Great, so more interesting technology will go behind Apple walls for years, and possibly never emerge at all.
Apple may themselves be innovative, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if their secrecy is a net loss for innovation across the sector (however you'd measure that).
Not a fan of the machine swallowing up the small, interesting players.
Net loss? Please. Apple is not the technology black hole you spin it to be, unless you promised yourself you'd never buy an Apple product, ever. But don't worry, Microsoft and Samsung are shameless in copying Apple. You'll get some version of this tech, once Apple perfects it.
Posters on this thread are throwing around some interesting ideas for this technology but I agree with Applesauce in the hopes that it becomes a feature of Final Cut. It might entice some of the pros who switched to Premier after the FCPX debacle.
Posters on this thread are throwing around some interesting ideas for this technology but I agree with Applesauce in the hopes that it becomes a feature of Final Cut. It might entice some of the pros who switched to Premier after the FCPX debacle.
Could be a great tool for getting remote performances by actors for animation, both live and filmed. Imagine none of the actors ever seeing another person in the performance other than in the final product.
FaceTime is what I was thinking of. Forget the kids. I would love to look like an orc or Putin or a gremlin while talking to the folks. And morphs to an appropriate creature as the watch monitors my heartrate to guess at mood.
Sounds like a cool side-plot for Big Bang Theory... imagine Wolowitz or Koothrapali with this.
Great, so more interesting technology will go behind Apple walls for years, and possibly never emerge at all.
Apple may themselves be innovative, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if their secrecy is a net loss for innovation across the sector (however you'd measure that).
Not a fan of the machine swallowing up the small, interesting players.
wait -- how does Apple's secrecy (not telling us what they're doing with purchased assets) detract from innovation in technology? because once the product/features are released into the wild, the innovation is out there. other companies are free to attempt to copy it and the world gets better.
This acquisition is also important in 'understanding' facial expressions. Don't underestimate facial indicators, minimally the ability to see where you're looking (Siri: "Hey, I see you're not watching the screen, so I'll read you your options..")
Remember when Apple first showed Photo Booth at a keynote and they had a filter that took any portrait and mapped your mouth onto the original? They never shipped that.
Apple is not the technology black hole you spin it to be, unless you promised yourself you'd never buy an Apple product, ever.
I don't understand what you mean by this, and I've made no such promise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
But don't worry, Microsoft and Samsung are shameless in copying Apple.
Certainly, but I'm not sure how that copying culture goes against my speculation about innovation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
You'll get some version of this tech, once Apple perfects it.
I very well may, that's not my point. My point was that all versions of the tech made by this company are now cloaked in Apple's secrecy veil for at least a year, probably two, possibly more. Only one company has access to it, and will be working on it, and they won't demo anything, they won't be participating in competition or collaboration until the day that they take the covers off. That makes the facial recognition technology scene a lot more boring until that date, and though the eventual unveil will no doubt bring some innovation to the table (albeit proprietary and not available for license), those two years (est) of reduced conversation could be a bigger setback than the eventual leap forward.
You'll get some version of this tech, once Apple perfects it.
I very well may, that's not my point. My point was that all versions of the tech made by this company are now cloaked in Apple's secrecy veil for at least a year, probably two, possibly more. Only one company has access to it, and will be working on it, and they won't demo anything, they won't be participating in competition or collaboration until the day that they take the covers off. That makes the facial recognition technology scene a lot more boring until that date, and though the eventual unveil will no doubt bring some innovation to the table (albeit proprietary and not available for license), those two years (est) of reduced conversation could be a bigger setback than the eventual leap forward.
I think you are both correct. Sometimes a new idea is best nurtured from a small focused group, and sometimes it's best done in a large community. Since this method of facial recognition is unique to the seminal group, which are still together, and owned by Apple (who have their own development ideas), the research may be not enhanced by an open community, and the patentable method may be lost.
Comments
Net loss? Please. Apple is not the technology black hole you spin it to be, unless you promised yourself you'd never buy an Apple product, ever. But don't worry, Microsoft and Samsung are shameless in copying Apple. You'll get some version of this tech, once Apple perfects it.
Oh I'm sure they're gonna milk every bit of this tech across all devices and services. Why not?
I predict Gamekit and ?tv support first. Then everything else. Should be exciting.
Imagine an online MMO where everyone's avatar talks and acts just like them in game?
Could be a great tool for getting remote performances by actors for animation, both live and filmed. Imagine none of the actors ever seeing another person in the performance other than in the final product.
FaceTime is what I was thinking of. Forget the kids. I would love to look like an orc or Putin or a gremlin while talking to the folks. And morphs to an appropriate creature as the watch monitors my heartrate to guess at mood.
Sounds like a cool side-plot for Big Bang Theory... imagine Wolowitz or Koothrapali with this.
wait -- how does Apple's secrecy (not telling us what they're doing with purchased assets) detract from innovation in technology? because once the product/features are released into the wild, the innovation is out there. other companies are free to attempt to copy it and the world gets better.
what am i missing here?
Some of the companies interested in automatic lip reading are not who you might expect
http://www.google.com/patents/US8442820
It makes sense they'd be interested tho.
This acquisition is also important in 'understanding' facial expressions. Don't underestimate facial indicators, minimally the ability to see where you're looking (Siri: "Hey, I see you're not watching the screen, so I'll read you your options..")
Remember when Apple first showed Photo Booth at a keynote and they had a filter that took any portrait and mapped your mouth onto the original? They never shipped that.
Maybe they will now.
Apple is not the technology black hole you spin it to be, unless you promised yourself you'd never buy an Apple product, ever.
I don't understand what you mean by this, and I've made no such promise.
But don't worry, Microsoft and Samsung are shameless in copying Apple.
Certainly, but I'm not sure how that copying culture goes against my speculation about innovation.
You'll get some version of this tech, once Apple perfects it.
I very well may, that's not my point. My point was that all versions of the tech made by this company are now cloaked in Apple's secrecy veil for at least a year, probably two, possibly more. Only one company has access to it, and will be working on it, and they won't demo anything, they won't be participating in competition or collaboration until the day that they take the covers off. That makes the facial recognition technology scene a lot more boring until that date, and though the eventual unveil will no doubt bring some innovation to the table (albeit proprietary and not available for license), those two years (est) of reduced conversation could be a bigger setback than the eventual leap forward.
I think you are both correct. Sometimes a new idea is best nurtured from a small focused group, and sometimes it's best done in a large community. Since this method of facial recognition is unique to the seminal group, which are still together, and owned by Apple (who have their own development ideas), the research may be not enhanced by an open community, and the patentable method may be lost.