dewme

foregoneconclusion said:

dewme said: The Netflix CEO is pretty much at the same place that many of us are at with Vision Pro - "we'll see where things go" which means we will wait and see. I'm waiting too. The big difference is we're all waiting because there is about $4K of our hard earned cash on the line and we don't really know for sure how this thing will fit into our lives other than the gee-whiz and oh-wow factor

If you know how an 100" 4K OLED TV would fit into your life then you already know how the AVP would fit. And you would be saving multiple thousands of dollars by getting the AVP instead of the TV. 

Maybe, but it seriously depends on who the "you" is and "how" the "you" is going to use the thing.

If the "you" is me and I'm looking to buy a 100" 4K OLED TV it's going to live in the family room, man cave, or she shack specifically to serve as a shareable entertainment center. There may be one or there may be a bunch of other (real not virtual) people sitting or mingling around the thing while the 100-incher is showcasing its gloriousness to everyone that's within sight of it. AVP clearly does not "fit" this diverse and flexible use case in a way that I can fathom. But yeah, if the "you" is always going to be one person or one person at a time and the giant TV as a shared entertainment center is not desired, or the single user cannot fit the 100 inch thing into their space or budget, and you're totally cool with strapping something to your face, then no problem. 

If using the Vision Pro as a giant TV replacement is your sole defining objective for buying the device, go for it. But the Vision Pro could potentially do a hell of a lot more than just being a giant single viewer TV or "Movie Theater for One." The possibilities are huge, but we don't yet know how or when those possibilities will be transformed into consumable features, functions, and applications. We only know what current VR headsets do today and not a lot of us are buying them. The Vision Pro is promising so much more than a conventional VR headset but it's still a bit of a mystery for a lot of us exactly what it will personally do for us. If you already know it's going to serve your needs, good for you because it is an amazing piece of technology. 

For me personally, if the Vision Pro was $500 I'd still be taking a wait & see approach with it. There is no downside, for me at least, to wait until I see what it really can do beyond fancy demos to even think about buying one. I had no such hesitancy when I saw the iPhone, iPad, MacBook Air, Apple Watch, HomePod, Apple TV, and paid iCloud services when they all arrived on the market. Nothing Apple sells is cheap, but most of what they sell is very good and I've never questioned the value that came with the purchase.

It's not a knock on the Vision Pro to take a wait & see approach when you honestly don't know how you would employ it in your personal life. I've done deep dives and prototypes that investigated ways to employ Google Glass and Microsoft HoloLens for industrial applications, so it's not like I cannot envision many applications for this type of technology in industry. For personal use, I'm still at a loss for how I'd use the Vision Pro today, other than for entertainment and to escape from reality for short periods of time.

At some point someone will probably show me something that convinces me otherwise and my piggy bank's life will be shattered.

Apple and Vision Pro proponents should not get their skivvies in a twist based on this article's headline. There's a little bit of chum in the water with the "insignificant" part - which does not appear anywhere in the quoted text.

What is relevant and is actually in the quoted text is:

"We have to be careful about making sure that we're not investing in places that are not really yielding a return, and I would say we'll see where things go with Vision Pro," Peters responded. "Certainly we're always in discussions with Apple to try and figure that out but right now, the device is so subscale that it's not really particularly relevant to most of our members."

Apple could change the calculus for Netflix given some incentive, and the Netflix CEO says that route is possible.

"We've worked together for a long time, we've always had active discussions to how we could help each other out," Peters said about incentives. "Sometimes we find a great space of overlap."

tht said:

Sigh. If the government wants to regulate something, they should regulate the open standards that businesses should use. Since it is a "standard" any browser maker can implement them.

As it stands, Google is doing the typical network effect of getting website developers to design their websites for Chrome, not a standard. Since websites work best with Chrome, Chrome will be used more, thereby giving Google a rather huge hand in how the web works.

By  website developers to design to a an open published standard, it levels the playing field and all web browsers should be able to render websites identically.

There's a lot of turtles on top of each other here too. Web data brokers, ad APIs, tracker APIs, who knows what else, are all designed to work best with this or that browser. It's all part of the network effect. This stuff has to be open and standardized so any web browser can implement. Websites surely will have preference with Google as search result placements and ad space money is on the line, and will do a lot to optimize the solution that makes the most money, which is probably Chrome since Google has so much control over the ad placement money.

If someone is penalised, it should be the entities who are trying to break the government approved web standards.

Mr Kiani is exactly correct in stating that the diagnosis of a serious medical condition such as Obstructive Sleep Apnea requires the use of medical grade equipment that has been certified (and quite likely calibrated) for detecting the condition in question. But then he goes on to rail against Apple's pulse oximetry implementation and its limitations when, in fact, Apple has never sought to certify or make any specific claims about the use of their pulse oximetry feature for diagnosing the conditions in question. Basically, he's criticizing Apple for not doing something that Apple specifically and officially claims they are not doing, and rightly, should not be doing at the level of their involvement.   

I do understand Mr Kiani's concerns from the standpoint of defining where devices such as the Apple Watch fall within the larger scope of health care. It's no different than the features in Apple Watch that detect irregular or abnormal heartbeats and heart rates. I have no doubt that many folks who are inside the realm of producing medical grade diagnostic equipment for helping doctors and healthcare professionals diagnose medical conditions have a negative reaction to seeing features in consumer products that may be implicitly seen as being valid medical diagnostic tools by users regardless of the many disclaimers put forth by the device maker. This is a legitimate concern, but it must be put into the broader perspective of individual's participation and awareness of their overall health and wellbeing. 

People are not like a herd of cows whose health, safety, and wellbeing depends on an individual like a medical specialist or doctor who is responsible for their husbandry. Most people are self aware and are responsible for participating in their own health care to a certain extent. If they don't feel well or notice something is "off," i.e., are exhibiting some kind of symptoms, they can and probably should seek the care of a medical professional. Unfortunately there are a lot of symptoms that can go unnoticed by an individual. For example, someone with obstructive sleep apnea may snore very loudly or stop breathing intermittently when they are sleeping. If there is nobody nearby, like a bedmate, to observe the symptoms the underlying condition may go unnoticed and not acted upon, which can lead to other serious health conditions. If their bedmate observes the symptoms, like obnoxious snoring, they can inform the affected person to look into what may be causing the snoring and bring it up with their primary care physician at their next visit.

In the example above is the bedmate a medical grade diagnostician? Unless the bedmate is a medical professional the answer is no. The bedmate is simply an observer who happens to observe something the affected person was unable to detect on their own, in this case because they are sleeping. Even if the bedmate observer was a medical professional they would still steer the affected person towards a medical professional who can properly diagnose the affected person's condition using all of the certified tools at their disposal. There's a huge difference between an observer and a diagnostician. The observer merely collects data. Turning data into information and subsequently turning information into action and response via diagnostic procedures requires additional context and appropriate reactive activities, including the application of medical grade measurement and diagnostic equipment and the consultation with other professionals. 

The Apple Watch is an observer that is capable of capturing, even if on a limited or intermittent basis, health related data that could otherwise go unnoticed by the wearer. No more, no less. The Apple Watch does not elevate the interpretation of the observed data and it most certainly does not attempt to diagnose the underlying condition. As a caring and responsible observer it does steer the wearer towards seeking professional help. When viewing healthcare from a holistic perspective, one that involves personal awareness and participation, and in concert with all of the other formal and professional layers, it's doing exactly what it can do and should do at this point in its evolution. 

I have to admit that I pretty much ignore the Dynamic Island on my 14 Pro Max. Not by choice but simply by habit and conditioning. Something may appear in the pill hole every so often but my Pavlovian conditioning from several years of using notchy phones kicks in and my brain pretty much blocks it out. Poof! It's suddenly invisible. I may occasionally notice something in the hole, but it doesn't register as anything important because it's so tiny. If it was something I really needed to know it would be put into a notification and have persistence. I honestly cannot attest to ever seeing the Dynamic Island cleave into two smaller mini islands. As conditioning based responses go, this one's not too bad I suppose. There's no uncontrollable salivation or drooling involved.