I hope so too, but that is entirely up to Apple. iOS has improved VERY slowly while Google and Samsung have had the pedal to the metal with Android. Siri is "still" in beta and it's been over a year now. Maps was not fully baked. I think THIS is the real reason that Scott Forstall has been shown the door. I do not like Google. I find them to be a sneaky, greasy company that just want to look over our shoulders 24-7 and harvest information.
That said, while it pains me to say this, some of what they do is fantastic work. Their new voice search for iOS is a great example. I normally avoid anything Google but I had heard such great things about their Google Voice iOS search that I had to give it a try. Wow. It does voice recognition in real time, on the phone and is incredibly accurate. Plus it's search results are complete and useful. Siri? Barely better than when it was announced if at all.
Apple should be embarrassed. But hey, we have green felt in Game Center and leather accents in our contacts and calendar apps, so we're good. /s
I haven't used it since testing it out but the app is so good, I cannot bring myself to delete it.
No thanks. Siri works quite well for me now.
I want more then voice recognition and web search.
I want intelligent speech interpretation that can then tap into dedicated services like Yelp and Wolfram and Fandango for better answers and actions.
Every now and then you come across a George Costanza moment: "Is anyone here a marine biologist?"
I myself have worked with touchscreens since 1985. I developed a macro language that would let an ordinary user create touch screen based multi media presentations. I also worked extensively with trying to understand gestures, but never pursued it because the hardware back then couldn't keep up. In 1986 iwon a national award for best use of technology for my implementation.
I have read your posts and I call BS. Sorry, but I'm not going to give you a pass on your "decades of touchscreen experience" claim.
Which systems have you developed for? What hardware? What software? How did you interface? Did you create your own drivers? What systems are you using in your house? Which system was your daughter using in 2003? Don't worry about having to dumb things down - I'm quite sure whatever you want to discuss I'll be intimately familiar with given my work as a developer since 1985.
I'm quite looking forward to the reply to this one.
Page can preach all he wants about how he wants to do right by the consumer, but at the end of the day, they're a business just like Apple. They're in this to make money. No one should ever believe that.
To those who claim that Google has given us great free services like Maps and Gmail and have made the world a better place with these services, let's not forget that Google gets tons of advertising revenue from them. They're comfortable in the strength of their business model that they're willing to give them away because they know they'll make it up several times over from ads.
And Google hasn't practiced what it preached. Maps for Android has features that the old iOS Maps didn't have. And if the rumors are to be believed, Google was withholding certain features from iOS, and tried to get their pound of flesh from Apple. If Google really cared about making the experience better for consumers, why didn't they let Apple have those features? At the end of the day, Google favored Android from day one, and they would have continued to do so.
Google is as guilty of trying to build islands as Apple and Amazon are.
I want more then voice recognition and web search.
I want intelligent speech interpretation that can then tap into dedicated services like Yelp and Wolfram and Fandango for better answers and actions.
Time will tell.
I predicted that Apple would release the Siri "API" and this would cause a whole new voice-app goldrush, including universal speech/dialog translation.
Schmidt showed the iPhone prototype to his girlfriend at the time, while he was sitting on the Apple BoD. He claims he wasn't that interested in it personally.
According to all the gossip rags, he didn't start dating that girlfriend until summer 2007... a half year after the iPhone was first shown off, and about the same time that it first went on sale. By then, it would've just been a curiousity. Supposedly, he first tried giving it to his wife.
So, instead of showing a secret, it sounds like he was just being cheap. Really cheap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
"Well, no, not… They're not really a search company."
"Well, what are they?"
"They're an AI company." And Steve gives Mossberg the look, you know? That one where it's like, "This is blindingly obvious to us, and it should be to you, and I'm quite satisfied with how my four word answer will cause far more of a stir than any multi-page article on any rumor site."
Touche! Exellent response. Siri, of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent
Let's be real, people. Does anyone believe the iPhone was ever going to be the only multitouch smartphone?
Nope. And while the iPhone was the first multi-touch phone sold, it wasn't the first one announced. That honor belongs to the Open Moko smartphone, two months before Jobs showed off the iPhone for the first time.
"The phone itself has a 2.8-inch VGA display, USB mesh file sharing, multi-touch sensor recognition, GSM, GPS, 128MB RAM, a Samsung ARM9-based processor and MP3 playback capabilities. The concept of their multi-touch gestures is that you can use two fingers to control a variety of tasks, such as two finger scrolling like the PowerBooks and MacBooks." - Gizmodo article, Nov 7, 2006
Other reporters even wondered if Apple had stolen some of the ideas, but I think not. As I keep saying, many touch features naturally end up being developed in parallel by multiple groups. Once you decide to go full touch, quite a few design options become obvious.
I want more then voice recognition and web search.
I want intelligent speech interpretation that can then tap into dedicated services like Yelp and Wolfram and Fandango for better answers and actions.
Time will tell.
I think Siri is "okay" but it needs to get faster. Google voice interprets your speech in real time on the phone. Not so with Siri, which is why it is so much slower. I also want more than voice recognition and web search, but when it comes to voice recognition and web search Google is absolutely killing it. Siri needs to be every bit as good, and right now it's not.
Apple's search results have been lacking as well. If I search for Pizza Hut for example, Siri sends my request to Apple's servers, thinks about it then sends back a list beginning with locations in other cities 40 minutes away. We have a Pizza Hut in my city 10 minutes away. What the heck is up with that? If I do the same thing with Google voice search, it recognizes my speech in real-time and kicks back accurate results lightening fast and yes, the number one hit is our local Pizza Hut. Siri takes upwards of ten seconds (or more) to give me useless information. Google voice takes a few seconds and gives me accurate information that I can actually use.
I am an Apple guy, but Apple needs to do better, plain and simple. Do it right or don't do it at all.
Yeah right Larry... You know what hurts even more? That knife you stuck in Steve Jobs' back as you turned it slowly... Judas, ever so free to walk and talk as though he didn't do anything at all.
As much as I like Android now I still despise the Google top executives... Page, Schmidt... Disgusting.
When I get my big break I hope to not be like them. I plan to not be like them. I pray to be ~better~ than them somehow.
There has been all this venom spewed here over Google entering the mobile business and "betraying" Apple in the process. What's becoming clear us that the mobile device is a conduit to Google's business. Call it AI. Call it big data management (or knowledge accrual and management, as they sometimes do internally). Whatever you call it, it's Apple that has entered Google's realm. This was inevitable from the beginning. Apple and Google could've been perfect partners, one making the slick front end device and the other building the world's most far reaching knowledge engine. But neither side would, could trust the other to cede control.
This is no longer about devices or apps. This is about what the devices and apps allow us to access. In this realm, Apple's only lead on Google is in music. Scott Forstall is not good enough a computer scientist to help Apple catch up. Let's see if Serlet might return or if Tim Cook is smart enough to acquire Wolfram.
There has been all this venom spewed here over Google entering the mobile business and "betraying" Apple in the process. What's becoming clear us that the mobile device is a conduit to Google's business. Call it AI. Call it big data management (or knowledge accrual and management, as they sometimes do internally). Whatever you call it, it's Apple that has entered Google's realm. This was inevitable from the beginning. Apple and Google could've been perfect partners, one making the slick front end device and the other building the world's most far reaching knowledge engine. But neither side would, could trust the other to cede control.
This is no longer about devices or apps. This is about what the devices and apps allow us to access. In this realm, Apple's only lead on Google is in music. Scott Forstall is not good enough a computer scientist to help Apple catch up. Let's see if Serlet might return or if Tim Cook is smart enough to acquire Wolfram.
Another way to look at it is that Android is Google's albatross. But I guess in Google's view, it's not only about what devices and apps allow us to access, in fact, it's more about what they allow them to access about us.
But, it's an interesting, although entirely misguided and backwards attempt to portray Apple as the one who tried to cut Google off at the knees. If only it weren't entirely plain that things went the other way around, you might even get away with it, if you were a little more persuasive.
According to all the gossip rags, he didn't start dating that girlfriend until summer 2007... a half year after the iPhone was first shown off, and about the same time that it first went on sale. By then, it would've just been a curiousity. Supposedly, he first tried giving it to his wife.
So, instead of showing a secret, it sounds like he was just being cheap. Really cheap.
Touche! Exellent response. Siri, of course.
Nope. And while the iPhone was the first multi-touch phone sold, it wasn't the first one announced. That honor belongs to the Open Moko smartphone, two months before Jobs showed off the iPhone for the first time.
"The phone itself has a 2.8-inch VGA display, USB mesh file sharing, multi-touch sensor recognition, GSM, GPS, 128MB RAM, a Samsung ARM9-based processor and MP3 playback capabilities. The concept of their multi-touch gestures is that you can use two fingers to control a variety of tasks, such as two finger scrolling like the PowerBooks and MacBooks." - Gizmodo article, Nov 7, 2006
Other reporters even wondered if Apple had stolen some of the ideas, but I think not. As I keep saying, many touch features naturally end up being developed in parallel by multiple groups. Once you decide to go full touch, quite a few design options become obvious.
Did you read the Gizmodo article carefully? It said "The concept of their multi-touch gestures is that you can use two fingers to control a variety of tasks, such as two finger scrolling like the PowerBooks and MacBooks." So their multi-touch is copied from PowerBooks and MacBooks?
Another way to look at it is that Android is Google's albatross. But I guess in Google's view, it's not only about what devices and apps allow us to access, in fact, it's more about what they allow them to access about us.
But, it's an interesting, although entirely misguided and backwards attempt to portray Apple as the one who tried to cut Google off at the knees. If only it weren't entirely plain that things went the other way around, you might even get away with it, if you were a little more persuasive.
There was no implication that Apple tried to cut Google off at the knees. Android is not Google's albatross, but is instead their Trojan horse. Anyone who doesn't get this simply doesn't get it. Don't obsess so much over iOS v Android. That was a prelude. You'll be gobsmacked over what's coming.
As for controlling what one can or cannot access, you're lying to yourself if you believe fat Apple is any less controlling. Any tech company with a big picture in mind is plotting how to shape, control information access. Don't kid yourself into believing otherwise.
Where Google stands out from Apple is not how they control your access to data, it's how they gather it. On that front, the ethical line is indeed up for debate. But ask yourself this, who's in a more powerful position - the company with the data or the other pounding the privacy ethos?
Did you read the Gizmodo article carefully? It said "The concept of their multi-touch gestures is that you can use two fingers to control a variety of tasks, such as two finger scrolling like the PowerBooks and MacBooks." So their multi-touch is copied from PowerBooks and MacBooks?
It's just the reporter's way of helping the reader understand, by referring to something else that used more than one finger.
Multi-touch has been around since at least the early 1980s. Here's a simple timeline:
It's just the reporter's way of helping the reader understand, by referring to something else that used more than one finger.
Multi-touch has been around since at least the early 1980s. Here's a simple timeline:
Hey, we're still waiting for you to respond to the post asking for details of your background, you know, because your claims about it are, shall we say, questionable. Or are you just hoping everyone will forget about that?
There was no implication that Apple tried to cut Google off at the knees. Android is not Google's albatross, but is instead their Trojan horse. Anyone who doesn't get this simply doesn't get it. Don't obsess so much over iOS v Android. That was a prelude. You'll be gobsmacked over what's coming.
I'm not holding my breath. Real soon now, I suppose?
never trust company who make money by tracking your activities and selling that info to somebody else. Oh, using a copy of somebody else's tech w/o permission and crushing that said company. Source: history
never trust company who make money by tracking your activities and selling that info to somebody else. Oh, using a copy of somebody else's tech w/o permission and crushing that said company. Source: history
Shouldn't be so hard on Apple. In most cases when they did thus, they paid up eventually.
Comments
"Google CEO Larry Page"?
I thought it was Larry Flint.
lol...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo63
I hope so too, but that is entirely up to Apple. iOS has improved VERY slowly while Google and Samsung have had the pedal to the metal with Android. Siri is "still" in beta and it's been over a year now. Maps was not fully baked. I think THIS is the real reason that Scott Forstall has been shown the door. I do not like Google. I find them to be a sneaky, greasy company that just want to look over our shoulders 24-7 and harvest information.
That said, while it pains me to say this, some of what they do is fantastic work. Their new voice search for iOS is a great example. I normally avoid anything Google but I had heard such great things about their Google Voice iOS search that I had to give it a try. Wow. It does voice recognition in real time, on the phone and is incredibly accurate. Plus it's search results are complete and useful. Siri? Barely better than when it was announced if at all.
Apple should be embarrassed. But hey, we have green felt in Game Center and leather accents in our contacts and calendar apps, so we're good. /s
I haven't used it since testing it out but the app is so good, I cannot bring myself to delete it.
No thanks. Siri works quite well for me now.
I want more then voice recognition and web search.
I want intelligent speech interpretation that can then tap into dedicated services like Yelp and Wolfram and Fandango for better answers and actions.
Time will tell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
Every now and then you come across a George Costanza moment: "Is anyone here a marine biologist?"
I myself have worked with touchscreens since 1985. I developed a macro language that would let an ordinary user create touch screen based multi media presentations. I also worked extensively with trying to understand gestures, but never pursued it because the hardware back then couldn't keep up. In 1986 iwon a national award for best use of technology for my implementation.
I have read your posts and I call BS. Sorry, but I'm not going to give you a pass on your "decades of touchscreen experience" claim.
Which systems have you developed for? What hardware? What software? How did you interface? Did you create your own drivers? What systems are you using in your house? Which system was your daughter using in 2003? Don't worry about having to dumb things down - I'm quite sure whatever you want to discuss I'll be intimately familiar with given my work as a developer since 1985.
I'm quite looking forward to the reply to this one.
Page can preach all he wants about how he wants to do right by the consumer, but at the end of the day, they're a business just like Apple. They're in this to make money. No one should ever believe that.
To those who claim that Google has given us great free services like Maps and Gmail and have made the world a better place with these services, let's not forget that Google gets tons of advertising revenue from them. They're comfortable in the strength of their business model that they're willing to give them away because they know they'll make it up several times over from ads.
And Google hasn't practiced what it preached. Maps for Android has features that the old iOS Maps didn't have. And if the rumors are to be believed, Google was withholding certain features from iOS, and tried to get their pound of flesh from Apple. If Google really cared about making the experience better for consumers, why didn't they let Apple have those features? At the end of the day, Google favored Android from day one, and they would have continued to do so.
Google is as guilty of trying to build islands as Apple and Amazon are.
I predicted that Apple would release the Siri "API" and this would cause a whole new voice-app goldrush, including universal speech/dialog translation.
I am shocked it hasn't happened yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Schmidt showed the iPhone prototype to his girlfriend at the time, while he was sitting on the Apple BoD. He claims he wasn't that interested in it personally.
According to all the gossip rags, he didn't start dating that girlfriend until summer 2007... a half year after the iPhone was first shown off, and about the same time that it first went on sale. By then, it would've just been a curiousity. Supposedly, he first tried giving it to his wife.
So, instead of showing a secret, it sounds like he was just being cheap. Really cheap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
"Well, no, not… They're not really a search company."
"Well, what are they?"
"They're an AI company." And Steve gives Mossberg the look, you know? That one where it's like, "This is blindingly obvious to us, and it should be to you, and I'm quite satisfied with how my four word answer will cause far more of a stir than any multi-page article on any rumor site."
Touche! Exellent response. Siri, of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent
Let's be real, people. Does anyone believe the iPhone was ever going to be the only multitouch smartphone?
Nope. And while the iPhone was the first multi-touch phone sold, it wasn't the first one announced. That honor belongs to the Open Moko smartphone, two months before Jobs showed off the iPhone for the first time.
"The phone itself has a 2.8-inch VGA display, USB mesh file sharing, multi-touch sensor recognition, GSM, GPS, 128MB RAM, a Samsung ARM9-based processor and MP3 playback capabilities. The concept of their multi-touch gestures is that you can use two fingers to control a variety of tasks, such as two finger scrolling like the PowerBooks and MacBooks." - Gizmodo article, Nov 7, 2006
Later, when the iPhone came out, Gizmodo remembered it: "OpenMoko - Did they have a time machine or what?"
Other reporters even wondered if Apple had stolen some of the ideas, but I think not. As I keep saying, many touch features naturally end up being developed in parallel by multiple groups. Once you decide to go full touch, quite a few design options become obvious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007
No thanks. Siri works quite well for me now.
I want more then voice recognition and web search.
I want intelligent speech interpretation that can then tap into dedicated services like Yelp and Wolfram and Fandango for better answers and actions.
Time will tell.
I think Siri is "okay" but it needs to get faster. Google voice interprets your speech in real time on the phone. Not so with Siri, which is why it is so much slower. I also want more than voice recognition and web search, but when it comes to voice recognition and web search Google is absolutely killing it. Siri needs to be every bit as good, and right now it's not.
Apple's search results have been lacking as well. If I search for Pizza Hut for example, Siri sends my request to Apple's servers, thinks about it then sends back a list beginning with locations in other cities 40 minutes away. We have a Pizza Hut in my city 10 minutes away. What the heck is up with that? If I do the same thing with Google voice search, it recognizes my speech in real-time and kicks back accurate results lightening fast and yes, the number one hit is our local Pizza Hut. Siri takes upwards of ten seconds (or more) to give me useless information. Google voice takes a few seconds and gives me accurate information that I can actually use.
I am an Apple guy, but Apple needs to do better, plain and simple. Do it right or don't do it at all.
For your sake, I hope you're not being serious.
This is no longer about devices or apps. This is about what the devices and apps allow us to access. In this realm, Apple's only lead on Google is in music. Scott Forstall is not good enough a computer scientist to help Apple catch up. Let's see if Serlet might return or if Tim Cook is smart enough to acquire Wolfram.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent
There has been all this venom spewed here over Google entering the mobile business and "betraying" Apple in the process. What's becoming clear us that the mobile device is a conduit to Google's business. Call it AI. Call it big data management (or knowledge accrual and management, as they sometimes do internally). Whatever you call it, it's Apple that has entered Google's realm. This was inevitable from the beginning. Apple and Google could've been perfect partners, one making the slick front end device and the other building the world's most far reaching knowledge engine. But neither side would, could trust the other to cede control.
This is no longer about devices or apps. This is about what the devices and apps allow us to access. In this realm, Apple's only lead on Google is in music. Scott Forstall is not good enough a computer scientist to help Apple catch up. Let's see if Serlet might return or if Tim Cook is smart enough to acquire Wolfram.
Another way to look at it is that Android is Google's albatross. But I guess in Google's view, it's not only about what devices and apps allow us to access, in fact, it's more about what they allow them to access about us.
But, it's an interesting, although entirely misguided and backwards attempt to portray Apple as the one who tried to cut Google off at the knees. If only it weren't entirely plain that things went the other way around, you might even get away with it, if you were a little more persuasive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
According to all the gossip rags, he didn't start dating that girlfriend until summer 2007... a half year after the iPhone was first shown off, and about the same time that it first went on sale. By then, it would've just been a curiousity. Supposedly, he first tried giving it to his wife.
So, instead of showing a secret, it sounds like he was just being cheap. Really cheap.
Touche! Exellent response. Siri, of course.
Nope. And while the iPhone was the first multi-touch phone sold, it wasn't the first one announced. That honor belongs to the Open Moko smartphone, two months before Jobs showed off the iPhone for the first time.
"The phone itself has a 2.8-inch VGA display, USB mesh file sharing, multi-touch sensor recognition, GSM, GPS, 128MB RAM, a Samsung ARM9-based processor and MP3 playback capabilities. The concept of their multi-touch gestures is that you can use two fingers to control a variety of tasks, such as two finger scrolling like the PowerBooks and MacBooks." - Gizmodo article, Nov 7, 2006
Later, when the iPhone came out, Gizmodo remembered it: "OpenMoko - Did they have a time machine or what?"
Other reporters even wondered if Apple had stolen some of the ideas, but I think not. As I keep saying, many touch features naturally end up being developed in parallel by multiple groups. Once you decide to go full touch, quite a few design options become obvious.
Did you read the Gizmodo article carefully? It said "The concept of their multi-touch gestures is that you can use two fingers to control a variety of tasks, such as two finger scrolling like the PowerBooks and MacBooks." So their multi-touch is copied from PowerBooks and MacBooks?
As for controlling what one can or cannot access, you're lying to yourself if you believe fat Apple is any less controlling. Any tech company with a big picture in mind is plotting how to shape, control information access. Don't kid yourself into believing otherwise.
Where Google stands out from Apple is not how they control your access to data, it's how they gather it. On that front, the ethical line is indeed up for debate. But ask yourself this, who's in a more powerful position - the company with the data or the other pounding the privacy ethos?
Originally Posted by Bilbo63
iOS has improved VERY slowly while Google and Samsung have had the pedal to the metal with Android.
Well, yeah. They had to. It was absolutely useless in the beginning.
Siri is "still" in beta and it's been over a year now.
Gmail was in beta for six years.
That said, while it pains me to say this, some of what they do is fantastic work.
I want them to get out of consumer computing entirely and focus on the self-driving cars. Stop doing everything else they do and just do the cars.
Siri? Barely better than when it was announced if at all.
Implying that it was bad at launch, which it wasn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan
Did you read the Gizmodo article carefully? It said "The concept of their multi-touch gestures is that you can use two fingers to control a variety of tasks, such as two finger scrolling like the PowerBooks and MacBooks." So their multi-touch is copied from PowerBooks and MacBooks?
It's just the reporter's way of helping the reader understand, by referring to something else that used more than one finger.
Multi-touch has been around since at least the early 1980s. Here's a simple timeline:
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Quote:
It's just the reporter's way of helping the reader understand, by referring to something else that used more than one finger.
Multi-touch has been around since at least the early 1980s. Here's a simple timeline:
Hey, we're still waiting for you to respond to the post asking for details of your background, you know, because your claims about it are, shall we say, questionable. Or are you just hoping everyone will forget about that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent
There was no implication that Apple tried to cut Google off at the knees. Android is not Google's albatross, but is instead their Trojan horse. Anyone who doesn't get this simply doesn't get it. Don't obsess so much over iOS v Android. That was a prelude. You'll be gobsmacked over what's coming.
I'm not holding my breath. Real soon now, I suppose?
Shouldn't be so hard on Apple. In most cases when they did thus, they paid up eventually.
To help out the users, we really should have a way to block ads if we don't want to see them.