No, Apple won't move the home button and Touch ID to the back of the 'iPhone 8'

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 45
    freeper said:
    "But doing so would be a huge blow to the ease of use and intuitiveness of the current home button Touch ID design. And that seems out of whack with Apple's philosophy."

     Ummm ... headphone jack anyone? 
    Not following you. Sales of 7 were awesome. Most iPhone users use the headphones that come in the box. And no, most of these users don't also use a MacBook. I know one guy in my gym who uses his favorite wired headphones with the free adapter. So, I personally don't know anyone with a real-world ease-of-use problem -- just lots of hand-wringing from online commenters always looking for an angle to insist they know better than the folks at Apple.


    Wow! You actually managed to make it through his word salad! I read till "headphone jack anyone?" and stopped.

    Also, it's freeper so he obviously has something negative to say about Apple.

    watto_cobraStrangeDays
  • Reply 42 of 45
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,073member
    Out of curiosity, what would be the benefit of a vertical camera array? 
     One of the characters on here...
    StrangeDaysfrac
  • Reply 43 of 45
    qwwera said:
    Reading the Chinese on the screen, it says "Product specification difference and explanations", "Hon-Hai", not Foxconn in the lower right corner, and some slogans that says "thanks for the hard work, reach for the peak performance" So it looks to me more like a training slide with mock specifications.
    Hon Hai is Foxconn
    Hon Hai is the corporate office, in Taiwan.  Foxconn is the subsidiary that does the assembly in mainland China.  I just don't think prototypes specifications would be important enough to make to a corporate slide.  Apple is not Hon Hai's only customer.
  • Reply 44 of 45
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    nhughes said:
    melgross said:
    nhughes said:
    Dracarys said:
    So theoretically it can happen yet your headline makes it sound like it definitely won't. It's a rumour, just like the rumour that it would be embedded in the glass. Theoretically either one can be correct at this point.
    We're dealing in rumors. Apple could theoretically not release an iPhone this year. They could theoretically say they have perfected the smartphone for all time and shut down the damn company, for all we know. I cannot definitively prove either of those to be untrue, even though we all know they are not true.

    Anyhow, it's clearly labeled as an editorial, not news. And that's precisely why.
    So this is the official policy of AI? To believe that the new phone won't be thicker? That what an editorial means.

    are you sure this isn't an opinion piece? That's when the writer expresses his or her opinion, which may not be the opinion of the publication. I hate it when writers, and publications can't tell the difference between one and the other. Standards are so low these days.

    go to any serious newspaper and you'll see both an editorial page, and an op. ed. page. They're different.
    As I alluded to in the second graf of this editorial, our staff received this tip with a picture of the "schematic" this morning, and we collectively decided it was not worth covering as news, because none of us believed it to be legitimate in any way. When the story started to gain traction elsewhere on the internet, our coverage turned into the editorial you see here — a way to address the news (and to explain to readers why we chose not to cover it).

    I have a degree in journalism and worked full-time as a reporter at a print newspaper for years. I know what an editorial is. I am not an opinion writer or a columnist for AppleInsider — my title is managing editor. I oversee the entire editorial staff.
    I understand that you do. But what we need here is perhaps an editorial page, where an editorial is made obvious, and official. I still read this as an opinion piece. And several people here have referred to it as an opinion piece, confirming what I'm saying. I have nothing against the article itself, though.
  • Reply 45 of 45
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    melgross said:
    Dracarys said:
    So theoretically it can happen yet your headline makes it sound like it definitely won't. It's a rumour, just like the rumour that it would be embedded in the glass. Theoretically either one can be correct at this point.
    this piece is labeled as an Opinion piece. and in Neil's opinion, no that isn't happening. valid opinion.
    Emm, editorial, not opinion. That's different. It should be listed as an opinion piece.
    I've googled this for you before. Here we go again:

    Editorial 
    noun
    1. 1
      a newspaper article written by or on behalf of an editor that gives an opinion on a topical issue.

      ...As Neil is indeed an editor, his piece is an editorial which is synonymous with an opinion piece, imo. But sure, the actual label here is Editorial and not Opinion as i wrote, but it's semantics because an editorial is still opinion.
      bluefire1 said:
      melgross said:
      Dracarys said:
      So theoretically it can happen yet your headline makes it sound like it definitely won't. It's a rumour, just like the rumour that it would be embedded in the glass. Theoretically either one can be correct at this point.
      this piece is labeled as an Opinion piece. and in Neil's opinion, no that isn't happening. valid opinion.
      Emm, editorial, not opinion. That's different. It should be listed as an opinion piece.
      Editorial: A newspaper article written by or on behalf of an editor that gives an opinion on a topical issue.
      Excuse me, but opinion pieces are written by editors as well. I don't need to see the definition, as I know what it is. I've written more than my share of articles for publications over the years, and did a lot of work in the publishing industry.

      an editorial is an official stance on the part of the publication. The editorial is clearly labeled as such. I could not tell that this was the official stance of AI.
      edited April 2017
    Sign In or Register to comment.