It basically just switches over Apple app accounts, such as Music and Photos. Everything else---all third party apps and the home screen layout and BT devices---are exactly the same.
It's laughably bad, since Photos doesn't even support more than one iCloud photo library per TV, so switching just makes the Photos app not work.
Mainly it makes the Apple TV+ app understand your watching history (“up next”) better.
Apple has an API so that third party apps can tie profiles to appletv user ids (iCloud ids) but I haven’t seen a single 3P app that uses it. Apple could make it mandatory at some point I suppose but the UX for connecting the two in each app would likely be tedious.
Also there is no password protection with changing user ids so kids can accidentally screw up your watch history / preferences. And without any passwords you don’t want to connect photos or anything like that to the tv.
It’s pretty much a botch, just like the cases described in this article.
> One of the websites doing this, SunTrust Bank, sent the user name and password we entered to a third party, Jornaya, which says it encrypts and discards the data it collects.
Wow. Deep down the page is a nugget about suntrust just giving away your username and password. Big reminder to use unique passwords of every site.
Sure. They’re not going to sell your username and password. But they’re a marketing company, and my experience with marketing companies is that they view IT as a cost center (despite marketing companies being mostly IT driven these days), and don’t spend a lot of time, effort, or energy on security. When they have a breach, it’s going to cost you more than just privacy.
There is a video circulating these comments. It shows someone register their finger without the screen, slap the screen protector over top and unlock with a different, previously rejected finger.
If the fingerprint somehow gets embedded into the screen protector, is it possible that the screen protector is "tainted" with the fingerprint from previous usage?
I'm not dismissing the claims, but I would like to see if the behavior can be replicated with a brand new screen protector.
Yes, I saw that and it definitely made me rethink my theory. Either it's trapping a fingerprint under the protector or this is not the first run with the screen protector and it's "tainted" with a fingerprint in it now.
This article is absolutely how I've come to feel about cars in the past 12-24 months. If a car doesn't have both CarPlay and Android Auto, I just won't get it[1]. It's like the top feature I care about after number of doors and the engine.
[1] - And there's no way I am paying extra to use it, sorry BMW.
That's exactly the conclusion I've come to as well. My current car has CarPlay and there's no way I'll go back. And trying to charge me a monthly fee to use it is just insulting.
Same. My previous car had CarPlay and was totaled after about 10 months when someone hit me on the freeway. When I shopped around to replace it, I didn't even consider any car without CarPlay.
You're totally right, and it's <1% of the car, but perception is everything. BMW doing it the DIVX way[1] for a feature that's included on a Ford Focus rubs me the wrong way badly.
Cars buying decisions are becoming more and more about UX and entertainment experience rather than HP and engine specs and even driving experience. It is scary for them to cede control of UI and UX to Apple and Google.
Auto OEMs have can't beat Apple and Google as far as the head-unit is concerned. They should accept this and find better ways of differentiating their overall experience.
