First, he's obviously not a troll, unless the definition has been expanded to mean "anyone who doesn't worship at the Apple altar." It's lazy to just slap the "troll" label on everyone with whom you disagree or just don't like.
Second, he brings up some interesting points. Even the stuff that's critical of Apple is interesting to me because it makes me a more informed consumer. In my business I always want to know what my competition is doing, even if it's only to learn from their mistakes. Similarly, I'm interested in protecting and maximizing the benefit of my investment in Apple products, so I want to know about things that may affect my little island. Those things include knowing what the competition is doing and how buyers are perceiving Apple's actions/products/services. Avon provides me some of that perspective.
Besides, he obviously THINKS about what he writes, which many here apparently do not.
tmay said: I always love personal anecdotal evidence; it tends to reek of perception bias, just as your anecdote does.
To be fair (to me) I did make it clear that the personal observation was intended to illustrate the point, not stand as evidence. I stated it as "Think about it this way..." not "Here's proof."
Second, any bias I bring to the discussion is irrelevant to the point I was making. It was argued that a device that makes it easier (i.e. simpler and less expensive than an AppleTV) for people to access iTunes Store content would have a negative impact on profits. My point was that I don't think that's true, and I pointed out why. I'm not sure how I "win" or "lose" by being either right or wrong, so personal bias isn't really a factor in this particular discussion.
Third, while anecdotal evidence is useless for quantifying anything, it's a perfectly normal way of observing generalized trends. For example, one only needs to ride the Skytrain to know that iPhones are really, really, popular in metro Vancouver. Obviously unscientific, but you'd have to be a serious pedant to insist on formal tabulations to draw a well-reasoned conclusion. The same is true of the iTunes movie store. The fact that those of us who are tuned-in to that market constantly hear about storing photos in iCloud, whether an iPad can replace a computer, and even the occasional comment about the Surface Studio, but never hear anyone talking about buying movies on iTunes, is pretty telling. Such impressions are obviously not good enough for building a business plan, but it doesn't take an auditor to recognize that iTunes isn't a commonly considered source for video content. But again, even if I were completely wrong on that point, it's irrelevant to the discussion of whether or not offering a streaming stick would reduce profits.
I enjoy anecdotes. They aren't universal truths, but are they real events that can have a profound impact on purchasing decisions. I will often read Amazon user reviews to get a feel for a product before buying. One could argue that they those buyers could be lying or that their review has a profound bias, but a little cognition goes a long way.
A had an argument with you about Tesla awhile back, and now you just told me why you weren't interested in any facts.
You just love a good anecdote!
How do you get "I'm not interested in any facts" because I wrote "I enjoy anecdotes"?
The problem that I see with delivering a low priced AppleTV, as an example, without simultaneously delivering a desirable subscription service, with or without original content, is that you'll sell a lot of AppleTV's at low prices, but you won't create any stickiness to keep them. Now that subscription services are not only common, but ubiquitous, you are in a situation where Apple could never hope to deliver all of the usable content.12th.
Good point.
Apparently you were right about my bias affecting my opinion. I'm one of a dying breed who wants to own the content and store it locally. Partly because I frequently rewatch stuff in my library and like knowing it will still be there if I want to watch it again in the future, and partly because I spend so much of my life in places with no access to streaming content.
It's slooooooowly penetrating my so-called brain that many people, maybe even most, consider the Netflix approach to be the ideal. I guess, unlike me, they haven't been in the middle of watching a series when the licensing ran out and it was no longer available on Netflix. Or tried watching a series that changed networks sometime during its run so only certain seasons are available for streaming while others are not.
I guess if the market prefers bulk subscription streaming over a la carte purchasing, Apple's in a tougher position than it would be trying to satisfy me.
What am I to think of a person such as yourself that is so confident in his assertions, and yet so wrong on the facts? Then you state, that even if the facts don't support you, it irrelevant to the discussion.
I mean, WTF?
The problem is that two issues got dropped into the same stew:
Issue 1. Would Apple offering a streaming stick adversely affect corporate profits?
Issue 2: Does Apple need to improve access to iTunes video content?
I used anecdotes to illustrate my thinking about Issue 2. They are irrelevant to Issue 1. I shouldn't have addressed both in the same post.
--
With that put to rest, I take issue with your portrayal of my conclusions as objectively wrong.
The article you linked does NOT contradict what I said. It says that Apple has a big share of that market. It also specifically says that it didn't compare that market to other forms of video consumption, like Netflix, conventional broadcast, VOD, physical media, and torrents. So Apple having a 65% share of a market in which the only other significant players were Xbox and Amazon Video just means Apple has the biggest slice of a tiny little pie. There's nothing in that to dispute the assertion that iTunes is not a household name when it comes to video consumption.
I understand the comparative value of empirical evidence versus anecdotal observation, but in this case the numbers don't tell enough of the story to either confirm or refute the argument.
First, he's obviously not a troll, unless the definition has been expanded to mean "anyone who doesn't worship at the Apple altar." It's lazy to just slap the "troll" label on everyone with whom you disagree or just don't like.
Second, he brings up some interesting points. Even the stuff that's critical of Apple is interesting to me because it makes me a more informed consumer. In my business I always want to know what my competition is doing, even if it's only to learn from their mistakes. Similarly, I'm interested in protecting and maximizing the benefit of my investment in Apple products, so I want to know about things that may affect my little island. Those things include knowing what the competition is doing and how buyers are perceiving Apple's actions/products/services. Avon provides me some of that perspective.
Besides, he obviously THINKS about what he writes, which many here apparently do not.
He lies, deform and biases the hell out of everything. So, how does not provide a good POV of the competition. That would only be true if you want to leave the Apple "bubble" to get a point of view from the alternate Android "bubble". There are a lot more neutral POV on Android than people like Gator and Avon that exist.
There are even people that provide contrarian opinions on this forum that are much more measured. I really don't care if someone here has 4 Android phones and Watches as long as they don't post lies all day long and sound like they're only here to push buttons (like not having owned Apple products since the 1990s or even ever,,,). and having 99% of negative opinions on Apple.
Android phones, especially in the low to mid market have their use; not everyone's buying a BMW; Lexus, Mercedes; a Hyundai, Ford and the like are still decent cars.
Btw, you framed the opinion of most here vs him as "worshipping", (so basically the classic fanboy/isheep insult in other words) this, added to the self agrandising insult that ended your comment makes me think you are a part of the problem rather than the solution you think you are. I can only surmize that you are a Mensa member/Astronaut to shovel such haughty crap.
BTW, there is "worshipping" at the altar and taking a dump on the Altar. See the difference.
He doesn't really give a damn about Apple products yet posts relentlessly here; why? it's all about how much satisfaction he gets from "setting us straight".
Someone who said straight out he's here to "teach" us about the world out there... Is someone who is by definition a troll.
I've dealt with trolls before they were named trolls in the mid 1980s and I'm pretty sure I can spot one... He's exactly the kind of reactionary button pushers that have infested MacRumors, so much so that I wouldn't be surprised he's got an account there. So, what the hell troll definition do you have.
He lies, deform and biases the hell out of everything.
In your attempt to ridicule another user, you've done a great job in describing yourself. If you're looking for a troll, you need look no further than a mirror. Congratulations on helping to create a toxic environment where a void of reason is the new norm and a difference of opinion is dealt with using grade school tactics.
i’m an active investor, which just means that I do all of the decisions myself, and don’t use managed accounts. So I have to be on the ball about it. Really, if you’re not doing estimates, you shouldn’t be an active investor. Just do what Buffet advises, and get a bundle of the Fortune 500 without management. Otherwise, it requires work.
Thanks for the (condescending) advice. Yeah, I happen to know a little bit about investing too, manage mine as well, so I am good.
The last thing this board needs is another sog35-type amateur investor bragging about stock price estimates for Apple (or any other stock), or some back and forth about market price forecasts. They go nowhere quickly.
I don’t know what you consider to be an amateur. You can only speak for yourself. In addition, any estimates we care to make, based on whatever facts and speculation we care to us, is our business, not yours. And remember that you are the one who. Made a condescending post to me. I didn’t make one to you. I was just explaining my position.
sorry that your superior sensibility and knowledge was hurt.
Oh gosh, not at all. I quite vividly recall our many discussions from many years ago, and your views on basic principles of valuation, and on things such as PE ratios, risk, cash flows, cost of capital, etc. Basedd on the many things you've said, I have a rather strong basis for the view I have formed.
That said, it's your wont to express any opinion on this forum, just as it is mine. It's a free country. It should be pointed out, however, that you seemed to be the one to take umbrage over my pointing out -- a couple of others pointed it out too, earlier in this thread -- that price forecasts for AAPL in the $175 region were not unique to you or sog35. I was simply saying something similar, and providing data on the median analyst forecast which also happens to be $175 per share (with a max that goes to $208). And I gave you a link.
Perhaps you or sog35 do (although I would find that difficult to believe), but I have no superior sensibility or knowledge to forecast stock prices.
As an aside, didn't AI used to have a separate section of stock price discussions (just as they did for political discussions)? I don't know if it's still there, but given the topic at hand in this blog, it seems like a discussion of stock price forecasts seems a tad misplaced.
It’s nice that you’ve formed such a strong opinion of my investing knowledge. I’d be curious as to which one if has done better during that time, but obviously, that can never happen. There’s usually a good reason as to why different people come to a similar conclusion about something, and that’s not bad. You seem to be trying to make it so though.
I said I have a 'strong basis' for my opinion. That's not the same as 'strong opinion.' Don't misstate.
I don't get into contests over who has.... er... bigger hands. I am glad you have convinced yourself that you can clearly separate luck from skill. Good for you.
It’s still just an opinion. If you state that basis it would be easier to evaluate it. Otherwise, we don’t know anything about it, and it’s just another opinion among many.
I told you it's based on numerous conversations we've had over the years. Do you seriously expect me to recount those?
Oh, yes, he does. And if you don't dance for him (recount your past conversations for his amusement), he's right. He'll tell you all about how right he is.
You are really being a pain in the ass for continuing this in the matter you are. Do you want me to flag YOU? I rarely gave points to people when I was a mod, just told them to knock it off, but you’re becoming a real problem here.
I wonder why you are no longer a mod?
I was a mod for years, and they switch them up after a time. Only the admins are permanent, as long as they continue to work here, that is.
I was made a moderator in the last year. I take a mostly hands-off approach, letting the bickering peter out on its own, but have stepped in from time to time to call out an aggregious infraction, and even boot one or two obvious trolls a dozen messages into their stay. I think you'd be a welcome addition back, Mel, should the admins want to tap you again for the role.
Thanks. Over the years, I had people say things to me that were vastly worse than what I’m accused of saying to the couple of people here who aren’t happy with me, and I never gave them any flags or points. My feeling was that I’d rather have then yell at me than someone else. But I would PM them, to talk about it. Sometimes people couldn’t believe that I was letting it go. I’m sure the older members remember. Some of these newer members are very intolerant.
I'm not sure how long my tenure will last. The admins added me as a moderator and I took that as a compliment, but shortly after that occurred I moved from Florida to the Philippines, a 12-hour shift, so I can't always be live as the conversations unfold. And I have almost no interest going offline to private chat someone about their behavior. I've administered several Facebook groups and a host of other forums over the years, all the way back to the days of AOL forums. I enjoy reading the comments here and adding my two cents, and while doing so will take actions when something agreegious is posted, but I can't be a full-time cop; there's real life to live, mountains to climb and such. But I'm happy to have the authority, even if I'm reluctant to wield it. I can help by a small measure to make these forums a better experience for others.
There's been a lot of talk about the under screen fingerprint sensor but I don't consider that to be all that special. It's just another way of doing something we already do, just in a different place.
Ridiculous. A reader under the screen allows you to have slim bezels AND keep the fingerprint sensor on the front, instead of the useless hack that everyone else is doing placing it on the back (because they had no alternative). That is, if Apple even goes this route (they likely have a superior solution in FaceID).
The same goes for speed. Mid tier phones have been fast enough for quite a while. The same applies to graphics. RAM and storage? Apple will finally leaving this problem behind.
Rubbish. For example, ARCore from Google requires the latest and fastest phones to work (because AR done in software requires power). This is why Apple also requires a minimum A9 equipped device to use ARKit. Mid-tier phones WILL NOT be able to do AR because they will lack the processor power to achieve it. The funny thing about this is that a 2 year old A9 equipped iPhone (even the least expensive SE) still outperforms 95% of Android devices on the market. Which is why Apple will dominate AR because of the sheer number of devices that will be able to use ARKit.
If all you do is run basic Apps, then mid-tier phones are fast. It's when you want to do something more that iOS shines (not only because of the superior processing power but because of Apps that can actually take advantage of it).
RAM is a problem? iOS isn't the clusterfuck known as Android where you need more RAM than a desktop PC running Windows before it will perform well.
Some kind of new optical biometric option? It's still just a biometric option, just a different one. Nice to have but little more.
More rubbish. Perhaps you forgot how useless Face Unlock was when Android introduced it? Easily fooled by a picture of you, forcing Google to add their Liveness Check feature which required you to blink to verify you weren't a picture. And having to hold your phone up to your face (even for a short time) to unlock? Nobody wants to do that, which is why nobody uses Face Unlock. Then Samsung decided to add this useless feature to the S8, and apparently forgot about the issues Google had and their system was also fooled with a picture. So was their iris scanner. Two-time losers for that screw up.
If Apple implements FaceID according to the features/capabilities shown by the companies they acquired, then it will be a complete game changer. Can't be fooled by a picture, can't be fooled by a 3D sculpture with your face applied to it, can tell identical twins apart, works in the dark, works from a partial view of your face, works at odd angles, and can't be fooled by sunglasses, beards or shaving. It's practically the perfect biometric unlocking feature. If you can see the screen of your phone then it can see you and unlock. It has all the features that make Touch ID so great (fast and accurate) without any drawbacks (like wearing gloves or having dirty/wet fingers).
Better battery is nothing new, nor is OLED, nor is wireless charging.
OLED is not new, but an OLED phone that supports color management is. Since Android doesn't have color management then having a great OLED screen with a wide color gamut is pointless since you can't render content correctly. The iPhone will be the first device in the world to have an OLED screen AND support color management. Couple that with individually calibrated screens and you get the most accurate color reproduction possible. It won't have the "pop" that the cartoonish OLED screens of other devices do, but I'll take accuracy over flash any day.
millions upon millions of phones have the sensor on the back and people have zero issues with them. For those people (myself included) moving the sensor from the front chin to under the screen is just that, a move. It is absolutely nothing special. There is zero change in function. Some phones already have full screen fronts and there is nothing to comment on except how it looks because the sensor is on the back well out of the way and users are comfortable with it. It's been that way for years. If it were different, rear sensors wouldn't have got past one generation. Do you doubt that Apple also has prototypes with rear sensors? If it were such a bad placement, those prototypes wouldn't exist.
Speed
ARCore and ARKit are not shipping products. Both require developers to develop the possibilities and we have NO IDEA how consumers will react. Right now there is nothing to do but wait. In the meantime, people with mid range phones will continue to use them happily, impervious to what is available through AR.
You think the new iPhones won't ship with more RAM? You don't think that older, supported phones won't feel the pinch of their RAM allotments? I would wait before before answering those questions. The fact that you don't take issue with my point on storage, I take as tacit admission that it was a problem.
Face Unlock? It is not meant to be a secure feature. On Samsung phones You cannot even activate it without a warning on security. The system will not even allow you to use it for payments. It is a convenience feature. Nothing more.
On the other hand iPhones allow you to not set any unlock code or use 0000, 1234, etc. In that situation, which option is more secure! The user has to decide, depending on how he/she takes security. Options are good and some Samsung users can try Iris scanning if they wish. iPhone users cannot.
FaceID will not be the gamechanger you think it will. It will simply be another biometric option and very little more. Am I for it? Yes, because options are good. For unlocking, any secure option is good, great even, but gamechanging, NO.
Colour management. Have you ever seen a regular user question colour on their screens? No, I didn't think you had. You might find a subset of pro users who appreciate it but the vast majority of users don't even know they have a 'problem'.
Any comments on battery design and charging? because I will take my fast charging over colour management any day.
Your comments regarding what represents true innovation versus "just another way of doing the same thing" mark you as a most common denominator user. That's nothing to be ashamed of, but it disqualifies you to preach among those here who have the technical chops to grok the difference.
So some case of premature ejaculation of a wanna-be-Apple, or some real innovation? anyway, they beat Apple to the "first post" race.
1) Who wouldn't want to have Apple's mindshare, valuation, or position in multiple markets? I'd like to see more companies strive for better products, over the "innovation" that occurred with the WinPC market where they found more clever ways to cut down on prices.
2) This is a known future in computing and this seems like a great achievement for Huawei. The benchmark seems a bit odd but maybe I don't understand the relevance of "images recognized per minute."
3) We got ML on the A10 a year ago and the Kirin 970 doesn't start shipping until mid October. I wouldn't be surprised if we see an A11 next month shipping to millions of customers by the end of September that blows the 970 out of the water. Designing their own chips has allowed Apple to do amazing things already. I hope we get to see what their in-house GPU designs can do this year.
When you build logic into hardware the ecceleration potential is typically orders of magnitude. The surprises regarding Kirin are (1) that Huawei has jumped into the SoC game with a viable offering (that's great for them) and (2) that they get only 5x performance over a phone that's doing the task in software. Lol
There's been a lot of talk about the under screen fingerprint sensor but I don't consider that to be all that special. It's just another way of doing something we already do, just in a different place.
Ridiculous. A reader under the screen allows you to have slim bezels AND keep the fingerprint sensor on the front, instead of the useless hack that everyone else is doing placing it on the back (because they had no alternative). That is, if Apple even goes this route (they likely have a superior solution in FaceID).
The same goes for speed. Mid tier phones have been fast enough for quite a while. The same applies to graphics. RAM and storage? Apple will finally leaving this problem behind.
Rubbish. For example, ARCore from Google requires the latest and fastest phones to work (because AR done in software requires power). This is why Apple also requires a minimum A9 equipped device to use ARKit. Mid-tier phones WILL NOT be able to do AR because they will lack the processor power to achieve it. The funny thing about this is that a 2 year old A9 equipped iPhone (even the least expensive SE) still outperforms 95% of Android devices on the market. Which is why Apple will dominate AR because of the sheer number of devices that will be able to use ARKit.
If all you do is run basic Apps, then mid-tier phones are fast. It's when you want to do something more that iOS shines (not only because of the superior processing power but because of Apps that can actually take advantage of it).
RAM is a problem? iOS isn't the clusterfuck known as Android where you need more RAM than a desktop PC running Windows before it will perform well.
Some kind of new optical biometric option? It's still just a biometric option, just a different one. Nice to have but little more.
More rubbish. Perhaps you forgot how useless Face Unlock was when Android introduced it? Easily fooled by a picture of you, forcing Google to add their Liveness Check feature which required you to blink to verify you weren't a picture. And having to hold your phone up to your face (even for a short time) to unlock? Nobody wants to do that, which is why nobody uses Face Unlock. Then Samsung decided to add this useless feature to the S8, and apparently forgot about the issues Google had and their system was also fooled with a picture. So was their iris scanner. Two-time losers for that screw up.
If Apple implements FaceID according to the features/capabilities shown by the companies they acquired, then it will be a complete game changer. Can't be fooled by a picture, can't be fooled by a 3D sculpture with your face applied to it, can tell identical twins apart, works in the dark, works from a partial view of your face, works at odd angles, and can't be fooled by sunglasses, beards or shaving. It's practically the perfect biometric unlocking feature. If you can see the screen of your phone then it can see you and unlock. It has all the features that make Touch ID so great (fast and accurate) without any drawbacks (like wearing gloves or having dirty/wet fingers).
Better battery is nothing new, nor is OLED, nor is wireless charging.
OLED is not new, but an OLED phone that supports color management is. Since Android doesn't have color management then having a great OLED screen with a wide color gamut is pointless since you can't render content correctly. The iPhone will be the first device in the world to have an OLED screen AND support color management. Couple that with individually calibrated screens and you get the most accurate color reproduction possible. It won't have the "pop" that the cartoonish OLED screens of other devices do, but I'll take accuracy over flash any day.
millions upon millions of phones have the sensor on the back and people have zero issues with them. For those people (myself included) moving the sensor from the front chin to under the screen is just that, a move. It is absolutely nothing special. There is zero change in function. Some phones already have full screen fronts and there is nothing to comment on except how it looks because the sensor is on the back well out of the way and users are comfortable with it. It's been that way for years. If it were different, rear sensors wouldn't have got past one generation. Do you doubt that Apple also has prototypes with rear sensors? If it were such a bad placement, those prototypes wouldn't exist.
Speed
ARCore and ARKit are not shipping products. Both require developers to develop the possibilities and we have NO IDEA how consumers will react. Right now there is nothing to do but wait. In the meantime, people with mid range phones will continue to use them happily, impervious to what is available through AR.
You think the new iPhones won't ship with more RAM? You don't think that older, supported phones won't feel the pinch of their RAM allotments? I would wait before before answering those questions. The fact that you don't take issue with my point on storage, I take as tacit admission that it was a problem.
Face Unlock? It is not meant to be a secure feature. On Samsung phones You cannot even activate it without a warning on security. The system will not even allow you to use it for payments. It is a convenience feature. Nothing more.
On the other hand iPhones allow you to not set any unlock code or use 0000, 1234, etc. In that situation, which option is more secure! The user has to decide, depending on how he/she takes security. Options are good and some Samsung users can try Iris scanning if they wish. iPhone users cannot.
FaceID will not be the gamechanger you think it will. It will simply be another biometric option and very little more. Am I for it? Yes, because options are good. For unlocking, any secure option is good, great even, but gamechanging, NO.
Colour management. Have you ever seen a regular user question colour on their screens? No, I didn't think you had. You might find a subset of pro users who appreciate it but the vast majority of users don't even know they have a 'problem'.
Any comments on battery design and charging? because I will take my fast charging over colour management any day.
Your comments regarding what represents true innovation versus "just another way of doing the same thing" mark you as a most common denominator user. That's nothing to be ashamed of, but it disqualifies you to preach among those here who have the technical chops to grok the difference.
This is actually incorrect and has nothing to do with 'chops'.
The OP jumped in feet first with the 'stupid' comment. Never a good way to start a post. He then followed up with his 'two second' comment which was completely ironic because he hadn't thought through my possible counter, and as I said in my response, the decision to put the sensor on the rear on many phones had and has nothing to do with lacking room on the front. They were deliberate design decisions that went through the full range of usability studies and had the relevant user studies to determine if users would like them on the rear. To even think no such studies are carried out is absurd in the extreme and makes the 'two second' comment look exactly what it is.
The fingerprint sensor is that: A fingerprint sensor. It doesn't matter where it is (on the front, on the side, on the back or under the screen) it does the job of scanning fingerprints. The placement or preference of placement has nothing to do with being a 'most common denominator user' nor innovation and it is exactly what I said. The same way of doing the same thing. It's function hasn't changed at all. Put my reply into the context of the post I was replying to. It has nothing to do with innovation, which in this case, wouldn't be what the sensor does but how it is done.
I took his comments point by point and even asked questions to see how he was thinking, to better understand his claims. He was unwilling or unable to respond in a normal fashion and just threw in the 'troll' grenade and withdrew.
If he hadn't started with 'stupid' and followed through with the 'two second' comment he wouldn't have received a pointed counter.
So, to sum up. The OP and my reply are on placement and function. Not technology or innovation.
First, he's obviously not a troll, unless the definition has been expanded to mean "anyone who doesn't worship at the Apple altar." It's lazy to just slap the "troll" label on everyone with whom you disagree or just don't like.
Second, he brings up some interesting points. Even the stuff that's critical of Apple is interesting to me because it makes me a more informed consumer. In my business I always want to know what my competition is doing, even if it's only to learn from their mistakes. Similarly, I'm interested in protecting and maximizing the benefit of my investment in Apple products, so I want to know about things that may affect my little island. Those things include knowing what the competition is doing and how buyers are perceiving Apple's actions/products/services. Avon provides me some of that perspective.
Besides, he obviously THINKS about what he writes, which many here apparently do not.
He lies, deform and biases the hell out of everything. So, how does not provide a good POV of the competition. That would only be true if you want to leave the Apple "bubble" to get a point of view from the alternate Android "bubble". There are a lot more neutral POV on Android than people like Gator and Avon that exist.
There are even people that provide contrarian opinions on this forum that are much more measured. I really don't care if someone here has 4 Android phones and Watches as long as they don't post lies all day long and sound like they're only here to push buttons (like not having owned Apple products since the 1990s or even ever,,,). and having 99% of negative opinions on Apple.
Android phones, especially in the low to mid market have their use; not everyone's buying a BMW; Lexus, Mercedes; a Hyundai, Ford and the like are still decent cars.
Btw, you framed the opinion of most here vs him as "worshipping", (so basically the classic fanboy/isheep insult in other words) this, added to the self agrandising insult that ended your comment makes me think you are a part of the problem rather than the solution you think you are. I can only surmize that you are a Mensa member/Astronaut to shovel such haughty crap.
BTW, there is "worshipping" at the altar and taking a dump on the Altar. See the difference.
He doesn't really give a damn about Apple products yet posts relentlessly here; why? it's all about how much satisfaction he gets from "setting us straight".
Someone who said straight out he's here to "teach" us about the world out there... Is someone who is by definition a troll.
I've dealt with trolls before they were named trolls in the mid 1980s and I'm pretty sure I can spot one... He's exactly the kind of reactionary button pushers that have infested MacRumors, so much so that I wouldn't be surprised he's got an account there. So, what the hell troll definition do you have.
I reached your second word and stopped.
'He lies'
Now I will ask you to give evidence of those lies.
If ever there was a way start a post you cannot possibly defend. That was it.
They are claiming the world's first mobile AI processing unit.
The official presentation isn't until tomorrow but if what is being claimed actually works on the device, they may have upped the ante a little. This makes me think Apple might also have something along those lines for their big reveal on the 12th.
Nobody cares. Even "if" they have a machine learning processor on board, how will it get used? The biggest problem with Android is device makers adding their own custom hardware that isn't actually supported by Android. So none of your Apps will properly take advantage of those features.
The rest of the 970 is generic off-the-shelf A73, A53 and Mali parts. Nothing new here, just another SoC based on ARM cores. At least Samsung and Qualcomm are now trying their hand at making their own custom cores, although they are still WAY behind Apple in this regard. The A11 should hit 4,000 single core, which makes it literally double that of the 835 or 8895. Quite amazing how far ahead Apple is.
If nobody cared, this site wouldn't have half as much Google and Samsung content.
Well congrats to you for your considerable efforts to increase that content further, Your loyalties to Android OS and Android OEM's surely have been noted by your handlers.
Sad, neither you nor I are buying iPhone 8's; me because I'm more interested in waiting for next year's, and completely happy with my iPhone 7 Plus, and you because you will be unable to remain the newest contrarian on AI if you capitulate.
I am actually in the market for an iPhone this year but it depends entirely on price. That would appear to rule out the iPhone 8 but the iPhone 7s is on my radar although it wouldn't be for me personally it would be my cash flowing into Apple Sales International. LOL.
...based on your comments, yet are constantly hawking arcane features and cost benefits of Android OEM's. One would almost think that you are avoiding speaking out on anything superior in iOS or iPhone hardware.
It's a question of balance. I don't need to sing the praises of Apple constantly here (I have a lot of Apple gear and that speaks volumes) but there is so much ignorance spurted out on Android and Android handsets that someone needs to remind people that much of it has little to do with hard fact (it's often embarrassing to read how I'll informed some people are) and Apple, in spite of what some here proclaim, has much catching up do in many areas.
People here gleefully poked fun at Samsung for the Note 7 fiasco but then tried to round it out to the Android handset market, failing to see for example, that Huawei's Supercharge technology leaves anything Apple currently has looking decidedly behind the times.
I live in both worlds and don't lap up whatever gets dumped on my plate just because it's this or that platform.
Another topic is how Apple does business, which I do not personally like but that is a personal opinion and everybody is free to their own opinion on that subject.
You don't like how Apple does business? I'd love to read more detail on your thoughts in that regard. I can say I don't like some of the decisions made in the Android world, like stuffing big batteries into their phones to get decent time between charges (commonly referred to as battery life). Why can't they do what Apple does; tightly integrate hardware and software to delivery each unit of computing power with less energy use. Apple does this because they are sensitive to environmental issues, and I like that about the way Apple does business.
Ha! I was generalising but yes but I could write a book on that subject. Too much to detail here. Going back to the run up of Apple almost disappearing and right up to the Apple of today.
The problem with the current Apple TV is not pricing, or whatever, it is basically that it seems like peripheral to the ecosystem and not central to it (as it should be in the home).
Because of its low integratiion with the rest of Apple's device it has to fight off other devices all alone based on price alone. That's not a good place to be for this device.
We will see if they have remedied this in this version.
After I started buying HomeKit connected devices, I discovered that I must have AppleTV or iPad to control things when away from home. So, it looks like AppleTV is a hub, very centric part in ecosystem. For myself, I prefer an iPad that stays at home all the time, because I've no TV set for years.
That’s 11 for the last one. 8 (in the normal cycle) is 12, but apparently they ARE actually going to release either two models or just 7 with a modified body for its ‘lower price’ release.
I'm with you. Clearly the next one should be the iPhone 2 to fill in that glaring numbering gap.
Did we ever learn what the "S" stands for?
What do you mean 'did we learn what the "S" stands for?' It was never a secret. It was announced when the 3GS came out in 2008. Do you have amnesia?
So some case of premature ejaculation of a wanna-be-Apple, or some real innovation? anyway, they beat Apple to the "first post" race.
1) Who wouldn't want to have Apple's mindshare, valuation, or position in multiple markets? I'd like to see more companies strive for better products, over the "innovation" that occurred with the WinPC market where they found more clever ways to cut down on prices.
2) This is a known future in computing and this seems like a great achievement for Huawei. The benchmark seems a bit odd but maybe I don't understand the relevance of "images recognized per minute."
3) We got ML on the A10 a year ago and the Kirin 970 doesn't start shipping until mid October. I wouldn't be surprised if we see an A11 next month shipping to millions of customers by the end of September that blows the 970 out of the water. Designing their own chips has allowed Apple to do amazing things already. I hope we get to see what their in-house GPU designs can do this year.
When you build logic into hardware the ecceleration potential is typically orders of magnitude. The surprises regarding Kirin are (1) that Huawei has jumped into the SoC game with a viable offering (that's great for them) and (2) that they get only 5x performance over a phone that's doing the task in software. Lol
I was surprised to see the slide with the iPhone 7 Plus since it shows just how great last year's A10 chip is compared to the Samsung S8 and makes Apple besting Huawei very obtainable this year. I think it would've been better for Huawei to use a second, popular Android-based device running a different SoC for comparison, not the gold standard in mobile SoCs that really isn't in direct commotion with Huawei since no Android-based device can use Apple's A-series chips. Not only does it reduce their stated accomplishment, but also gives Apple even more attention.
So some case of premature ejaculation of a wanna-be-Apple, or some real innovation? anyway, they beat Apple to the "first post" race.
1) Who wouldn't want to have Apple's mindshare, valuation, or position in multiple markets? I'd like to see more companies strive for better products, over the "innovation" that occurred with the WinPC market where they found more clever ways to cut down on prices.
2) This is a known future in computing and this seems like a great achievement for Huawei. The benchmark seems a bit odd but maybe I don't understand the relevance of "images recognized per minute."
3) We got ML on the A10 a year ago and the Kirin 970 doesn't start shipping until mid October. I wouldn't be surprised if we see an A11 next month shipping to millions of customers by the end of September that blows the 970 out of the water. Designing their own chips has allowed Apple to do amazing things already. I hope we get to see what their in-house GPU designs can do this year.
When you build logic into hardware the ecceleration potential is typically orders of magnitude. The surprises regarding Kirin are (1) that Huawei has jumped into the SoC game with a viable offering (that's great for them) and (2) that they get only 5x performance over a phone that's doing the task in software. Lol
I think the numbers themselves aren't all that important at this stage, at least in the bigger picture. For this chip they have to 'sell' it and 5x is great when 2x would have been great too.
Remember that Apple could announce their own implementation in a few days, run exactly the same test against this Kirin and leave it standing. I doubt the numbers are that important for this release.
After following the keynote it was clear that this is just the beginning. They have opened the platform up and provided their own API but claim developers must now find good uses for the unit. Huawei got the ball rolling and we will see where it can go. They supposedly have thousands of employees developing code for the NPU and already have it running to handle a lot of the phone's internal functioning. That is all well and good but until a phone is made available for the general public we can't know how all of this will play out. The wait will be short though. What we can be sure of is that Huawei's goal of 'knowing you' , then 'being you' is finally and very slowly materialising.
The other angle to this was also outlined. Onboard AI and latency. As was the notion of some current AI being simply 'reactionary'. It was curious that they mentioned AI latency in a car-use context.
Then, there is the question of exactly how much power the NPU needs to carry out the tasks within the limitations of a mobile device dependant on a battery.
This advancement is probably directly connected with the work of Cambricon who have been working closely with Huawei.
Apart from that the enhanced dual ISPs and the Cat 18 LATE modem were also important changes to this Kirin.
Without a doubt, the A11 bring some new numbers to the table and if there is no AI to be revealed (I'm betting on them announcing something though), Apple will have to 'sell' them too.
The rest of the Kirin 970 (fabrication process excepted) is largely similar to the 960 so the number crunching stuff won't change all that much. Graphics will see a boost but power consumption, management and other efficiencies will probably mark a difference though.
Beyond that and in the context of the phone, I think the onus will be on battery tech and the Leica partnership.
So, the competion has all but put its cards on the table and Apple will do likewise on the 12th.
So some case of premature ejaculation of a wanna-be-Apple, or some real innovation? anyway, they beat Apple to the "first post" race.
This looks really good. Give credit where it’s due. We’ll see what Apple says, but Huawei looks to have thought this entire thing though very thoroughly.
There's been a lot of talk about the under screen fingerprint sensor but I don't consider that to be all that special. It's just another way of doing something we already do, just in a different place.
Ridiculous. A reader under the screen allows you to have slim bezels AND keep the fingerprint sensor on the front, instead of the useless hack that everyone else is doing placing it on the back (because they had no alternative). That is, if Apple even goes this route (they likely have a superior solution in FaceID).
The same goes for speed. Mid tier phones have been fast enough for quite a while. The same applies to graphics. RAM and storage? Apple will finally leaving this problem behind.
Rubbish. For example, ARCore from Google requires the latest and fastest phones to work (because AR done in software requires power). This is why Apple also requires a minimum A9 equipped device to use ARKit. Mid-tier phones WILL NOT be able to do AR because they will lack the processor power to achieve it. The funny thing about this is that a 2 year old A9 equipped iPhone (even the least expensive SE) still outperforms 95% of Android devices on the market. Which is why Apple will dominate AR because of the sheer number of devices that will be able to use ARKit.
If all you do is run basic Apps, then mid-tier phones are fast. It's when you want to do something more that iOS shines (not only because of the superior processing power but because of Apps that can actually take advantage of it).
RAM is a problem? iOS isn't the clusterfuck known as Android where you need more RAM than a desktop PC running Windows before it will perform well.
Some kind of new optical biometric option? It's still just a biometric option, just a different one. Nice to have but little more.
More rubbish. Perhaps you forgot how useless Face Unlock was when Android introduced it? Easily fooled by a picture of you, forcing Google to add their Liveness Check feature which required you to blink to verify you weren't a picture. And having to hold your phone up to your face (even for a short time) to unlock? Nobody wants to do that, which is why nobody uses Face Unlock. Then Samsung decided to add this useless feature to the S8, and apparently forgot about the issues Google had and their system was also fooled with a picture. So was their iris scanner. Two-time losers for that screw up.
If Apple implements FaceID according to the features/capabilities shown by the companies they acquired, then it will be a complete game changer. Can't be fooled by a picture, can't be fooled by a 3D sculpture with your face applied to it, can tell identical twins apart, works in the dark, works from a partial view of your face, works at odd angles, and can't be fooled by sunglasses, beards or shaving. It's practically the perfect biometric unlocking feature. If you can see the screen of your phone then it can see you and unlock. It has all the features that make Touch ID so great (fast and accurate) without any drawbacks (like wearing gloves or having dirty/wet fingers).
Better battery is nothing new, nor is OLED, nor is wireless charging.
OLED is not new, but an OLED phone that supports color management is. Since Android doesn't have color management then having a great OLED screen with a wide color gamut is pointless since you can't render content correctly. The iPhone will be the first device in the world to have an OLED screen AND support color management. Couple that with individually calibrated screens and you get the most accurate color reproduction possible. It won't have the "pop" that the cartoonish OLED screens of other devices do, but I'll take accuracy over flash any day.
millions upon millions of phones have the sensor on the back and people have zero issues with them. For those people (myself included) moving the sensor from the front chin to under the screen is just that, a move. It is absolutely nothing special. There is zero change in function. Some phones already have full screen fronts and there is nothing to comment on except how it looks because the sensor is on the back well out of the way and users are comfortable with it. It's been that way for years. If it were different, rear sensors wouldn't have got past one generation. Do you doubt that Apple also has prototypes with rear sensors? If it were such a bad placement, those prototypes wouldn't exist.
Speed
ARCore and ARKit are not shipping products. Both require developers to develop the possibilities and we have NO IDEA how consumers will react. Right now there is nothing to do but wait. In the meantime, people with mid range phones will continue to use them happily, impervious to what is available through AR.
You think the new iPhones won't ship with more RAM? You don't think that older, supported phones won't feel the pinch of their RAM allotments? I would wait before before answering those questions. The fact that you don't take issue with my point on storage, I take as tacit admission that it was a problem.
Face Unlock? It is not meant to be a secure feature. On Samsung phones You cannot even activate it without a warning on security. The system will not even allow you to use it for payments. It is a convenience feature. Nothing more.
On the other hand iPhones allow you to not set any unlock code or use 0000, 1234, etc. In that situation, which option is more secure! The user has to decide, depending on how he/she takes security. Options are good and some Samsung users can try Iris scanning if they wish. iPhone users cannot.
FaceID will not be the gamechanger you think it will. It will simply be another biometric option and very little more. Am I for it? Yes, because options are good. For unlocking, any secure option is good, great even, but gamechanging, NO.
Colour management. Have you ever seen a regular user question colour on their screens? No, I didn't think you had. You might find a subset of pro users who appreciate it but the vast majority of users don't even know they have a 'problem'.
Any comments on battery design and charging? because I will take my fast charging over colour management any day.
Feh. You’re just making excuses. I’ve not seen one review that didn’t mention the inconvience of a rear mounted ID button. You can’t use it when the phone is on a table without picking it up. Sure, forget things that do matter. Samsung’s is particularly hated.
just because Samsung always has issues with their features, doesn’t mean that Apple will. That’s just a very bad argument from you. Apple came out with Touch ID and it worked great from the very beginning, but Samsung just felt that it HAD to have that bullet point, so they added one that didn’t work, very typical of them.
samsung has options, because its facial and iris unlock options don’t work well. Again, that doesn’t mean that Apple’s won’t work well.
color management is important. I understand that you don’t want to say that, because Android doesn’t have it, and it’s not likely it will.
fast charging sucks, because you’re guaranteed of having your battery fail before its normal lifetime is up. So, be happy with that.
Lots of people use the 'can't use it on a table without picking it up' to argue against rear mounted sensors but what use do you make of the phone in those situations?
If you're in a bar a want to look at your screen on the table, for example? That's what double tap to wake is for (and is coming to iPhone soon). If you actually want to do something a bit more involved in a mobile situation then I suppose the phone is in your hand already and the placement is a non-issue in that situation. You'll have to give me a different use situation for the table top scenario for me to evaluate. As things are, even picking the phone up to unlock is far less effort than turning the page of a newspaper, adjusting my glasses or raising a coffee cup to my mouth. That's to say even lifting to unlock is a non-issue. But with tap to wake, that isn't an issue.
Very simply, if you want to turn the phone on without having to pick it up. Double tapping isn’t the solution. There are a lot of reasons for that. Maybe you’re cooking, and just need to see the recipe you have on the screen one more time. You just need to touch with one fingertip, rather than to have to clean your entire hand off. Yes, it makes a difference.
comparing two entirely different things doesn’t make your case. If I wanted to read a paper newspaper, which I don’t anymore, then I wouldn’t be talking about a phone in comparison.
thanks for addressing the other issues I brought up in the post. ;-(
fast charging sucks, because you’re guaranteed of having your battery fail before its normal lifetime is up. So, be happy with that.
I'm not sure that's a real factor if you're on a two-year upgrade cycle and when you can have the battery replaced so easily.
My understanding is that the two biggest factors in having a shortened lifespan on a battery are voltage fluctuations and temperature. I live in a particularly hot environment and have had a series of battery issues with Apple batteries. The latest was two weeks ago when I had to change an iPhone 6 battery. Apple said it should be good for 500 to 800 cycles. The diagnostics showed a little over 500. I wonder if heat played a role there. Impossible to know. I have been using the supplied Huawei fast charger, nightly for the last two years with no perceivable downgrade in battery life for my use. It's only two phones but I haven't hit that guarantee of having it fail yet and even if it does fail in the coming months I can have it replaced easily.
I will use the phone all day, sometimes heavily. Occasionally I will use a RAVPower backup to get me home. Often, when I get home I will shower and get ready to go out. That's when the phone goes back onto fast charge and by the time I'm ready to leave, I have enough juice to get me through the night. That's when fast charging comes into its own in spite of any shortening of lifespan.
I've come to depend on it now. Maybe I've just been lucky but I would appreciate your opinion on how Huawei designs its Supercharge battery tech as they do it all themselves and are very confident in their entire battery production process from chargers through to chemistry through to safety. This independently of any guaranteed shortened lifespan as I'm not a battery expert.
EDIT: I couldn't find much on Supercharge but this article has a video in it which goes over the basics of the Supercharge approach.
I saw an interview in Spanish with a Spanish Huawei engineer. I will try to locate it and extract the information. Then there was a supposed battery breakthrough by Watt Lab two years ago (Huawei's battery research unit) that claimed quick charging without impacting battery life. No idea if that breakthrough has made it into a shipping product yet.
Here's the snippet:
"Watt Lab, which belongs to the Central Research Institute at Huawei Technology Corporation Limited, unveiled their new quick charging lithium-ion batteries at the 56th Battery Symposium in Japan. Using next generation technology, these new batteries have achieved a charging speed 10 times faster than that of normal batteries, reaching about 50% capacity in mere minutes.
Huawei presented videos of the two types of quick charging lithium-ion batteries: one battery with a 600 mAh capacity that can be charged to 68% capacity in two minutes; and another with a 3000 mAh capacity and an energy density above 620 Wh/L, which can be charged to 48% capacity in five minutes to allow ten hours of phone call on Huawei mobile phones. These quick charging batteries underwent many rounds of testing, and have been certified by Huawei's terminal test department.
According to Huawei, the company bonded heteroatoms to the molecule of graphite in anode, which could be a catalyst for the capture and transmission of lithium through carbon bonds. Huawei stated that the heteroatoms increase the charging speed of batteries without decreasing energy density or battery life."
Fast charging results in higher average temperatures in the battery, and the device overall. Quick charging is much worse, and has resulted in premature battery failures. You need a particularly robust battery for that, and you’re just not going to get that on phones that are already sold on tiny margins. I’ve seen a lot of claims for battery designs. Only when they have extensive use in consumer devices are they really validated.
this, added to the self agrandising insult that ended your comment
Man, I really need to work on my writing. While that was intended as a good natured barb about the snipers who fire off a missive without really thinking it through, I assure you it wasn't meant to be self-aggrandizing. Every once in a while I'll take a solid position on something I genuinely think I'm right about, but most of the time I try to take into account the fact that I'm an idiot with massive holes in my knowledge and the intellectual agility of a soap dish.
makes me think you are a part of the problem rather than the solution you think you are.
I wasn't trying to be a solution, I just did a lousy job of what should have been an off-hand quip. Maybe what I should have written is "Avon doesn't have the same affect on me that he has on you. Oh well, everyone sees things differently." or something like that.
Or I could have just thought that and not bothered to type at all. I'll consider that in the future to avoid the perception of being a problem child.
I can only surmize that you are a Mensa member/Astronaut to shovel such haughty crap.
No, no, no. Not Mensa, moron. Of course, my stupidity alone isn't enough to produce so many wholly unintended impressions, but combine that with me being utterly obtuse socially and we get the winning formula you're seeing.
BTW, there is "worshipping" at the altar and taking a dump on the Altar. See the difference.
I do. I'll try to be more respectful. I just find the zealous Apple evangelists as tiresome as you do the contrarians. It's hard to have a meaningful discussion with someone who bases their argument on the belief that their position is supported by an infallible deity with a crystal ball.
My understanding of the term is that it's more specific than the way it's applied these days. It's someone who doesn't necessarily believe what they're writing, but makes provocative statements just to upset others. Apparently there are people who enjoy creating shit and watching the chaos, who don't understand that they're socially maladjusted.
One can be arrogant, misinformed, abrasive, and of a differing and/or unpopular opinion without being a troll.
Perhaps I've misunderstood, or maybe the definition has expanded.
Comments
Not me.
First, he's obviously not a troll, unless the definition has been expanded to mean "anyone who doesn't worship at the Apple altar." It's lazy to just slap the "troll" label on everyone with whom you disagree or just don't like.
Second, he brings up some interesting points. Even the stuff that's critical of Apple is interesting to me because it makes me a more informed consumer. In my business I always want to know what my competition is doing, even if it's only to learn from their mistakes. Similarly, I'm interested in protecting and maximizing the benefit of my investment in Apple products, so I want to know about things that may affect my little island. Those things include knowing what the competition is doing and how buyers are perceiving Apple's actions/products/services. Avon provides me some of that perspective.
Besides, he obviously THINKS about what he writes, which many here apparently do not.
Good point.
Apparently you were right about my bias affecting my opinion. I'm one of a dying breed who wants to own the content and store it locally. Partly because I frequently rewatch stuff in my library and like knowing it will still be there if I want to watch it again in the future, and partly because I spend so much of my life in places with no access to streaming content.
It's slooooooowly penetrating my so-called brain that many people, maybe even most, consider the Netflix approach to be the ideal. I guess, unlike me, they haven't been in the middle of watching a series when the licensing ran out and it was no longer available on Netflix. Or tried watching a series that changed networks sometime during its run so only certain seasons are available for streaming while others are not.
I guess if the market prefers bulk subscription streaming over a la carte purchasing, Apple's in a tougher position than it would be trying to satisfy me.
Issue 1. Would Apple offering a streaming stick adversely affect corporate profits?
Issue 2: Does Apple need to improve access to iTunes video content?
I used anecdotes to illustrate my thinking about Issue 2. They are irrelevant to Issue 1. I shouldn't have addressed both in the same post.
--
With that put to rest, I take issue with your portrayal of my conclusions as objectively wrong.
The article you linked does NOT contradict what I said. It says that Apple has a big share of that market. It also specifically says that it didn't compare that market to other forms of video consumption, like Netflix, conventional broadcast, VOD, physical media, and torrents. So Apple having a 65% share of a market in which the only other significant players were Xbox and Amazon Video just means Apple has the biggest slice of a tiny little pie. There's nothing in that to dispute the assertion that iTunes is not a household name when it comes to video consumption.
I understand the comparative value of empirical evidence versus anecdotal observation, but in this case the numbers don't tell enough of the story to either confirm or refute the argument.
That would only be true if you want to leave the Apple "bubble" to get a point of view from the alternate Android "bubble".
There are a lot more neutral POV on Android than people like Gator and Avon that exist.
There are even people that provide contrarian opinions on this forum that are much more measured.
I really don't care if someone here has 4 Android phones and Watches as long as they don't post lies all day long and
sound like they're only here to push buttons (like not having owned Apple products since the 1990s or even ever,,,).
and having 99% of negative opinions on Apple.
Android phones, especially in the low to mid market have their use; not everyone's buying a BMW; Lexus, Mercedes;
a Hyundai, Ford and the like are still decent cars.
Btw, you framed the opinion of most here vs him as "worshipping",
(so basically the classic fanboy/isheep insult in other words)
this, added to the self agrandising insult that ended your comment
makes me think you are a part of the problem rather than the solution you think you are.
I can only surmize that you are a Mensa member/Astronaut to shovel such haughty crap.
BTW, there is "worshipping" at the altar and taking a dump on the Altar. See the difference.
He doesn't really give a damn about Apple products yet posts relentlessly here;
why? it's all about how much satisfaction he gets from "setting us straight".
Someone who said straight out he's here to "teach" us about the world out there...
Is someone who is by definition a troll.
I've dealt with trolls before they were named trolls in the mid 1980s and I'm pretty sure I can spot one...
He's exactly the kind of reactionary button pushers that have infested MacRumors, so much so that I wouldn't be surprised he's got an account there.
So, what the hell troll definition do you have.
So, as you would say, "frack" off.
The OP jumped in feet first with the 'stupid' comment. Never a good way to start a post. He then followed up with his 'two second' comment which was completely ironic because he hadn't thought through my possible counter, and as I said in my response, the decision to put the sensor on the rear on many phones had and has nothing to do with lacking room on the front. They were deliberate design decisions that went through the full range of usability studies and had the relevant user studies to determine if users would like them on the rear. To even think no such studies are carried out is absurd in the extreme and makes the 'two second' comment look exactly what it is.
The fingerprint sensor is that: A fingerprint sensor. It doesn't matter where it is (on the front, on the side, on the back or under the screen) it does the job of scanning fingerprints. The placement or preference of placement has nothing to do with being a 'most common denominator user' nor innovation and it is exactly what I said. The same way of doing the same thing. It's function hasn't changed at all. Put my reply into the context of the post I was replying to. It has nothing to do with innovation, which in this case, wouldn't be what the sensor does but how it is done.
I took his comments point by point and even asked questions to see how he was thinking, to better understand his claims. He was unwilling or unable to respond in a normal fashion and just threw in the 'troll' grenade and withdrew.
If he hadn't started with 'stupid' and followed through with the 'two second' comment he wouldn't have received a pointed counter.
So, to sum up. The OP and my reply are on placement and function. Not technology or innovation.
'He lies'
Now I will ask you to give evidence of those lies.
If ever there was a way start a post you cannot possibly defend. That was it.
Remember that Apple could announce their own implementation in a few days, run exactly the same test against this Kirin and leave it standing. I doubt the numbers are that important for this release.
After following the keynote it was clear that this is just the beginning. They have opened the platform up and provided their own API but claim developers must now find good uses for the unit. Huawei got the ball rolling and we will see where it can go. They supposedly have thousands of employees developing code for the NPU and already have it running to handle a lot of the phone's internal functioning. That is all well and good but until a phone is made available for the general public we can't know how all of this will play out. The wait will be short though. What we can be sure of is that Huawei's goal of 'knowing you' , then 'being you' is finally and very slowly materialising.
The other angle to this was also outlined. Onboard AI and latency. As was the notion of some current AI being simply 'reactionary'. It was curious that they mentioned AI latency in a car-use context.
Then, there is the question of exactly how much power the NPU needs to carry out the tasks within the limitations of a mobile device dependant on a battery.
This advancement is probably directly connected with the work of Cambricon who have been working closely with Huawei.
Apart from that the enhanced dual ISPs and the Cat 18 LATE modem were also important changes to this Kirin.
Without a doubt, the A11 bring some new numbers to the table and if there is no AI to be revealed (I'm betting on them announcing something though), Apple will have to 'sell' them too.
The rest of the Kirin 970 (fabrication process excepted) is largely similar to the 960 so the number crunching stuff won't change all that much. Graphics will see a boost but power consumption, management and other efficiencies will probably mark a difference though.
Beyond that and in the context of the phone, I think the onus will be on battery tech and the Leica partnership.
So, the competion has all but put its cards on the table and Apple will do likewise on the 12th.
Looks like an interesting next three months.
Very simply, if you want to turn the phone on without having to pick it up. Double tapping isn’t the solution. There are a lot of reasons for that. Maybe you’re cooking, and just need to see the recipe you have on the screen one more time. You just need to touch with one fingertip, rather than to have to clean your entire hand off. Yes, it makes a difference.
comparing two entirely different things doesn’t make your case. If I wanted to read a paper newspaper, which I don’t anymore, then I wouldn’t be talking about a phone in comparison.
thanks for addressing the other issues I brought up in the post. ;-(
Fast charging results in higher average temperatures in the battery, and the device overall. Quick charging is much worse, and has resulted in premature battery failures. You need a particularly robust battery for that, and you’re just not going to get that on phones that are already sold on tiny margins. I’ve seen a lot of claims for battery designs. Only when they have extensive use in consumer devices are they really validated.
Man, I really need to work on my writing. While that was intended as a good natured barb about the snipers who fire off a missive without really thinking it through, I assure you it wasn't meant to be self-aggrandizing. Every once in a while I'll take a solid position on something I genuinely think I'm right about, but most of the time I try to take into account the fact that I'm an idiot with massive holes in my knowledge and the intellectual agility of a soap dish.
I wasn't trying to be a solution, I just did a lousy job of what should have been an off-hand quip. Maybe what I should have written is "Avon doesn't have the same affect on me that he has on you. Oh well, everyone sees things differently." or something like that.
Or I could have just thought that and not bothered to type at all. I'll consider that in the future to avoid the perception of being a problem child.
No, no, no. Not Mensa, moron. Of course, my stupidity alone isn't enough to produce so many wholly unintended impressions, but combine that with me being utterly obtuse socially and we get the winning formula you're seeing.
I do. I'll try to be more respectful. I just find the zealous Apple evangelists as tiresome as you do the contrarians. It's hard to have a meaningful discussion with someone who bases their argument on the belief that their position is supported by an infallible deity with a crystal ball.
My understanding of the term is that it's more specific than the way it's applied these days. It's someone who doesn't necessarily believe what they're writing, but makes provocative statements just to upset others. Apparently there are people who enjoy creating shit and watching the chaos, who don't understand that they're socially maladjusted.
One can be arrogant, misinformed, abrasive, and of a differing and/or unpopular opinion without being a troll.
Perhaps I've misunderstood, or maybe the definition has expanded.