Apple Used to Be an Inventor. Now It’s Mainly a Landlord(bloomberg.com)
bloomberg.com
Apple Used to Be an Inventor. Now It’s Mainly a Landlord
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-11-02/apple-s-business-is-about-services-more-than-new-iphones-now?srnd=premium
380 comments
The AirPods are my favorite purchase I’ve made in the last several years and definitely the best new technology product I’ve seen in a long time. I use mine for hours every day and have for the last year and a half. Before I got my AirPods I had used and returned multiple other wireless earbuds and none of them hold a candle to the AirPods. And somehow the AirPods are half the price of any of those others. I’ve kept an eye on the industry and all the new things coming out and I still haven’t seen anything that has the size, battery life, functionality, range, and audio quality as AirPods at any price point. Even if you use them entirely with android/windows and don’t get any of the benefits of apple’s fancy pairing, the size, quality, and battery life are still light years ahead of any of the competition. (by quality I mean the audio doesn’t cut out except for on very rare occasions, and I can hear everything clearly whether I’m using the pair or just one. I’m not an audiophile so I’m not going to judge on that metric, but they sound great to me for music, audiobooks, podcasts, and phone calls)
Which other true wireless earbuds have you tried? I bought some Jabra Elite Active 65t's and I've been very happy with them. I don't have the Airpods so I can't do a direct comparison, but from what I've read, the 65t has a bit less battery life in the case, but also has an actual noise isolating design. They're about the same size as the Airpods (and they don't have the stem, so depending on how you count they might be smaller), still have a 5 hour listen time without charging from the case, and seem to have a higher audio quality. I've heard similar things about the Samsung IconX as well. I would consider at least these two products as in the same class as the airpods: similar functionality at a similar price ($130-170). But I'm really interested in your perspective as someone who's used both the Airpods and other wireless earbuds.
I've tried airpods, $40 enacfires, and 5+ other models for market research.
As an Android user, airpods didn't offer that much functionality, was $160+, looked like qtips sticking out of my ear, and the sound wasn't that great either.
I think the $40 enacfires might have had a better bass than the airpods. I've gotten intimate with these products down to Bluetooth compatibility and chipsets. In my opinion, it's a lot of hype at a high price point when it costs nowhere close. I'm mind blown by the marketing genius. At the same time, I will never go back to wired, wireless is amazing. Companies sure are milking this new technology though and it's just getting started.
As an Android user, airpods didn't offer that much functionality, was $160+, looked like qtips sticking out of my ear, and the sound wasn't that great either.
I think the $40 enacfires might have had a better bass than the airpods. I've gotten intimate with these products down to Bluetooth compatibility and chipsets. In my opinion, it's a lot of hype at a high price point when it costs nowhere close. I'm mind blown by the marketing genius. At the same time, I will never go back to wired, wireless is amazing. Companies sure are milking this new technology though and it's just getting started.
The Airpods cost a lot because: a) Apple but also, b) because if they sold them for $55 they would never be able to keep up with the demand. Airpods do look like qtips, but now that they've become such a common site, my eyes have gotten used to them. I'm waiting for them to make matte black ones!
What about shure SE215 + shure BT-1 combo (bluetooth adapter)? A good starter at a low price for an audiophile. The BT-1 actually talks to you to say its battery level on startup
AirPods have terrible fit.
> I still haven’t seen anything that has the size, battery life, functionality, range, and audio quality as AirPods at any price point
Walmart has wired earbuds for under $5, which are quite small (they fit in your ears), have perpetual battery life (because they have no battery!), the same functionality (they play sound, in your ears), great range and great audio quality.
And you won't have to replace them in two years. Isn't that great?
Walmart has wired earbuds for under $5, which are quite small (they fit in your ears), have perpetual battery life (because they have no battery!), the same functionality (they play sound, in your ears), great range and great audio quality.
And you won't have to replace them in two years. Isn't that great?
Before getting the AirPods I agreed with you, Bluetooth headphones were much more hassle than they were worth. But the AirPods do really eliminate all of the inconveniences I had with Bluetooth headphones. As for whether they are worth the cost difference over wired headphones, I suppose that’s a personal preference, but I love the freedom, and since I walk many miles every day listening to audiobooks not having a cord to get caught on things or needing to be routed through clothing is a benefit for me. Also when I’m walking with my girlfriend we can each wear one AirPod and listen to something together without needing to stand within a couple feet of each other and have the awkwardness of a physical tether via a wired headphone splitter. I realize your comment is more snarky than practical, but it might be worth getting one from an Apple store and then returning it within their return policy just to have a chance to play with it and see how far the technology has evolved, it’s much more improved than you might expect.
And even if the airpods aren’t worth the investment for you personally, the fact that Apple is innovating here will hopefully push other manufacturers to innovate and maybe someday all Bluetooth headphones will be as painless, even ones that are significantly cheaper.
As an analogy, I hated the iPhone in its first few years on the market. I was perfectly happy with my windows mobile smartphone with its QVGA resistive stylus-based touchscreen, enormous thick physical keyboard. I thought everyone that paid $800 for a sexy but functionally limited iPhone was a sheep. But Apple forced the smartphone industry to play by a different rulebook, and now I’m pretty excited with the levels of innovation that happens across all manufacturers.
And even if the airpods aren’t worth the investment for you personally, the fact that Apple is innovating here will hopefully push other manufacturers to innovate and maybe someday all Bluetooth headphones will be as painless, even ones that are significantly cheaper.
As an analogy, I hated the iPhone in its first few years on the market. I was perfectly happy with my windows mobile smartphone with its QVGA resistive stylus-based touchscreen, enormous thick physical keyboard. I thought everyone that paid $800 for a sexy but functionally limited iPhone was a sheep. But Apple forced the smartphone industry to play by a different rulebook, and now I’m pretty excited with the levels of innovation that happens across all manufacturers.
I used to think the same about laptops, until I got my Macbook Pro in 2013. I wanted an SSD laptop, there weren't too many options at the time (at least not in my city), one of the options was the Macbook Pro and the difference in price was minimal compared to other SSD Windows machines, so I gave Apple a chance and... it totally changed my perspective as a customer, now I look for other things than just "specs", now I like to think I see the whole picture, why do I want to get a "better" CPU or more RAM for the money if all the other aspects of the laptop will be compromised (cheap materials, the computer needing maintenance to prevent slowdown over time). I'm writing this on that same machine, and it still works like the first day and it hasn't shown any signs that it won't keep working like this in a while, this is the first time I can say that about a computer.
I'm sorry but to anyone who's actually tried and lived with AirPods, there's no going back and there's no comparison to anything on the market at any price (even at a higher price).
It's so drastically better than anything on the market, that I'll immediately buy a new pair if I lose my current ones. I wouldn't even think twice about the price.
There is no other headphones on the market where I can play 1:1 basketball for hours, have the headphones never fall out, and I don't even notice I have them on the entire time. They're a part of me. I literally forget that I have them in my ears, and they easily switch between all of the devices in my life in a way no other headphones do. It's a signficant quality of life improvement for me.
It's so drastically better than anything on the market, that I'll immediately buy a new pair if I lose my current ones. I wouldn't even think twice about the price.
There is no other headphones on the market where I can play 1:1 basketball for hours, have the headphones never fall out, and I don't even notice I have them on the entire time. They're a part of me. I literally forget that I have them in my ears, and they easily switch between all of the devices in my life in a way no other headphones do. It's a signficant quality of life improvement for me.
The airpods I used a couple times fell out when I was running.
That's fair - I have a coworker whose ears are shaped weirdly and he cannot use AirPods at all (or even the previous wired EarPods, for that matter)
It's a one-size-fits-all design and if it's a little off you're kinda out of luck. They fit me perfectly though which is one of the things that blew my mind initially. I didn't realize how many of previous fit issues were a result of having a cord that tugs when you make any movements.
It's a one-size-fits-all design and if it's a little off you're kinda out of luck. They fit me perfectly though which is one of the things that blew my mind initially. I didn't realize how many of previous fit issues were a result of having a cord that tugs when you make any movements.
I don't know if Apple changed the shape for AirPods (they look very similar to the EarPods) but the AirPods stay in my ears so much better, it's night and day. I've been attributing it to the weight/tug of the cable.
They have terrible fit for my ears.
I'd never understood the appeal of wireless headphones, and I guess I kind of do now that I have AirPods. Mine fit fine and stay in while running, but that's the only use I've found for them. Anywhere else and I'd much rather use my 15 year old Sennheiser earbuds because I have so many problems with the AirPods:
* like pretty much all Apple earbuds, they don't seal to my ear so they're totally useless in loud places like airplanes (my #1 use case for headphones)
* audio frequently drops out, especially when outside (and there's nothing for the bluetooth signal to reflect off of)
* terrible mic quality for phone calls
* unreliable pairing to my Surface Pro
* one more thing for me to forget to charge
Some of this is anecdata and maybe I just have lemon AirPods, but my experience has been very far from "there's no going back and there's no comparison". I'd sell them without reservation if I didn't feel weird in general about selling earbuds.
* like pretty much all Apple earbuds, they don't seal to my ear so they're totally useless in loud places like airplanes (my #1 use case for headphones)
* audio frequently drops out, especially when outside (and there's nothing for the bluetooth signal to reflect off of)
* terrible mic quality for phone calls
* unreliable pairing to my Surface Pro
* one more thing for me to forget to charge
Some of this is anecdata and maybe I just have lemon AirPods, but my experience has been very far from "there's no going back and there's no comparison". I'd sell them without reservation if I didn't feel weird in general about selling earbuds.
You should take them into the Apple store.
A couple of those points are not my experience at all. My audio never drops out unless I'm far out of range or in a weird weather environment and my mic quality is excellent (in fact, I take calls regularly).
A couple of those points are not my experience at all. My audio never drops out unless I'm far out of range or in a weird weather environment and my mic quality is excellent (in fact, I take calls regularly).
They're over a year old, so probably not worth the trouble. Just dug the AirPods out of the junk drawer and they seem to be working better than I recall. Recently got a new iPhone, so perhaps some of my problems were the old phone's fault instead of the AirPods. I don't have any other bluetooth devices so there wouldn't have been anything else to tip me off.
I know you're being sarcastic but the range on my AirPods is greater than 30ft, down the hall and two rooms over.
Come on. Wireless is a hugely important feature. The PC market is dominated by laptops. Because they are wireless. The phone market is dominated by cell phones. Because they are wireless.
Wired earplugs on a phone are a usability nightmare as soon as you stand up. No thanks.
Huh? Are you 8 feet tall?
Nightmare is overstating the case, but it is convenient not to have to manage a tether running from the phone to your head if you're doing anything active.
It's also convenient not to have to manage bluetooth pairing, though I usually find that to be less of a problem with most headphones and more of a problem with various car audio systems and some speakers.
So, Airpods solve those problems.
IMO none of this justifies removing the headphone jack and therefore the option of spending only $5-$20 on your headphones, and the particular solution package airpods embody won't justify their price for me: I've never liked Apple's earbuds, more of an over-the-ear fan anyway, $20-$40 over the ear bluetooth headsets work fine for me, if I'm spending $100+ on headphones they're going to be focused on audio quality in a way Apple will never prioritize over industrial design aesthetics and ecosystem.
But, Airpods still solve those problems, and people who love the particular package have a right to enjoy it.
It's also convenient not to have to manage bluetooth pairing, though I usually find that to be less of a problem with most headphones and more of a problem with various car audio systems and some speakers.
So, Airpods solve those problems.
IMO none of this justifies removing the headphone jack and therefore the option of spending only $5-$20 on your headphones, and the particular solution package airpods embody won't justify their price for me: I've never liked Apple's earbuds, more of an over-the-ear fan anyway, $20-$40 over the ear bluetooth headsets work fine for me, if I'm spending $100+ on headphones they're going to be focused on audio quality in a way Apple will never prioritize over industrial design aesthetics and ecosystem.
But, Airpods still solve those problems, and people who love the particular package have a right to enjoy it.
I’m assuming you’ve never had your earbuds ripped out by a doorknob or random piece of furniture? Lucky you.
where as just standing up may be a bit exaggerated(though forgetting and it unplugging and possibly breakage from a forcible unplug) wired headphone are a nightmare they are always in the way and even if you line them through your clothes they have issues.
Maybe using a laptop on a couch, or trying to move after standing up.
I think their biggest innovation is making devices where everything just works. Look no further than any two year old who has been exposed to an iPad to see that their interfaces are super-intuitive. Plus, unlike most manufactures, they control all the hardware plus the software, so they can make sure that the entire experience is seamless.
I do agree with this. When I was younger I would happily blow a whole weekend getting my window manager set just so or figuring out how to load load songs onto my Diamond Rio from RedHat. Now I’m middle aged and I’m willing to pay all sorts of $$ to have it just work in a sensible way. And work it does — nothing in android or windows land even comes close. It’s surprising how many comments I see here that are completely oblivious to this and insist on trashing apple for being “not free”. The market has spoken. Almost no one cares.
Interesting: I used to use what you use now, and I gave it up when I realized I was spending too much time re-training, learning the latest UI fads, and not getting any real work done. No consistency, no backwards-compatibility, just the upgrade treadmill. Now that I'm an adult, it isn't worth chasing that anymore, and I'm on Linux now.
Window Maker hasn't changed in a very long time.
Window Maker hasn't changed in a very long time.
I have both android and ios devices. Android is far superior for file management. Ios is a joke in that regard. Folders weren't broken but somehow ios managed to break them. Now if I want to save a random file on my ipad I have to choose a directory related to some unrelated app!? Why can't I just create a directory like I do on every other device I own?
why are you trying to “manage files”? More control comes at the expense of ease of use (generally) it seems like, if you can’t give up one you won’t get the other
Because I need to reference files quickly on the go and can't risk not being able to access them due to poor/no internet connectivity. I also want to be able to save files that ios doesn't provide a way to save (eg download YouTube) and have now found a third party app that lets me do that. Should be a core part of ios. ITunes is shit.
100% agreed. People are complaining online about how the new Mac Mini is priced, but they're not just selling a computer. It's a whole ecosystem of things of mostly reliable stuff that works well with each other. They can put a price premium for the quality of their software ecosystem, which keeps getting better.
Being able to use your phone as a camera to take a photo directly into a document in Pages on your computer is a pretty cool trick.
Having your airpods pairing sync between your devices and easily jump to the device you're using is really well done (from what I hear, I don't have them myself).
A phone getting more than two years of software updates may not be flashy, but I'm more interested in that than anything else that phone manufacturers are doing.
Being able to use your phone as a camera to take a photo directly into a document in Pages on your computer is a pretty cool trick.
Having your airpods pairing sync between your devices and easily jump to the device you're using is really well done (from what I hear, I don't have them myself).
A phone getting more than two years of software updates may not be flashy, but I'm more interested in that than anything else that phone manufacturers are doing.
100% agreed. People are complaining online about how the new Mac Mini is priced, but they're not just selling a computer. It's a whole ecosystem of things of mostly reliable stuff that works well with each other.
The old Mac Mini started at $499 with a slow processor even when it was new, a slow hard drive and 4GB of RAM. That was a configuration that no one should have bought. The cheapest previous Mac Mini that anyone should have bought was $699.
The old Mac Mini started at $499 with a slow processor even when it was new, a slow hard drive and 4GB of RAM. That was a configuration that no one should have bought. The cheapest previous Mac Mini that anyone should have bought was $699.
A lot of people buy the Mac Mini because it is the cheapest way to do iPhone development.
You really don’t want to run XCode with 4GB of RAM
All of that stuff is great, and does not explain why the Mac Mini, an entry-level Apple computer, is somehow proportionally worth $300 more than it used to be.
Well, it's going from a laptop based dual core CPU, to a desktop based quadcore CPU. Not a great reason to increase the price dramatically, but it is a big difference in terms of performance.
The other thing I think people are failing to realize, is who is the Mac Mini for? It used to be for Windows switchers who wanted to plug in a small box to their existing mouse/keyboard/monitor situation. It was an introduction to the world of OS X. Nowadays, who uses the Mac Mini? Developers who need to compile in Xcode, and probably some creatives. The device serves a much different purpose nowadays, since most of your casual Apple users can get away with an iPad or a MB/MBA.
Personally, the new Mac Mini really appeals to me, regardless of price. I've been using a 2012 era mac mini machine, and the current bottle neck is the CPU. If I can spend $700 today, and have a capable macOS device for another 6-7 years, with some RAM upgrades, I think that's well worth it.
The other thing I think people are failing to realize, is who is the Mac Mini for? It used to be for Windows switchers who wanted to plug in a small box to their existing mouse/keyboard/monitor situation. It was an introduction to the world of OS X. Nowadays, who uses the Mac Mini? Developers who need to compile in Xcode, and probably some creatives. The device serves a much different purpose nowadays, since most of your casual Apple users can get away with an iPad or a MB/MBA.
Personally, the new Mac Mini really appeals to me, regardless of price. I've been using a 2012 era mac mini machine, and the current bottle neck is the CPU. If I can spend $700 today, and have a capable macOS device for another 6-7 years, with some RAM upgrades, I think that's well worth it.
I use one from 2006 or so. Was planning to get a 'new' 2012 one sometime soon. :-) Now, not sure which to get! I just like them. (You sure picked me - its my first Mac, am a programmer/'creative')
It's worth more because people are voluntarily paying more. If it wasn't worth $300 more, then people would by paying less for the alternative, but there isn't one. The amount of hours I've wasted on Windows and lost productivity makes me not even think about price when buying something from Apple.
Yeah, I've had Windows 10 uninstall my GPU drivers and replace them with 6-month old ones that don't work. I know they're supporting a bizarre variety of different hardware, but regardless of the reasons the software reliability isn't there.
Granted there's some tradeoff with repairs, if your Mac dies you probably can't go on Newegg, get a replacement part, and have it fixed yourself in 2 days. But that tradeoff has worked out well for me so far.
Granted there's some tradeoff with repairs, if your Mac dies you probably can't go on Newegg, get a replacement part, and have it fixed yourself in 2 days. But that tradeoff has worked out well for me so far.
The $499 Mac Mini came with 4GB of RAM, a 5400 rpm hard drive and had a 1.4Ghz CPU.
A usable Mac Mini was at least $699.
A usable Mac Mini was at least $699.
Bought a couple of the old base level minis for a DTP shop back then (more RAM / IO bound than CPU). They allowed for installing 16GB of cheap commodity RAM and 2x 2.5” drives which netted you a decent 1.5 TB Fusion Drive. Good days. Today, with improved vendor lock-in for essential components, you’re looking at 2k+ for an equivalent spec. No thanks :)
The RAM is user upgradeable, and an external SSD drive connected to TB3 is not going to exactly be slow.
If you are so inclined you can use an eGPU something you couldn’t do on any previous Mac Mini.
If you are so inclined you can use an eGPU something you couldn’t do on any previous Mac Mini.
That was 4 years ago, so that was probably as reasonable an amount of memory as 8 GB is today. And the Macbook Airs start at a 1.6 GHz dual core, so Apple isn't above using slower processors in new products. It'll work fine for some people.
The SSD is non-negotiable today though, I'll give you that one.
The SSD is non-negotiable today though, I'll give you that one.
4Gb is good for a media server and not much else.
Between memory compression and very fast SSDs, I bet you could do it. Especially if you aren’t running a bunch of Chrome/Electron stuff like developers tend to.
Of course a lot of the target market for Macs like that would be better served by iPads now.
Of course a lot of the target market for Macs like that would be better served by iPads now.
The 4GB Macs in question were using slow 5400 rpm hard drives.
But, until two months ago, I was using a circa 2009 Core 2 Duo 2.66Ghz laptop with 4GB of RAM with an external USB drive running Windows 10 as a Plex Server. It could do one or two streams depending on the bit rate. It could not do a 4K stream.
But, until two months ago, I was using a circa 2009 Core 2 Duo 2.66Ghz laptop with 4GB of RAM with an external USB drive running Windows 10 as a Plex Server. It could do one or two streams depending on the bit rate. It could not do a 4K stream.
They control all the hardware plus the software, yet the results are way more unimpressive than what I'd expect from that. I have bought an iPhone to port my game engine to iOS and setting it up was an unpleasant experience full of little annoying (although harmless) little glitches. Even LineageOS felt better that that, I honestly expected it the other way around - as I'm a Maemo user that got both Android and iOS phones only for development purposes, I tried them both at approximately the same time and could directly compare.
This is so true. People keep comparing the specs with competitors but they're missing the point.
Apple's strength, be it when they are doing it well or not, has always been UX.
Apple's strength, be it when they are doing it well or not, has always been UX.
Man, I wish I had what you have, because it doesn't "just work". Hook us up with some of that.
there is very little seamless about the newest apple products, especially their software interfaces. i still have no idea what is happening with icloud or their files application or their gesture language. it is all very confusing. and just works? i actually don't own a single apple product that didn't have a major hardware failure within the first few years.
back when it was mac os x versus windows xp, sure, apple was well ahead of everyone else. that isn't true anymore, but people still claim it.
back when it was mac os x versus windows xp, sure, apple was well ahead of everyone else. that isn't true anymore, but people still claim it.
> I think their biggest innovation is making devices where everything just works.
Unless you're holding it wrong.
Or trying to use it in some way contrary to corporate policy.
Or trying to fix it.
In the last two cases, you realize the rest of that aphorism: It Just Works For Apple.
Unless you're holding it wrong.
Or trying to use it in some way contrary to corporate policy.
Or trying to fix it.
In the last two cases, you realize the rest of that aphorism: It Just Works For Apple.
I love the fact that I can keep them in my ear and just go on my Macbook and select the output from the volume icon. I’m always amazed by that.
You know the truly damning thing is that we’re all surprised by this feature working. This is exactly the sort of thing that should be completely painless.
I bought the cheapest possible Bluetooth dongle (says "Griffin" on it, whoever they are) and paired it to my Android phone.
One day I wondered what happens if it can see two paired devices - does it forget one? Is there some unusably awful UX? Does it brick them altogether?
So I paired the Linux laptop. The dongle (which says "Connected" when I turn it on normally near the phone) now says "Second. Device. Connected" when it can also see the laptop. It appeared as one of the output options in the laptop's audio settings. If you play music on the phone, or receive a call, the music on the laptop stops, and you can take the call (or listen to music) instead.
Essentially, with the cheapest available product it appears to be as you say "completely painless". What exactly are Airpods / Apple doing here that makes it worth the extra? Maybe the voice telling you what's going on is nicer?
One day I wondered what happens if it can see two paired devices - does it forget one? Is there some unusably awful UX? Does it brick them altogether?
So I paired the Linux laptop. The dongle (which says "Connected" when I turn it on normally near the phone) now says "Second. Device. Connected" when it can also see the laptop. It appeared as one of the output options in the laptop's audio settings. If you play music on the phone, or receive a call, the music on the laptop stops, and you can take the call (or listen to music) instead.
Essentially, with the cheapest available product it appears to be as you say "completely painless". What exactly are Airpods / Apple doing here that makes it worth the extra? Maybe the voice telling you what's going on is nicer?
It's been so long since I've used anything other than my AirPods I'd forgotten this isn't the usual experience.
Yeah, that's the most annoying thing about my Sony bluetooth headphones. They really don't like to switch between my phone and my Mac.
Bluetooth in general is so shitty about this. How iOS/Apple gets it right and no one else does is beyond me.
Tight OS integration is their advantage. Airpods can do things in ways other manufacturers cannot. The OS has special case Airpod code. How would another manufacturer replicate this? I don't think they could without Apple's ecosystem. Try Airpods on Windows. They aren't as simple to setup.
While the pairing process with non-Apple devices is the slightly more cumbersome standard Bluetooth pairing process, they still switch between multiple devices much more easily than other wireless headphones I own. I just tell windows to connect to my AirPods and they connect. I tell my android phone to connect my AirPods and it connects to those instead. Often with other wireless headphones I have to fiddle with the pairing mode on the headphones to get it to allow me to connect it to a different device, even if it’s already been paired in the past. My $350 Bose wireless headphones (2018 model) can only remember pairing with two devices before it needs to be re-paired. So using it with my phone, iPad, and computer is a bit of a pain. There must be other headphone manufacturers that get this right, but the AirPods are my first experience with not being frustrated by Bluetooth headphones, and the first time I’ve found wireless headphones to be less hassle than wired headphones.
I'll second this. Using the same Bluetooth headphones with three computers and a phone would be a nightmare with any other brand, but with the Airpods you just connect and it... works. No mucking around with pairing and for any Apple device you don't even need to open the Bluetooth menu.
>The OS has special case Airpod code. How would another manufacturer replicate this? I don't think they could without Apple's ecosystem.
They could if Apple would license out the W1 chip, or even sell dongles with W1 functionality that convert the 3.5mm jacks in headphones into bluetooth (like one of these: https://www.amazon.com/Bluetooth-Receiver-TaoTronics-Hands-F...).
Of course they never will, but a man can dream.
They could if Apple would license out the W1 chip, or even sell dongles with W1 functionality that convert the 3.5mm jacks in headphones into bluetooth (like one of these: https://www.amazon.com/Bluetooth-Receiver-TaoTronics-Hands-F...).
Of course they never will, but a man can dream.
Other manufacturers could work within the Bluetooth SIG to fix those problems for everyone, if they wanted to. They just don't care enough to make that investment.
well, they get it right just for their systems. could sony try to make their stuff work 'the same' on multiple different windows installs? possibly, but it's a lot of work, and they can't guarantee the same bluetooth radio chips or versions, etc.
Yes. For years I haven't been able to use my Bluetooth headphones with my Android phone :(
Device switching (particular between both Apple and non-Apple devices) is the primary reason I cannot switch to wireless, and cannot buy a phone without a headphone jack.
Moving AirPod pairing from iOS -> Mac works well, but going the other way is always a struggle for me. I nearly always have to go into my iOS device's Bluetooth settings to reconnect. It's tolerable, but an annoyance.
Not that in control center, you can tap and hold or force touch the music widget, then tap the “output” button at top right, then tap on your AirPods to quickly switch them to iOS device if they’re not currently paired.
nice, i always wondered why you couldnt do this with a force press on the bluetooth icon
now i know
now i know
What I do is put them back in the case real quick and open it near my iPhone. That seems to do the trick though it’s arguably not much better than going into Settings.
I've tried this many times, but it doesn't ever seem to actually work. If my Mac is nearby, it immediately steals the pairing back, even if they're not the most recently selected audio device on the Mac.
Selecting a new audio source from the swipe up menu seems to work pretty consistently for me.
I find it works better if I disconnect them from Mac first.
Part of the problem with the Mac is that Intel has been slow to make progress. Particularly when it comes to faster low-power chips, Moore's Law has been failing us for some time now.
How long till Apple start putting their A-series chips in Macs?
How long till Apple start putting their A-series chips in Macs?
The new iPad Pro already benchmarks as high as some of their recent laptops (Yes, I know the thermals are different, etc but bear with me here)
My bet is that over the years iPad Pro will expand to do more and more of the jobs that people traditionally use MacBooks (or laptops in general) to do. We'll eventually see a world where most people have iPads, not laptops - thereby relying on A-series chips, not Intel, to get their work done. iPad sales are already encroaching Mac sales, and Apple already acknowledges that for most people, the iPad is enough to be their primary computer or soon will be (you can see this in their communications and commercials).
I know it might be difficult for a somewhat technical (and maybe a little bit older) community like HN to imagine, but this is one of my strong beliefs with regards to Apple's product lineup. I truly think the iPad Pro is the dark horse that no one will see coming (especially given that Apple themselves hadn't really focused on iPad deeply for the first couple years of its existence).
My bet is that over the years iPad Pro will expand to do more and more of the jobs that people traditionally use MacBooks (or laptops in general) to do. We'll eventually see a world where most people have iPads, not laptops - thereby relying on A-series chips, not Intel, to get their work done. iPad sales are already encroaching Mac sales, and Apple already acknowledges that for most people, the iPad is enough to be their primary computer or soon will be (you can see this in their communications and commercials).
I know it might be difficult for a somewhat technical (and maybe a little bit older) community like HN to imagine, but this is one of my strong beliefs with regards to Apple's product lineup. I truly think the iPad Pro is the dark horse that no one will see coming (especially given that Apple themselves hadn't really focused on iPad deeply for the first couple years of its existence).
I still don't think the iPad is enough even for most consumers. The competition for the iPad pro is the surface, which has more I/O that people would actually use (see that nice USB-A port and headphone jack?) but importantly comes with a full featured OS that everyone has been using for decades. I could see people moving to a surface type device over a laptop because it has a full featured OS, but iOS is just too limiting. Look at how ridiculous the 1 foot iPad looks with two fingers worth of space between every icon; its just too rigid of an OS to support all the different workflows people might have in their jobs.
I think people have used iOS long enough to see that it's pretty limited as far as file management goes. The great multitasking of the iPad is still limited to split screening just two apps, a big step down in productivity from even classic MacOS of the 90s.
I think people have used iOS long enough to see that it's pretty limited as far as file management goes. The great multitasking of the iPad is still limited to split screening just two apps, a big step down in productivity from even classic MacOS of the 90s.
I think Surface is part of the future too. I think Surface and iPad will dominate traditional laptop sales in the next decade.
They each represent 2 different opinionated views of productivity/creative-focused computing (just like the 2 different opinions of Android vs iOS in mobile computing). I think you're right that today the Surface does far better in the IO department and IO is a dealbreaker for a lot of people. But again, the world isn't standing still, and Apple just released an iPad Pro with USB-C....that's definitely signaling something.
We don't have to make this a conversation about Apple. I think the whole industry is moving in that direction.
Interestingly, I don't have the same belief in ChromeOS. I don't think it'll ever be truly competitive with the Surface or iPad lineup partly because Microsoft still has a stranglehold on the desktop/laptop market. It'll be easy and tempting to move to a Surface device that can do so much more than ChromeOS without changing your existing workflow from Windows.
Android? Well, Android tablets have languished for a very long time - it's basically a dead market walking. The problem isn't so much the hardware languishing as much as it's the software ecosystem that languishes as a result. Even if the Android ecosystem catches up hardware-wise, it'll be a while before the app ecosystem gets kickstarted again.
They each represent 2 different opinionated views of productivity/creative-focused computing (just like the 2 different opinions of Android vs iOS in mobile computing). I think you're right that today the Surface does far better in the IO department and IO is a dealbreaker for a lot of people. But again, the world isn't standing still, and Apple just released an iPad Pro with USB-C....that's definitely signaling something.
We don't have to make this a conversation about Apple. I think the whole industry is moving in that direction.
Interestingly, I don't have the same belief in ChromeOS. I don't think it'll ever be truly competitive with the Surface or iPad lineup partly because Microsoft still has a stranglehold on the desktop/laptop market. It'll be easy and tempting to move to a Surface device that can do so much more than ChromeOS without changing your existing workflow from Windows.
Android? Well, Android tablets have languished for a very long time - it's basically a dead market walking. The problem isn't so much the hardware languishing as much as it's the software ecosystem that languishes as a result. Even if the Android ecosystem catches up hardware-wise, it'll be a while before the app ecosystem gets kickstarted again.
I think the Surface turned out to be a better product.
I used to think phones and tablets would be defined by lower performance but extremely energy efficient. And any learning from these low power designs would leak to desktops and laptops, but with more power to play with, they would be faster.
But now we’ve got these very powerful iPads and iPhones, but they exist in a limited ecosystem.
The Surface may not have the fancy A12 SoC but the entire line up seems to have intel cpus and run Windows. And their product lineup seems to be a single platform with increasing capabilities. Tablet, better tablet, laptop, better laptop. But you can run all the same stuff.
I’d love Mac OS in an iPad right now that can use the same binaries.
I used to think phones and tablets would be defined by lower performance but extremely energy efficient. And any learning from these low power designs would leak to desktops and laptops, but with more power to play with, they would be faster.
But now we’ve got these very powerful iPads and iPhones, but they exist in a limited ecosystem.
The Surface may not have the fancy A12 SoC but the entire line up seems to have intel cpus and run Windows. And their product lineup seems to be a single platform with increasing capabilities. Tablet, better tablet, laptop, better laptop. But you can run all the same stuff.
I’d love Mac OS in an iPad right now that can use the same binaries.
"Tablets are on the way to replace laptops" has been a claim ever since the very first iPad was released. The numbers don't show that, however. Laptops are still selling strong, and tablets haven't taken over.
I really don't think so.
Whether or not the iPad pro has good hardwear is irrelevant.
What matters is that it is missing and extremely important feature, which is a mouse and keyboard.
I don't care how powerful a keyboard is if I can't use a physical keyboard and mouse for it.
Power can't beat UX, and boy is the keyboard good UX when you compare it to tablets or phones.
Whether or not the iPad pro has good hardwear is irrelevant.
What matters is that it is missing and extremely important feature, which is a mouse and keyboard.
I don't care how powerful a keyboard is if I can't use a physical keyboard and mouse for it.
Power can't beat UX, and boy is the keyboard good UX when you compare it to tablets or phones.
This sounds like the kind of argument people made when the iPhone had a software keyboard and every other smartphone had a physical tactile keyboard.
What I think you're missing is that the world will evolve in ways to accommodate a mouse-light interface or evolve to include it if it becomes obvious that it's mission-critical (it's not at all obvious today, despite legacy thinking). Neither version of the future precludes the iPad at all. Just look at the new gestural interface on the new iPhone X/XR/XS devices. It makes navigating the OS effortless and super fast in ways that it simply wasn't before. Before it, people were saying that it's too slow to navigate on a mobile device. How many other innovations like that are coming down the line? We don't know.
I say this as someone who's used an iPad Pro along with the Keyboard Cover for quite some time. No, you won't be able to type on it for hours and hours. But you'll be able to type on it for an hour or so consistently. That's a BIG deal, and changes A LOT. It's only going to get better from here. There are a lot of apps that support countless keyboard shortcuts, including Google's whole G Suite, Office 365, Lightroom, and the upcoming full version of Photoshop in 2019.
If you asked me 3 years ago if I thought the iPad would replace Laptops, I'd tell you probably not. Apple had done little to differentiate it from the iPhone lineup in terms of iOS or even hardware features. But with the iPad Pro specifically, I think things have taken a real turn and Apple is signaling that they're ready to focus on taking it from a media consumption device to a more productive, mission-critical device.
120hz refresh rate, full digitizer, Apple Pencil, the new integrated keyboard cases, a new focus on pro apps, and a ton of improvements to the actual UI/UX to make multitasking and app-switching easier....etc etc. These were all the things that were missing for a long time. But Apple is finally doing all the things needed to move iPad in a direction where people will choose it over laptops at an increasing rate.
The kicker is this: Apple announced recently during WWDC that iOS apps will work on MacOS. Many of their new stock apps in MacOS Mojave are just ported iOS apps. They are truly and confidently doubling down on iOS and iPad.
That's my personal prediction and belief anyway.
What I think you're missing is that the world will evolve in ways to accommodate a mouse-light interface or evolve to include it if it becomes obvious that it's mission-critical (it's not at all obvious today, despite legacy thinking). Neither version of the future precludes the iPad at all. Just look at the new gestural interface on the new iPhone X/XR/XS devices. It makes navigating the OS effortless and super fast in ways that it simply wasn't before. Before it, people were saying that it's too slow to navigate on a mobile device. How many other innovations like that are coming down the line? We don't know.
I say this as someone who's used an iPad Pro along with the Keyboard Cover for quite some time. No, you won't be able to type on it for hours and hours. But you'll be able to type on it for an hour or so consistently. That's a BIG deal, and changes A LOT. It's only going to get better from here. There are a lot of apps that support countless keyboard shortcuts, including Google's whole G Suite, Office 365, Lightroom, and the upcoming full version of Photoshop in 2019.
If you asked me 3 years ago if I thought the iPad would replace Laptops, I'd tell you probably not. Apple had done little to differentiate it from the iPhone lineup in terms of iOS or even hardware features. But with the iPad Pro specifically, I think things have taken a real turn and Apple is signaling that they're ready to focus on taking it from a media consumption device to a more productive, mission-critical device.
120hz refresh rate, full digitizer, Apple Pencil, the new integrated keyboard cases, a new focus on pro apps, and a ton of improvements to the actual UI/UX to make multitasking and app-switching easier....etc etc. These were all the things that were missing for a long time. But Apple is finally doing all the things needed to move iPad in a direction where people will choose it over laptops at an increasing rate.
The kicker is this: Apple announced recently during WWDC that iOS apps will work on MacOS. Many of their new stock apps in MacOS Mojave are just ported iOS apps. They are truly and confidently doubling down on iOS and iPad.
That's my personal prediction and belief anyway.
Phones never replaced laptops though. Phone are useful, and yet will never ever replaced the desktop, solely because of screen size. You can't magic a full screen monitor on your phone.
Yes, iPads could be useful for some circumstances, but power was never the limiting factor.
Take an iPad from 5 years ago, and you have something that works just as well for all iPad usecases.
My point is that I don't think anyone could imagine sitting 8 hours a day, typing away at an iPad.
For office work, a mouse and keyboard is essential.
How can you possible spend hours typing away at something that doesn't have a keyboard? And the vast majority of office usecases involve lots and lots of typing and mouse usage.
An iPad being useful is not the same thing as replacing office work.
Yes, iPads could be useful for some circumstances, but power was never the limiting factor.
Take an iPad from 5 years ago, and you have something that works just as well for all iPad usecases.
My point is that I don't think anyone could imagine sitting 8 hours a day, typing away at an iPad.
For office work, a mouse and keyboard is essential.
How can you possible spend hours typing away at something that doesn't have a keyboard? And the vast majority of office usecases involve lots and lots of typing and mouse usage.
An iPad being useful is not the same thing as replacing office work.
I think it's coming very soon, perhaps in the next generation of Macbook Pros. The writing was on the wall when Apple released the new iPad Pros: https://bgr.com/2018/11/01/new-ipad-pros-speed-will-be-a-nig...
I know these are synthetic benchmarks, but it's incredible to see the A12X outperform the iMac 27" Retina... These chips have the potential to blow the doors off of Intel's Core i7/i9 while having 2x the battery life.
I know these are synthetic benchmarks, but it's incredible to see the A12X outperform the iMac 27" Retina... These chips have the potential to blow the doors off of Intel's Core i7/i9 while having 2x the battery life.
> How long till Apple start putting their A-series chips in Macs?
What most people call a Mac? I'm betting 2020.
If you expand your thought a bit, you could say they already have the A-series chips in a Mac with the new iPad Pros. It looks like before long Adobes creative suite will be on the iPad Pro. It has a keyboard, can hook up to external monitors, etc... And, while it still would not work for most people on HN, it is getting very close to a full computer replacement for many.
What most people call a Mac? I'm betting 2020.
If you expand your thought a bit, you could say they already have the A-series chips in a Mac with the new iPad Pros. It looks like before long Adobes creative suite will be on the iPad Pro. It has a keyboard, can hook up to external monitors, etc... And, while it still would not work for most people on HN, it is getting very close to a full computer replacement for many.
Did you know 'Moore's Law' is a nice idea, and not actually regulated by anything?
Yes, but it's an assumption on which many decisions across the industry on predicated, because it has held fairly consistent for a long time, until recently.
Moore's Law truly ending would cause a lot of upheaval. Is causing, but luckily a lot of the industry has shifted focus to mobile anyway, where advancements continue to accelerate for now.
Moore's Law truly ending would cause a lot of upheaval. Is causing, but luckily a lot of the industry has shifted focus to mobile anyway, where advancements continue to accelerate for now.
There are lots of similar features which are just really nice from a UX perspective. The whole WiFi password sharing thing is basically perfect - and underlying a lot of these features are relatively complex technologies.
I agree it doesn’t excuse the lack of attention to Mac hardware though. That’s something I find absolutely baffling; I don’t understand the reason why they’re not periodically releasing newer Macs instead of letting whole chunks of the product line rot. I get that consumer devices are more profitable, but I struggle to think that they wouldn’t still make a handsome sum of money. The product lineup is still kind of spotty and weird. That said, it’s possible that the recent releases and upcoming Mac Pro will mark a bit of a change of pace on this front.
I agree it doesn’t excuse the lack of attention to Mac hardware though. That’s something I find absolutely baffling; I don’t understand the reason why they’re not periodically releasing newer Macs instead of letting whole chunks of the product line rot. I get that consumer devices are more profitable, but I struggle to think that they wouldn’t still make a handsome sum of money. The product lineup is still kind of spotty and weird. That said, it’s possible that the recent releases and upcoming Mac Pro will mark a bit of a change of pace on this front.
TBH Cook seems rather miserly. There seems to be a "Bare minimum with the odd cool extra thrown in to give us a USP and maximum margins" approach, and not so much of the "How OMG wow can we make everything we do?" of the Jobs days. (Hit and miss as it was - more hits than misses, IMO.)
It's a fine big pile of beans financially, but ambitions for the future UX and brand image - including support - seem to be shrinking rather than expanding.
It's a fine big pile of beans financially, but ambitions for the future UX and brand image - including support - seem to be shrinking rather than expanding.
All those terrible things would be fine if people stopped buying them. You vote for what you want with money and if people are willing to buy terrible things then they will continue making it.
People aren't buying terrible things, they're buying the best thing available to them.
Edit: Samsung/Microsoft/Google are free to come up with their own ecosystem and quality hardware devices that don't have the drawbacks that Apple's do. But for some reason they don't.
Edit: Samsung/Microsoft/Google are free to come up with their own ecosystem and quality hardware devices that don't have the drawbacks that Apple's do. But for some reason they don't.
The idea that people think there is no better / equivalent alternative is an issue. Why people are willing to begrudgingly spend thousands on something without doing research doesn't make a lot of sense.
Because people want it? I don't understand why tech people can't understand the most obvious of actions. Apple is popular because people love their products.
Apple may not always have the specs or work best with non-Apple services, but Apple products are consistently high quality, integrate nicely into Apple's ecosystem, and are brand that shows its owners are a certain type of class. Signifying you're of a certain type of class or are "hip" seems to be what so many tech people get hung up upon yet its basic consumerism.
Certain types of people wear Nike clothes or wear Ralph Lauren, or drive a Tesla. Showing you're a HENRY (High Earner; Not Rich Yet) is apart of Apple's appeal.
So no, people know there are Apple alternatives but they don't care because Apple has an appeal that other tech companies have trouble emulating on top of constantly being high quality products. There's almost no Apple product that is "bottom of the barrel" in terms of quality.
Apple may not always have the specs or work best with non-Apple services, but Apple products are consistently high quality, integrate nicely into Apple's ecosystem, and are brand that shows its owners are a certain type of class. Signifying you're of a certain type of class or are "hip" seems to be what so many tech people get hung up upon yet its basic consumerism.
Certain types of people wear Nike clothes or wear Ralph Lauren, or drive a Tesla. Showing you're a HENRY (High Earner; Not Rich Yet) is apart of Apple's appeal.
So no, people know there are Apple alternatives but they don't care because Apple has an appeal that other tech companies have trouble emulating on top of constantly being high quality products. There's almost no Apple product that is "bottom of the barrel" in terms of quality.
Apple processors always blow away the competitors by miles and it takes them the competitors up to a year to catch up. They have amazing cameras, music quality, build, looks, display, security, etc. If they aren't the best, they are in the top 3. And that is all in 1 phone.
I do not personally prefer Apple cause it is not my cup of tea (and I need headphone jack) but they have been coming up with amazing phones year after year, and you can easily skip a year without it affecting your usage.
They cannot reinvent the wheel every time.
I do not personally prefer Apple cause it is not my cup of tea (and I need headphone jack) but they have been coming up with amazing phones year after year, and you can easily skip a year without it affecting your usage.
They cannot reinvent the wheel every time.
I do research and my couple forays into Android, while less expensive, were not good experiences. Admittedly my last Android phone was a Nexus 5, so maybe I should look again?
The problem is after other poor experiences I will only get a Google phone. The Pixel 3 XL with 128gb is $999. A new iPhone Xs is 1249 for the 256gb. Is taking yet another chance on Android worth $250? How well will that Pixel 3 XL even be supported?
It just isn't as simple as no one does any research.
The problem is after other poor experiences I will only get a Google phone. The Pixel 3 XL with 128gb is $999. A new iPhone Xs is 1249 for the 256gb. Is taking yet another chance on Android worth $250? How well will that Pixel 3 XL even be supported?
It just isn't as simple as no one does any research.
Exactly this.
I've made four attempts to consider an Android ecosystem and have owned the following:
Nexus 4, Nexus 5, Note 5, and Pixel 2XL.
The Nexus/Pixel phone hardware were fine, but I found that the software ecosystem was heavily lacking. I got the impression that to the majority of Android devs, UX was the last thing they cared about.
The Note 5 on the other hand was one of the most disrespectful, anti-consumer experiences I had ever encountered since ditching a dumbphone years ago. The carrier I used (Verizon) felt it was appropriate to plaster its own logo on the back of the phone and in a loading splash screen when powering on the phone, plus preload the phone with a bunch of useless apps that could not be uninstalled.
Every single time that I've purchased an Android device hoping that it was finally good enough, I've ended up carrying my iPhone as a secondary device within a week and either returning or throwing the Android device in the drawer within a month.
I've made four attempts to consider an Android ecosystem and have owned the following:
Nexus 4, Nexus 5, Note 5, and Pixel 2XL.
The Nexus/Pixel phone hardware were fine, but I found that the software ecosystem was heavily lacking. I got the impression that to the majority of Android devs, UX was the last thing they cared about.
The Note 5 on the other hand was one of the most disrespectful, anti-consumer experiences I had ever encountered since ditching a dumbphone years ago. The carrier I used (Verizon) felt it was appropriate to plaster its own logo on the back of the phone and in a loading splash screen when powering on the phone, plus preload the phone with a bunch of useless apps that could not be uninstalled.
Every single time that I've purchased an Android device hoping that it was finally good enough, I've ended up carrying my iPhone as a secondary device within a week and either returning or throwing the Android device in the drawer within a month.
The negatives were mainly concerning their desktop / laptop designs and business model of said desktop / laptops.
Often there really is no better / equivalent alternative. If you have a specific need for a particular feature then there may be only a few devices with offer it at all. So as a consumer you have a choice between buying crap or nothing at all. There's no economic way to signal that you'd be willing to pay for something better.
What if people know they're not getting the fastest/biggest/best but pay a premium anyway? It might be a trope but "it just works" is a heck of a value proposition for most people.
But for some reason they don't.
Microsoft are adding headphones to the Surface range very soon, early reviews are very positive.
Microsoft are adding headphones to the Surface range very soon, early reviews are very positive.
And then my laptop/tablet crashes with every update. Not to mention, they are priced similarly, yet they somehow sell less reliable devices.
Contrary to that, I've been using my 2012 MacBook Pro non-retina and iPhone SE with public beta for over two years now, and they haven't crashed even once.
Windows just isn't cool, no matter how hard Microsoft tries to rebrand it. It'll never be cool until Microsoft does something to not make it ubiquitous.
Windows is what you use when you're a kid at a public school or have parents that don't have the money to buy a Mac. Macs and iPhones are trendy because not everyone owns them, they're really nice, and they're pricey.
Windows is like Wal-mart while Apple is Whole Foods.
Windows is what you use when you're a kid at a public school or have parents that don't have the money to buy a Mac. Macs and iPhones are trendy because not everyone owns them, they're really nice, and they're pricey.
Windows is like Wal-mart while Apple is Whole Foods.
Windows isn't cool because of BSODs, constant restarts and waiting for it to update, and Candy Crush advertisements in the start menu. And the hibernate/sleep function worked terribly (at least for the longest time, don't know if it's fixed now), compared to Apple's fold down the screen when you want to go and open it back up to what you were doing and it works all the time.
That too.
Microsoft allows venders with terrible design teams to sell their product and customers associate Windows with these product lines. Microsoft cannot control their brand.
Apple controls the entire stack so they're able to constantly deliver a quality experience.
If all Windows machines were like the Surface Book then this conversation would be different.
Microsoft allows venders with terrible design teams to sell their product and customers associate Windows with these product lines. Microsoft cannot control their brand.
Apple controls the entire stack so they're able to constantly deliver a quality experience.
If all Windows machines were like the Surface Book then this conversation would be different.
But Microsoft themselves is now the one putting candy crush ads on the start menu, and forcing everyone into a two-major-upgrades-per-year cycle that's causing so many headaches.
Lets also not forget the shell is so shit that they finally started shipping the linux subsystem.
Honestly I would have gone to primarily linux instead of mac years ago if osx hadn't been what it is (bsd/*nix).
Honestly I would have gone to primarily linux instead of mac years ago if osx hadn't been what it is (bsd/*nix).
40%+ of smart phones sold in the US are iPhones There is no exclusivity in owning an iPhone.
Tell that to people who deride their “green bubble friends”
edit: Apple isn't the best choice.
(previously: I think it's increasingly obvious that for everyone except osx stans, it's not the best choice available)
and it hasn't been for a long time. Apple was at their peak imo with the MacBook pro a generation or two back. They took out the disk drive (everyone said that was radical, but hadn't used it in years) and worked with the single piece of aluminum. Nowadays, that's not just familiar, it's pedestrian. There's plenty of options in the PC world that have that. What has apple done since? Removed magsafe and usb a??? Made the worst laptop keyboard to be on a flagship in memory?
It used to be that Apple was the only place you could get great design, a phenomenal screen, and good battery life in the same package. But other manufacturers (especially Dell, Lenovo, and Microsoft) have seriously stepped up.
and it hasn't been for a long time. Apple was at their peak imo with the MacBook pro a generation or two back. They took out the disk drive (everyone said that was radical, but hadn't used it in years) and worked with the single piece of aluminum. Nowadays, that's not just familiar, it's pedestrian. There's plenty of options in the PC world that have that. What has apple done since? Removed magsafe and usb a??? Made the worst laptop keyboard to be on a flagship in memory?
It used to be that Apple was the only place you could get great design, a phenomenal screen, and good battery life in the same package. But other manufacturers (especially Dell, Lenovo, and Microsoft) have seriously stepped up.
> I think it's increasingly obvious that for everyone except osx stans, it's not the best choice available, and it hasn't been for a long time
The problem with arguments like this is that they're self-reinforcing. If I try to refute it, you'll just peg me as an "osxistan" (is that a country?) and say I've proven you right.
The problem with arguments like this is that they're self-reinforcing. If I try to refute it, you'll just peg me as an "osxistan" (is that a country?) and say I've proven you right.
thats a fair criticism, i'll consider rewording (stan is a reference to a superfan of eminems, from his song stan). alternatively, you could of course explain why you think apple laptops are the best choice still in 2018(if that's how you feel), its not as if i didn't have some reasoning in my comment that you are free to clash with.
I have a Macbook Pro with touch bar and a Dell XPS. Windows seems to have endless updates and little control over them. Drivers are a pain, bios updates seem to be really important. Blue screens. Unreliable Bluetooth. I've had dell support need to replace almost everything in that machine. And this is supposed to be one of the best Windows laptops.
After six months of struggle with the Dell, I got a MBP. I actually love the keyboard. The speakers are amazing. The trackpad is the industry best. Bluetooth works perfectly. The screen is gorgeous, the build quality is unmatched, and Mac OS is intuitive, clutter free, and stable.
Night and day difference between them.
After six months of struggle with the Dell, I got a MBP. I actually love the keyboard. The speakers are amazing. The trackpad is the industry best. Bluetooth works perfectly. The screen is gorgeous, the build quality is unmatched, and Mac OS is intuitive, clutter free, and stable.
Night and day difference between them.
I think windows updates are the worst part of windows, with apple, it seems to be fanfare to new features, with occasional bugs, but with windows, its not communicated to the user what's being fixed, or how long it will take until it begins. the experiance with the dell bluescreen on a new machine is unacceptable, full stop. at the same time, i'd be terrified of the possibility of the macbook pro keyboard bricking at any time. do you miss USB A?
> its not as if i didn't have some reasoning in my comment that you are free to clash with
I could have, but I didn't see much reason to because you didn't seem open to a discussion. You preemptively dismissed any argument by implying that anyone who disagrees with you is a "osx stan".
> alternatively, you could of course explain why you think apple laptops are the best choice still in 2018(if that's how you feel)
I do feel that Apple laptops are the best choice _for me_. I don't much care what laptop you use. I think everyone should pick the tools that work best for them. We don't have to be on the same platform to collaborate.
My main reason for choosing Apple laptops is macOS, but I also think the hardware is very good. Expensive, but very good.
I could have, but I didn't see much reason to because you didn't seem open to a discussion. You preemptively dismissed any argument by implying that anyone who disagrees with you is a "osx stan".
> alternatively, you could of course explain why you think apple laptops are the best choice still in 2018(if that's how you feel)
I do feel that Apple laptops are the best choice _for me_. I don't much care what laptop you use. I think everyone should pick the tools that work best for them. We don't have to be on the same platform to collaborate.
My main reason for choosing Apple laptops is macOS, but I also think the hardware is very good. Expensive, but very good.
It’s a pointless discussion. We’d be better off playing tic-tac-toe to decide who is “right”. What is “the best” isn’t a factual thing, it’s a preference.
Unless we see some major innovations in battery or display technology, I don't even know what new territory we expect Apple to pioneer at right now in smartphones.
The tech press cares a whole lot about having a steady stream of new and shiny things. But I think most people want to live in a world where their relationship to technology involves just buying the best one you can afford at the time and use it until it either stops working or is no longer adequate to your needs. Then you repeat.
Banking on loyalty isn't a bad thing. It means people think your product is reliable and served them well the last time they made the purchase.
The tech press cares a whole lot about having a steady stream of new and shiny things. But I think most people want to live in a world where their relationship to technology involves just buying the best one you can afford at the time and use it until it either stops working or is no longer adequate to your needs. Then you repeat.
Banking on loyalty isn't a bad thing. It means people think your product is reliable and served them well the last time they made the purchase.
I don't expect Apple to pioneer anything in smartphones. I expect Apple to pioneer in health, home automation, anyone-can-play content distribution, robotics, non-ridiculous comfortable VR/AR, conversational AI, and customer support quality.
These are all open product frontiers, and the next+++(+) iPad Pro is going to become increasingly irrelevant unless Apple develops a strong lead in at least some of them.
You can see the movement being made in a few of these, but there's no evidence so far of any likely game changers in the pipeline - just slimmer and more minimal hardware, with a few OS tweaks.
These are all open product frontiers, and the next+++(+) iPad Pro is going to become increasingly irrelevant unless Apple develops a strong lead in at least some of them.
You can see the movement being made in a few of these, but there's no evidence so far of any likely game changers in the pipeline - just slimmer and more minimal hardware, with a few OS tweaks.
It's soon 2019, I never used any wireless earbuds/plugs and I'm doing well.
The word you probably intended to use is languish instead of vanquish.
Is there any decent data on those AirPods? I am considering them against the OnePlus Bullet Wireless if I'm forced to go this way with a new phone. Overall I'm not a big fan of the completely separated earbud style Apple went with and I'm not using them with any other Apple hardware. The OnePlus design seems better, the price is much cheaper and the charging time is much less, but if the quality isn't there then maybe the Apple ones are the way to go.
I just wish they had decent objective quality numbers like I can find for even fairly cheap wired headphones via InnerFidelity. Anyone know if these are widely published for any of the wireless headphones?
I just wish they had decent objective quality numbers like I can find for even fairly cheap wired headphones via InnerFidelity. Anyone know if these are widely published for any of the wireless headphones?
Yes. Here it is :
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/apple/airpods-wire...
They have most truly wireless earphones, but the OP Bullets aren't on there yet.
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/apple/airpods-wire...
They have most truly wireless earphones, but the OP Bullets aren't on there yet.
That's pretty disappointing, looks like they lose a lot of the lows compared to even the $20 Xiaomi Piston 3 (wired) ones I'm used to or the slightly more expensive VSonic VSD1 series.
This is my biggest worry with wireless - paying a lot more money for a lot less in the quality department. Thanks for the link though, seems like good data and I'll definitely check out some other options.
This is my biggest worry with wireless - paying a lot more money for a lot less in the quality department. Thanks for the link though, seems like good data and I'll definitely check out some other options.
AirPods have no latency issues since the latency is taken into account when playing back video. It seems the video is belt back by the expected latency of the Bluetooth connection.
Thanks, that was the impression I got on my phone - it seemed to automatically compensate for the Bluetooth delay, maybe it's more of an issue when using it on a desktop which doesn't have that functionality.
I think you'd need to specify what kind of data you're looking for. Apple publishes the specs for dynamic range and whatnot but it sounds like you're looking for some kind of mythical "quality" number.
The battery life and charging is arguably the best thing, and they do sound great, but they also have a high pitched electronic frequency in them that I've gone through a replacement and still had. Pain in the ass.
I love 'em, and I want them to be better :)
I love 'em, and I want them to be better :)
I'll wait until the AirPods has noise-cancelling. I can't wait until Apple enters into the NC game!
They already are in it with Beats. [1] I imagine the engineering challenge of ANC with earpods is enormous. If they can shrink that down to AirPod size, that’d be one of the biggest technological marvels they’d accomplish.
1. https://store.apple.com/xc/product/MTQW2LL/A
1. https://store.apple.com/xc/product/MTQW2LL/A
I don't think this will ever happen.
They were designed to be used whilst people are walking around doing everyday things. That includes being near traffic where cancelling all of the noise can kill you.
Expect them to do noise cancelling in over ear form as part of Beats brand similar to 1000MX3 and QC35.
They were designed to be used whilst people are walking around doing everyday things. That includes being near traffic where cancelling all of the noise can kill you.
Expect them to do noise cancelling in over ear form as part of Beats brand similar to 1000MX3 and QC35.
Yeah, I carry AirPods and good old Bose noise-cancelling in-ear earphones. The AirPods are convenient eg inside, but just too permeable to sound; when there is any noise around, I have to revert to the Boses.
rauhl(2)
What a silly article. How someone could look at Apple's chip developments (A, T, S, W, etc. series of processors) and think they aren't innovative is mind-boggling. Apple developing key silicon in their devices is a major security benefit for their users and I consider that an innovative model.
The Apple ecosystem itself is innovative and I don't think there's a single company that does it better.
They still lead in interfaces (biometrics...FaceID) and multi-touch gestures.
I don't use Siri, but I'm glad they are developing that technology in a way that doesn't flat-out violate the privacy of their users. I just hope all the criticism comparing Siri versus Google Assistant and Cortana don't push them to change that posture.
It feels like Apple hate is becoming a meme. You can certainly criticize the company... their product line is becoming confusing, but to say they "used" to be an innovator is ignorant.
The Apple ecosystem itself is innovative and I don't think there's a single company that does it better.
They still lead in interfaces (biometrics...FaceID) and multi-touch gestures.
I don't use Siri, but I'm glad they are developing that technology in a way that doesn't flat-out violate the privacy of their users. I just hope all the criticism comparing Siri versus Google Assistant and Cortana don't push them to change that posture.
It feels like Apple hate is becoming a meme. You can certainly criticize the company... their product line is becoming confusing, but to say they "used" to be an innovator is ignorant.
> It feels like Apple hate is becoming a meme.
Hasn't it always been, though? This probably comes off as conspiracy-theoretic, but I feel like there's a real financial incentive to keep their stock prices as in-flux as possible to allow for proper buy-in/cash-out gains.
Hasn't it always been, though? This probably comes off as conspiracy-theoretic, but I feel like there's a real financial incentive to keep their stock prices as in-flux as possible to allow for proper buy-in/cash-out gains.
I can certainly believe that there are plenty of people that try to manipulate the stock price, but most Apple haters aren't playing the stock market.
By far the most common cause of Apple hate I see is what appears to be consumers who are essentially disgruntled that none of Apple's products are targeted at their own use case: eg. gamers who always decried the Mac Pro because they wanted a cheap traditional desktop, not a workstation; or people who wish Apple was competing in the $500 laptop market, or the 8+lbs mobile workstation or gaming laptop market. A large portion of complaints about Apple hardware being overpriced can be traced back to misunderstandings about what Apple's actually selling and how it differs from the Dell that somebody tries to compare it to. (Of course, there are plenty of things that Apple does over-charge for.)
Next most common are probably the people who despise the "walled garden". They're quite vocal in these parts of the web, but I doubt they outnumber the previous category of Apple detractors.
By far the most common cause of Apple hate I see is what appears to be consumers who are essentially disgruntled that none of Apple's products are targeted at their own use case: eg. gamers who always decried the Mac Pro because they wanted a cheap traditional desktop, not a workstation; or people who wish Apple was competing in the $500 laptop market, or the 8+lbs mobile workstation or gaming laptop market. A large portion of complaints about Apple hardware being overpriced can be traced back to misunderstandings about what Apple's actually selling and how it differs from the Dell that somebody tries to compare it to. (Of course, there are plenty of things that Apple does over-charge for.)
Next most common are probably the people who despise the "walled garden". They're quite vocal in these parts of the web, but I doubt they outnumber the previous category of Apple detractors.
Or people who don't like having to deal with dongles.
After seeing Jim Cramer mention on camera the idea of putting out a false Apple rumor (example given in 2006 was "The iPhone is being delayed"), I'm less inclined to write off conspiracies in this regard. Don't know that it's a full-blown Conspiracy™, but the financial incentives are there for the right people.
The financial incentive is much more pedestrian: hot take clickbait for struggling news organizations.
And TouchId. And FaceID. And Apple Watch. And Airpods. And Apple Pencil. And TrueTone. And Swift. And the new file system.
Anybody who thinks Apple isn’t innovating is an ignorant jackass.
Anybody who thinks Apple isn’t innovating is an ignorant jackass.
All of these things are true but none of those have even come close to the way they moved the needle with the phone/pad.
Of course let's count the number of years it took them to get there from the newton. You can't just shit out a new groundbreaking ecosystem/product every year like clockwork. If you try 99% of those will be huge misses.
Of course let's count the number of years it took them to get there from the newton. You can't just shit out a new groundbreaking ecosystem/product every year like clockwork. If you try 99% of those will be huge misses.
Apple Watch is dominating the wearables space.
And the level of sophistication and complexity in the Series 4 version is really impressive e.g. ECG, Heart Rate Monitor, Siri, Apple Pay.
And the level of sophistication and complexity in the Series 4 version is really impressive e.g. ECG, Heart Rate Monitor, Siri, Apple Pay.
Exactly they cannot keep inventing the wheel.
> Apple Pencil
huh...not a joke
huh...not a joke
Not an artist, but apparently the pencil is way better than the pen and tablet solutions shipped by companies like Wacom. And apparently the new version could possibly be the smallest inductive charging system yet produced.
> And apparently the new version could possibly be the smallest inductive charging system yet produced.
I think that title is still held by Samsung's Note 9 stylus.
I think that title is still held by Samsung's Note 9 stylus.
None of those are innovations, merely entering a market space that already existed. Sure, they've done that in the past with the phone...but they crafted it so well it put everyone to shame. Outside of the Apple Watch the others in your list haven't really pushed boundaries. Even the Apple Watch has a lot of gimmicks that no one uses and things like the Fitbit can easily mimicked at a much lower cost.
biometrics...FaceID
The face is not a particularly good biometric modality - its main use is identification without user cooperation.
Iris recognition wins in pretty much every category.
The face is not a particularly good biometric modality - its main use is identification without user cooperation.
Iris recognition wins in pretty much every category.
Putting conditions on the use of the hardware is distinctly harmful to consumers in a way that otherwise good design cannot ameliorate.
Conditions like "must log in to a Google account to use this" and "must agree that Google can harvest your private data for financial gain so we can pay off those executives" yes that is harmful.
I've yet to see a product that requires that. Let's compare Apple's devices against devices that actually exist instead of terrible devices that exist only in fantasy.
You can run as Guest on a Chromebook. No Google account required.
Oh, Guest mode, that makes everything OK then. lol
It certainly breaks your claim and shows that Apple is the worst offender.
Uhhhh... no.
No argument here :)
Which has nothing to do with innovation. You might not like it, but it’s a meaningless argument when you’re asking about whether Apple is innovative or not.
Also, good luck finding a phone that doesn’t do that.
Also, good luck finding a phone that doesn’t do that.
I wasn't arguing against them being innovative, I was pointing out that they are definitely also a landlord.
> Also, good luck finding a phone that doesn’t do that.
Not a good defense of amoral behavior.
> Also, good luck finding a phone that doesn’t do that.
Not a good defense of amoral behavior.
Fair.
[deleted]
Two months ago, Apple announced an ECG sensor for your wrist. A year before that, they announced face detection for the purposes of identity with enough accuracy that it can be used for financial transactions. Also, AirPods are incredible. I'm not saying Apple has a monopoly on invention, but to say they 'used to be an inventor'? That's weird.
Personally, I find FaceID to be vastly inferior to TouchID for many of my regular use cases.
Perhaps the worst one is that you cannot easily unlock your phone while it lays on a conference room table to see the contents of a message. You need to picking it up and point it at your face. Likewise when using the phone while it is in a stand/holder.
The one and only benefit I found is during the winter, it is easier to unlock the phone with gloves on.
Both of them are terrible for security.
Perhaps the worst one is that you cannot easily unlock your phone while it lays on a conference room table to see the contents of a message. You need to picking it up and point it at your face. Likewise when using the phone while it is in a stand/holder.
The one and only benefit I found is during the winter, it is easier to unlock the phone with gloves on.
Both of them are terrible for security.
Both of them are terrible for security.
Please stop propagating this falsehood, or at least accept that it comes with caveats. Biometric ID on Apple devices is likely to be a significant improvement for many users.
Please stop propagating this falsehood, or at least accept that it comes with caveats. Biometric ID on Apple devices is likely to be a significant improvement for many users.
It _always_ depends on your threat model. Most people need protection from snooping family members, or people who find your phone if you lose it. For these use cases Face/Touch ID both work great. If you are trying to secure your data from the NSA, well you have probably already lost, but by all means, turn off Face ID.
> If you are trying to secure your data from the NSA, well you have probably already lost, but by all means, turn off Face ID.
If you're trying to secure your data from the NSA, carry a flip phone and turn it off and throw it in the freezer before you have any sensitive in-person conversations. Also have all of your sensitive in-person conversations right next to a loud white noise generator (i.e. on the seashore). And memorize all of your confidential information. And always carry a highly reliable suicide method in case you get captured and interrogated.
I'm not being funny here, these are literally the precautions that people take against state-level espionage.
If you're trying to secure your data from the NSA, carry a flip phone and turn it off and throw it in the freezer before you have any sensitive in-person conversations. Also have all of your sensitive in-person conversations right next to a loud white noise generator (i.e. on the seashore). And memorize all of your confidential information. And always carry a highly reliable suicide method in case you get captured and interrogated.
I'm not being funny here, these are literally the precautions that people take against state-level espionage.
"for many users"
I think the OP is signaling they were already aware of the threat model point before your comment.
I think the OP is signaling they were already aware of the threat model point before your comment.
How do you protect against family members who have enough pictures of you to create a 3D printed model of your head [1]?
[1]: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/hackers-trick-apple-iphone-x...
[1]: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/hackers-trick-apple-iphone-x...
> How do you protect against family members who have enough pictures of you to create a 3D printed model of your head [1]?
With therapy.
With therapy.
Was that ever confirmed? The article you link raises doubts about it, and I could find no followup when searching, just contemporary press.
Here's a contemporary article doubting it: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/11/hacke...
Here's a contemporary article doubting it: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/11/hacke...
After 10 attempts it's going to wipe the phone.
Given how sensitive FaceID is I don't think this is a realistic bypass approach. Not that it was even confirmed anyway.
Given how sensitive FaceID is I don't think this is a realistic bypass approach. Not that it was even confirmed anyway.
If they are that desperate, you’ve got bigger problems.
I find Face ID to be a vast improvement over Touch ID. It's much faster and less fiddly to unlock the phone than with the old Touch ID. I love that you can activate and unlock the phone just by looking at it. Apple Pay is much faster. And I like that it's smart enough to not dim the screen when you're looking at it, even if you haven't interacted with the device for a while.
My personal inconvenience is that I'm myopic so I tend to hold my phone too close to my face. The camera doesn't see me and have to tap the PIN every other time. TouchID doesn't depend on that and where my face is. My fingers are always near the phone.
However, I recognize this is an edge case.
However, I recognize this is an edge case.
I am also near sighted. I have to back the phone away from my face to get it to unlock when I am not wearing glasses/contacts. At least it will retry on a swipe-up.
I find that Face ID is only a mild win over Touch ID in situations where it's better, such as when you're taking the phone out of your pocket in one motion, or when the phone is propped upright and you get more details on a notification.
But in situations where it fails I find that it fails harder and repeatedly, which makes you want to choose a simple password (perhaps that's why Apple tucks away the alphanumeric option). When a phone is laying flat on a desk, you can lean your face over the phone. When your head is on a pillow, you can lift your head off the pillow. When the lighting conditions aren't good, you can just turn on the lights and position the phone at that "magic distance" until it unlocks. But if you don't it'll just fail again and again.
As a minor point, I'm surprised that you prefer to double press while looking at your phone, versus having a fingerprint reader on the back so you can unlock your phone in one gesture of hand toward the payment system.
But in situations where it fails I find that it fails harder and repeatedly, which makes you want to choose a simple password (perhaps that's why Apple tucks away the alphanumeric option). When a phone is laying flat on a desk, you can lean your face over the phone. When your head is on a pillow, you can lift your head off the pillow. When the lighting conditions aren't good, you can just turn on the lights and position the phone at that "magic distance" until it unlocks. But if you don't it'll just fail again and again.
As a minor point, I'm surprised that you prefer to double press while looking at your phone, versus having a fingerprint reader on the back so you can unlock your phone in one gesture of hand toward the payment system.
"When the lighting conditions aren't good"
Huh? Face ID uses infrared. It doesn't need external light.
You're right about the pillow thing, but the way I see it, if you can't lift your head off a pillow you probably shouldn't be using your phone!
Huh? Face ID uses infrared. It doesn't need external light.
You're right about the pillow thing, but the way I see it, if you can't lift your head off a pillow you probably shouldn't be using your phone!
"I'm surprised that you prefer to double press while looking at your phone"
The double-press for Apple Pay? In many situations you don't actually have to do this. Just place the phone up against the store's reader, then look directly at the phone and Apple Pay will activate without further interaction.
On London Underground and Buses, though, that's awkward and might hold up the queue, so I do double-tap to activate Apple Pay in advance before getting to the reader. But that's certainly no more difficult than with Touch ID, when you had to double-tap the home button.
(Also, you don't have to double-press and look simultaneously. The double-press will activate Apple Pay, then a quick glance at the phone will unlock it for payment. You then have a minute or so to actually touch it on the card reader).
The double-press for Apple Pay? In many situations you don't actually have to do this. Just place the phone up against the store's reader, then look directly at the phone and Apple Pay will activate without further interaction.
On London Underground and Buses, though, that's awkward and might hold up the queue, so I do double-tap to activate Apple Pay in advance before getting to the reader. But that's certainly no more difficult than with Touch ID, when you had to double-tap the home button.
(Also, you don't have to double-press and look simultaneously. The double-press will activate Apple Pay, then a quick glance at the phone will unlock it for payment. You then have a minute or so to actually touch it on the card reader).
Ok, but whether or not you like it, it's certainly a new feature that is technically sophisticated.
Apple did not need to introduce FaceID... seems to me a non-inventing landlord would have just ridden TouchID as long as possible.
Apple did not need to introduce FaceID... seems to me a non-inventing landlord would have just ridden TouchID as long as possible.
[deleted]
I have an old iPhone, so I can't compare the two. But what I will say is that I REGULARLY have trouble with TouchID. Hands not dry enough, or just failing to recognize fingerprint for other reasons. If FaceID does better than work, say, 2/3 of the time then I'll have a better experience than TouchID.
I have unusually greasy fingers, so TouchID never worked for me on iPhone. (It seems to work fine on my MacBook Pro, though, so maybe it got better). FaceID doesn't consistently recognize the particular smushed shape of my face first thing in the morning, but other than that, it's perfect.
Just a reminder, that under US law, the 5th amendment only applies to passwords (what you know), and not biometrics (what you are). If you choose to use FaceID, thumbprints etc, the government can force you to unlock your device.
Another reminder, you can temporarily disable Face/Touch ID by holding the volume up and power buttons for two seconds, something you could probably do while your phone is in your pocket without anyone noticing.
>something you could probably do while your phone is in your pocket without anyone noticing
that's easy to do if you're driving a car and you get pulled over, but what if a cop stops you on the street? reaching into your pocket is asking to get shot.
that's easy to do if you're driving a car and you get pulled over, but what if a cop stops you on the street? reaching into your pocket is asking to get shot.
*Does not apply to the rest of developed countries.
I just tried this on a 6S plus and it doesn't work.
The one that does is to rapidly press the power button 5 times.
The one that does is to rapidly press the power button 5 times.
I think GP's instructions work only on Face ID devices.
Yes, but it is worth clarifying since GP explicitly said: "disable Face/Touch ID".
>A year before that, they announced face detection for the purposes of identity with enough accuracy that it can be used for financial transactions.
considering a random scribble on a receipt or check is enough to authorize/authenticate a transaction, that bar is pretty low.
considering a random scribble on a receipt or check is enough to authorize/authenticate a transaction, that bar is pretty low.
That’s not the bar anywhere outside the US. It’s a huge improvement in the US, but it’s still a big improvement everywhere else too.
> A year before that, they announced face detection for the purposes of identity
Somewhat like Windows Hello, that also existed, based on technology from the Xbox Kinect?
> Two months ago, Apple announced an ECG sensor for your wrist.
Okay, so this is cool. But, putting on my paramedic hat for a moment, there is _SO_ much disinformation about what this does and what it is capable of detecting, what the difference is between FDA _clearance_ and _approval_, etc.
It can detect A-fib. This is a common, but usually not life threatening medical condition. It's good to have it diagnosed, but even undiagnosed, many people live happy lives blisfully unaware of it. Another way you can potentially recognize A-fib? It's not quite as fancy as the Apple Watch, though: put your fingers on your radial pulse by your wrist. Feel yourself skipping every fourth beat? That _could_ be a problem (though there are other diagnoses).
The Apple Watch does not and _cannot_ (despite ill-informed articles by Cnet and others) take the place of a "12 lead" ECG (random detail, in the medical field, ECG usually refers to an echocardiogram, an ultrasound imaging, and EKG, for electrocardiogram, is most commonly used for what the Apple Watch and other devices are doing).
From Cnet[1]: "Traditional EKG machines have 12 leads with electrodes that are attached all over your body to measure the electrical signals. Apple compares what the Apple Watch Series 4 does to a single-lead EKG, which research shows is just as effective at measuring the heart's electrical signals as a 12-lead machine."
This is flat out and factually wrong. The linked research shows nothing of the sort, and tries to walk someone through using a single lead system multiple times (up to 10), to get the full results of a 12 lead (if you've ever wondered why a 12 lead EKG only requires 10 physical leads, think of them more as 'axes', measured multiple ways, i.e. from lead 1 to lead 4, lead 1 to 5, etc), and then being able to aggregate them manually. For one, this requires moving the end points of the leads multiple times, something you could not do with the Apple Watch (or, to be clear and fair, any other watch), unless you're planning on holding it in many different spots in sequence (which then has issues of being more a time lapse, than a snapshot).
What does that mean? It can't diagnose impending heart attacks, nor heart disease, valve problems, circulatory disorders, and it likely never will, especially with current hardware.
This is also why it's obtained FDA clearance, not approval. To use a metaphor, it's more like a fitness device on steroids, so to speak, with some minor overlap into general health. But not that much more.
[1]: https://www.cnet.com/how-to/apple-watch-ekg-what-is-ekg/
Somewhat like Windows Hello, that also existed, based on technology from the Xbox Kinect?
> Two months ago, Apple announced an ECG sensor for your wrist.
Okay, so this is cool. But, putting on my paramedic hat for a moment, there is _SO_ much disinformation about what this does and what it is capable of detecting, what the difference is between FDA _clearance_ and _approval_, etc.
It can detect A-fib. This is a common, but usually not life threatening medical condition. It's good to have it diagnosed, but even undiagnosed, many people live happy lives blisfully unaware of it. Another way you can potentially recognize A-fib? It's not quite as fancy as the Apple Watch, though: put your fingers on your radial pulse by your wrist. Feel yourself skipping every fourth beat? That _could_ be a problem (though there are other diagnoses).
The Apple Watch does not and _cannot_ (despite ill-informed articles by Cnet and others) take the place of a "12 lead" ECG (random detail, in the medical field, ECG usually refers to an echocardiogram, an ultrasound imaging, and EKG, for electrocardiogram, is most commonly used for what the Apple Watch and other devices are doing).
From Cnet[1]: "Traditional EKG machines have 12 leads with electrodes that are attached all over your body to measure the electrical signals. Apple compares what the Apple Watch Series 4 does to a single-lead EKG, which research shows is just as effective at measuring the heart's electrical signals as a 12-lead machine."
This is flat out and factually wrong. The linked research shows nothing of the sort, and tries to walk someone through using a single lead system multiple times (up to 10), to get the full results of a 12 lead (if you've ever wondered why a 12 lead EKG only requires 10 physical leads, think of them more as 'axes', measured multiple ways, i.e. from lead 1 to lead 4, lead 1 to 5, etc), and then being able to aggregate them manually. For one, this requires moving the end points of the leads multiple times, something you could not do with the Apple Watch (or, to be clear and fair, any other watch), unless you're planning on holding it in many different spots in sequence (which then has issues of being more a time lapse, than a snapshot).
What does that mean? It can't diagnose impending heart attacks, nor heart disease, valve problems, circulatory disorders, and it likely never will, especially with current hardware.
This is also why it's obtained FDA clearance, not approval. To use a metaphor, it's more like a fitness device on steroids, so to speak, with some minor overlap into general health. But not that much more.
[1]: https://www.cnet.com/how-to/apple-watch-ekg-what-is-ekg/
Having said that, an incidental 1 lead EKG on a wrist that can be brought up to your primary care and cardiologist at a later date is a game-changer. In clinical practice we will often use a Holter monitor (4 lead wearable EKG) to look for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, but having a passive monitor such as this on for months at a time will help doctors have more information regarding tachycardias like atrial fibrillation. I disagree profoundly with the assessment that the Apple Watch is just a glorified fitbit. (Source: medical resident)
ECG on your wrist is a gimmick, not a true innovation. Extremely impressive from a technical standpoint, but not actually relevant to many consumers.
The criticism always comes back to how impactful the original iPhone and iPod were. Apple has failed to live up to that standard ever since, but to be honest it's an impossible standard to be held to.
The criticism always comes back to how impactful the original iPhone and iPod were. Apple has failed to live up to that standard ever since, but to be honest it's an impossible standard to be held to.
It's embarrassing that this doesn't include a massive, bold-faced disclaimer above the headline.
Bloomberg is in the midst of a credibility-destroying fight with Apple over a sensational story that no other journalists can corroborate. Bloomberg has dug in, staking their reputation on Apple being wrong.
Seemingly in response Bloomberg... publishes a hand-wavy piece of cultural criticism about the meaning of Apple doing iterative design?
Bloomberg is in the midst of a credibility-destroying fight with Apple over a sensational story that no other journalists can corroborate. Bloomberg has dug in, staking their reputation on Apple being wrong.
Seemingly in response Bloomberg... publishes a hand-wavy piece of cultural criticism about the meaning of Apple doing iterative design?
What is embarrassing is believing there's now a conspiracy against Apple because Bloomberg got a scoop and decided to follow through.
Don't worry, Apple can survive some criticism.
Don't worry, Apple can survive some criticism.
Who said anything about a conspiracy? It's a basic premise of journalism—if your outlet is embroiled in a war with a certain subject, you need to disclose that so your readers can properly contextualize your recycled lightweight column.
I don't think there's a conspiracy. I don't know whether Bloomberg or Apple are right. I didn't comment on that. But I do think this article and the lack of a disclosure is a horrible look for Bloomberg.
I don't think there's a conspiracy. I don't know whether Bloomberg or Apple are right. I didn't comment on that. But I do think this article and the lack of a disclosure is a horrible look for Bloomberg.
Scoops are usually considered first reports of true stories.
That's definitely a shame. It's filed under "Bloomberg Opinion" though (with a disclaimer at end about it being opinion of the article author).
P.S. it's even worse that the hypocrite fans don't callout when the paid-for praise happens without disclaimer. And that happens way more often.
P.S. it's even worse that the hypocrite fans don't callout when the paid-for praise happens without disclaimer. And that happens way more often.
I'm generally against the "opinion/news" distinction anyway, but the same disclosures should apply in the opinion section. For example, if a newspaper published an opinion piece arguing against a new health care law, shouldn't readers know that the writer is the head of an insurance company that would lose billions if the law were past?
I agree with you—if a company advertises with a given outlet and journalists write stories about that company, positive or negative, I'd like to know about it. Unlike in this case, there is the supposed "separation of church and state" that protects newsrooms from the advertising side of these businesses. But I'm skeptical that works perfectly in practice.
But this is something else entirely. There's no firewall between Bloomberg's editors and... Bloomberg's editors.
I agree with you—if a company advertises with a given outlet and journalists write stories about that company, positive or negative, I'd like to know about it. Unlike in this case, there is the supposed "separation of church and state" that protects newsrooms from the advertising side of these businesses. But I'm skeptical that works perfectly in practice.
But this is something else entirely. There's no firewall between Bloomberg's editors and... Bloomberg's editors.
Do you know what really worries me about Apple now?
So, when SJ came back to Apple, he reorganized their (then at the time) computer lines into more streamlined ones. Something like (I might get some of the names wrong), into consumer/pro and portable/desktop
iBook/Powerbook, iMac/Powermac
Now look at their line now
What the F is an iPhone XR? Is the XS "better" than the X or not? Why are there 2 iPad Pros? Is an iPad 4 better than an iPad? Which one is which?
Not to mention the dongles, USB-C mess, etc
So, when SJ came back to Apple, he reorganized their (then at the time) computer lines into more streamlined ones. Something like (I might get some of the names wrong), into consumer/pro and portable/desktop
iBook/Powerbook, iMac/Powermac
Now look at their line now
What the F is an iPhone XR? Is the XS "better" than the X or not? Why are there 2 iPad Pros? Is an iPad 4 better than an iPad? Which one is which?
Not to mention the dongles, USB-C mess, etc
They've definitely failed at saying 'no' - no to selling last years model as a budget, no to selling 2 different sizes of the same phone, they've lost their mojo in saying "this is the best product available if you're looking for an everyday driver and don't need all the RAM in the world", or, "this is the best product available if you're running Final Cut Pro on the road"
To your point, you can actually buy 2 different Macbook Airs from their official shop, clicking through the glossy introduction of the one released last week, 5th generation i5 or 8th generation i5 with TouchID, slim bezel, USB C etc
To your point, you can actually buy 2 different Macbook Airs from their official shop, clicking through the glossy introduction of the one released last week, 5th generation i5 or 8th generation i5 with TouchID, slim bezel, USB C etc
Selling last year's model as a budget option was a Steve Jobs decision. It started with the iPhone 3G, which remained on sale in 2009 for a lower price, after the 3Gs was released.
Expanding SKUs was also a Jobs decision. He cut the computer line back to the quadrants in the late 90s as a way to triage the company. But later he oversaw the introduction of multiple new product lines, models, sizes, and color combinations.
Critics fretted about focus when he introduced the Cube, when he introduced the iPod, when he introduced the Macbook Air, when he introduced the iPad, when he introduced the Xserve, when he introduced the Hi-Fi. Some of them worked, some of them didn't. The ones that worked, really worked well though.
Expanding SKUs was also a Jobs decision. He cut the computer line back to the quadrants in the late 90s as a way to triage the company. But later he oversaw the introduction of multiple new product lines, models, sizes, and color combinations.
Critics fretted about focus when he introduced the Cube, when he introduced the iPod, when he introduced the Macbook Air, when he introduced the iPad, when he introduced the Xserve, when he introduced the Hi-Fi. Some of them worked, some of them didn't. The ones that worked, really worked well though.
Steve Jobs was not perfect and what he set out is not doctrine. Apple can be successful without following what he has done in the past. Simply computing has moved on, people own computers for different reasons and the pro / consumer split is not as clear as it once was. Devices can be fashion accessories. Where / how does that fit into the Steve jobs pro / consumer split?
They didn’t stop selling the $999 non-retina “old” MBair because that is Apple’s single best-selling computer. They sell a fuckton of them every September.
Jobs era re-designed the boxes with chip generations, but there's always been sku complexity and naming consistency weirdness
iMac SE / iBook SE iMac Aluminum - Core2/i3/i5/i7 20, 21, 24, 27 iTools/.Mac/MobileMe/iCloud iPod Mini/Shuffle/Nano/Touch 3rd 4th 5th gen USB1/USB2/FireWire400/800/30-pin/ . . iPhone XS/XSMax/XR lightning/usb-c
iMac SE / iBook SE iMac Aluminum - Core2/i3/i5/i7 20, 21, 24, 27 iTools/.Mac/MobileMe/iCloud iPod Mini/Shuffle/Nano/Touch 3rd 4th 5th gen USB1/USB2/FireWire400/800/30-pin/ . . iPhone XS/XSMax/XR lightning/usb-c
Agreed. "Early 2014" is not a good model description
This drives me crazy with Mac products. Would it kill Apple to print the damn hardware revision on the case? It doesn't have to be big, just a tiny line of text in the back corner that tells you exactly what hardware you have.
My MBP says "Model A1502 EMC 2830" on the bottom. My iMac says Model A1207, EMC 2118. My old MBP is Model A1226, EMC 2136. These are short unique model identifiers and any web search will get you all the specs and spare parts you want.
Apple has stopped including strings like "2.4GHz Core 2 Duo/2GB/256MB VRAM/160GB 5400rpm", but then only half of that is accurate for the machine I just read that off of, because of upgrades. (And that label was only accessible by pulling out the battery.)
Apple has stopped including strings like "2.4GHz Core 2 Duo/2GB/256MB VRAM/160GB 5400rpm", but then only half of that is accurate for the machine I just read that off of, because of upgrades. (And that label was only accessible by pulling out the battery.)
They do do this. There's a "Model A####"included in the tiny text on the back of iOS devices, and on the underside of laptops.
A few quick thoughts:
>What the F is an iPhone XR? Is the XS "better" than the X or not?
Somewhat agree about the XR, though I guess the idea is it's one less than an S, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say their "S" naming scheme has been consistent since it was introduced after the iPhone 4.
> Why are there 2 iPad Pros?
Steve once said netbooks were dead, then released a laptop in exactly that form factor (11 in MBA). Clearly there was market demand for it, and I assume their must be demand for both sizes here as well.
> Is an iPad 4 better than an iPad?
Agree here, they've changed this particular convention a lot, but looks like we're settling on Pro and base.
> Not to mention the dongles, USB-C mess, etc
Very much agree here. I really, really hope dongle hell will be a short lived phenomenon and USB-C adoption in peripherals and the rest of the industry picks up. Apple has been right about big bets like this before, so hopefully here too, but right now, it is definitely a mess.
>What the F is an iPhone XR? Is the XS "better" than the X or not?
Somewhat agree about the XR, though I guess the idea is it's one less than an S, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say their "S" naming scheme has been consistent since it was introduced after the iPhone 4.
> Why are there 2 iPad Pros?
Steve once said netbooks were dead, then released a laptop in exactly that form factor (11 in MBA). Clearly there was market demand for it, and I assume their must be demand for both sizes here as well.
> Is an iPad 4 better than an iPad?
Agree here, they've changed this particular convention a lot, but looks like we're settling on Pro and base.
> Not to mention the dongles, USB-C mess, etc
Very much agree here. I really, really hope dongle hell will be a short lived phenomenon and USB-C adoption in peripherals and the rest of the industry picks up. Apple has been right about big bets like this before, so hopefully here too, but right now, it is definitely a mess.
> Steve once said netbooks were dead, then released a laptop in exactly that form factor (11 in MBA). Clearly there was market demand for it, and I assume their must be demand for both sizes here as well.
Just a point of clarification on netbooks. Netbooks were a flop because they were bulky, slow, hard to type on, had terrible screens, and came with minuscule trackpads.
The air was none of those things, and was the progenitor of a new class of laptop that would be known as "Ultrabooks".
Just a point of clarification on netbooks. Netbooks were a flop because they were bulky, slow, hard to type on, had terrible screens, and came with minuscule trackpads.
The air was none of those things, and was the progenitor of a new class of laptop that would be known as "Ultrabooks".
Another example was when Steve said 7-inch tablets were "too small" and you'd need to file-down your fingers to use them (not sure what you'd need to operate 3.5-inch iPhones then). He said this while Apple had the 8-inch iPad mini in development.
SJ was a salesman - he'd say untrue things to make his product look good, like trash-talking 5.5-inch phones(!) and saying "no-one wants 'Hummer' phones" while - you guessed it - Apple had larger phones in the pipeline, because the demand was there.
SJ was a salesman - he'd say untrue things to make his product look good, like trash-talking 5.5-inch phones(!) and saying "no-one wants 'Hummer' phones" while - you guessed it - Apple had larger phones in the pipeline, because the demand was there.
The iPad Mini has 4:3 screen ratio, so quite a bit larger and more useful screen than the 7" 16:9 Android tablets
Same with the netbooks, weren't those often 9" 16:9 with terrible Atom CPU and slow HD?
Same with the netbooks, weren't those often 9" 16:9 with terrible Atom CPU and slow HD?
It's kind of shitty and deceptive to measure screen size by the diagonal. You could have literally a single row of pixels 15 inches wide; does that mean you have a 15 inch display?
How would you recommend we measure screen size? Length x Width I assume is the obvious one, but that’s harder to compare. I suppose you could argue comparing diagonals isn’t a good benchmark either, but it works well enough when screens tend to have similar aspect ratios, as they mostly do.
HxW would be easier to compare if anything. Today you have to look at the aspect ratio to even figure out what the diagonal really means (and the difference between, say, 2:3 and 16:9 is huge).
Square inches is also a single dimension.
Ooh, I really like that one! Measuring area makes a lot more sense.
Do you think Apple already had larger phones in the pipeline at the time of Steve Jobs’s death? I think the slightly larger iPhone 5 probably was, but not the iPhone 6 or 6+.
If Apple were to drop lightning and switch all their phones to USB-C, the rest of the industry would move to USB-C much more rapidly.
We may never be fully rid of USB-A since it's embedded everywhere into things like homes and cars, but it makes a lot of sense for USB-C to replace all the other permutations (B, mini, micro, lightning, etc) found on devices.
We may never be fully rid of USB-A since it's embedded everywhere into things like homes and cars, but it makes a lot of sense for USB-C to replace all the other permutations (B, mini, micro, lightning, etc) found on devices.
(A) problem with USB-C is that devices can selectively support different subsets of its functionality. So instead of having one port to rule them all, you have just as many different ports as before, except they all look the same and take some of the same cables.
True, there is some potential for confusion. But it would be totally cost-prohibitive for every device to support Thunderbolt 3 or for every cable to support 100W power delivery.
What is lacking, perhaps, is a standard way to visually identify these capabilities.
What is lacking, perhaps, is a standard way to visually identify these capabilities.
I used to think the whole “X sucks we’ll never make one” was a feint to catch competitors off balances but lately I’ve wondered if it wasn’t a goad. He says something, his engineers prove him wrong, he changes his mind.
An internal message of “I dare you to prove me wrong” could be demoralizing to some but cause others to rise to the occasion.
An internal message of “I dare you to prove me wrong” could be demoralizing to some but cause others to rise to the occasion.
> Somewhat agree about the XR, though I guess the idea is it's one less than an S
I certainly don't find it obvious that XR means "less" than XS. I could just as easily see it meaning "greater", in the way that the 18th rank is greater" than the 19th rank (in this case the ranked things being letters). Until I actually learned the difference, I actually had thought that the XR was the more expensive one.
I certainly don't find it obvious that XR means "less" than XS. I could just as easily see it meaning "greater", in the way that the 18th rank is greater" than the 19th rank (in this case the ranked things being letters). Until I actually learned the difference, I actually had thought that the XR was the more expensive one.
You don't have to choose between an iPhone 4400, 9600, 8600, 7300, 6500, 5500, or 7600 though. Or even know the difference between all of those models. That's what the desktop Mac product line looked like when SJ returned to Apple, and those were just desktop Macs; there were also three PowerBooks, a couple Performas (which were mostly rebadged Power Macs), a couple Workgroup Servers, and a bunch of clones that were mostly indistinguishable except some of them were slightly overclocked.
Apple painted themselves into a bit of a quagmire with the iPhone X branding. There's no way to make "iPhone XS" / "iPhone Excess" not sound stupid†.
Personally, I think they should have just called it the new iPhone X. And eventually we'd start differentiating by year (iPhone X 2017), as we have with the iPad and Mac line for quite some time.
†Then again, this is the company that released a product called "iPad" and managed to make us forget how stupid that sounds.
Personally, I think they should have just called it the new iPhone X. And eventually we'd start differentiating by year (iPhone X 2017), as we have with the iPad and Mac line for quite some time.
†Then again, this is the company that released a product called "iPad" and managed to make us forget how stupid that sounds.
[deleted]
I like this part:
Apple is milking its essentially captive audience. I hesitate to call it “loyal” — these are, essentially, people who look with trepidation at the idea of moving years of photos and other data to a different system.
My wife gnashed her teeth when she got one of the new, wildly overpriced iPhones — but she just can’t imagine switching to Android.
Apple is milking its essentially captive audience. I hesitate to call it “loyal” — these are, essentially, people who look with trepidation at the idea of moving years of photos and other data to a different system.
My wife gnashed her teeth when she got one of the new, wildly overpriced iPhones — but she just can’t imagine switching to Android.
I wonder if Apple have a demographics problem looming. The teeth-gnashing wife probably has had iPhones since the beginning and her reasons for not wanting to switch are understandable enough. She can also look after her phone and not need so many replacement devices.
But the kids who didn't get on the Apple bandwagon when iTunes was a groundbreaking exciting thing with an Apple ecosystem that made it all work wonderfully?
I suspect that the kids who expect parents to pay for everything might be burdened with commodity Android devices that cost a lot less than the deluxe Apple phones. Lose the phone too often and it becomes a distinctly mid to low end commodity Android device. If that happens then they get to be outside the Android ecosystem and grow up not needing Apple. Meanwhile, the parents just don't replace their phones often enough as what they have is good enough.
Apple can't produce a low-end device as this would cannibalise their premium sales so they are stuck in the realm of hardware and need to push this services model on their customer base.
As time goes on an a phone is just a commodity 'hand rectangle' with little class value. Having the latest and greatest doesn't make you one of the cool kids any more than having a fancy laptop makes you special. There are no queues outside the stores on launch day anymore and there is no returning to that.
A further problem that Apple have is the amount of markets affected by currencies that have gone south or are protected by tariffs. This affects their competitors too, slowing down the upgrade cycle. The UK is a significant market for Apple and after the Brexit vote the pound lost 20% of value making the latest and greatest iphone cost a pretty penny. Unless you are rich enough for these things to not matter then you do have to ask what you are getting for paying five times as much for a fancy iPhone rather than a similarly sized screen on an Android budget device, particularly when signal strength/battery is a huge part of what the product is.
But the kids who didn't get on the Apple bandwagon when iTunes was a groundbreaking exciting thing with an Apple ecosystem that made it all work wonderfully?
I suspect that the kids who expect parents to pay for everything might be burdened with commodity Android devices that cost a lot less than the deluxe Apple phones. Lose the phone too often and it becomes a distinctly mid to low end commodity Android device. If that happens then they get to be outside the Android ecosystem and grow up not needing Apple. Meanwhile, the parents just don't replace their phones often enough as what they have is good enough.
Apple can't produce a low-end device as this would cannibalise their premium sales so they are stuck in the realm of hardware and need to push this services model on their customer base.
As time goes on an a phone is just a commodity 'hand rectangle' with little class value. Having the latest and greatest doesn't make you one of the cool kids any more than having a fancy laptop makes you special. There are no queues outside the stores on launch day anymore and there is no returning to that.
A further problem that Apple have is the amount of markets affected by currencies that have gone south or are protected by tariffs. This affects their competitors too, slowing down the upgrade cycle. The UK is a significant market for Apple and after the Brexit vote the pound lost 20% of value making the latest and greatest iphone cost a pretty penny. Unless you are rich enough for these things to not matter then you do have to ask what you are getting for paying five times as much for a fancy iPhone rather than a similarly sized screen on an Android budget device, particularly when signal strength/battery is a huge part of what the product is.
Weird. I recently moved from Android to iOS, for privacy reasons as well as wanting a phone that would be supported with software updates for a long time.
I've really really enjoyed the switch. Admittedly, it helped that I got the iPhone SE which hadn't been discontinued yet; I might have been less happy with the newer X-series phones, particularly given the sticker price.
I've really really enjoyed the switch. Admittedly, it helped that I got the iPhone SE which hadn't been discontinued yet; I might have been less happy with the newer X-series phones, particularly given the sticker price.
> I've really really enjoyed the switch.
How so?
I've been a mac user for many years but can't really justify the price of an iphone. I've been considering making the switch though, for better integration, privacy and smaller phone. Not sure it's worth it.
How so?
I've been a mac user for many years but can't really justify the price of an iphone. I've been considering making the switch though, for better integration, privacy and smaller phone. Not sure it's worth it.
Basically just a more intuitive and polished overall user interface. There was definitely some learning time, but once I'd learned some of the common actions, I found it much simpler to work with. But it's probably something that is subjective, so I can't vouch that everyone will feel the same way (indeed, I have some friends who have switched from iOS to Android and found the latter more intuitive).
Of course, the price issue was a little different for me since I prefer not to replace devices often, so the longer software support actually means if I amortize the cost of the phone over the time that I use it, iPhones actually come out ahead of Android phones on price.
Of course, the price issue was a little different for me since I prefer not to replace devices often, so the longer software support actually means if I amortize the cost of the phone over the time that I use it, iPhones actually come out ahead of Android phones on price.
There's no rule that you need to buy the latest iPhone model with top specs.
A two-year-old iPhone still gets about 3 years of updates - more than most flagship Androids.
A two-year-old iPhone still gets about 3 years of updates - more than most flagship Androids.
The thing that kills me isn't the photos/songs, those are trivial to transfer. It's finding suitable replacements for all of my apps.
Heck, I'm still on iOS 10 because I havn't found 64 bit versions of some of my most used apps.
Heck, I'm still on iOS 10 because I havn't found 64 bit versions of some of my most used apps.
The main Android dealbreaker for me is all the viruses, followed by OS fragmentation and finally the fact there is no privacy protection ( i.e. secure enclave )
Viruses: doesn't really apply if you just download non shady things from the play store
OS fragmentation: doesn't apply if you're not a developer, just pick a phone that will have a reasonable amount of updates over its lifetime
Privacy protection: really depends how you feel about Google on this one
Presence of a secure element: this one really depends on your threat profile
OS fragmentation: doesn't apply if you're not a developer, just pick a phone that will have a reasonable amount of updates over its lifetime
Privacy protection: really depends how you feel about Google on this one
Presence of a secure element: this one really depends on your threat profile
> Viruses: doesn't really apply if you just download non shady things from the play store
Easier said than done, especially when looking for more obscure apps. Also, it's not easy for non-technical folks to tell the difference...
> OS fragmentation: doesn't apply if you're not a developer, just pick a phone that will have a reasonable amount of updates over its lifetime
How long is "reasonable" relative to iOS? I recently moved from Android to iOS mainly because of this.
> Privacy protection: really depends how you feel about Google on this one
I'm not sure feelings are relevant here. The truth is simply the truth.
> Presence of a secure element: this one really depends on your threat profile
Agreed, but it's good to have the extra security guarantees.
Easier said than done, especially when looking for more obscure apps. Also, it's not easy for non-technical folks to tell the difference...
> OS fragmentation: doesn't apply if you're not a developer, just pick a phone that will have a reasonable amount of updates over its lifetime
How long is "reasonable" relative to iOS? I recently moved from Android to iOS mainly because of this.
> Privacy protection: really depends how you feel about Google on this one
I'm not sure feelings are relevant here. The truth is simply the truth.
> Presence of a secure element: this one really depends on your threat profile
Agreed, but it's good to have the extra security guarantees.
> How long is "reasonable" relative to iOS? I recently moved from Android to iOS mainly because of this.
4 years, basically.
Nexus 6 was supported for all security updates from launch in November 2014 to this month (November 2018). In terms of feature updates, it got up to Android 7.1.1, and I am not aware of any major app that wouldn't run on that today. Not exactly great, but certainly not a new phone per year. I believe Apple's policy is 5 years, rather than 4, with a reported risk of iOS updates purposefully making the original hardware performance worse (e.g. battery life).
Strictly as a geeky side note, if you have the time to spend DIYing your primary mobile OS (which, admittedly, very few people would prefer doing), there are pretty cool third-party Android distros and other OSes that will keep a Nexus 4 (2012, 6 years old) alive and well. Possibly a Galaxy Nexus (2011, 7 years old) too, but I am less sure about that...
Edit: To clarify, what I am saying is that, for most users, iOS' long term support is better than Android's. But, for Google phones and the like, it is only slightly better, not day-and-night better.
4 years, basically.
Nexus 6 was supported for all security updates from launch in November 2014 to this month (November 2018). In terms of feature updates, it got up to Android 7.1.1, and I am not aware of any major app that wouldn't run on that today. Not exactly great, but certainly not a new phone per year. I believe Apple's policy is 5 years, rather than 4, with a reported risk of iOS updates purposefully making the original hardware performance worse (e.g. battery life).
Strictly as a geeky side note, if you have the time to spend DIYing your primary mobile OS (which, admittedly, very few people would prefer doing), there are pretty cool third-party Android distros and other OSes that will keep a Nexus 4 (2012, 6 years old) alive and well. Possibly a Galaxy Nexus (2011, 7 years old) too, but I am less sure about that...
Edit: To clarify, what I am saying is that, for most users, iOS' long term support is better than Android's. But, for Google phones and the like, it is only slightly better, not day-and-night better.
> OS fragmentation: doesn't apply if you're not a developer, just pick a phone that will have a reasonable amount of updates over its lifetime
Can you make a recommendation here? I am an iPhone user who might be inclined to switch to Android, but I still haven't found a phone that would satisfy this criterion. To clarify: "reasonable" for me means ~5 years, as this is how long I expect to keep using the same phone.
Can you make a recommendation here? I am an iPhone user who might be inclined to switch to Android, but I still haven't found a phone that would satisfy this criterion. To clarify: "reasonable" for me means ~5 years, as this is how long I expect to keep using the same phone.
iPhones already don't get full updates. They get progressively trimmed updates as time goes on. Stock android does a similar thing. If you get a Pixel, you get 2 years of OS updates (my Pixel from 2016 is running the latest Android), at least 3 years of security updates, and many software updates in the meantime (most of Android's functionality can be upgraded without an OS update).
FWIW, phones aren't designed to last 5 years. The batteries aren't, the screens aren't, the casing isn't, and the hardware generally doesn't (newer software = more demanding).
That said, if you do require to use the same device for five years, and need the latest software on it, than Apple is probably your only option.
FWIW, phones aren't designed to last 5 years. The batteries aren't, the screens aren't, the casing isn't, and the hardware generally doesn't (newer software = more demanding).
That said, if you do require to use the same device for five years, and need the latest software on it, than Apple is probably your only option.
> FWIW, phones aren't designed to last 5 years. The batteries aren't, the screens aren't, the casing isn't, and the hardware generally doesn't (newer software = more demanding).
FWIW I’m typing this on a 4 year old iPhone and I expect it to easily last another year. Battery was replaced once. Modern smart phones are complex, expensive, ressource intensive assemblies. Swapping them out every 2 years is crazy (... and yet common, sadly)
FWIW I’m typing this on a 4 year old iPhone and I expect it to easily last another year. Battery was replaced once. Modern smart phones are complex, expensive, ressource intensive assemblies. Swapping them out every 2 years is crazy (... and yet common, sadly)
What generation of iPhone are you currently using?
I have and enjoy the Pixel 2 and plan on keeping it for at least another two years. The Pixel 3 (non-xl) would be an ideal phone if you are moving from iPhone and are looking for a long term, well-supported phone.
I have and enjoy the Pixel 2 and plan on keeping it for at least another two years. The Pixel 3 (non-xl) would be an ideal phone if you are moving from iPhone and are looking for a long term, well-supported phone.
Some users buy a new phone every year; for those users I would agree that OS fragmentation is a trivial issue. But if you keep your phone longer, it becomes more important. Many OEMs don't keep their promises to push OTA upgrades in a timely way. Many more OEMs don't make any promises at all. A lack of updates can leave users vulnerable to widely-known attack vectors.
OS fragmentation: doesn't apply if you're not a developer, just pick a phone that will have a reasonable amount of updates over its lifetime
So which Android phone could I have bought in 2013 that would still be getting updates like the iPhone 5s?
So which Android phone could I have bought in 2013 that would still be getting updates like the iPhone 5s?
> OS fragmentation: doesn't apply if you're not a developer, just pick a phone that will have a reasonable amount of updates over its lifetime
Define reasonable. In order to get Android updates for any amount of time, you mostly have to pick higher end phones. Well, If I am expected to pay laptop prices for a phone, I should be able to keep it for as long as I keep a laptop. Two years of updates isn't cutting it anymore.
Define reasonable. In order to get Android updates for any amount of time, you mostly have to pick higher end phones. Well, If I am expected to pay laptop prices for a phone, I should be able to keep it for as long as I keep a laptop. Two years of updates isn't cutting it anymore.
With Google being forced to open up then platform, I expect the viruses and OS fragmentation to get worse as various manufacturers put out half baked software which they don't properly design with security in mind. While even Google has their problems but they do have a seriously strong security team.
There really aren't significant virus concerns on Android. This concern has been overblown.
I'm not sure what you mean by OS fragmentation. Different vendors offer their own branches so maybe you will find that you like one vs the other? Some people prefer Samsung's Android, others prefer the stock experience. Its really just a matter of personal preference for most people.
Privacy can definitely be a problem, though. It is getting a little bit better, but the pace of improvement is not great.
I'm not sure what you mean by OS fragmentation. Different vendors offer their own branches so maybe you will find that you like one vs the other? Some people prefer Samsung's Android, others prefer the stock experience. Its really just a matter of personal preference for most people.
Privacy can definitely be a problem, though. It is getting a little bit better, but the pace of improvement is not great.
The main iOS dealbreaker for me is the lack of strong AI offering. Google's ecosystem is just so good on that front. Siri is not competitive with the google assistant.
I don't have update issues as I only buy Nexus/Pixel. I've yet to encounter a single piece of malware in the years I've been using android, so this seems like an overblown issue. Mind you, I don't download that many apps, just use some of the more mainstream ones.
I believe Google protects my privacy just fine, but I do admire the extra security that iOS has built into the OS. Wish android did better here.
I don't have update issues as I only buy Nexus/Pixel. I've yet to encounter a single piece of malware in the years I've been using android, so this seems like an overblown issue. Mind you, I don't download that many apps, just use some of the more mainstream ones.
I believe Google protects my privacy just fine, but I do admire the extra security that iOS has built into the OS. Wish android did better here.
I hear you. I decided this last summer to move out of "Apple Land" to Android. Didn't know much about it but I just didn't want the walled garden anymore. I have moved everything over. Got the Pixel because I wanted "stock" and "updates" and the camera. Haven't had any issues. Next step is moving my wife over as well. It's been a pretty good experience.
My first smart phone was an iPhone, because it was the cool thing to do and nicely integrated everything, but I wanted to dip into app programming and couldn't justify $99/year for experimentation, so when my iPhone died, I just swapped to Android. If it had been more open and at least let me easily program for my own phone at the time, I probably never would have switched.
Same for me -- I wouldn't mind developing for iPhones, but I have no intention to fully switch to the Apple ecosystem. It's a no go as long as I can't use my Linux desktop for this.
I’m not really sure I buy the premise - Apple has never been much of an inventor, instead being more of a “competent executor”. It’s true that Apple is likely to continue to increase its service offerings, but I don’t think that fundamentally changes the nature of the company. Since Apple has historically focused on executing extant ideas well, it’s quite possible that we won’t see any massive new markets until we know what the next “hot new tech” will be. AR maybe?
I disagree, when apple released the iphone, they changed the face of what smart phones would ultimately become. The touch experience they pioneered really shouldn't be overlooked, and add that on to future technologies like the ipad, where both were deeply immersive devices that people were able to generate new and exiting feelings towards.
Since then, apple has migrated from being a brand focused on the shear love of using technology to essentially any other luxury brand (I disagree with the premise that they aren't still inventors in the engineering sense, but they certainly aren't innovating in the way they had prior).
The closest thing we have today would be something like Alexa, where people young and old can be deeply immersed with a new, and further humanizing, piece of technology. Apple certainly had a head start with Siri, but they were never able to keep up and clearly misunderstood what people are getting out of digital assistants with their homepod since it's too much of a luxury sound product rather than something more utilitarian.
Since then, apple has migrated from being a brand focused on the shear love of using technology to essentially any other luxury brand (I disagree with the premise that they aren't still inventors in the engineering sense, but they certainly aren't innovating in the way they had prior).
The closest thing we have today would be something like Alexa, where people young and old can be deeply immersed with a new, and further humanizing, piece of technology. Apple certainly had a head start with Siri, but they were never able to keep up and clearly misunderstood what people are getting out of digital assistants with their homepod since it's too much of a luxury sound product rather than something more utilitarian.
Many people probably don't recall that the Android interface Google was working on about the same time as the iPhone was released was a Blackberry clone. They adopted Apple's style afterwards. Of course, Apple's interface wasn't totally novel. A fullscreen (no keyboard) touch device already existed (to some degree, Palm Pilots reserved the lower portion of the screen for some input stuffs). The novel aspect was the multi-point touch support, where previous touch screen devices had support for a single touch point at a time, and often relied on a stylus (or fingernail) and were non-responsive to finger presses.
they changed the face of what smart phones would ultimately become
I get that, but they didn’t “invent” the smartphone. They executed an existing concept far better than anybody else had been able to up until then, and the result of that was a complete industry change. It’s great, but they weren’t there when the first smartphones appeared - they came along with a much better implementation of the concept.
I think they’ll continue to do this in other markets as they develop.
I get that, but they didn’t “invent” the smartphone. They executed an existing concept far better than anybody else had been able to up until then, and the result of that was a complete industry change. It’s great, but they weren’t there when the first smartphones appeared - they came along with a much better implementation of the concept.
I think they’ll continue to do this in other markets as they develop.
This really sounds like people are splitting at hairs doing gymnastics to give Apple as little credit as possible.
What does 'invent' even mean to you, and the others, then?
If Apple didn't do what they did, where would we be?
What does 'invent' even mean to you, and the others, then?
If Apple didn't do what they did, where would we be?
[deleted]
Its really easy to find out this stuff by googling it. There were smart phones back in 1993. Apple's came out years later. That hair is half a decade wide?
> Since Apple has historically focused on executing extant ideas well...
> I disagree, when apple released the iphone, they changed the face of what smart phones would ultimately become.
It looks like you're actually agreeing: They (Apple) executed on an extant idea (smart phones) so well that they changed the face of the industry (app stores, etc etc).
> I disagree, when apple released the iphone, they changed the face of what smart phones would ultimately become.
It looks like you're actually agreeing: They (Apple) executed on an extant idea (smart phones) so well that they changed the face of the industry (app stores, etc etc).
Steve Jobs was, among many other things, both good and bad, an irreplaceable human being. The Apple that created the Apple II, Macintosh, iPod, and iPhone isn't coming back.
That having been said, of the two post-Steve Jobs Apples that we've seen, this one is still pretty damn decent. They aren't killing the entire company by throwing all their software engineering resources at a Second System Effect technical quagmire like Copland, they aren't selling laptops that spontaneously burst into flames like the PowerBook 5300, and they aren't investing in solutions in search of a problem like OpenDoc. They also aren't selling dozens of indistinguishable products that are only distinguishable by arbitrary four-digit product numbers.
That having been said, of the two post-Steve Jobs Apples that we've seen, this one is still pretty damn decent. They aren't killing the entire company by throwing all their software engineering resources at a Second System Effect technical quagmire like Copland, they aren't selling laptops that spontaneously burst into flames like the PowerBook 5300, and they aren't investing in solutions in search of a problem like OpenDoc. They also aren't selling dozens of indistinguishable products that are only distinguishable by arbitrary four-digit product numbers.
Agreed - they had tonnes of amazing, creative talent during both Jobs eras, and they still do, but Jobs was clearly a crucial piece in their revolutionary product development. Without him, they’re not going to be knocking out products that literally alter society every 5 years or so. He’s not replaceable.
Still, I think their attention to detail and user experience is about as strong as ever, for both their hardware and software. Innovation will still come out of Apple, just not as game changing as it used to be. I think they’ll transition to being sort of a “Samsung with better UX and attention to detail”, which is a company I’ll continue to buy products from, even if it is a bit of a letdown from what they were with Jobs.
Still, I think their attention to detail and user experience is about as strong as ever, for both their hardware and software. Innovation will still come out of Apple, just not as game changing as it used to be. I think they’ll transition to being sort of a “Samsung with better UX and attention to detail”, which is a company I’ll continue to buy products from, even if it is a bit of a letdown from what they were with Jobs.
> killing the entire company by throwing all their software engineering resources at a Second System Effect technical quagmire like Copland
They bought themselves out of this, of course, by buying NeXT (managed by SJ). But NeXTstep itself could have easily fallen prey to the second system effect. Was it luck or skill that saved it?
Back in 2000, SJ said that Mac OS X would set up Apple "for the next 20 years". It's 18 years later. What's next? I'm an avid Mac user but these days it pretty much just looks like a good implementation of a 1980's Unix workstation. The ways I wish it were improved are not easy to add to the current architecture. When Apple decides that it has run its course, who's going to lead the team to make its successor? There isn't another SJ startup to buy.
Then again, I don't see Microsoft or the various Linux-based groups or even DARPA taking the lead on next-generation operating system design, either. I don't think it's fair to single out Apple. The whole industry has put all its eggs in the basket of "basically a Unix workstation". That was a great design for its day but I wouldn't use it if I were starting from scratch today. Are we going to just keep adding new syscalls and userspace layers for every new idea we have? Is this the endgame for computer science?
They bought themselves out of this, of course, by buying NeXT (managed by SJ). But NeXTstep itself could have easily fallen prey to the second system effect. Was it luck or skill that saved it?
Back in 2000, SJ said that Mac OS X would set up Apple "for the next 20 years". It's 18 years later. What's next? I'm an avid Mac user but these days it pretty much just looks like a good implementation of a 1980's Unix workstation. The ways I wish it were improved are not easy to add to the current architecture. When Apple decides that it has run its course, who's going to lead the team to make its successor? There isn't another SJ startup to buy.
Then again, I don't see Microsoft or the various Linux-based groups or even DARPA taking the lead on next-generation operating system design, either. I don't think it's fair to single out Apple. The whole industry has put all its eggs in the basket of "basically a Unix workstation". That was a great design for its day but I wouldn't use it if I were starting from scratch today. Are we going to just keep adding new syscalls and userspace layers for every new idea we have? Is this the endgame for computer science?
The GUI and WIMP interfaces were born out of experiments by a small team doing independent research, and future interface innovation is just as likely to come from places like that. Even Apple's multi-touch gestures were largely already thought out by the small company Fingerworks before they acquired them. Though I also don't doubt that there is interesting stuff happening in secret rooms at Apple that we aren't privy to.
I'd still look at projects like Dynamicland [1], or to scifi: the form factor for the iPad appeared in ST:TNG 20 years before it did on shelves[2], many AR researchers reference Vernor Vinge's Rainbow's End.
[1] http://dynamicland.org/
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVqHoGKQXLI
I'd still look at projects like Dynamicland [1], or to scifi: the form factor for the iPad appeared in ST:TNG 20 years before it did on shelves[2], many AR researchers reference Vernor Vinge's Rainbow's End.
[1] http://dynamicland.org/
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVqHoGKQXLI
> Back in 2000, SJ said that Mac OS X would set up Apple "for the next 20 years".
In the 1990's, he also said that if he ran Apple, he would milk the Mac for all its worth and move on to the next big thing. That was the iPhone, and now Apple is milking that for all its worth, too.
It's not a historical necessity that we ever do invent something bigger and better than "basically a Unix workstation", any more than we need to fundamentally reinvent any of the other foundational technologies of our civilization. A Mac today is a good implementation of a 1980's Unix workstation the same way an airliner today is a good implementation of a 1960's Boeing. Invent a better operating system? Sure, you could also invent a better jet engine or make concrete obsolete if you wanted to, and maybe someone will, but it's been a long time since anybody did.
In the 1990's, he also said that if he ran Apple, he would milk the Mac for all its worth and move on to the next big thing. That was the iPhone, and now Apple is milking that for all its worth, too.
It's not a historical necessity that we ever do invent something bigger and better than "basically a Unix workstation", any more than we need to fundamentally reinvent any of the other foundational technologies of our civilization. A Mac today is a good implementation of a 1980's Unix workstation the same way an airliner today is a good implementation of a 1960's Boeing. Invent a better operating system? Sure, you could also invent a better jet engine or make concrete obsolete if you wanted to, and maybe someone will, but it's been a long time since anybody did.
Apple used to be a slave to the gods of productivity. Now it's living its best life using the 4 hour work week strategy!
Just riffing on that metaphor, which is true in a lot of ways, Apple could really, _really_ benefit the world by publishing "Apple standards for business" or something similar, a reference point for other corporations who will frankly never be Apple, but could at least kick things up a notch in terms of overall professionalism and impact.
A few very successful corporations have come to the point where they are practically worshiped and almost universally admired, but we are not getting all the cultural benefit from them that we can. That needs to be part of the deal--we give you our markets and cultural attention, you return to us your cultural technology in a more concrete form, at the very least by publishing standards that can be applied to other human organizations. This will help us accelerate human cultural evolution and we'll all benefit.
A few very successful corporations have come to the point where they are practically worshiped and almost universally admired, but we are not getting all the cultural benefit from them that we can. That needs to be part of the deal--we give you our markets and cultural attention, you return to us your cultural technology in a more concrete form, at the very least by publishing standards that can be applied to other human organizations. This will help us accelerate human cultural evolution and we'll all benefit.
I wish I could say Android was different. Yea, Google and Samsung et. al. do make a lot of other products, so their entire business model isn't the same as Apple. But in the phone market, customers don't have all that much choice regardless of who they pick. I'm an Apple hater myself, but I fear the day Apple finally goes away.
My particular pain point here is Apple music. I've got gigabytes of music that I've curated over the years, and had on iPods, then on my iPad. But Music has gone from a library first approach to a store first approach, it is getting pretty difficult to keep a set of tunes physically on your device. That makes me sad.
Pretty amusing to read this on Bloomberg of all places. Practically the definition of innovator turned rent-seeker. One of the most entrenched incumbents in technology.
I thought this was interesting. Although its charging for services, it fits in apples slightly more privacy focused business model.
"Rent extraction from a user base that finds it hard to go away may sound a bit like extortion. But it’s more honest and upfront than extracting data from users in ways they often don’t understand and then making money off the data, as Facebook does. That honesty is in itself a competitive advantage for Apple as it gradually reimagines itself as more of a services company."
"Rent extraction from a user base that finds it hard to go away may sound a bit like extortion. But it’s more honest and upfront than extracting data from users in ways they often don’t understand and then making money off the data, as Facebook does. That honesty is in itself a competitive advantage for Apple as it gradually reimagines itself as more of a services company."
I think people in the mainstream media and even most people period just don't understand innovation cycles. They expect novelty every year, but they don't realize that revolutions are created by consistently great evolution over a long period of time.
We're nearing the top of the S curve with regards to the smartphone business. Upgrade cycles are getting longer. Phones are getting as powerful as laptops and people are finding them good enough for most things, for longer periods of time.
You can't expect the same level of novelty and change every single year. This headline also under-appreciates just how much the world has changed in the past 10 years because of the smartphone. Everything is wildly different and even as I type this, it's really hard to have perspective about just how significant the changes have been especially since we experience them incrementally. 10 years isn't even that long of a time period.
It's all about the ecosystem and services now. Companies are investing deeply into integrated bundles of services and ecosystem add-ons (HomePod, Watch, Apple Music, iCloud etc) with the smartphone sitting at the center tying everything together.
Each piece might not be the iPhone in terms of size, but that's unrealistic. The iPhone is probably one of the greatest single business lines of all time. That type of step function product doesn't come along every year let alone every decade.
It's not about any single product anymore. It's about integrating technology deep into your life with the smartphone at the center (or in Amazon's case, Alexa since they missed the Smartphone era).
Ecosystems are inventions in their own. How they grow matter. What values they espouse matter. Focusing on the individual parts instead of how the pieces tie together to make a powerful whole is missing the forest for the trees.
Apple also isn't the same company they were in 2007. Just look at the iPhone install base growth: https://www.valuewalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Screens...
That's just iPhone. If you count all iOS devices (iPad, iPod Touch, etc), they're well over a billion users globally. They serve more customers, in more countries, with more preferences than ever before in the company's history. If you're expecting the company to move the same way they did when they were barely international and had a tiny fraction of the operations and customers they have today, then that's also unrealistic.
Look at complex multinational products like Apple Pay and how difficult it is for anyone to deliver a service like that seamlessly in every country in the world (even Apple hasn't launched it everywhere). Services like that require multi-year planning, complex dealmaking, geopolitical factors, operational risk, complex financial operations, etc. Things like Apple Pay are severely under-appreciated because it doesn't make for a good headline and it doesn't make for a fun product review on The Verge or YouTube.
If Apple can make iPhone your only wallet and convince banking partners and retailer around the world to accept Apple Pay AND do it in a way that respects the privacy of every transaction. THAT is innovation. THAT is magical. But that is also hard to appreciate and it will happen incrementally over the years. We'll take it for granted, move on, and demand more.
As Bezos said in his previous shareholder letter: "Customers are divinely discontent"
We're nearing the top of the S curve with regards to the smartphone business. Upgrade cycles are getting longer. Phones are getting as powerful as laptops and people are finding them good enough for most things, for longer periods of time.
You can't expect the same level of novelty and change every single year. This headline also under-appreciates just how much the world has changed in the past 10 years because of the smartphone. Everything is wildly different and even as I type this, it's really hard to have perspective about just how significant the changes have been especially since we experience them incrementally. 10 years isn't even that long of a time period.
It's all about the ecosystem and services now. Companies are investing deeply into integrated bundles of services and ecosystem add-ons (HomePod, Watch, Apple Music, iCloud etc) with the smartphone sitting at the center tying everything together.
Each piece might not be the iPhone in terms of size, but that's unrealistic. The iPhone is probably one of the greatest single business lines of all time. That type of step function product doesn't come along every year let alone every decade.
It's not about any single product anymore. It's about integrating technology deep into your life with the smartphone at the center (or in Amazon's case, Alexa since they missed the Smartphone era).
Ecosystems are inventions in their own. How they grow matter. What values they espouse matter. Focusing on the individual parts instead of how the pieces tie together to make a powerful whole is missing the forest for the trees.
Apple also isn't the same company they were in 2007. Just look at the iPhone install base growth: https://www.valuewalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Screens...
That's just iPhone. If you count all iOS devices (iPad, iPod Touch, etc), they're well over a billion users globally. They serve more customers, in more countries, with more preferences than ever before in the company's history. If you're expecting the company to move the same way they did when they were barely international and had a tiny fraction of the operations and customers they have today, then that's also unrealistic.
Look at complex multinational products like Apple Pay and how difficult it is for anyone to deliver a service like that seamlessly in every country in the world (even Apple hasn't launched it everywhere). Services like that require multi-year planning, complex dealmaking, geopolitical factors, operational risk, complex financial operations, etc. Things like Apple Pay are severely under-appreciated because it doesn't make for a good headline and it doesn't make for a fun product review on The Verge or YouTube.
If Apple can make iPhone your only wallet and convince banking partners and retailer around the world to accept Apple Pay AND do it in a way that respects the privacy of every transaction. THAT is innovation. THAT is magical. But that is also hard to appreciate and it will happen incrementally over the years. We'll take it for granted, move on, and demand more.
As Bezos said in his previous shareholder letter: "Customers are divinely discontent"
The copy editor put a click-bait title on the article to get more hits/views, but if you read past it you'll find a fairly even and uncontroversial analysis. It's not an op-ed piece whining for more innovation as the title might imply
The author emphasizes how Apple has created an ecosystem with its iPhone, but that it needs to extract more value from the services provided to that ecosystem to make up for declining sales of the devices themselves (instead of continually raising device prices)
Authors for these publications rarely if ever write their own headlines
The author emphasizes how Apple has created an ecosystem with its iPhone, but that it needs to extract more value from the services provided to that ecosystem to make up for declining sales of the devices themselves (instead of continually raising device prices)
Authors for these publications rarely if ever write their own headlines
A significant proportion of HN comments lately have been apologist about the nature of headlines.
I can’t help feeling like we should stop apologizing. They suck, they’re inflammatory. I think it should be okay to complain about them.
No, I really believe we must complain about them. Loudly, and in numbers.
I can’t help feeling like we should stop apologizing. They suck, they’re inflammatory. I think it should be okay to complain about them.
No, I really believe we must complain about them. Loudly, and in numbers.
Nah just try to avoid reading these publications. if you really want to understand a market you need to pay to either have a phone call with an expert or buy market research. these articles are written solely to grab your attention and get you to look at ads. sometimes they are good if the journalist had integrity but in the vast majority of cases they're not because the journalist is not an expert in what they're covering/has deadlines to meet and is churning out content on some topic specified by their boss
> I think people in the mainstream media just don't understand innovation cycles. They expect novelty every year, but they don't realize that revolutions are created by consistently great evolution over a long period of time.
In 1900, Lord Kelvin famously gave an address at a physics conference in which he stated: "There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement."
In 1900, Lord Kelvin famously gave an address at a physics conference in which he stated: "There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement."
I think we may soon be entering a post smart phone era but the replacements just aren’t ready yet.
I had hopes that the Apple Watch 4 would be the iPhone 3g moment, but it’s not enough faster, smaller, or long running to make that logical leap.
For instance, if I could make calls from my watch and have an iPad mini 5 without also carrying a phone around with me, I might be tempted by that. But neither the hardware nor wireless plans are there for that. Yet.
I had hopes that the Apple Watch 4 would be the iPhone 3g moment, but it’s not enough faster, smaller, or long running to make that logical leap.
For instance, if I could make calls from my watch and have an iPad mini 5 without also carrying a phone around with me, I might be tempted by that. But neither the hardware nor wireless plans are there for that. Yet.
The apple watch 3 was probably the 3g moment. It's the best selling watch in the world. They're probably mostly limited by the requirement of owning an iphone.
I cannot imagine an iPad mini being part of the replacement of smart phones.
The thing is, I want the biggest screen that can fit into my pocket. Maybe something else can replace that need (glasses, projectors, holigrams) but whatever it is will have to be at least as portable as a smartphone.
I think the pocket was critical to iPhones success.
The thing is, I want the biggest screen that can fit into my pocket. Maybe something else can replace that need (glasses, projectors, holigrams) but whatever it is will have to be at least as portable as a smartphone.
I think the pocket was critical to iPhones success.
Great points. Bloomberg has been consistently dropping the ball on good journalism lately.
"I think people in the mainstream media just don't understand innovation cycles."
I think this very article shows the author understands this phenomenon well, he just doesn't use terms like "S curve" to describe it.
I think this very article shows the author understands this phenomenon well, he just doesn't use terms like "S curve" to describe it.
I think that you are correct. I also think that journalists look for attention-grabbing headlines. I haven’t read the article, but the headline makes me think that the author saw the movie The Founder, where a McDonald’s co-founder leverages the real estate market as the primary profit generator, and thought, “I can apply that to Apple.”
It doesn't have to be every year. Every 4 years could be it, but it isn't. Apple's recent 'innovations' are the expected outcome of large amounts of money and demand for higher performance. When Apple released the first Iphone, that was innovation. The watch, innovative but ineffective. Apple hasn't made anything innovative enough to trump the lineup of Macbooks and Iphones. It's the same thing as saying the Intel I9 series is 'innovative'. It's planned release of better performing features, there is no big gap being crossed.
You could say the same or similar things about other companies with similar business models today who rose to prominence because of repeated innovation yet have since become seemingly stagnant: Google, Valve, ...
It seems like stagnation eventually catches up to every company. Google got big on rapid innovation and emphasis on engineering, but by long observation we can see it becomes more and more difficult to do that in a large company, and todays heros on innovation seem to be tomorrows megacorps waiting for the upstarts to overtake them when some large event changes the market. Maybe it's a mix of pride, complaceny, internal politics, and large-corp culture.
There’s a pattern in business of changing CEOs during different phases of the company lifecycle. They have CEOs for growth, ones for mergers, ones for IPOs and ones for selling out.
When a company is growing if you let yourself get pulled in too many directions you’ll suffocate. But maybe the message becomes “we concentrate on a few important things” and eventually those things become boring. You need a new message before you become stodgy.
There’s also JWZ’s dotcom era theory about people wanting to make a company successful vs people who want to be at a successful company.
When a company is growing if you let yourself get pulled in too many directions you’ll suffocate. But maybe the message becomes “we concentrate on a few important things” and eventually those things become boring. You need a new message before you become stodgy.
There’s also JWZ’s dotcom era theory about people wanting to make a company successful vs people who want to be at a successful company.
I hadn't seen this before [ https://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nomo.html ], but I really like it, thank you for quoting it! Posting here in case anyone else benefits.
Just a warning to anyone who didn't already click: JWZ has a beef with Hacker News, and redirects to borderline NSFW image on Imgur. Cut and paste if you want to read it.
I wouldn't say Google is stagnant... Apple users can thank them for forcing Apple to make their phone OS better (and vice-versa with regard to hardware).
Google's problem isn't innovation, it's supporting and following-through on their innovations past the honeymoon period.
Google's problem isn't innovation, it's supporting and following-through on their innovations past the honeymoon period.
They keep making new messaging apps that compete with each other instead of providing users with one great messaging app. Gmail's getting objectively crappier and they're killing off the much better Inbox interface. I'm not saying they make unilaterally bad decisions and I'm decently happy with my cheap Android phone but ten years ago Google was making new and exciting stuff and I haven't felt that way about them in years.
Google is also milking their moat. Look at the 10x price increase for using map APIs in the middle of this year.
Google seems stuck in the Xerox Parc trap. They babysit a bunch if twenty something kids while they daydream but they don’t have the tools or drive to mature those efforts into product roadmaps.
Only google is in the uncanny valley. They go far enough to get people engaged a bit then cancel or reimagine the projects (or people wander off and their replacements have different theories?) and so instead of having no product or engagement they get just enough to draw negative attention, pissing people off who thought something good was going to happen and never did. Like Fox Networks with Joss Whedon...
Only google is in the uncanny valley. They go far enough to get people engaged a bit then cancel or reimagine the projects (or people wander off and their replacements have different theories?) and so instead of having no product or engagement they get just enough to draw negative attention, pissing people off who thought something good was going to happen and never did. Like Fox Networks with Joss Whedon...
This partially explains why Berkshire Hathaway is now largest stock holder in Apple. They prefer companies with 'moat'. Ability to innovate is unpredictable.
Of course they do. Moats are great for investors. Not so great for consumers.
Depends on the company. Moats extract additional value from customers. I think Google, Apple, and Amazon are all examples of companies that use that extra value to invest in innovation (benefitting customers in the end). Comcast is a great example of a company that doesn’t.
I've learned that some of Bloomberg's journalism is bullshit, and this article helps me stand by my opinion.
FaceID? ECG monitor? AirPods and the general continuity between Apple products? Seems like Bloomberg is just an attention whore. I can see an argument for the Apple customer market becoming saturated, but Apple has not lost its inventiveness.
The idea of becoming a landlord who is unable to bring in new people with exciting technology is only true if you consider
FaceID? ECG monitor? AirPods and the general continuity between Apple products? Seems like Bloomberg is just an attention whore. I can see an argument for the Apple customer market becoming saturated, but Apple has not lost its inventiveness.
The idea of becoming a landlord who is unable to bring in new people with exciting technology is only true if you consider
Meanwhile geeks are marvelling at the speed improvements of their latest SoC's over the previous generation and over their competitors.
In benchmarks, sure. But day to day, the new phones only really show their speed in things like games. The Everyman is good with a 6S. That's about when peak phone happened. That's when phones got "fast enough". That's why the 6S is still one of the most used iPhones (14% last number I read.)
Tinfoil hat theory: Is apple holding back their x86 offerings so that their in-house arm processors can catch up performance wise? Perhaps in preparation for an all-arm line up?
This is completely unfair! It is not that the pace of innovation at Apple has slowed down, it is that the success of their innovative products is dwarfed by their legacy business. The Apple watch would be a game changer in terms of revenue for Apple circa 2003 (when it was presumably innovative). It is still an excellent and innovative product, like AirPods.
Apple always seemed to have had four things going for them; Product Innovation, Developing extremely high-quality HW and SW with attention to both details and user experience, a world-class supply chain and finally a technological edge.
I would argue that under Steve Jobs both the supply chain and the technological edge had some focus but there wasn't a huge gap with the competition, This could be either because it required time to achieve this gap and Steve simply wasn't at the helm for that long or it wasn't his main focus and is currently the focus of Tim Cook considering his background, either way, I think Apple is currently and going to continue to blow everyone out of the water with technologies like their SOC's and will continue having the most efficient supply chain and manufacturing capacity in the world churning out products that beat the industry margins by a mile.
Regarding the quality, design and user experience it mostly stagnated, don't get me wrong they're still way higher than the industry average and I can see Johnny Ives touch in most of their products, but I don’t see the kind of passion that went into designing the interface of a device like the iPhone with ideas like pinch to zoom and the spring effect. Apple seems to have a design team that is world class but uninspired and just doing their job.
Now the most important point and this is what I honestly believe is the problem with Apple is the Product Innovation, this appears to have completely stopped after Steve, I try not to believe that Steve Jobs was THE product manager at Apple and avoid the cult of personality, but it's very hard to shake this idea when during his tenure they've released multiple industry-changing products, and they've failed to release a single one after he left.
I think Apple is going to continue to release high-quality, well designed, cutting edge and high margin products, but I highly doubt with the current leadership they'll be able to release a single new product that changes the status quo like Steve used to.
I would argue that under Steve Jobs both the supply chain and the technological edge had some focus but there wasn't a huge gap with the competition, This could be either because it required time to achieve this gap and Steve simply wasn't at the helm for that long or it wasn't his main focus and is currently the focus of Tim Cook considering his background, either way, I think Apple is currently and going to continue to blow everyone out of the water with technologies like their SOC's and will continue having the most efficient supply chain and manufacturing capacity in the world churning out products that beat the industry margins by a mile.
Regarding the quality, design and user experience it mostly stagnated, don't get me wrong they're still way higher than the industry average and I can see Johnny Ives touch in most of their products, but I don’t see the kind of passion that went into designing the interface of a device like the iPhone with ideas like pinch to zoom and the spring effect. Apple seems to have a design team that is world class but uninspired and just doing their job.
Now the most important point and this is what I honestly believe is the problem with Apple is the Product Innovation, this appears to have completely stopped after Steve, I try not to believe that Steve Jobs was THE product manager at Apple and avoid the cult of personality, but it's very hard to shake this idea when during his tenure they've released multiple industry-changing products, and they've failed to release a single one after he left.
I think Apple is going to continue to release high-quality, well designed, cutting edge and high margin products, but I highly doubt with the current leadership they'll be able to release a single new product that changes the status quo like Steve used to.
Yeah, the kind of landlord that designs its own CPUs, GPUs and co-processors, has its own language (Swift), solves several difficult engineering problems with every new product, and so on.
Meanwhile, since I was watching Apple in 2000-2007, when they "used to be an inventor", they used to put out barely incremental updated for the iPod, the OS, and Mac laptops every year.
People would circulate rumors for months, and then cheer, for tiny generational spec updates on iPods. Now we get 10x the technological change we got every year of that era between iPhone models, and people are blaze about it.
Also, Google aside (and them only on the software assistant side) who solves any interesting consumer problems in the space Apple works?
Meanwhile, since I was watching Apple in 2000-2007, when they "used to be an inventor", they used to put out barely incremental updated for the iPod, the OS, and Mac laptops every year.
People would circulate rumors for months, and then cheer, for tiny generational spec updates on iPods. Now we get 10x the technological change we got every year of that era between iPhone models, and people are blaze about it.
Also, Google aside (and them only on the software assistant side) who solves any interesting consumer problems in the space Apple works?
Its sad state of affairs that companies are tying and locking down their hardware to specific software:
You cant modify the new Xboxes or Playstations.
Some Android phones are dependant on the manufacturers customised version of the AOSP.
On Macs it is not easy to install another operating system, like you can do with a PC (although I have managed to get Ubuntu 18.10 running on my Macbook Pro 13,1)
Consumers are going to be really challenged at some point and think, "hey, I have very little control over this thing I bought. Am I ok with this or am I going to start hacking?"
We could see another renaissance like you had in the early 80s with hackers sharing and porting software onto the weird and wonderful computers they were building back then.... who knows?
You cant modify the new Xboxes or Playstations.
Some Android phones are dependant on the manufacturers customised version of the AOSP.
On Macs it is not easy to install another operating system, like you can do with a PC (although I have managed to get Ubuntu 18.10 running on my Macbook Pro 13,1)
Consumers are going to be really challenged at some point and think, "hey, I have very little control over this thing I bought. Am I ok with this or am I going to start hacking?"
We could see another renaissance like you had in the early 80s with hackers sharing and porting software onto the weird and wonderful computers they were building back then.... who knows?
Sorry, I think consumers are perfectly fine with severe limitations of control over their hardware. The percentage of hacked consumer electronics is slim.
Why don't we all steer towards the IBM PC clone model, but for smartphones? Why do we have free/open Linux on PCs and not on phones?
By the way, ironically, with its single user OS, an iPhone is more a "Personal Computer" than most PCs.
By the way, ironically, with its single user OS, an iPhone is more a "Personal Computer" than most PCs.
> Why don't we all steer towards the IBM PC clone model, but for smartphones?
The PC model was an accident and not generally considered a win for IBM, even if it was for other players (especially Microsoft) in the surrounding ecosystem; but Android is largely Google being trying to the Microsoft of the PC clone model without anyone having to be IBM (with much of their OS free, so that it enables the Linux-equivalent—where both it and the DOS equivalent are, well, Linux under the hood.)
The PC model was an accident and not generally considered a win for IBM, even if it was for other players (especially Microsoft) in the surrounding ecosystem; but Android is largely Google being trying to the Microsoft of the PC clone model without anyone having to be IBM (with much of their OS free, so that it enables the Linux-equivalent—where both it and the DOS equivalent are, well, Linux under the hood.)
Yes, but it's relatively cheap to create a new phone especially if you don't need the best specs (see all the cheap Chinese brands). The main feature of the phone needs to be that it is standardized and open. The initial market could be large.
> Why don't we all steer towards the IBM PC clone model, but for smartphones?
Isn't that Android?
Isn't that Android?
Sadly not, IBM PC clones are software compatible from the BIOS up, Android phones are not. It is an absolute nightmare to install a newer version of the OS or to get another OS ported onto an Android phone. There is no common device architecture, OEM's violate the GPL constantly and do not release kernel sources.
Smartphones are not PC's, they're just hobbled embedded devices.
Smartphones are not PC's, they're just hobbled embedded devices.
Not at all. A PC has a defined hardware interface that allows software to be created and ported easily between PCs. Arm is in a less-good position with this. There are newer efforts that make portability easier, but is still nowhere close to what can be done on PC.
What makes Android, Android to everyone outside of China is the proprietary Google Play Services and all of Google’s first party apps.
And what made an IBM-compatible an IBM-compatible was the proprietary Microsoft DOS and Windows operating systems.
And neither were ever considered “open” unlike the legendary tweet of by Rubin...
https://twitter.com/arubin/status/27808662429?s=21
https://twitter.com/arubin/status/27808662429?s=21
Sounds like a good description of Valve after Steam too. Used to focus on products and invent new series, now mostly cashes in on services and microtransactions relating to its older works.
Wonder if this is a trend, especially for larger companies.
Wonder if this is a trend, especially for larger companies.
This is partly the reason why Berkshire Hathaway is now the largest owner of Apple stock. They believe that Apple has a 'moat' they can use to defend their position. It think they are correct.
What can always happen is that they fail to see change coming and drop the ball like Nokia did. They had incredible moat in multiple areas: manufacturing, supply chain, technology and scale. They were able to produce high quality phones with the same cost as cheap brands and pocketed the difference in profits but they didn't see the revolution coming.
The future of Apple's growth is pivot to services and rent from platform.
What can always happen is that they fail to see change coming and drop the ball like Nokia did. They had incredible moat in multiple areas: manufacturing, supply chain, technology and scale. They were able to produce high quality phones with the same cost as cheap brands and pocketed the difference in profits but they didn't see the revolution coming.
The future of Apple's growth is pivot to services and rent from platform.
Apples product line is not understandable anymore, it used to be simple but now there are too many dubious options and weird branding.
Even Microsoft's Surface line (which is a similar mess) is easier to comprehend now.
Even Microsoft's Surface line (which is a similar mess) is easier to comprehend now.
Complexity in the names of devices has nothing to do with those devices being innovative, or Apple being inventive.
And from sales numbers, clearly the naming of the new iPhone lineup hasn't deterred people from looking at apple.com and figuring out what device suits their needs.
And from sales numbers, clearly the naming of the new iPhone lineup hasn't deterred people from looking at apple.com and figuring out what device suits their needs.
The most unfortunate part for me is that Apple's service apps like Apple Music are pretty awful to use. Their stock Music app on iOS takes far too many taps to do anything, is buggy, and overall not a great experience.
The same is true on my MacBook, the only way for me to use Apple Music is through iTunes, a complete dumpster fire of an app on OSX. Apple Music is an otherwise fantastic service, but it is hobbled by terrible UX.
The same is true on my MacBook, the only way for me to use Apple Music is through iTunes, a complete dumpster fire of an app on OSX. Apple Music is an otherwise fantastic service, but it is hobbled by terrible UX.
It had a difficult version 1, but having been a subscriber to Rdio, Deezer, Spotify, and Apple Music. While they all have areas where they could improve, I prefer Apple Music to all of them from a UX perspective (especially in how it handles music that you upload to your library). I think a lot of it comes down to different UX being more or less appropriate to the way a person consumes and conceptualizes music.
Difficult V1 is a generous way to put it, it was a mess, and I agree Apple Music has since improved on iOS. I came in from Spotify and moved to AM family plan, and while I found Spotify a little better in terms of UX, I wanted better integration into my device ecosystem.
I understand that not all apps can be perfect for everyone, but I find the latest iOS app overall very regressed from the previous ones. For example, from a fresh start (as it often happens due to iOS nuking apps in the background) none of the tabs are cached whatsoever, so I have to wait for them to load every single time. Music.app has a completely different feel than other iOS system apps I use frequently, like Photos for example: All tabs are loaded upon start, and importantly, it remembers which tab I was last in, even from a cold start. I discover a lot of new music via the Radio tab, and I almost always find myself waiting for it to load. Often times when dealing with a bluetooth disconnect I have to go into system bluetooth settings to reconnect because for whatever reason, they won't be in the audio output menu in the Music app.
This may seem like a rant, but I use their music service hours every day on my way to and from work, and while working. It's the little details that made me like Apple's ecosystem in the first place, and that seems to be missing lately.
I'm not even talking about the mess that is iTunes.
I understand that not all apps can be perfect for everyone, but I find the latest iOS app overall very regressed from the previous ones. For example, from a fresh start (as it often happens due to iOS nuking apps in the background) none of the tabs are cached whatsoever, so I have to wait for them to load every single time. Music.app has a completely different feel than other iOS system apps I use frequently, like Photos for example: All tabs are loaded upon start, and importantly, it remembers which tab I was last in, even from a cold start. I discover a lot of new music via the Radio tab, and I almost always find myself waiting for it to load. Often times when dealing with a bluetooth disconnect I have to go into system bluetooth settings to reconnect because for whatever reason, they won't be in the audio output menu in the Music app.
This may seem like a rant, but I use their music service hours every day on my way to and from work, and while working. It's the little details that made me like Apple's ecosystem in the first place, and that seems to be missing lately.
I'm not even talking about the mess that is iTunes.
What's the point here?
- There were mp3 files and player long before the first iPod
- Before the iPhone there were other smartphones
- Before the iPad there were other tablets
- Don't get me started on the Watch...
Apple was never an Inventor. Everything they've ever created was built around a technology or even products that existed before. Apple "just" gets the user experience right and and builds products that most people find accessible, easy to use, and reliable.
- There were mp3 files and player long before the first iPod
- Before the iPhone there were other smartphones
- Before the iPad there were other tablets
- Don't get me started on the Watch...
Apple was never an Inventor. Everything they've ever created was built around a technology or even products that existed before. Apple "just" gets the user experience right and and builds products that most people find accessible, easy to use, and reliable.
I'll give you the watch but the iPod isn't an mp3 player, the iPhone isn't a smartphone, and the iPad isn't a tablet.
The iPod is THE mp3 player, the iPhone is THE smartphone, and to a lesser extent the iPad is THE tablet.
No, Apple didn't invent the concepts but they created the definitive product using those concepts.
The iPod is THE mp3 player, the iPhone is THE smartphone, and to a lesser extent the iPad is THE tablet.
No, Apple didn't invent the concepts but they created the definitive product using those concepts.
Multi-touch input was an Apple invention, and it enabled the iPhone and the iPad.
I think you'll find this isn't true. Invented in the 70s and in-use as early as 1985. But just like everything else, Apple was the game-changing commercial implementation of it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-touch
Yes multi-touch used in the context of a smartphone, I should have said.
Could not agree more!
People keep complaining that Apple isn’t bringing the next iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch level innovation, but honestly no one is pushing them so why should they? As far as moving markets they’ve done enough to coast a bit. Noone is complaining that companies like Ford and Toyota are “just making new cars instead og innovativt”
Poor examples - Ford reinvented itself recently, dropped sedans entirely from its product line, doubled down on trucks. Toyota brought its hybrid power train to Camry and Lexus product lines. They're innovating all the time.
Innovating by making new cars. Just like Apple is innovating by making new iPhones new laptops and new iPads. Have you seen the new iPad Pro? It’s a beast that almost deserves a new catagory all for itself. Yet people say Apple has stopped innovating because it’s “just another iPad” which is my point exactly.
Yeah, that's a click-baity headline; but they're not wrong. There's a shift from the "line up at dawn for the new Apple Dingus" to an arguably more stable "tic-toc" upgrade cycle, with hopefully some Apple Music and iCloud subscriptions thrown in. That's where I'm at right now. Both of us are still on iPhone 6s. I have an iPad from last year that I expect to last a few more. Hers is the generation prior, and will get replaced when iOS no longer supports it (or I upgrade). Newest Mac is from 2012. Now, part of it is "good enough". The new phones aren't so outstanding as to warrant an upgrade, the 6s does the jobs we need just fine. Part of it is "there's nothing to buy"; see: laptops. But Apple still gets money for Apple Music, iCloud, and whatever we get off iTunes.
But as for the click-bait headline, we both just bought our first Apple Watches, the Series 4. Strap one of those puppies on your wrist for a day and talk to me about "used to be an inventor". (Side note: AAPL might not have sold us phones for a while, but they did "invent" a watch that we'd buy. They still got our hardware money.)
But as for the click-bait headline, we both just bought our first Apple Watches, the Series 4. Strap one of those puppies on your wrist for a day and talk to me about "used to be an inventor". (Side note: AAPL might not have sold us phones for a while, but they did "invent" a watch that we'd buy. They still got our hardware money.)
If it's not too off topic, what is it about the watch that you like so much? I've still got my iPhone 6 and was nodding my head in agreement until you got to the watch part, so just curious, what makes it a compelling product for you?
Background: Pebble user since the original Kickstarter, had several of those. I've been using Garmin products for ages for running and cycling. Briefly flirted with the original Samsung Gear band (what a POS that was). Went to a Garmin Fenix 3 HR when they got iOS notifications, thus combining high-quality fitness watch with sorta-smartwatch. In short, I'm sold on smartwatches, and do endurance sports.
Objectives: notifications so the phone can stay in bag/pocket. The more "phone stays in pocket" features, the better. Must function as a standalone fitness device (IOW, must have GPS; syncing later is an expected compromise).
Series 4 is finally the perfect storm to get me to buy one. The first ones had no GPS or water resistance. I'm not paying that much if I still have to keep a Garmin around. Series 3 added LTE. Ah, now I can go for a long run in the woods and leave my phone at home. But I'd laid out big bucks for a Fenix 3, and meh, nothing about the 3 really grabbed me, and by then I was used to ignoring the Apple Watch. But with the 4, it looks like Apple decided to make the fitness aspects stop sucking. IOW, maybe I could use this as a running watch, too. As a person who has Wolfe-Parkinson (heart condition fixed with ablation), the ECG piqued my interest. Now, doc said I'm fixed, so ECG shouldn't be an important feature. But it got me thinking, which led to talking to the wife, which led to "well, why don't you just buy one, then?".
"Well, maybe I just will."
"Buy me one, too. Silver aluminum with nylon band."
"Yes, dear."
We've not had them but a week, but I'm more impressed than I expected to be. (I mean, I'm really impressed, but I don't want to drip fanboi on anyone, so I'll tone it down.) The stock workout app would do just fine for most folks. If you're not most folks, WorkOutdoors has been impressive the few times I've used it, and there's RunKeeper and the like. We used the LTE functionality first day we ran with them to co-ordinate (we run separately, with dogs). The screen, OMG, it's head-and-shoulders better than my Fenix. Raise-to-wake is reliably better than the Garmin (you'll need raise-to-turn-on-backlight for the Garmin in anything but outdoor sunlight or a bright room). It's gettin' dark here in the PNW, and for my old eyes the Apple OLED is easier to read on a dark run than the Garmin backlight reflective.
As far as the "smartwatch" part, I'll just summarize and say that IMO it's the best smartwatch going right now. YMMV, or maybe that's not even all that important. Of the functionality the Garmin replicates, the Apple version is just much more refined. As one example, if there's a notification on the Garmin, better hurry and look before it goes away. Apple waits until you raise your wrist to look at it before the timer starts.
The Garmin will stick around in the rotation. Even as a close-to-three-hours marathon runner, I wouldn't trust the Apple battery to go the distance, let alone anything longer. If I'm knocking around on wooded trails, the Garmin will probably take a hit better than the exposed glass on an Apple. IOW, serious outdoor work. But I'm not as adventurous as I used to be, so for everyday-carry I'm really enjoying Apple's offering.
Objectives: notifications so the phone can stay in bag/pocket. The more "phone stays in pocket" features, the better. Must function as a standalone fitness device (IOW, must have GPS; syncing later is an expected compromise).
Series 4 is finally the perfect storm to get me to buy one. The first ones had no GPS or water resistance. I'm not paying that much if I still have to keep a Garmin around. Series 3 added LTE. Ah, now I can go for a long run in the woods and leave my phone at home. But I'd laid out big bucks for a Fenix 3, and meh, nothing about the 3 really grabbed me, and by then I was used to ignoring the Apple Watch. But with the 4, it looks like Apple decided to make the fitness aspects stop sucking. IOW, maybe I could use this as a running watch, too. As a person who has Wolfe-Parkinson (heart condition fixed with ablation), the ECG piqued my interest. Now, doc said I'm fixed, so ECG shouldn't be an important feature. But it got me thinking, which led to talking to the wife, which led to "well, why don't you just buy one, then?".
"Well, maybe I just will."
"Buy me one, too. Silver aluminum with nylon band."
"Yes, dear."
We've not had them but a week, but I'm more impressed than I expected to be. (I mean, I'm really impressed, but I don't want to drip fanboi on anyone, so I'll tone it down.) The stock workout app would do just fine for most folks. If you're not most folks, WorkOutdoors has been impressive the few times I've used it, and there's RunKeeper and the like. We used the LTE functionality first day we ran with them to co-ordinate (we run separately, with dogs). The screen, OMG, it's head-and-shoulders better than my Fenix. Raise-to-wake is reliably better than the Garmin (you'll need raise-to-turn-on-backlight for the Garmin in anything but outdoor sunlight or a bright room). It's gettin' dark here in the PNW, and for my old eyes the Apple OLED is easier to read on a dark run than the Garmin backlight reflective.
As far as the "smartwatch" part, I'll just summarize and say that IMO it's the best smartwatch going right now. YMMV, or maybe that's not even all that important. Of the functionality the Garmin replicates, the Apple version is just much more refined. As one example, if there's a notification on the Garmin, better hurry and look before it goes away. Apple waits until you raise your wrist to look at it before the timer starts.
The Garmin will stick around in the rotation. Even as a close-to-three-hours marathon runner, I wouldn't trust the Apple battery to go the distance, let alone anything longer. If I'm knocking around on wooded trails, the Garmin will probably take a hit better than the exposed glass on an Apple. IOW, serious outdoor work. But I'm not as adventurous as I used to be, so for everyday-carry I'm really enjoying Apple's offering.
This morning I watched two non-technical Apple users be amazed by something automatic - WiFi credential sharing.
User 1 wanted to connect her MacBook Pro to the Wifi. User 2 picked up her phone and was prompted to share her WiFi credentials with the MacBook - it was almost like magic and it worked.
User 1 wanted to connect her MacBook Pro to the Wifi. User 2 picked up her phone and was prompted to share her WiFi credentials with the MacBook - it was almost like magic and it worked.
How utterly embarrassing for Bloomberg. My respect for them has plummeted recently.
[deleted]
My issue with Apple is they continue to hold product launch events as if they've invented a new class of product(s), when they are incremental changes at best (with the exception of the ECG on the Apple Watch.) With the resources Apple has, they should be taking more risks. Tim has basically turned Apple into a boring incremental product company...like a traditional car company. New model year, this model is the best we've ever made...sure, fine but don't pretend that you've created something groundbreaking at every launch event.
Eh... I mean Google's entire business model is to essentially rent you out services in exchange for your personal information.
Also, I contend that Apple's "invention" has been to repackage computing in a premium package. Smart phones, music players, tablets all existed before Steve flashed them on stage, he just made you want to use them by making them sexy and cool, which wasn't that hard, because the early days of computing is about as unsexy as it gets.
Also, I contend that Apple's "invention" has been to repackage computing in a premium package. Smart phones, music players, tablets all existed before Steve flashed them on stage, he just made you want to use them by making them sexy and cool, which wasn't that hard, because the early days of computing is about as unsexy as it gets.
I don't think something like the iphone specifically existed before its debut, but I could be wrong.
Which characteristics do you consider distinctive? I think of capacitive touch with no keyboard, but such phones did exist. Costs for those kinds of screens had been coming down before the iphone launched. It was obvious we'd see more capacitive screen phones before the iphone launch, though Apple certainly accelerated it.
Gesture UI (the audience literally gasped when Steve scrolled through a long list by flinging it, and applauded pinch-to-zoom), and actually using best of class components (except the camera).
All the other smartphones then were laggy/poor screen/plastic shells/etc. Their UIs stunk. It was a huge step up with a bunch of key incremental innovations in a single package.
All the other smartphones then were laggy/poor screen/plastic shells/etc. Their UIs stunk. It was a huge step up with a bunch of key incremental innovations in a single package.
Exactly. And he said Apple was five years ahead of everyone else, and I think he was right, or it may have even been an understatement, because trying out competing phones years afterward, they were still more clunky than any iPhone.
There was nothing even remotely close to the touch UI Apple created and enabled with multi-touch.
Yes, check out the LG Prada. It was actually thought at the time that Apple had copied that design.
Microsoft also pushed tablets long before Apple ever did. Like I said, Apple repackages things.
Microsoft also pushed tablets long before Apple ever did. Like I said, Apple repackages things.
Apple was in the tablet game pretty early with the Newton.
Granted the Newton was the predecessor of the ipad, although it was more a PDA like device. The Microsoft tablet was very much an early ipad.
I look at Tesla as the next Apple. There's not much room for fast innovation in the smart phone space, but cars are outdated, and self driving / electric cars with better robotic manufacturing methods give an opportunity for new entrants to appear. It's too late for Apple though at this point to manufacture the full hardware (and also behind Waymo in self driving software).
Self driving cars are a way to fleece investors for 5 or 10 more years until everyone realizes it just isn't happening.
[deleted]
Admittedly I'm not even going to read the article to see if the headline is just clickbait. The premise is absurd. Apple still sets the bar for innovation. The fact that it is also incredibly good at monetizing its efforts does not take away from that fact.
You should read it, it's more about how everyone has a phone already, and there are fewer must have improvements to drive new sales, so revenue growth is coming mostly from services instead.
Just like McDonalds... http://blog.wallstreetsurvivor.com/2015/10/08/mcdonalds-beyo...
The article didn't mean landlord in the older, literal sense of making money off of leasing land, but in the more modern, figurative sense of taking a cut of products and services provided through their platforms.
Apple has botched the Mac lineup and is becoming anti-consumer. I've been a Mac users since the 80's and this is a very different Apple today.
This draws parallels to Valve, for me.
Same narrative since Jobs died. And yet, their stock keeps skyrocketing.
Steve Jobs was Apple's inventor. They've been trying to emulate him since his passing, which is showing obviously to not be the same thing.
Apple died with Steve Jobs. No new products just same shit with double and triple price. Shrinking customer base due to overpricing is the death of any company and utter betrayal of Jobs vision.
From the comments I see a lot of people are confused by the headline. Apple still invents, but only for the sake of improving existing products, and not really in a way that makes you imagine what you can do, thus it's not the type of invention that matters.
There, I said it.
I made the mistake of buying a Macbook with a touch bar because I thought it was kind of cool when I finally got to see it in person. The novelty that came from this cheap gimmick wore off in a matter of minutes, even though the technical obstacles that had to be overcome must've been great.
The face-tracking cameras in the latest iPhones and iPads? Impressive on their own, but Apple has failed to do anything really fascinating with them besides using them to unlock your device or to puppet an emoji.
Apple invents only for the sake of creating additional cheap gimmicks without creating genuinely exciting products. As I fumble with the awful keyboard on my Macbook I question just how capable they are of even creating quality products.
There, I said it.
I made the mistake of buying a Macbook with a touch bar because I thought it was kind of cool when I finally got to see it in person. The novelty that came from this cheap gimmick wore off in a matter of minutes, even though the technical obstacles that had to be overcome must've been great.
The face-tracking cameras in the latest iPhones and iPads? Impressive on their own, but Apple has failed to do anything really fascinating with them besides using them to unlock your device or to puppet an emoji.
Apple invents only for the sake of creating additional cheap gimmicks without creating genuinely exciting products. As I fumble with the awful keyboard on my Macbook I question just how capable they are of even creating quality products.
What has Apple invented? As far as I'm aware, they have patents of re-purposing other inventions, or design patents. But cannot think of anything they "invented" that didn't already exist before.
They were the first to mass market capacitive touch/multitouch. I believe they acquired many of the underlying technologies, but so far as I know, they were the first to ship a multitouch user interface with a capacitive touchscreen.
Multitouch was an Apple invention. http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1036701/US7479949.pdf
* If I open the case near my phone, it automatically pairs and shoes battery levels.
* They sound decent for earbuds (not in-ear plugs which I hate)
* Lasts reasonable amount of time on its battery and quickly charges while in case.
I could not get this experience ever before and honestly, even after I have had it for a year. I don't know of a better competition to it.
But, letting the Mac lineup vanquish with old internals for years and gouging prices on soldered SSDs and memory - no excuse, that's just shitty.