or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Email from Steve Jobs reveals Apple TV 'magic wand,' other future product ideas
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Email from Steve Jobs reveals Apple TV 'magic wand,' other future product ideas - Page 3

post #81 of 112
Apparently Google has a new Google TV in the works. OK if, Apple's redesigned ATV can't do something better than this then I've lost faith in Apple. And for as much as people bitch about Apple not being innovative anymore it's amazing how many companies are basically just giving us a version of what already exists. So that's the big thing right now, TV interfaces. Are there that many people coming home at night complaining about their TV interface? Seems to me tech companies are at a loss for what the "next big thing" is/will be so they're all just copying each other.



post #82 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

I think 'further lock customers into our ecosystem' is reaching the double-edged point for Apple.  I always thought I'd hop back to Apple once they built a bigger phone- but the thought of getting to use only what Apple allows, and knowing that trying to use anything non-Apple on an Apple phone can be sometimes deliberately cludgey

I don't think the lock-in is quite like that. You aren't hindered from using non-Apple options, it's just that Apple's ones are more compelling as they are designed to work together. Few things are designed specifically to work with Android so no single accessory or software is more compelling than another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

I'd like to see a shift from the broadcast/segmented mindset.  Let the content creators create.  That's what its really all about.  Take Boardwalk Empire or Game of Thrones and just make them.  Don't focus so much on making broadcast 'episodes'  Just make the serious.  When I'm ready to watch on my time, just let me say 'turn on Game of Thrones' to my phone and have the series pick up where I left off.  If I hadn't watched in a while, I won't mind if its smart enough to ask if I want a quick recap first =)

Content providers need to change strategy. There was a survey recently about how the youngest generations are moving away from the TV model:

http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2014/03/study-are-millennials-are-leaving-televisions-behi.html

The popularity of DVRs offered a big hint that scheduling wasn't working. People don't want to sit through a regimented schedule and why even have 24/7 channels when the viewer only watches 1 channel at a time and 1 show at a time? On-demand content is the way to go.

That could change how content is cut too because they aren't filling a predefined time slot. That can be a good or bad thing but as long as they have some sort of rules so that viewers aren't disappointed by shows that drag on too long or are too short, it would give shows more freedom. The release schedule also gives time to build up hype about it and audience through word of mouth. If they just filmed an entire series to show at once, it would have as much longevity so I expect they'd retain some sort of release schedule even with on-demand.

Youtube could easily have been the distribution method but it's a single point of failure. The problem with on-demand is guaranteeing the stream. Think how few times TV actually goes out. Far less than you see buffering messages or slow page loading. Eventually the bandwidth issues will be sorted out but it needs to happen first before broadcasters will jump in completely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy 
Google offers just that feature, tho it's still pretty new so not available for all movies.

Another feature I wanted Apple to have back here in 2012:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/154837/tim-cook-hints-that-apple-plans-to-redefine-the-television-set/160#post_2246282

before Google stole it! Good to know it's available somewhere though. It might be best for movie producers to implement this like a subtitles track. They'd just have cast and producer ids and then mark characters in each scene.
post #83 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

That's the problem with most of these services. They are so limited that it makes it easy to forget they exist. It has to be something that works well.

Now I don't expect that this would work for every video everywhere, but if a company like Apple, Google, Netflix or Amazon announces this feature I'd like it to work for their respective content libraries.

Gotta start somewhere Soli. Waiting until millions of movies and TV show episodes all offer it before anyone can use it seems unreasonable to me. Until it's out in the wild for consumers to use for themselves I don't even know how a company could figure out for certain which types of info are worth the effort of compiling. Apple TV content is limited too but it's still worthwhile isn't it? I'm fairly sure you wouldn't have suggested that Apple wait to put the product on the market you can "have it all" . Apple TV would still be vaporware. There's a lot of products that are a work in progress, yet still worthy of seeing the light of day now.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #84 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Gotta start somewhere Soli. Waiting until millions of movies and TV show episodes all offer it before anyone can use it seems unreasonable to me. Until it's out in the wild for consumers to use for themselves I don't even know how a company could figure out for certain which types of info are worth the effort of compiling. Apple TV content is limited too but it's still worthwhile isn't it? I'm fairly sure you wouldn't have suggested that Apple wait to put the product on the market you can "have it all" . Apple TV would still be vaporware. There's a lot of products that are a work in progress, yet still worthy of seeing the light of day now.

1) I don't expect that "woman in elevator" gets tagged with version 1 but it needs to be something complete enough that the user will want to use the system otherwise it will fail. Potential is worthless if you can't execute when all eyes are watching. You only have one shot to make a good impression and then that impression has to be within the scope of reality when other use the device.

2) Apple did several unique things with the Apple TV; things that I think are why it almost failed from the start. First of all, they introduced it back in 2006 as the iTV. Jobs stated it was a codename which is highly atypical for Apple. He showed the box and demoed the UI. Why do all that when you don't even have a product name for it? I think the answer was to get content vendors on-board. At that point it was just the Disney umbrella, but everyone was scared of digital content. Apple jumped the gun by releasing it too soon and it almost cost them. The other problem was they officially introduced it right before the iPhone. I mean literally in the same presentation on that fateful day in January 2007. It was overshadowed and still didn't get the other studios to come onboard for a couple years. They also didn't have the UI down properly and I'm still not satisfied with how Computers show up for Home Sharing when it should be that iTunes Library directly as an app for each that are tied to the Apple TV for sharing.
Edited by SolipsismX - 4/5/14 at 1:59pm

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #85 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by G4Dualie View Post

Apple would do well to encapsulate this charade in an advertising campaign of commercials to expose what it is Apple's competitors have to do to get the chance to breath rarified air.

Apple's current advertising lacks b4lls. Or style. With a couple of minor exceptions.

By corporate, for corporate.
post #86 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
That's what is meant when people say Apple doesn't care about specs. They don't add specs just to check something off a list. They add specs that make the device work better. If that happens to also put them well in front of the competition in terms of specs they will then market that spec because it's good for business but their business is making the device better, not simply adding it so they can say it's better. That's all the difference in the world.

 

I don't know if I agree in the case of this particular quote. I read his comment as saying the spec boost is the feature in and of itself. If the comment had been "increase speed" or "reduce lag" or "increase capacity" or any comment that referred to the end-user experience I would agree with you, but that's not what he wrote. The email said they should increase specs to stay ahead and I believe that's exactly what he meant -- use a spec bump to increase the appeal of what might otherwise be perceived as a dated device until they could offer LTE.

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #87 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Are there that many people coming home at night complaining about their TV interface?

Not me. TiVo is pretty good.

post #88 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post

I don't know if I agree in the case of this particular quote. I read his comment as saying the spec boost is the feature in and of itself. If the comment had been "increase speed" or "reduce lag" or "increase capacity" or any comment that referred to the end-user experience I would agree with you, but that's not what he wrote. The email said they should increase specs to stay ahead and I believe that's exactly what he meant -- use a spec bump to increase the appeal of what might otherwise be perceived as a dated device until they could offer LTE.

Those are just quick and dirty topics to cover. In no way do I believe that Steve was saying they need to increase specs just to say they are better than the competition and check items off a spec sheet. I think the simplest answer is the standard upping of various specs with each iteration to make the product better. You can look at their devices to see that Apple didn't just add specs for the hell of it. For example, no LTE until the 3rd-gen chips arrived so when they did include it in the iPhone the battery life for '4G' LTE was the same as '3G'.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #89 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I'd like to at least have an HDMI passthrough on the Apple TV. This way, whatever the primary input is will be sent to the TV and the Apple TV UI will always be ready to overlay on the screen. It would at least get me to use their Apple TV more if I didn't have to go through the rigamarole of finding the TV remote and changing the input which admittedly isn't difficult but definitely is annoying.

 

Is there some significant technical or contractual hurdle to overcome in order to make that happen, or are you and I the only ones who object to having to change inputs on the TV to change source devices? Do other people not understand the benefit or just not really care that much?

 

I'm just trying to figure out why Apple wouldn't have added this yet? Though now that I think about it, there may actually be a downside for those who don't like learning new UIs: "Hello Apple? I just hooked up my new Apple TV and now I can't figure out how to watch TV. The game is on but all I can see is Netflix!" To many, the concept of one-input-per-device may actually be more intuitive.

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #90 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post

Is there some significant technical or contractual hurdle to overcome in order to make that happen, or are you and I the only ones who object to having to change inputs on the TV to change source devices? Do other people not understand the benefit or just not really care that much?

I'm just trying to figure out why Apple wouldn't have added this yet? Though now that I think about it, there may actually be a downside for those who don't like learning new UIs: "Hello Apple? I just hooked up my new Apple TV and now I can't figure out how to watch TV. The game is on but all I can see is Netflix!" To many, the concept of one-input-per-device may actually be more intuitive.

Not that I'm aware of but I think your comment about it having its own complexities of the user not understanding how the passthrough works sounds valid to me. I assume Apple thought of this idea and probably had it working in their labs up to a decade ago, but if they still haven't released such a device we have to assume there are feasibility issues we can't fully understand without creating our own prototypes.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #91 of 112
This is what the Internet sounds like. Interesting.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #92 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post


....snip....

Though now that I think about it, there may actually be a downside for those who don't like learning new UIs: "Hello Apple? I just hooked up my new Apple TV and now I can't figure out how to watch TV. The game is on but all I can see is Netflix!" To many, the concept of one-input-per-device may actually be more intuitive.

I don't think this would be confusing for the kind of non-techie people you mention, because we were all used to the signal going through the VCR and making sure the TV/VCR setting was correct for many years. The kids too young to remember that would get used to it quickly, I think.

Of course then there's always the demographic whose VCR's clock kept blinking "12:00" because they couldn't figure out how to set it. I see them resisting any new distribution system.
post #93 of 112

I don't think Jobs was referring to any kind of actual wand.  He was likely using it metaphorically.

post #94 of 112
Anyway, to continue musing, I can't see Apple building an integrated TV set like Gene Munster appears to be pining for. The price of the display is going to keep plummeting (of course, quality will plummet, too—that's what always happens), making people willing to pay less and less for a TV. At the same time, even if you have to accommodate 4K (at 60 Hz for 3D—why not!), a very low-end processor is perfectly capable of dealing with that. There would be no need for hardware upgrades in the foreseeable future. The display might need replacing as the phosphors in the LED backlight get tired—or if it's OLED, as it absorbs water out of the air—but I can't imagine Apple wanting to get in a replacement market like that.

Apple is a hardware company, and I just can't see them entering a market where the technology is fully mature and unlikely to need updating this century. All they could do is sell their control box—call it Apple TV or whatever, and update software as needed. In this one area they would primarily be a software company instead of following their usual writing-software-to-sell-hardware strategy. Maybe...I can't see it, but what do I know? I still buy CDs because I refuse to pay money for heavily-compressed noise. I'm being left behind by the march of events. Maybe Apple will be too—but I think they'd get left behind quicker if they tried to enter the enormously-expensive-all-in-one-TV-set market.
post #95 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post

Anyway, to continue musing, I can't see Apple building an integrated TV set like Gene Munster appears to be pining for. The price of the display is going to keep plummeting (of course, quality will plummet, too—that's what always happens), making people willing to pay less and less for a TV. At the same time, even if you have to accommodate 4K (at 60 Hz for 3D—why not!), a very low-end processor is perfectly capable of dealing with that. There would be no need for hardware upgrades in the foreseeable future. The display might need replacing as the phosphors in the LED backlight get tired—or if it's OLED, as it absorbs water out of the air—but I can't imagine Apple wanting to get in a replacement market like that.

Apple is a hardware company, and I just can't see them entering a market where the technology is fully mature and unlikely to need updating this century. All they could do is sell their control box—call it Apple TV or whatever, and update software as needed. In this one area they would primarily be a software company instead of following their usual writing-software-to-sell-hardware strategy. Maybe...I can't see it, but what do I know? I still buy CDs because I refuse to pay money for heavily-compressed noise. I'm being left behind by the march of events. Maybe Apple will be too—but I think they'd get left behind quicker if they tried to enter the enormously-expensive-all-in-one-TV-set market.

A couple things:

1) TV Monitors need to come in types and sizes that range much higher than Apple wants to deal with.

2) TV monitors aren't changed as often as "computer" HW and that's exactly what Apple will be selling you with a "smart" box that connects to your TV.

For these reasons I fully expect the Apple TV to be a fully separate device but perhaps Apple can create a standard in which their box can plug in to the back of any number of display types and sizes from any number of vendors that will transmit power, data and video back and forth. This means Apple can then make the Apple TV an annual product with new HW and SW features.

The problem is for this to work Apple will need to get with at least a couple of the major ones to create the standard. Luckily, they've worked with phone carriers and now automobile manufactures so that shouldn't be tough. The biggest hurdle I see may be having to make it "open" so that other vendor's media appliances can be attached in the same way. This, unfortunately, is where Apple historically has plenty of hubris, but the silver lining is that CarPlay isn't going to exclude other mobile OSes on the cars that support it so perhaps they can find a solution that finally brings the living room into the 21st century.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #96 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

"Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic." Albus Dumbledore:

I see voice search as being the future of TV. There are plenty of things that voice isn’t very good at. For instance, writing this reply can be accomplished better with typing, but if I want to setup an appointment on my iPhone then Siri is how I will do that. Instead of unlocking my phone, locating the calendar app, opening it, going to the right date, creating a new appointment, adding a name for the appointment, using the dials to then set a start time, and saving it. Instead I just hold down the Home Button and saying “Set appointment for the Dentist on May 1st at 9:30am.” It will even let me know if there are any conflicts with that date and time. That’s how I want voice search to be for a TV!

There's also the embarrassment factor. People can sometimes feel silly using a voice interface in public, but talking to your TV in your own home is no problem.

post #97 of 112

I think the most important thing that still hasn't been done is the Cloud part, iCloud Storage? iDrive ( aka buying Dropbox but failed ), and moving everything to the cloud. Apple must be waiting for something, but their DataCenter building speed isn't keeping up. ( Intentionality ? )

 

And the global cloud also means a few DC in Europe and Asia. Which they have none yet.

There are only two kind of people in this world.

Those who dont understand Apple and those who misunderstood Apple.

Reply

There are only two kind of people in this world.

Those who dont understand Apple and those who misunderstood Apple.

Reply
post #98 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post

I don't think this would be confusing for the kind of non-techie people you mention, because we were all used to the signal going through the VCR and making sure the TV/VCR setting was correct for many years. The kids too young to remember that would get used to it quickly, I think.

Of course then there's always the demographic whose VCR's clock kept blinking "12:00" because they couldn't figure out how to set it. I see them resisting any new distribution system.

The UX for setting those was non standard and often atrocious. My folks had one where you could just set the minutes up or down.

That's exactly what you don't want and of course modern wifi connected devices, if they need to show the time will automatically get it.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #99 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

I think the most important thing that still hasn't been done is the Cloud part, iCloud Storage? iDrive ( aka buying Dropbox but failed ), and moving everything to the cloud. Apple must be waiting for something, but their DataCenter building speed isn't keeping up. ( Intentionality ? )

And the global cloud also means a few DC in Europe and Asia. Which they have none yet.

How haven't they done that? You may not like the implementstioj of it but a lot of your data and purchases is in the cloud and streamable too.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #100 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post
 

Note: Jobs's description of the "Holy War with Google" was "all the ways we will compete with them" [emphasis added]. No mention of legal battles against them.


I have to agree. I see no reason why this would mean 'litigation'. First of all if that would have been the case it would have been 'Holy War with Samsung'. What it does do is show that Steve Jobs was somewhat worried about Android (something that some Apple fanatics always said wasn't the case, that Apple just does what it does and never looks to/worries about the competition). Just shows you that Apple is a company like any other, looking at what the competition does and catch up where necessary and if possible improve it.

post #101 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


A couple things:
 
1) TV Monitors need to come in types and sizes that range much higher than Apple wants to deal with.

2) TV monitors aren't changed as often as "computer" HW and that's exactly what Apple will be selling you with a "smart" box that connects to your TV.

For these reasons I fully expect the Apple TV to be a fully separate device but perhaps Apple can create a standard in which their box can plug in to the back of any number of display types and sizes from any number of vendors that will transmit power, data and video back and forth. This means Apple can then make the Apple TV an annual product with new HW and SW features.

The problem is for this to work Apple will need to get with at least a couple of the major ones to create the standard. Luckily, they've worked with phone carriers and now automobile manufactures so that shouldn't be tough. The biggest hurdle I see may be having to make it "open" so that other vendor's media appliances can be attached in the same way. This, unfortunately, is where Apple historically has plenty of hubris, but the silver lining is that CarPlay isn't going to exclude other mobile OSes on the cars that support it so perhaps they can find a solution that finally brings the living room into the 21st century.


The only way I see Apple releasing something like an Apple TV is by releasing a TV with upgradeable modules. Kind of like Samsung's smart TV's work nowadays. No one is going to buy a new TV every year right :s? So sell a TV that is compatible with the modules and then every year bring out a new module (which includes a new SoC and such). And maybe even upgrade the TV (better color reproduction or so) for new customers.

But I have to say that I don't think Apple will ever release a TV.

post #102 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chipsy View Post


The only way I see Apple releasing something like an Apple TV is by releasing a TV with upgradeable modules. Kind of like Samsung's smart TV's work nowadays. No one is going to buy a new TV every year right :s? So sell a TV that is compatible with the modules and then every year bring out a new module (which includes a new SoC and such). And maybe even upgrade the TV (better color reproduction or so) for new customers.
But I have to say that I don't think Apple will ever release a TV.

Hmmm. . . Project Ara for a set-top box?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #103 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Another feature I wanted Apple to have back here in 2012:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/154837/tim-cook-hints-that-apple-plans-to-redefine-the-television-set/160#post_2246282

before Google stole it! Good to know it's available somewhere though. It might be best for movie producers to implement this like a subtitles track. They'd just have cast and producer ids and then mark characters in each scene.

IIRC it's not the first good idea you've posted here that became reality either. Google certainly deserves a lot of praise for listening and building so quickly.. Just 90 days after you mentioned it Google engineers were able to create a way to offer you the feature. Proof of just how talented they are.. 1wink.gif
Edited by Gatorguy - 4/6/14 at 8:52am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #104 of 112

Wanna know what's "magic"?

 

iMessage and FaceTime. 

 

I've been using both of these now on a regular basis (that is, VERY regularly), and they've practically melted into the background to the degree that I just take both of them for granted now. I could be on iMessage on my Mac, and my iPhone simply knows I'm reading iMessages on my Mac. The level of syncing here works beautifully. Across all devices. So well that it's all pretty much invisible. 

 

THAT is magic: the way software and hardware interact in order to allow for conveniences that work so well that you barely notice them after a while. 

 

A little off-topic, but I felt like mentioning it. 

post #105 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Wanna know what's "magic"?

 

iMessage and FaceTime. 

 

I've been using both of these now on a regular basis (that is, VERY regularly), and they've practically melted into the background to the degree that I just take both of them for granted now. I could be on iMessage on my Mac, and my iPhone simply knows I'm reading iMessages on my Mac. The level of syncing here works beautifully. Across all devices. So well that it's all pretty much invisible. 

 

THAT is magic: the way software and hardware interact in order to allow for conveniences that work so well that you barely notice them after a while. 

 

A little off-topic, but I felt like mentioning it. 

so does fb messenger. Has it stolen Apple magic or is it just what is expected for a messenger app. It is also cross platform which is more than I message so it must be more magical!!
post #106 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chipsy View Post
 
Just shows you that Apple is a company like any other, looking at what the competition does and catch up where necessary and if possible improve it.

 

I agree with you completely. In the case of Android though, I think it was more than just careful monitoring of the competition. I think it was a personal mission for Mr. Jobs. I get the impression that he didn't care for seeing others reap the rewards of his visions, whether it be a graphical UI for personal computing or a touch screen handheld. The former got him steaming mad at Bill Gates/Microsoft and the latter at Google. That's why the Samsung litigation doesn't surprise me at all. It's a matter of principle.

 

I just hope the current iteration of the TV isn't the final embodiment of his vision for that device and that enhancements are yet to come.

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #107 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post
 

Wanna know what's "magic"?

 

iMessage and FaceTime. 

 

I've been using both of these now on a regular basis (that is, VERY regularly), and they've practically melted into the background to the degree that I just take both of them for granted now. I could be on iMessage on my Mac, and my iPhone simply knows I'm reading iMessages on my Mac. The level of syncing here works beautifully. Across all devices. So well that it's all pretty much invisible. 

 

I use the Messages app all the time too, but for me it isn't yet blending seamlessly into my flow of existence. Are you not finding that messages on the Mac still often appear out of order?

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #108 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post
 

 

I agree with you completely. In the case of Android though, I think it was more than just careful monitoring of the competition. I think it was a personal mission for Mr. Jobs. I get the impression that he didn't care for seeing others reap the rewards of his visions, whether it be a graphical UI for personal computing or a touch screen handheld. The former got him steaming mad at Bill Gates/Microsoft and the latter at Google. That's why the Samsung litigation doesn't surprise me at all. It's a matter of principle.

 

I just hope the current iteration of the TV isn't the final embodiment of his vision for that device and that enhancements are yet to come.

I agree with you more or less on the touchscreen handheld, but to be correct one should state a 'capacitive touchscreen handheld' as there were already touchscreen handhelds out there but most were resistive touchscreens. Though in the case of the GUI he was inspired by the work of Xerox Parc. You have to give him credit though for immediately realizing that this was going to be the future and for going all in on it. So in that case it wasn't necessarily his vision but he did play a major part in getting it out there (as in showing people that it was the way to go).

But you have to give it to him, he had this knack of knowing what was going to be the next big thing.

post #109 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

IIRC it's not the first good idea you've posted here that became reality either. Google certainly deserves a lot of praise for listening and building so quickly.. Just 90 days after you mentioned it Google engineers were able to create a way to offer you the feature. Proof of just how talented they are.. 1wink.gif

Yeah, it's nice they actually implemented it. They should brand these features better though. They call them "info cards" but that's too generic. They let you find out songs used in the movie (saves using something like Shazam and it could link to purchase options if it doesn't already), character bios, movie info and related movies. It doesn't even have to be a word that automatically associates itself with what it does. People know Shazam is a music search now.

They do this in Google search, they have search by image but I had to find out for myself they had it. I use it all the time. I find an image somewhere and it's too low res so I just hit image search, and hit the "search by image" button and it shows matching content. It would be good if they did it for movies too e.g search Youtube or other online movies for a matching screencap. I don't know why they have multiple search boxes, the image icon can sit in the main Google box as well as a movie icon and allow you to search for images or movies. There can be a maps icon and translate so you don't have to keep jumping to another page to use the search.
post #110 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post
 

 

I use the Messages app all the time too, but for me it isn't yet blending seamlessly into my flow of existence. Are you not finding that messages on the Mac still often appear out of order?

 

 

Yes, but very rarely. For me, at least, it's not to any degree that cuts into the experience. 

 

I guess I simply rely on it a lot these days and it's really come through. 

post #111 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnd0ps View Post


Does it vibrate?

Lol, you said it better.

post #112 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post
 

 

I use the Messages app all the time too, but for me it isn't yet blending seamlessly into my flow of existence. Are you not finding that messages on the Mac still often appear out of order?

 

 

Yes, but very rarely. For me, at least, it's not to any degree that cuts into the experience. 

 

I guess I simply rely on it a lot these days and it's really come through. 

 

Yeah, I still use Messages regularly in spite of the bug, but I do find it really irritating to sometimes have to hunt through the transcript to see where Messages has dropped the new bubble THIS time. It happens twice, maybe three times a day here (I'm in Vancouver if that makes any difference).

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Email from Steve Jobs reveals Apple TV 'magic wand,' other future product ideas