 & 1 still worked as well as day one.

Edited by mmmcurry, 06 October 2023 - 12:17.

[renzmann]

No one is forcing you. That is entirely your choice. Just because you are not being offered something that you would prefer does not mean that you are forced to take the alternative.

You're not wrong, and I see your point. If the only F1 broadcaster in my country only offers F1 in a package with sports I don't like, nobody forces me to buy anything.

 

This wasn't my original point, but I do think there's some coercion involved, because regulators miss the point about sports markets. As I see it, Sky Germany is a monopolist in the German F1 market. Sure, German race fans can watch other series (or other sports, or nothing) as well, but there is only a single F1 broadcaster. That enables Sky to ask prices far above what apparently is the market price (27 euros vs. 8 euros at F1TV). It'd be nice not to be a costumer in a monopolist market, i.e. multiple competitors should broadcast F1 IMO.

 

Then again, sports broadcasting is one of the very few commodities I'm a socialist at  It's bad for democracy if not everybody can watch the nation's favorite sports for free. I miss the days when I saw a great football match and the next day at school everybody (students and teachers alike) would talk about it. Now, even events like quarter or semi finals CL matches are only being watched by very few colleagues. Societies need binding!

[Skelly1927]

You're not wrong, and I see your point. If the only F1 broadcaster in my country only offers F1 in a package with sports I don't like, nobody forces me to buy anything.

 

This wasn't my original point, but I do think there's some coercion involved, because regulators miss the point about sports markets. As I see it, Sky Germany is a monopolist in the German F1 market. Sure, German race fans can watch other series (or other sports, or nothing) as well, but there is only a single F1 broadcaster. That enables Sky to ask prices far above what apparently is the market price (27 euros vs. 8 euros at F1TV). It'd be nice not to be a costumer in a monopolist market, i.e. multiple competitors should broadcast F1 IMO.

 

Then again, sports broadcasting is one of the very few commodities I'm a socialist at  It's bad for democracy if not everybody can watch the nation's favorite sports for free. I miss the days when I saw a great football match and the next day at school everybody (students and teachers alike) would talk about it. Now, even events like quarter or semi finals CL matches are only being watched by very few colleagues. Societies need binding!

I am not sure how you can have competing live broadcasts in the same market. I know Sky does a deal with Channel 4 for the British Grand Prix, but that's semi-promotional for Sky to entice viewers to get the full package. Any way I am not how you can have two competing pay-for suppliers of broadcast. F1 only has a product if it can offer national broadcasters exclusivity. I am not sure it's monopolistic either. You are free to watch other motorsports and there's plenty out there. It just sounds like the typical "I like this thing I want it for free".

I have my issues with Sky and the various broadcasters of F1 because the product they offer isn't worth it, but I have taken my custom elsewhere.

 

[mmmcurry]

I am not sure how you can have competing live broadcasts in the same market. I know Sky does a deal with Channel 4 for the British Grand Prix, but that's semi-promotional for Sky to entice viewers to get the full package. 

 

 

I thought that the British GP was protected, like the football world cup and Olympics and they had to be made free to air, could be wrong though it happens (just ask the wife...). 

[jonpollak]

One speaks English, Latin and ancient Greek - there are no other languages

What?…. NO Sanskrit?
You’re younger than I thought !!

Jp

[pdac]

... I know Sky does a deal with Channel 4 for the British Grand Prix, but that's semi-promotional for Sky to entice viewers to get the full package. ...

 

 

I thought that the British GP was protected, like the football world cup and Olympics and they had to be made free to air, could be wrong though it happens (just ask the wife...). 

 

Indeed. They are obliged to make the British Grand Prix coverage available to all as a condition of their licence to broadcast in the UK.

[New Britain]

You're not wrong, and I see your point. If the only F1 broadcaster in my country only offers F1 in a package with sports I don't like, nobody forces me to buy anything.

 

This wasn't my original point, but I do think there's some coercion involved, because regulators miss the point about sports markets. As I see it, Sky Germany is a monopolist in the German F1 market. Sure, German race fans can watch other series (or other sports, or nothing) as well, but there is only a single F1 broadcaster. That enables Sky to ask prices far above what apparently is the market price (27 euros vs. 8 euros at F1TV). It'd be nice not to be a costumer in a monopolist market, i.e. multiple competitors should broadcast F1 IMO.

 

Then again, sports broadcasting is one of the very few commodities I'm a socialist at  It's bad for democracy if not everybody can watch the nation's favorite sports for free. I miss the days when I saw a great football match and the next day at school everybody (students and teachers alike) would talk about it. Now, even events like quarter or semi finals CL matches are only being watched by very few colleagues. Societies need binding!

How would you do that? The commercial rights to events such as the Olympics and World Cup are owned by NGOs and thus may be thought of as public property (at least in a sense). Motor races are typically organised and promoted by private businesses. The commercial rights to F1 are the property of a private business. Although one might argue that Mosley stole the rights from an NGO when he essentially gave them to his business partner (at the very least Mosley committed fraud), the fact is that for the next 80-ish years they will be private property.

[loki]

Not being able to watch a privately owned sporting event is bad for democracy?  Seriously?  That’s as wacky as me not getting a Merceds SUV  for free is bad for democracy.

[flatlandsman]

This might also free up UK viewers to watch F1TV coverage, but I would imagine if they do buy this, Apple will just sell the rights coverage to SKY again. And maybe have F1TV as part of an Apple package. 

Either way as a punter you will not win!

[Amphicar]

Indeed. They are obliged to make the British Grand Prix coverage available to all as a condition of their licence to broadcast in the UK.

Not true - the British GP is no longer protected by the OFFCOM code. The race is only available free to air because Channel 4 did a deal with Sky that runs to 2026.

[RacingSmoke]

Then again, sports broadcasting is one of the very few commodities I'm a socialist at  It's bad for democracy if not everybody can watch the nation's favorite sports for free. I miss the days when I saw a great football match and the next day at school everybody (students and teachers alike) would talk about it. Now, even events like quarter or semi finals CL matches are only being watched by very few colleagues. Societies need binding!

 

The same with me back when I was at school. Some of the best moments of school for me were when my team Chelsea beat Liverpool. All of my friends were Liverpool fans and I often went over the edge and provoked them into putting hands on me     

 

Those were really the days... anyway, enough of my reminiscing. 

 

Apple gaining the rights could better the coverage. My only thing is it would be great if they could just offer it as standalone package, not tying into other bundles or whatever. What would people be willing to pay a month? I think £10 to £20 could be fair price point given the market.

[YamahaV10]

As long as F1TV remains an option as well, let them have it.

Yes. Pretty tough to beat F1TV. They better not screw it up

[pdac]

Not true - the British GP is no longer protected by the OFFCOM code. The race is only available free to air because Channel 4 did a deal with Sky that runs to 2026.

You are correct (and I am wrong). I'm sure the British Grand Prix used to be a listed event, but it appears it is no longer (perhaps it never was and I'm just dreamed that up).

 

So it looks like the live coverage on C4 is simply a commercial deal (although I wouldn't discount the possibility that someone with power has suggested to Sky that if they opened up to a deal on the GP, they would not be pushed on other things)

Edited by pdac, 06 October 2023 - 20:29.

[pdac]

Yes. Pretty tough to beat F1TV. They better not screw it up

 

Live coverage through F1TV is not available in the UK because Sky has the exclusive rights. I'm sure if Apple get the exclusive rights in other regions, then F1TV live coverage will cease to be available in those regions too.

[FirstnameLastname]

F1TV is surely a given for Liberty? No way they’d give their own in-house operation up?

[Sterzo]

As so often, the UK government stance on broadcasting of sport is muddled, inconsistent and barely comprehensible. As far as I can work out:

• The government does believe in the principle that certain sports ought to be available to watch on TV free of charge. The British GP certainly was included in the list (why?), though no longer is (why?) and other races weren't (why?).
• There is an organisation called the Sports Alliance which represents various sporting bodies' interests to the government. They have a Voluntary Code of Conduct which includes making sports events, or highlights thereof, available to free TV, presumably to head off possible government intervention. (Might perhaps be why Channel 4 have the highlights).
• In English law, there is no concept of "owning" a sport. Why do I mention this? Because I've read it on a solicitor's site, though I don't know what the implications are, other than it sounds inconsistent with the situation in F1.

Anyone else confused? Come and join me.

[jonpollak]

Right on Roger !!!

it’s like Richy Sumac sends out a press release to cover all bases and appears to be doing something, anything about nothing.
Jp

[loki]

F1 one doesn’t own the sport of motor racing.  They own a particular company that commercializes a specific type of racing.  They are licensed the broadcast rights to that particular form of event.  They are under no obligation to provide anything free of charge to the UK.  Worst case is they don’t offer it in the market.  The operating entity of FOM is a Jersey based company and the parent of that company being Liberty aren’t obligated to follow UK law regarding non UK based operations.

 

If you want to see it you’re going to have to pay for it or convince the BBC to buy the rights.  Even though you’d still be paying for it.  

 

Do you guys really think Apple is going to pay that much for the rights and offer it at a reduced price?  They would buy it to make money and get people to subscribe to Apple TV.

[Deeq]

I'm not what anyone would ever call and Apple fan. I detest the company, but Apple Music works perfectly on my Android phone, using my iTunes account. (I get Apple Music free through my Verizon account. Otherwise, I'd just get Spotify)

Me 2™ ;- not Apple fan, never owned an iDevice ever. 😁
Its the iTunes that is (specially) the dealbreaker for me, I really hate that program.

[Deeq]

is the goal post move now from "apple wants us to buy hardware" to "you have to have an apple account"?
Any app requires an account - how is that a problem? You need an account to sign in to Netflix, to Hulu, to anything.
You need an appleid to sign it to anything with Apple.

I dont have a problem having an apple account...pay attention now, i do have a problem installing iTunes. QED
One can have a Google account or Microsoft ditto, without ever installing neither Outlook, Office, Windows or Android.
Web based account, why do i have to install iTunes to another of my devices to access AppleTV in my LG TV?
Do i have to have iTunes in order to stream Apple TV or not? 2 (apps) for 1 (service stream) is usually a bargain...but not here as you see.

F1TV pro better not demand an iTunes add-on in the future.. 😰

Edited by Deeq, 06 October 2023 - 23:39.

[RacingFan10]

Apple vs Windoze:

Old workplace laptop, Win7, then Win 10 in 2021, over time both slowed down even though they were locked down, had to run a VM to do any work testing as everything in prod / dev was linux

Wife's laptop 2 year old laptop that gets used for occasional browsing and docs in Libra Office (I refuse to pay for office), slow, ok it wasn't a gaming machine, but we're not asking much of it. Came with win10, I see no reason to upgrade. Noticeably slower than when we first got it. I update it, the mrs doesn't.

Current work, MacBook Pro, nice bit of kit, no slowdown that I've noticed after 1.5 years, as it's unix based it means I can do all testing on the local machine without VMs

My laptop, nearly 7 year old laptop running Ubuntu 22.04 LTS, mostly browsing / radio, bought when I left a previous job to learn tech (after failing to do the same on another windows PC), Done video editing on it, was a bit painful, but it wasn't  powerful when I bought it, seems faster than the current Win laptop even though it's older and less powerful.

 

Windows is the main reason why I have a PS5, no faf with drivers, bloatware, it just works, even after 5 years no slow down, for the fraction of a price of a gaming PC. But it depends what you're after, for me Linux laptop does everything I want.

 

 

How much did the windows machines cost you vs the macbook pro? One third of the price or so? Did the windows machines have SSD?

All the time people say these things (like you said) its because they compare a more powerful and more expensive Apple machine to a cheaper, less powerful budget Windows machine, always the same story. It's nonsense to compare a 2500€ macbook pro with a 800€ Windows laptop.

By the way, all of them slow down over time, it's just that the very powerful and expensive ones are much harder to notice (no matter Apple or Windows)

Edited by RacingFan10, 06 October 2023 - 23:51.

[pdac]

How much did the windows machines cost you vs the macbook pro? One third of the price or so? Did the windows machines have SSD?

All the time people say these things (like you said) its because they compare a more powerful and more expensive Apple machine to a cheaper, less powerful budget Windows machine, always the same story. It's nonsense to compare a 2500€ macbook pro with a 800€ Windows laptop.

By the way, all of them slow down over time, it's just that the very powerful and expensive ones are much harder to notice (no matter Apple or Windows)

 

Years ago I switched off automatic updates and supposed 'security fixes' and manually install only what is very necessary. My Windows computer has never been compromised and runs as fast as I would expect. The only issues now are with certain software that assumes everyone has the fastest processor and the biggest memory pool and decides it can grab all it wants. The only one in that category I have to put up with is the web browser.

[kumo7]

Years ago I switched off automatic updates and supposed 'security fixes' and manually install only what is very necessary. My Windows computer has never been compromised and runs as fast as I would expect. The only issues now are with certain software that assumes everyone has the fastest processor and the biggest memory pool and decides it can grab all it wants. The only one in that category I have to put up with is the web browser.

Windows is getting better, Apple's becoming fine machine for an independent video makers, and Chrome machine is setting up fine.
I say battle is not between windows and apple, but it includes Google-Android.

I prefer Apple as I hate Windows updates. I truly hate sitting in front of computerS just to update several silly questions that Windows update is programmed to ask to users for setting it up, and demand uses to look up technical terms, words, jargons and whatever users do not know in order for the updates and installation to be completed successfully. Apple just does it and I have NEVER had frustration that I had with Windows. Chrome I can imagine using it, but the idea that anything I do goes straight into the main server as the AI-nutrition, makes me think twice if I enjoy the comfort.

But F1 and Apple business is not much to do with their main business, but more to do with the financial numbers that they are making. Apple is seeking other way out for China's decline and too expensive iPhone price mechanism. Once iPhone was a cash cow, but now iPhone is limping behind google. Chinese are reluctant to step up to over 1500 doller top end models and populations declining. Apple needs some big income source and that is us F1 fans and Apple TV+.
If Apple do not take F1, then Google will. Liberty may like to go with Apple as Apple will pay more than Google.
Us, viewers, may enjoy Apple show, but I think it will costs MORE as we want MORE information, and the contents will not be tailored to as we wanted, because it will be an world wonder show, once it kicks off at somewhere on this earth.

WhenChinese population is shrinking and India becomes the number one population, the business model will change.

Edited by kumo7, 07 October 2023 - 14:41.

[Sterzo]

F1 one doesn’t own the sport of motor racing.  They own a particular company that commercializes a specific type of racing.  They are licensed the broadcast rights to that particular form of event.  They are under no obligation to provide anything free of charge to the UK.  Worst case is they don’t offer it in the market.  The operating entity of FOM is a Jersey based company and the parent of that company being Liberty aren’t obligated to follow UK law regarding non UK based operations.

All true, but does not exclude the possibility of government intervention. The UK gov has stepped in to regulate football governance as recently as this year, where you could equally argue they have no role. And we've already established they have historically mandated the free transmission of one F1 race per annum. The principles, murky as they may be, could be applied more widely. Public reaction to exploitation of monopoly-like power could trigger something one day. Excuse me, I'm off now with my banner to go and lie down in Parliament Square.

[kumo7]

Now All iPhones have USB-C plug. 

[RacingFan10]

Years ago I switched off automatic updates and supposed 'security fixes' and manually install only what is very necessary. My Windows computer has never been compromised and runs as fast as I would expect. The only issues now are with certain software that assumes everyone has the fastest processor and the biggest memory pool and decides it can grab all it wants. The only one in that category I have to put up with is the web browser.

Yeah, automatic updates are stupid and should be switched off. It means the computer can be using bandwidth, power and resources in a bad moment, when you may need them.

You should manually choose when to update, and the optimal moment is when you don't use the computer at all.

[KnucklesAgain]

Apple TV and Apple Music apps are available on Android, the Apple TV is available for Fire TV, other platforms, and in SkyQ. This is not hard to figure out if you have internet and a browser, before posting

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 07 October 2023 - 13:14.

[loki]

Windows is getting better, Apple's becoming fine machine for an independent video makers, and Chrome machine is setting up fine.
I say battle is not between windows and apple, but it includes Google-Android.

I prefer Apple as I hate Windows updates. I truly hate sitting in front of computerS just to update several silly questions that Windows update is programmed to ask to users for setting it up, and demand uses to look up technical terms, words, jargons and whatever users do not know in order for the updates and installation to be completed successfully. Apple just does it and I have NEVER had frustration that I had with Windows. Chrome I can imagine using it, but the idea that anything I do goes straight into the main server as the AI-nutrition, makes me think twice if I enjoy the comfort.

But F1 and Apple business is not much to do with their main business, but more to do with the financial numbers that they are making. Apple is seeking other way out for China's decline and too expensive iPhone price mechanism. Once iPhone was a cash cow, but now iPhone is limping behind google. Chinese are reluctant to step up to over 1500 doller top end models and populations declining. Apple needs some big income source and that is us F1 fans and Apple TV+.
If Apple do not take F1, then Google will. Liberty may like to go with Apple as Apple will pay more than Google.
Us, viewers, may enjoy Apple show, but I think it will costs MORE as we want MORE information, and the contents will not be tailored to as we wanted, because it will be an world wonder show, once it kicks off at somewhere on this earth.

WhenChinese population is shrinking and India becomes the number one population, the business model will change.

 

Apple phones far outpace the sale of Google branded phones.  Android phones are more common than iOS phones if nothing else due to the number of manufacturers making them and price points that are more favorable to developing nations and those with limited budgets.  As a brand Apple significantly bests all other single brands in terms of sales. 

[pdac]

Apple phones far outpace the sale of Google branded phones.  Android phones are more common than iOS phones if nothing else due to the number of manufacturers making them and price points that are more favorable to developing nations and those with limited budgets.  As a brand Apple significantly bests all other single brands in terms of sales. 

 

Ah, but if there were fewer manufacturers of Android phones, wouldn't that mean that each manufacturer would gain a greater market share. Then following on, perhaps if there were only one manufacturer of Android phones, that manufacturer could outperform the single iOS phone manufacturer.

[New Britain]

Ah, but if there were fewer manufacturers of Android phones, wouldn't that mean that each manufacturer would gain a greater market share. Then following on, perhaps if there were only one manufacturer of Android phones, that manufacturer could outperform the single iOS phone manufacturer.

Possible, but the marketing would have to be more narrowly focused, there would be less product and feature differentiation (within the Android 'family'), and fewer pricing strategies. Android unit sales might still be greater than Apple unit sales, but it is unlikely that there would be 100% carry-over of Android sales.

[pdac]

Possible, but the marketing would have to be more narrowly focused, there would be less product and feature differentiation (within the Android 'family'), and fewer pricing strategies. Android unit sales might still be greater than Apple unit sales, but it is unlikely that there would be 100% carry-over of Android sales.

 

But the basic premise, I think, is valid - that if there were only one Android phone manufacturer and only one iOS phone manufacturer, then it's quite possible that Android would still win out as the most popular amongst the masses. Or to put is another way, there's nothing to suggest that Apple's offering is the most popular.

[RacingFan10]

Apple phones far outpace the sale of Google branded phones.  Android phones are more common than iOS phones if nothing else due to the number of manufacturers making them and price points that are more favorable to developing nations and those with limited budgets.  As a brand Apple significantly bests all other single brands in terms of sales. 

Not true! Samsung has always sold more smartphones than Apple, and in fact it's the company that sells so many hardware parts to Apple, including the display.

[Melbourne Park]

Not being able to watch a privately owned sporting event is bad for democracy?  Seriously?  That’s as wacky as me not getting a Merceds SUV  for free is bad for democracy.

 

Get into government representation, you'll get that free car ... as for Apple, all the bidding for F1 will just make it cost more for subscribers, no matter the flavour. But it will cost users more as Apple has less content than for instance, Netflix or Disney etc. Apple needs F1 more than F1 needs Apple. IMO if Apple gets F1, it will hurt the number of viewers who actually watch the sport. And I am currently an Apple + subscriber. But about the need to watch F1, IMO F1 has been boring for years - its not about drivers much anymore - its all about the car, and more than that, the rules which control development. But that seems have have infected lots of motor sports too ... it was much better decades ago, but then the picture quality, colour and camera work today is phenomenal, which kinda makes up for the processional events dominated by which car one drives. And as Ross Brawn has said, that if the starting grid position was based on the points leader in the WDC starting last, and the lowest points driver starting first - the teams would develop cars that could overtake. 

Edited by Melbourne Park, 08 October 2023 - 00:19.

[New Britain]

But the basic premise, I think, is valid - that if there were only one Android phone manufacturer and only one iOS phone manufacturer, then it's quite possible that Android would still win out as the most popular amongst the masses. Or to put is another way, there's nothing to suggest that Apple's offering is the most popular.

Certainly possible; whether 'quite' possible (within the confines of our speculative hot air in this forum ) would at least in part depend on the relative market shares in the current, multi-Android market structure.

[kumo7]

Apple phones far outpace the sale of Google branded phones.  Android phones are more common than iOS phones if nothing else due to the number of manufacturers making them and price points that are more favorable to developing nations and those with limited budgets.  As a brand Apple significantly bests all other single brands in terms of sales. 

 

Well great!

 

I have from computer, watch, iPhone pad, et all coordinated with Apple, I am happy to have this boss who allowed me to do it, I mean financially I had to do this and that tricks, but still I am free of many thing I dislike, and free from this emotion that I am feeding someone else's advertisement.

 

But what I mean is the momentum. even if the brut forces of Apple might be stronger than Android, Android is the OS that changes the other half of the world frame. Android is not like Windows that only make us operate PC, but it actively controls the transformation. Apple says it has secrurity in his hands, and the most like the way it deals with us, except its costs. and impetus, momentum of iPhone is not as rapid as iPhone4s.

 

 

Within this frame, Apple taking the control of F1 is not only important for the content of the broadcasting, or say manifest, but also the way the idea that Apple has for its property to perform.

Edited by kumo7, 08 October 2023 - 00:52.