- Last Active
I've been pretty damn frustrated with homekit so far. I have a Lyric sitting in a drawer and I've been holding out on buying lighting because of the expected hassle. I installed the schlage door lock that I bought from the Apple store (in its nice, Apple-specific packaging) and the *&^%ing thing doesn't even work with iPhone 7 (the tech had me do the set up on my old iPhone 6, but the homekit was too buggy to use, and then it disconnected completely; it's now a $200 dumb lock.) An idevices outdoor plug wouldn't install. Still no homekit compatible garage door opener apparently (although one is supposedly coming). The only smoke/CO alarm I've found has terrible reviews on amazon; not reassuring for a safety device. Why bother creating a platform like this if it's going to be so difficult to use? I can't be the only one with these frustrations. The homekit app was my favorite part of iOS 10. Unfortunately it's been a huge disappointment for me.
In case anyone is interested: I have the nanoleaf aura and it is really great and could not be easier to set up. It's the only functional item on my Apple Home control panel.
I imagine google as a small child, aimlessly stumbling around the pre-school playground until they see another kid enjoying a toy, then they start throwing a tantrum because all of the sudden they have to have that toy. Hurry Phil, find a shiny object to distract them with so we don't have to hear them whining!
Seriously though, is there an Apple product google hasn't tried to copy? They tried like 6 times with the TV. Oh, and of course they mocked Siri as useless until they saw people enjoying it, now they have entire products built around their version of it. I'd be sad if it wasn't so damn funny.
I know someone who's a big fan of PewDiePie, and so I actually watched his response videos to the sign controversy. He basically paid some guys whose entire shtick is to get paid to hold up any sign while laughing and jumping around in a silly way. It was clearly meant to be an obviously over the top joke, and I have to admit that juxtaposition of those silly guys holding up such a ridiculously morose sign was kind of funny. But, clearly, others may legitimately feel differently about it.
gatorguy said:cali said:Notice something?
Goog is always selling off companies/tech it acquired while I can't remember the last time Apple sold any part of its business. Can you?
tells me Apple actually buys things it can utilize and....utilizes them bringing in profit.
asdasd said:patchythepirate said:I could see the appeal of wanting to join Tesla. A great case can be made for Tesla becoming very successful if you consider the synergy between EVs, powerwalls, and rooftoop solar installations. Like Apple, they're taking disparate technologies and businesses and making them work as one cohesive whole. The execution isn't exactly great, and the products not as refined as Apple's, but they still have a very compelling product portfolio.
The typical acquisition targets people talk about for Apple are usually beyond absurd, but it may make a lot of sense for Apple to buy Tesla (assuming it's even an option). The places where Tesla is lacking is where Apple excels.
melgross said:We continue to read about how much more efficient OLED screens are, particularly because black pixels aren't illuminated from behind. We rarely read, in those same articles, just how much more power is consumed by OLED pixels when they are at a bright level.
apple's watch is using an OLED screen, according to Apple, because it's thinner than an LCD and LED backlight, not because it's significantly more efficient. The entire reason why OLED devices often have a black background is because of the inefficiency at brighter levels. The interesting thing here is that while, over the years, OLEDs have become more efficient, so have LCD LED backlights. The two screen types are at about the same overall efficiency, and apparently will continue to be for some time.
OLEDs do have some other advantages, mainly the mythical edge to edge screen. And, as I've mentioned, they are thinner. The disadvantages include the still problematic burn in. While that has been improved over time, it still exists, and is part of the continued problem over shorter overall screen life. The shorter screen life, and burn in are related to the problem of why OLEDs aren't nearly as bright as LCDs. When more power is poured in, they, like every other illumination device, get hotter. But OLEDs can't get as hot as an inorganic led, so they can only have so much power. That means their brightness is restricted.
the latest OLED screens are stuck below 400 nits in normal mode. They can jump to over 600 for a short time in direct daylight, but there is no manual control over that high brightness. LCDs can get to over 600 nits in normal mode, and up to 700 nits in bright daylight. It's true that most time that isn't needed, but when it is, it makes a big difference.
i don't know what Apple is doing with the Apple Watch Series 2 OLED screens, as Apple states that they can reach 1,000 nits in direct daylight, and indeed, it's a lot brighter than my friends first gen Apple Watch under these conditions. Either Apple has made a breakthrough that their manufacturer uses exclusively for them, or Apple isn't worried about shortening the screen lifetime, as watches aren't used as much as a smartphone.
but, my take on these stories is to be just a bit skeptical about the virtues of OLEDs. While they're better than they used to be, as is everything electronic, they're not yet a paragon of virtue.
BTW, I use my 4.7" iPhone 7 almost exclusively one-handed, all day long, in my non-dominant hand even, as I'm always multitasking.. checking my work computer, driving, eating.. and yes, even at the urinal! A 5"+ screen in the current 4.7" form factor is my ideal phone.
techlover said:Good grief can we give the whole copying thing a rest already?
Everyone copies everyone. We are all standing on the shoulders of giants.
That being said, one thing I hope Apple will copy from Google is being able to log into any web browser from anywhere, go to the app store page, and install any app to any device I choose.
That is one of the things Google gets right. You search for an app on the Google Play Store website from any browser, you find it easily because their search works. You then click install, and by the time you have picked up the device you installed said app to, its already downloading and installing.
It's quite slick and seamless and I think that is well worth copying. I'd love to see Apple do that same exact thing.