Category: News

I am considering two 6-foot power cords to replace the one for my M4 2024 10-core iMac (model A3137). I am not an electrician, so I want to ensure I choose the correct one. From my research, I believe that the replacement cord should have an IEC320 C5 connector on one end and a NEMA 5-15P three-prong plug on the other end.

This cord is typically referred to as a 143W power adapter extension cable. One of the cords I am looking at is rated for 1250 watts. However, I find the terminology around volts and watts confusing, and I have concerns about fire safety and the potential for damaging my iMac.

The original power cord measures 3 meters, but I need a longer cord since it is currently too short for my setup. In making my selection, my primary concern is ensuring that the new cord can safely power my iMac without risk of overheating or electrical issues. I want to ensure that it meets the required specifications for both voltage and wattage to avoid any potential hazards.

If anyone has insights into the differences between the two options or can clarify whether the watt rating is adequate for my device, I would appreciate the guidance. My goal is to find a suitable and safe replacement that allows me to set up my iMac more comfortably.

It appears that the link you have followed is not valid. This could be due to a misspelling or an error in the URL itself. If you are the publisher of this link, be aware that many links fail because of incorrect parameters or extra characters at the end of the URL. Please double-check the link to ensure everything is entered correctly.

If everything looks correct but the link still isn’t working, you might want to try clearing your browser’s cache or using a different browser or device to see if that resolves the issue. Before giving up, test the link once more to confirm. If you continue to encounter problems, please reach out for support. You can contact us directly via email for assistance with the bad link.

It seems that the link you attempted to access is not valid. The URL may contain an error or could have been misspelled. If you are the publisher of the content, it’s worth noting that many links become inactive due to simple mistakes, such as misspelled parameter names or the inclusion of extra characters at the end of the link.

Take a moment to double-check the URL for any discrepancies. Should the link appear correct but still not function, consider clearing your browser’s cache or trying to access the link using a different browser or device. This may resolve the issue, and you can then try testing the link once more.

If you’ve exhausted these options and the link remains unresponsive, please reach out to us for further assistance. You can contact our support team via email at [email protected], and include “Bad Link” in the subject line so we can help you promptly. Thank you for your understanding, and we appreciate your patience as we work to resolve this issue.

It seems that the link you attempted to access is invalid. The error may be due to a typo in the link or the addition of incorrect characters. If you are the publisher of the content, it’s worth checking the link for any errors in the parameter names or any unintended modifications. Even a small mistake can lead to a broken link.

If everything appears to be correct but the link is still unresponsive, you can try clearing your browser’s cache or switching to a different browser or device. It may be helpful to test the link again after making these adjustments. If the issue persists and you have exhausted all options, please reach out to us for assistance. You can contact our support team directly via email at [email protected], and be sure to include ‘Bad Link’ in the subject line for quicker resolution.

Thank you for your understanding, and we apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.

It appears that the link you tried to access is not valid. This might be due to a typo in the URL or the inclusion of extra characters that shouldn’t be there. If you are the publisher of the link, it’s important to double-check for any possible errors. Often, links fail because of small mistakes in the parameter names or formatting.

Before taking any further steps, make sure the URL is correctly typed. If you have verified that the link is accurate but it still doesn’t work, consider clearing your browser cache or attempting to open the link on a different browser or device. Testing the link again can sometimes resolve the issue. If you have tried all these suggestions and the link still does not function, please reach out for assistance.

You can contact our support team via email to report the broken link, and we will be happy to help you resolve the issue. Thank you for your understanding.

We apologize, but the link you attempted to access appears to be invalid. It may have been entered incorrectly or contains typographical errors. If you are the publisher of this link, it’s important to check for common mistakes. Many links break due to misspellings in parameter names or because extra characters have been mistakenly added at the end of the URL.

Before making further attempts, please verify that the link is formatted correctly. If everything seems accurate and the link continues to malfunction, consider clearing your browser’s cache or attempting to open it in a different browser or device. After making these adjustments, try testing the link once more. Should you still experience difficulties, please reach out to us for assistance.

We are here to help.

It seems that the link you tried to access is not valid. The URL you followed may be either incorrect or contain a typo. If you are the publisher of the link, be aware that most issues arise from simple errors, such as misspelled parameter names or inadvertently adding extra characters to the end of the URL.

Before concluding that the link is broken, ensure that it has been entered accurately. If your link appears to be correct but is still not functioning, consider trying a few troubleshooting steps. First, clear your browser’s cache, as this can sometimes resolve loading issues.

Additionally, using a different browser or a separate device may help determine if the problem is specific to your current setup. After performing these checks, give the link another try. If it still does not work and you continue to encounter issues, feel free to reach out for assistance.

You can contact our support team for help with the link. Please provide details about the issue you are experiencing to help us assist you more effectively. In the meantime, we apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused and appreciate your patience as we work to resolve any link-related issues.

General Motors (GM) made headlines last year with its decision to discontinue support for Apple CarPlay and Android Auto in its new electric vehicles, opting instead for its proprietary software platform, Ultifi. This choice has sparked significant controversy, as many consumers view CarPlay as an essential feature.

In fact, a survey conducted by Apple revealed that 79% of U.S. car buyers preferred vehicles compatible with CarPlay. The launch of Ultifi has not gone smoothly for GM; early users of the Chevrolet Blazer EV encountered various technical difficulties with the platform.

Although some issues have since been addressed, the automaker’s ability to develop software is being questioned, especially in comparison to technology giants like Apple. GM has stated that its software strategy aims to enhance integration within its overall vehicle ecosystem, signifying a desire to have more control over the in-car experience.

This approach, while potentially beneficial, carries risks. In a recent interview, GM’s senior vice president of software, Baris Cetinok, who previously worked at Apple, justified the phase-out of CarPlay.

He argued that GM’s commitment to creating a cohesive in-vehicle experience would lead to improved customer satisfaction. Cetinok emphasized that by managing everything from vehicle construction to infotainment, GM could deliver a more seamless experience.

Cetinok elaborated on this vision, highlighting the challenges of switching between different user interfaces like CarPlay while performing complex tasks such as towing. He believes that a unified system can facilitate easier interactions and integration with advanced driving features, ultimately enabling a more efficient user experience.

Overall, GM’s shift away from established platforms poses both opportunities and challenges as it seeks to redefine the in-car technology landscape.

Porsche’s chief designer, Michael Mauer, has confirmed the luxury automaker’s commitment to integrating CarPlay Ultra in upcoming vehicle models. However, he did not provide a specific timeframe for when this feature will be available or additional details.

Porsche was initially included in Apple’s list of manufacturers eager to support the next generation of CarPlay, known as CarPlay Ultra, when it was announced in June 2022. The brand teased what CarPlay Ultra would look like in its vehicles in December 2023 but had not updated the public on its plans until now.

Presently, CarPlay Ultra is available exclusively in luxury Aston Martin vehicles within the U.S. and Canada. Apple has indicated that many other manufacturers, including Hyundai, Kia, and Genesis, are also working on providing this advanced software in their vehicles in the near future.

Launched recently, CarPlay Ultra features deep integration with a vehicle’s instrument cluster and systems, offering built-in radio and climate apps, widgets, and customizable interfaces tailored to each vehicle’s model and brand aesthetics. This system allows drivers to access their iPhone’s app-related data alongside important driving information, such as current speed and tire pressure.

While many manufacturers are embracing CarPlay Ultra, some have announced they will not adopt it, including Mercedes-Benz, Audi, BMW, and Volvo. Interestingly, a recent statement from Polestar suggested enthusiasm for CarPlay Ultra, though conflicting reports imply they may not have plans to implement it after all.

As Apple continues to roll out new technology, the future of CarPlay Ultra hangs in the balance, especially with various industry players weighing their options.

The iPhone 16 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro Max feature a new capability in the Voice Memos app that allows users to add a second audio layer to an existing recording. This feature is perfect for those looking to include vocals, narration, or extra instrumentals without the hassle of using headphones.

With the advanced A18 Pro chip, these iPhone models can play an original Voice Memo through their speakers while simultaneously isolating and capturing new audio. This innovation provides musicians, podcasters, or anyone who frequently records voice notes with the ability to layer sounds, enhancing their recordings effortlessly.

After recording, users can edit and fine-tune layered recordings directly on their device, or transfer them to professional software like Logic Pro for more advanced mixing. To create a layered recording, start by opening the Voice Memos app located in the Utilities folder.

Select the existing recording you wish to augment, and tap the waveform icon to access the audio. From there, pressing the plus icon allows you to prepare for recording a new layer.

When you’re ready, simply tap the red record button to capture the additional audio. After recording, you’ll notice the new layered recording in your Voice Memos list, marked with an overlapping tiles symbol.

You can mix these layers easily by adjusting the Layer Mix slider found in the settings, enabling you to balance the sound effectively. For editing flexibility, you can separate the layers by using the More button and selecting “Separate Layers.” This generates two distinct recordings, which can then be altered or played independently.

It’s important to note that while the layering feature is exclusive to the iPhone 16 Pro models, playback is available on any device running compatible software. Layered recordings are saved in the QuickTime Audio format, and on older devices, separating the layers converts them to accessible .m4a files.

However, only the original layer can be transcribed or recorded in stereo, as additional layers are captured in mono.