DropDMG 3.6.8 is a maintenance update to my app for creating and working with Mac disk image files. In addition to various updates and bug fixes, it adds the ability to control how many operations DropDMG performs simultaneously and to set the name of the invisible folder where DropDMG stores the background picture.
Some interesting bugs were:
As I’ve discussed here, since Big Sur or so I’ve seen lots of problems with macOS’s handling of external drives. (And even internal ones—my home folder routinely temporarily disappears, which makes Finder lose its sidebar and confuses other running apps.) One manifestation of this is that the /Volumes folder often contains entries for volumes that are no longer mounted. (And not just on my cursed Mac—it’s been a top customer support issue lately.) This can cause a variety of problems when creating disk images if macOS tries to reuse an old mount point that hasn’t been properly cleaned up. DropDMG 3.6.8 now works around this.
As with EagleFiler, our Download Fixer tool can be used to make the DropDMG app launchable if macOS’s Gatekeeper erroneously thinks it’s damaged.
Disk Image DropDMG Mac Mac App macOS 15 Sequoia Storage
Meta (via Hacker News, MacRumors):
Today, we unveiled Orion, previously codenamed Project Nazare, which we believe is the most advanced pair of AR glasses ever made.
Orion combines the look and feel of a regular pair of glasses with the immersive capabilities of augmented reality – and it’s the result of breakthrough inventions in virtually every field of modern computing.
[…]
While Orion won’t make its way into the hands of consumers, make no mistake: this is not a research prototype. It’s one of the most polished product prototypes we’ve ever developed, and is truly representative of something that could ship to consumers. Rather than rushing to put it on shelves, we decided to focus on internal development first, which means we can keep building quickly and continue to push the boundaries of the technology, helping us arrive at an even better consumer product faster.
Alex Heath:
They look almost like a normal pair of glasses.
[…]
Zuckerberg imagines that people will want to use AR glasses like Orion for two primary purposes: communicating with each other through digital information overlaid on the real world — which he calls “holograms” — and interacting with AI.
[…]
The hardware for Orion exists in three parts: the glasses themselves; a “neural wristband” for controlling them; and a wireless compute puck that resembles a large battery pack for a phone. The glasses don’t need a phone or laptop to work, but if they’re separated from the puck by more than 12 feet or so, they become useless.
[…]
At 98 grams, the glasses weigh significantly more than a normal pair but also far less than mixed reality headsets like the Meta Quest or Apple’s Vision Pro.
[…]
As Meta’s executives retell it, the decision to shelve Orion mostly came down to the device’s astronomical cost to build, which is in the ballpark of $10,000 per unit. Most of that cost is due to how difficult and expensive it is to reliably manufacture the silicon carbide lenses. When it started designing Orion, Meta expected the material to become more commonly used across the industry and therefore cheaper, but that didn’t happen.
Ben Thompson:
Meta has decided to hold off on shipping a consumer version until they can bring the price down. That will be a tall order, and that challenge should be kept in mind with everything that follows.
[…]
What follows is unadulterated praise. Orion makes every other VR or AR device I have tried feel like a mistake — including the Apple Vision Pro. It is incredibly comfortable to wear, for one. What was the most striking to me, however, is that the obvious limitations — particularly low resolution — felt immaterial. The difference from the Quest or Vision Pro is that actually looking at reality is so dramatically different from even the best-in-class pass-through capabilities of the Vision Pro, that the holographic video quality doesn’t really matter. Even the highest quality presentation layer will pale in comparison to reality; this, counter-intuitively, gives a lot more freedom of movement in terms of what constitutes “good enough”. Orion’s image quality — thanks in part to its shockingly large 70 degree field of view — is good enough. It’s awesome, actually. In fact — and I don’t say this lightly — it is good enough that, for the first time ever, I felt like I could envision a world where I don’t carry a smartphone.
John Gruber:
Meta still hasn’t posted today’s keynote address on YouTube; best I’ve found is this recording of the livestream, starting around the 43m:20s mark. I watched the most of the keynote live and found it engaging. Just 45 minutes long — partly because it was information dense, and partly because Mark Zuckerberg hosted the entire thing himself.
[…]
In terms of actual products that will actually ship, Meta announced the $300 Quest 3S. That’s more than an entire order of magnitude lower-priced than Vision Pro. Vision Pro might be more than 10× more capable than Quest 3S, but I’m not sure it’s 10× better for just playing games and watching movies, which might be the only things people want to do with headsets at the moment. They also launched a 7,500-unit limited edition of their $430 actually-somewhat-popular Ray-Ban Wayfarer “smart” glasses made with translucent plastic, iMac-style.
[…]
It really is true that Meta’s Ray-Ban Wayfarers are nearly indistinguishable from just plain Wayfarers. Orion isn’t like that at all. If you went out in public with these — which you can’t, because they’re internal prototypes — everyone would notice that you’re wearing some sort of tech glasses, or perhaps think you walked out of a movie theater without returning the 3D goggles. But: you could wear them in public if you wanted to, and unlike going out in public wearing a VR headset, you’d just look like a nerd, not a jackass. They’re close to something. But how close to something that would actually matter, especially price-wise, is debatable.
Federico Viticci:
The end goal was always glasses – never VR headsets.
I’m incredibly excited about a near future where AR glasses look like regular glasses we can wear.
Previously:
Update (2024-09-30): Jason Snell:
It’s a real punch to Apple’s jaw, one that makes the Vision Pro look dowdy and pointless. Media coverage of Orion has been really strong. People who tried it were impressed. It’s a win for Meta.
But look closer, and you can see exactly what game Meta is playing. Meta says that Orion would cost about $10,000 today, and that the company couldn’t see itself shipping the product. Orion, as used this week by various media influencers, is a tech demo—not a product that will ever ship. Meta says that it has backed off any plans to ship it and instead expects that it will ship a product sort of like it between 2027 and 2029.
This is all part of the game, of course. For decades now, competitors have made hay over Apple’s refusal to make public demonstrations of what it’s working on behind the scenes. Apple’s silence is assumed by many to indicate the company is behind on some innovation or another. And sometimes it’s actually behind—but other times, it’s not. It’s just keeping quiet.
[…]
In other words, Meta and Apple—both committed to the idea that AR glasses we wear in our daily lives might be a huge part of future computing tech—tried to make the product happen, and realized that the time just wasn’t right. Apple didn’t say anything. Meta showed off a product that will never ship (but might lead to something that will ship at the end of the decade) and gained some nice press coverage this week.
John Gruber:
But according to The Verge, these Orion prototypes only get 2 hours of battery life. And they’re too thick and chunky. You look weird, if not downright ugly, wearing them. So Meta not only needs to bring the price down by a factor of at least 3× (which would put it around the $3,500 price of Vision Pro, which most critics have positioned as too expensive), they also need to make the glasses smaller — more svelte — while increasing battery life significantly.
[…]
It’s exciting that they showed Orion publicly, but I don’t think it helped Meta in any way going forward.
I think it helps in the sense that, based on what’s been shown publicly, it seems like Meta is on the right track and Apple may be pursuing a dead end.
Dare Obasanjo:
One thing I found interesting about Apple Vision Pro is that it broke from Apple’s approach of building the polished version of a nerdy product and bringing it to the masses (e.g. iPod, iPhone, iPad and Apple Watch).
The Vision Pro is more like the Lisa.
Steve Toughton-Smith:
But let’s not grade on a curve here. Vision Pro gets a battery life of 2 hours. Vision Pro is too thick and chunky. Vision Pro looks weird and ugly.
[…]
Thing is, Apple did ship their prototype
(Half the system apps aren’t even recompiled for visionOS, not even in visionOS 2. It’s been a long time since Apple shipped something this unfinished)
Ryan Jones:
Vision Pro strategy is akin to the first iPhone being $3000, 4x the size and weight, requiring wall plug (so it doesn’t leave house), all to get a Retina screen.
M.G. Siegler:
Other reports about Meta’s AR work had noted that a separate puck outside of headsets was likely needed. And while I at first assumed this was similar to the way the Vision Pro needs its tethered battery pack or perhaps closer, the way the Magic Leap also had a tethered “Lightpack” puck, this news is seemingly a bit better as it’s a wireless device, no less than Meta CTO Andrew Bosworth noted in response on Threads. That’s because it’s not a battery – though presumably it has its own battery – it’s a computing device that transmits to the glasses.
And that got me thinking – why the hell didn’t Apple do this with the Vision Pro? […] Perhaps the single biggest complaint about the Vision Pro is its weight.
[…]
It’s not just that it’s strange that Apple isn’t off-loading compute to their big brick battery, it’s arguably stranger that they’re not off-loading it to the insanely great computer any Vision Pro owner likely has in their pocket. The iPhone.
Update (2024-10-01): The Talk Show:
Jason Snell returns to the show to discuss Apple’s September product announcements, and Meta’s Orion prototype AR glasses.
M.G. Siegler:
Fast forward about eight months and the Vision Pro is… barely talked about any more. I’ve visited a number of Apple Stores in a number of different cities over these past many months and while the tables for the iPhones and iPads and Macs are generally busy, you rarely see anyone ogling the Vision Pro. It was and remains a rather incredible piece of technology, but it’s just not that interesting as a product right now. That’s Apple’s own fault. And recent unveilings by Snap and yes, Meta, showcase why.
Artificial Intelligence Augmented Reality Hardware Meta Orion AR Glasses
Deepa Seetharaman et al. (Hacker News):
OpenAI is planning to convert from a nonprofit organization to a for-profit company at the same time it is undergoing significant personnel changes, including the resignation Wednesday of its chief technology officer, Mira Murati.
[…]
Under the proposed changes, the nonprofit arm of OpenAI and Chief Executive Sam Altman would own stakes in the new for-profit company. Altman hasn’t previously owned a stake in OpenAI.
[…]
The restructuring is designed in part to make OpenAI more attractive to investors, as the company is currently attempting to close a funding round of up to $6.5 billion. […] Unlike prior investors in OpenAI, those who put money into the current round wouldn’t have a cap on the profits they can earn.
Jay Peters and Kylie Robison (Hacker News):
“I’m stepping away because I want to create the time and space to do my own exploration,” she wrote in a post on X. “For now, my primary focus is doing everything in my power to ensure a smooth transition, maintaining the momentum we’ve built.”
In addition to Murati, two other OpenAI leaders are also departing: Bob McGrew, OpenAI’s chief research officer who spoke to The Verge for the release of its o1 “reasoning” model just two weeks ago, and Barret Zoph, VP of post training. CEO Sam Altman said they “made these decisions independently of each other and amicably” in a separate note to employees he also posted on X.
M.G. Siegler:
[For Altman, a] 7% of $150B – the rumored valuation of the most recent funding coming together – is just over $10B. That’s probably not a coincidence.
[…]
Clearly, this was not some sort of planned transition – as Altman’s statement (which was actually a re-statement to include the people beyond Murai leaving– read into that what you will) highlights[…] So again, he’s chalking these three departures up to coincidental timing. That’s certainly possible, but it’s also hard to overlook all of the other recent departures. Someone has to ask: what is going on here?
See also: Brew Markets.
Previously:
Update (2024-09-27): Hayden Field (via Hacker News):
At an all-hands meeting Thursday, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said there are no plans for him to get a “giant equity stake” in the company.
Update (2024-09-30): M.G. Siegler:
While they published this on Friday – before the subsequent WSJ report that Apple had dropped out of the financing – it's worth digging a bit more into the numbers that Mike Isaac and Erin Griffith obtained with regard to OpenAI[…]
Update (2024-10-03): Cade Metz (via Hacker News):
OpenAI said on Wednesday that it had completed a $6.6 billion fund-raising deal that nearly doubles the high-profile company’s valuation from just nine months ago.
The new fund-raising round, led by the investment firm Thrive Capital, values OpenAI at $157 billion, according to two people with knowledge of the deal. Microsoft, the chipmaker Nvidia, the tech conglomerate SoftBank, the United Arab Emirates investment firm MGX and others are also putting money into OpenAI.
[…]
Under the terms of the new investment round, OpenAI has two years to transform into a for-profit business or its funding will convert into debt, according to documents reviewed by The Times.
Update (2024-10-07): David Karpf (via Hacker News):
OpenAI announced this week that it has raised $6.6 billion in new funding and that the company is now valued at $157 billion overall. This is quite a feat for an organization that reportedly burns through $7 billion a year—far more cash than it brings in—but it makes sense when you realize that OpenAI’s primary product isn’t technology. It’s stories.
Case in point: Last week, CEO Sam Altman published an online manifesto titled “The Intelligence Age.” In it, he declares that the AI revolution is on the verge of unleashing boundless prosperity and radically improving human life. “We’ll soon be able to work with AI that helps us accomplish much more than we ever could without AI,” he writes. Altman expects that his technology will fix the climate, help humankind establish space colonies, and discover all of physics. He predicts that we may have an all-powerful superintelligence “in a few thousand days.” All we have to do is feed his technology enough energy, enough data, and enough chips.
Artificial Intelligence Business OpenAI
Juli Clover:
With the iPhone 15 models that came out last year, Apple added an opt-in battery setting that limits maximum charge to 80 percent. The idea is that never charging the iPhone above 80 percent will increase battery longevity, so I kept my iPhone at that 80 percent limit from September 2023 to now, with no cheating.
My iPhone 15 Pro Max battery level is currently at 94 percent with 299 cycles. For a lot of 2024, my battery level stayed above 97 percent, but it started dropping more rapidly over the last couple of months.
[…]
I don’t have a lot of data points for comparison, but it does seem that limiting the charge to 80 percent kept my maximum battery capacity higher than what my co-workers are seeing, but there isn’t a major difference. I have four percent more battery at 28 more cycles, and I’m not sure suffering through an 80 percent battery limit for 12 months was ultimately worth it.
It’s possible that the real gains from an 80 percent limit will come in two or three years rather than a single year, and I’ll keep it limited to 80 percent to see the longer term impact.
John Gruber (Mastodon):
I’m so glad Clover ran this test for a year and reported her results, because it backs up my assumption: for most people there’s no practical point to limiting your iPhone’s charging capacity. All you’re doing is preventing yourself from ever enjoying a 100-percent-capacity battery. Let the device manage its own battery. Apple has put a lot of engineering into making that really smart.
My iPhone 15 Pro, now just under a year old, shows a maximum capacity of 91% and a cycle count of 145. I have been using the automatic optimized charging, mostly via MagSafe. The cycle count is low so I expected better. I certainly notice the phone depleting more than when it was new
I think there are two conclusions here. First, the benefit of the 80% limit is not very clear, although presumably Apple had reason to believe it would help in some circumstances. Second, batteries still don’t last very long, even with the fancy optimized charging. It still seems like the health will be almost down to 80% after two years. I wish battery replacements were easier or that Apple started out with larger batteries for more headroom.
Kirk McElhearn:
[The] iPhone 15 is the first one that’s rated for 1000 cycles, not 500 like previous models. I would expect battery health to be over 90% after a year; if it’s not, I see it hard for it to last 1000 cycles and still charge to 80%.
[…]
[The] real story is that these phones won’t last 1000 cycles. I don’t think most of the people in the comments realize that the iPhone 15 is supposed to last twice as long as previous iPhones.
My 2 1/2-year-old Apple Watch SE is down to 76% battery health. Apple recommends that I service it, but I’m not sure it’s worth $99 for a new battery when there will probably be a new SE soon. What’s strange is that the watch usually easily lasts through the day, but sometimes it will run out of power around 5 PM for no apparent reason. The Settings app shows that it was fully charged in the morning and then steadily declined, even though I wasn’t really even using it. Unlike on iOS, there doesn’t seem to be a way to display the power drain by app.
See also:
Previously:
Update (2024-09-27): See also: Hacker News.
Update (2024-10-02): Nick Heer:
Here is my Numbers spreadsheet with a little over a hundred reports. As I was entering it, two things struck me:
Far more of the people reporting 100% remaining battery capacity after typical use have turned on the charge limiter.
People who use the charge limiter seem to also use their phones less but, critically, the 80% limiter appears to help lighter users.
Battery Life Battery Replacement iOS iOS 17 iPhone iPhone 15 Pro watchOS watchOS 11 watchOS 12
