Yeah Id love this

It is not getting better over time for me. I'll have entire days where Apple's face recognition does not work once. It's even worse when you have a long passcode.

Why are there so many people here who can not believe that FaceID does not work for some people?

I'd love if they had a fingerprint scanner on the back like Google Pixel phones used to have. Bonus point is it would make the larger phones much easier to hold 8)

Oh yeah! I don't discredit that. For a lot of people, face recognition works better than fingerprint recognition, and vice versa.

With people saying things like "Your face seems to be the problem here" or "people don’t know how to train it and actively work against its learning abilities", I feel like I need to add my two cents. Fingerprint recognition works far far better for me

The problem is I never had to worry or think about "training" my TouchID, and I never had to worry about my thumb having different glasses, different hairstyles, different masks, etc.

It's very very very far from "just works" when we have to consider and micromanage Apple's implementation details.

Horses are cool and they say neigh. What can't we be more horsey?

This is definitely not right-wing propaganda, where are you getting that?

Seriously, I'm a "terminally online" leftist and I can't imagine an interpretation where "don't install self-signed root CAs to your personal device" is right-wing propaganda. I think you're wrong here, but I'm genuinely curious about how you arrive to this conclusion.

Installing a root CA to your personal device breaks a lot of security assumptions. I assume Apple has carved out an exception for their own updates and app installs, because a root CA would feasibly allow them to "see everything on your phone". As it stands, a root CA only allows them to intercept and modify everything in the network data.

That said, I don't speak German(?) well-enough (or use iPhones enough) to know if this is indeed a self-signed root CA.

AppleCare+ is not worth it unless you live in a high-theft area or if you lose or break your devices very regularly.

I'd not buy AppleCare+, because I've never broken or lost a phone (in ~10 years of phone ownership). I'd estimate I lose/break my phone every >10 years.

How does this math work? Let me break it down:

AppleCare+ for losing/destroying a phone:

If I remember the prices correctly, it's $150/year, and then you pay $150 for theft or damage. Let's say you have a $1200 iPhone Pro Max, and to be generous to Apple, let's assume you would lose or irreparably damage the device. (So, we're looking at a $1200 replacement cost.)

This means paying $150 yearly for AppleCare would save you $1050 in replacement costs. Put another way, this only makes sense if $150 <= $1050 * p, where p is the probability you break your phone. This comes out to exactly p = 1/7.

This means AppleCare+ only makes sense if you expect there's a 14% chance to lose or break your phone. Put another way, this would only make sense if you lose or break your phone once every seven years.

AppleCare+ for breaking a screen:

If I remember correctly, AppleCare+ also covers screen repairs, bringing them to $50 down from $300. By similar math, this makes sense only if you break your screen once every two years.

Note I don't have the exact numbers for your specific iPhone, so YMMV, but these numbers should be ballpark.

A note on insurance

The cost-benefit analysis of health insurance is a little different.

I buy health-insurance, even though the math loses out in my favor if we look at dollar costs.

For example, say my estimated health costs are $150, but I pay $200 in insurance monthly. Why?

Because the $400 costs more than $400, because I do not have $100K. If I needed $100K treatment, I would not be able to afford it, so I would die. (I'm in the USA.) My life costs more than $100K.

But for a phone? If I lost a $1200 phone, I can pay for that since I have $1200 in my bank account. So the $1200 only costs $1200.

Even if you can't afford $1200, you can still get a cheaper phone (~$50 for a very cheap Android or $450 for the cheapest iPhone), so you are not locked entirely out of modern life. This also factors into the cost benefit analysis: Are you willing to go down for a cheaper phone if you destroy or lose this one?

A note on repair costs

These are also using Apple's quotes for repair costs. These numbers don't factor in cheaper repair costs from third-party repair shops. These make AppleCare+ less necessary.

TLDR:

Unlike "real insurance", this is a straight cost-benefit analysis, assuming you have ~$2000 'free money' to your name.

AppleCare+ only makes sense if you lose/destroy your phones ~every 7 years, or shatter your screen once ~every 2 years. (These numbers may vary.)

So,