First look: Hands-on with Apple's iPhone X

145791022

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 436
    avon b7 said:

    sog35 said:
    rattlhed said:
    Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X?  64GB and 256GB?  What happened to 128GB?  Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone.  Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive.  Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing.  No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model.  I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models.  bummer.
    paying $50 more for 128 additional GB is a great deal.

    If a 128GB phone was available it would have been $1099.   With more 4k video and larger photo's you will be happy you bought the 256GB phone.
    Which is why Apple does it. Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
    Nonsense. There's a low-end capacity, and a high-end (4x more). Which do you need? Low end needs? Great, get the low-end capacity. High-end needs? Great, get the high-end capacity for 150 more. Which type of user are you?
    Just maybe he was the one in the middle?

    You know, low, mid, high?

    It's upsell. Trying to spin it any other way is foolish IMO.
    Not half as foolish as an Android user trying to bag on Apple on an Apple site all day, but that's just my opinion.

    Let me revise my terms -- Apple sells three other models (7, 6s, SE) that have options for 32gb. 32gb, which is by definition the low-end capacity. The new 8 and X are flagships phones and come in 64gb and 256gb. 64 is double the low-end capacity and is by definition medium-capacity, and 256gb is high-capacity. Thus the flagship devices come in medium- and high-capacity only. So now that they've eliminated low-end on the flagship devices, you're going to complain about there not being a mid-medium-capacity? That's beyond reason.

    It's just proof that no matter what, people will complain. Even if they're using Android knockoffs and have no intention to buy any of the new devices.

    edited September 2017 tmaybb-15netmagePickUrPoisonbrucemc
  • Reply 122 of 436
    It will definitely be interesting to get more details on the 1st Apple GPU down the road. The hammer hasn't really come down yet, but the competitors can probably see the shadow starting to form. 
    netmage
  • Reply 123 of 436
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 1,826member
    sog35 said:
    avon b7 said:

    sog35 said:
    rattlhed said:
    Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X?  64GB and 256GB?  What happened to 128GB?  Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone.  Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive.  Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing.  No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model.  I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models.  bummer.
    paying $50 more for 128 additional GB is a great deal.

    If a 128GB phone was available it would have been $1099.   With more 4k video and larger photo's you will be happy you bought the 256GB phone.
    Which is why Apple does it. Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
    Nonsense. There's a low-end capacity, and a high-end (4x more). Which do you need? Low end needs? Great, get the low-end capacity. High-end needs? Great, get the high-end capacity for 150 more. Which type of user are you?
    Just maybe he was the one in the middle?

    You know, low, mid, high?

    It's upsell. Trying to spin it any other way is foolish IMO.


    One in the middle?

    The Samsung S8 only come with 64GB. Thats it.

    Why the hell are you grumbling about the iPhone having 2 storage sizes while the competition only has one?
    Could it have something to do with the user being able to add up to 256GB of their choice?
  • Reply 124 of 436
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 1,826member
    avon b7 said:

    sog35 said:
    rattlhed said:
    Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X?  64GB and 256GB?  What happened to 128GB?  Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone.  Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive.  Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing.  No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model.  I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models.  bummer.
    paying $50 more for 128 additional GB is a great deal.

    If a 128GB phone was available it would have been $1099.   With more 4k video and larger photo's you will be happy you bought the 256GB phone.
    Which is why Apple does it. Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
    Nonsense. There's a low-end capacity, and a high-end (4x more). Which do you need? Low end needs? Great, get the low-end capacity. High-end needs? Great, get the high-end capacity for 150 more. Which type of user are you?
    Just maybe he was the one in the middle?

    You know, low, mid, high?

    It's upsell. Trying to spin it any other way is foolish IMO.
    Not half as foolish as an Android user trying to bag on Apple on an Apple site all day, but that's just my opinion.

    Let me revise my terms -- Apple sells three other models (7, 6s, SE) that have options for 32gb. 32gb, which is by definition the low-end capacity. The new 8 and X are flagships phones and come in 64gb and 256gb. 64 is double the low-end capacity and is by definition medium-capacity, and 256gb is high-capacity. Thus the flagship devices come in medium- and high-capacity only. So now that they've eliminated low-end on the flagship devices, you're going to complain about there not being a mid-medium-capacity? That's beyond reason.

    It's just proof that no matter what, people will complain. Even if they're using Android knockoffs and have no intention to buy any of the new devices.

    avon b7 said:

    sog35 said:
    rattlhed said:
    Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X?  64GB and 256GB?  What happened to 128GB?  Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone.  Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive.  Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing.  No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model.  I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models.  bummer.
    paying $50 more for 128 additional GB is a great deal.

    If a 128GB phone was available it would have been $1099.   With more 4k video and larger photo's you will be happy you bought the 256GB phone.
    Which is why Apple does it. Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
    Nonsense. There's a low-end capacity, and a high-end (4x more). Which do you need? Low end needs? Great, get the low-end capacity. High-end needs? Great, get the high-end capacity for 150 more. Which type of user are you?
    Just maybe he was the one in the middle?

    You know, low, mid, high?

    It's upsell. Trying to spin it any other way is foolish IMO.
    Not half as foolish as an Android user trying to bag on Apple on an Apple site all day, but that's just my opinion.

    Let me revise my terms -- Apple sells three other models (7, 6s, SE) that have options for 32gb. 32gb, which is by definition the low-end capacity. The new 8 and X are flagships phones and come in 64gb and 256gb. 64 is double the low-end capacity and is by definition medium-capacity, and 256gb is high-capacity. Thus the flagship devices come in medium- and high-capacity only. So now that they've eliminated low-end on the flagship devices, you're going to complain about there not being a mid-medium-capacity? That's beyond reason.

    It's just proof that no matter what, people will complain. Even if they're using Android knockoffs and have no intention to buy any of the new devices.

    It's still upsell. However you paint it.

    And you obviously haven't been paying attention today. I have been praising Apple, in part, just for what you mention (the new price spread). I even defended the notch and haven't had anything much to say on the price of the X.

    Yee ha!
  • Reply 125 of 436
    tmaytmay Posts: 2,339member
    avon b7 said:

    sog35 said:
    rattlhed said:
    Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X?  64GB and 256GB?  What happened to 128GB?  Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone.  Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive.  Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing.  No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model.  I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models.  bummer.
    paying $50 more for 128 additional GB is a great deal.

    If a 128GB phone was available it would have been $1099.   With more 4k video and larger photo's you will be happy you bought the 256GB phone.
    Which is why Apple does it. Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
    Nonsense. There's a low-end capacity, and a high-end (4x more). Which do you need? Low end needs? Great, get the low-end capacity. High-end needs? Great, get the high-end capacity for 150 more. Which type of user are you?
    Just maybe he was the one in the middle?

    You know, low, mid, high?

    It's upsell. Trying to spin it any other way is foolish IMO.
    Not half as foolish as an Android user trying to bag on Apple on an Apple site all day, but that's just my opinion.

    Let me revise my terms -- Apple sells three other models (7, 6s, SE) that have options for 32gb. 32gb, which is by definition the low-end capacity. The new 8 and X are flagships phones and come in 64gb and 256gb. 64 is double the low-end capacity and is by definition medium-capacity, and 256gb is high-capacity. Thus the flagship devices come in medium- and high-capacity only. So now that they've eliminated low-end on the flagship devices, you're going to complain about there not being a mid-medium-capacity? That's beyond reason.

    It's just proof that no matter what, people will complain. Even if they're using Android knockoffs and have no intention to buy any of the new devices.

    Before the iPhone event, it was Snagdragon 835, and face recognition, and under screen touch ID, and Kirin 970 and AI processor, all from the usual Android loving suspects on AI.

    Now all these losers are left with is complaining about "upsell" storage, and why isn'r removable storage a thing with Apple.

     Post Apple Event Headline;

    "Apple gives impressive beatdown to rivals posing as tech companies".


    StrangeDays
  • Reply 126 of 436
    sog35 said:
    MplsP said:

    For those bemoaning the "High Price" of the iPhone X...

    A loaded iPhone 8 Plus costs $45.75 per month under the IUP.  A loaded iPhone X costs $56.16 -- $10.41 per month more for the very best!
    That's exactly how companies want you to think about it - divide what you're paying into smaller, more frequent amounts to make it seem smaller. The bottom line is you're still paying over 40% more to get an iPhone X vs an iPhone 8. Even more than that if you finance it with a credit card like a lot of people unfortunately do. 
    40% What?

    iPhone 8 Plus - $799
    iPhone X - $999

    That's only 25% more.

    You can't compare the X to the 8.  The X has a much bigger screen.  Its like crying that the 100 inch TV cost so much more than the 60 inch TV.
    Yes we can compare the X to the 8 because both have the same screen width: just 375 logical pixels. Stop fooling yourself.
  • Reply 127 of 436
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    sog35 said:
    rattlhed said:
    Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X?  64GB and 256GB?  What happened to 128GB?  Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone.  Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive.  Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing.  No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model.  I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models.  bummer.
    paying $50 more for 128 additional GB is a great deal.

    If a 128GB phone was available it would have been $1099.   With more 4k video and larger photo's you will be happy you bought the 256GB phone.
    Which is why Apple does it. Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
    Nonsense. There's a low-end capacity, and a high-end (4x more). Which do you need? Low end needs? Great, get the low-end capacity. High-end needs? Great, get the high-end capacity for 150 more. Which type of user are you?
    Just maybe he was the one in the middle?

    You know, low, mid, high?

    It's upsell. Trying to spin it any other way is foolish IMO.
    Not half as foolish as an Android user trying to bag on Apple on an Apple site all day, but that's just my opinion.

    Let me revise my terms -- Apple sells three other models (7, 6s, SE) that have options for 32gb. 32gb, which is by definition the low-end capacity. The new 8 and X are flagships phones and come in 64gb and 256gb. 64 is double the low-end capacity and is by definition medium-capacity, and 256gb is high-capacity. Thus the flagship devices come in medium- and high-capacity only. So now that they've eliminated low-end on the flagship devices, you're going to complain about there not being a mid-medium-capacity? That's beyond reason.

    It's just proof that no matter what, people will complain. Even if they're using Android knockoffs and have no intention to buy any of the new devices.

    avon b7 said:

    sog35 said:
    rattlhed said:
    Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X?  64GB and 256GB?  What happened to 128GB?  Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone.  Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive.  Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing.  No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model.  I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models.  bummer.
    paying $50 more for 128 additional GB is a great deal.

    If a 128GB phone was available it would have been $1099.   With more 4k video and larger photo's you will be happy you bought the 256GB phone.
    Which is why Apple does it. Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
    Nonsense. There's a low-end capacity, and a high-end (4x more). Which do you need? Low end needs? Great, get the low-end capacity. High-end needs? Great, get the high-end capacity for 150 more. Which type of user are you?
    Just maybe he was the one in the middle?

    You know, low, mid, high?

    It's upsell. Trying to spin it any other way is foolish IMO.
    Not half as foolish as an Android user trying to bag on Apple on an Apple site all day, but that's just my opinion.

    Let me revise my terms -- Apple sells three other models (7, 6s, SE) that have options for 32gb. 32gb, which is by definition the low-end capacity. The new 8 and X are flagships phones and come in 64gb and 256gb. 64 is double the low-end capacity and is by definition medium-capacity, and 256gb is high-capacity. Thus the flagship devices come in medium- and high-capacity only. So now that they've eliminated low-end on the flagship devices, you're going to complain about there not being a mid-medium-capacity? That's beyond reason.

    It's just proof that no matter what, people will complain. Even if they're using Android knockoffs and have no intention to buy any of the new devices.

    It's still upsell. However you paint it.
    No it isn't. It's medium- (64) and high-capacity (256) on the flagship devices. They've eliminated low-capacity (32). Now you want to redefine medium (64) as "low" and introduce a mid-medium as the new "medium".

    Classic goalpost moving. Per usual. 

    Love how Android users work so hard to find reasons to dislike products they aren't going to use.
    edited September 2017 tmaybb-15brucemc
  • Reply 128 of 436
    MplsP said:

    For those bemoaning the "High Price" of the iPhone X...

    A loaded iPhone 8 Plus costs $45.75 per month under the IUP.  A loaded iPhone X costs $56.16 -- $10.41 per month more for the very best!
    That's exactly how companies want you to think about it - divide what you're paying into smaller, more frequent amounts to make it seem smaller. The bottom line is you're still paying over 40% more to get an iPhone X vs an iPhone 8. Even more than that if you finance it with a credit card like a lot of people unfortunately do. 
    Is there a problem with divide what you're paying into smaller, more frequent amounts to make it seem smaller doable?

    Do you pay rent or a mortgage, utilities, car payments, your phone bill?

    To me, it makes more sense to spread the $1,150 over 24 months (interest free loan) and invest the remaining $thousand and change in something like AAPL. At the end of 24 months I can resell the iPhone for $250-$400.

    Just like you pay for your phone service monthly, why shouldn't you pay for the device that consumes that service on a monthly basis?


    Back in the days of yesteryear -- circa 1980-1998, pre cellular phones (pre millennials):

    We lived in Pasadena, CA.  
    • We paid a monthly rental to Bell Telephone  (now AT&T again) of about $30-$45 per month for each phone (we never got ownership of the phones). 
    • The whole family had to take turns using the phones
    • We were charged per month for each phone line 
    • We paid a one time charge (AIR ~$50-$75) for installation of each phone line.
    • We also paid for the monthly telephone service (it was called Land Line Service)
    • We got unlimited free calls within our telephone area code
    • We were charged extra per minute (rounded up) for calls to nearby area codes, e.g. South Pasadena, Glendale, Los Angeles, etc.
    • The charges were at different rates for inter-state, intra-state, long-distance and overseas calls
    • You could transmit data via a modem at each end -- roughly $200-$300 for a 300-1200 baud modem (30-120 characters per second)
    • The phones were not mobile -- they were tethered to the wall, and we, in turn were tethered to them.
    So, every month we received this mondo phone bill of, say $200-$300 (1990 dollars), often more!


    Today, our last phone bill was $237 for 5 lines and data.  We each pay $46 for our iPhone under the iUP.

    We're paying $467 per month ($237 + 5 * 46) for our phone service.  That's $467 in 2017 dollars -- about equivalent to $250 in 1990 dollars.

    For those few dollars, we each have:
    • a private, secure iPhone
    • phone, messaging and data services
    • access to worldwide calling, messaging, data
    • a state-of-art camera
    • mapping, location services, Find Friends, etc.
    • access to the internet
    • a computer
    • mobility
    • unprecedented convenience

    Looks like a great deal to me...  If we judiciously use it as a tool instead of it using us:


    tmaySpamSandwichStrangeDaysalandailnetmagefirelock
  • Reply 129 of 436
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    sog35 said:
    rattlhed said:
    Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X?  64GB and 256GB?  What happened to 128GB?  Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone.  Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive.  Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing.  No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model.  I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models.  bummer.
    paying $50 more for 128 additional GB is a great deal.

    If a 128GB phone was available it would have been $1099.   With more 4k video and larger photo's you will be happy you bought the 256GB phone.
    Which is why Apple does it. Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
    Nonsense. There's a low-end capacity, and a high-end (4x more). Which do you need? Low end needs? Great, get the low-end capacity. High-end needs? Great, get the high-end capacity for 150 more. Which type of user are you?
    Just maybe he was the one in the middle?

    You know, low, mid, high?

    It's upsell. Trying to spin it any other way is foolish IMO.
    Not half as foolish as an Android user trying to bag on Apple on an Apple site all day, but that's just my opinion.

    Let me revise my terms -- Apple sells three other models (7, 6s, SE) that have options for 32gb. 32gb, which is by definition the low-end capacity. The new 8 and X are flagships phones and come in 64gb and 256gb. 64 is double the low-end capacity and is by definition medium-capacity, and 256gb is high-capacity. Thus the flagship devices come in medium- and high-capacity only. So now that they've eliminated low-end on the flagship devices, you're going to complain about there not being a mid-medium-capacity? That's beyond reason.

    It's just proof that no matter what, people will complain. Even if they're using Android knockoffs and have no intention to buy any of the new devices.

    avon b7 said:

    sog35 said:
    rattlhed said:
    Am I the only one that's disappointed with the memory configurations on both the iPhone 8 and X?  64GB and 256GB?  What happened to 128GB?  Last year was the first year I opted for a 128GB iPhone.  Seemed like a perfect price point between plenty of storage without being too expensive.  Dropping 128 this year is quite disappointing.  No way I can go backwards to 64, so if I want to upgrade I have to opt for the most expensive model.  I really think the phones should have been 128 (for the price of 64) and 256. I guess this is the way they get all those millions of phones they sold in the last couple of years at 128 to opt for the most expensive models.  bummer.
    paying $50 more for 128 additional GB is a great deal.

    If a 128GB phone was available it would have been $1099.   With more 4k video and larger photo's you will be happy you bought the 256GB phone.
    Which is why Apple does it. Phil Schiller’s middle name is upsell.
    Nonsense. There's a low-end capacity, and a high-end (4x more). Which do you need? Low end needs? Great, get the low-end capacity. High-end needs? Great, get the high-end capacity for 150 more. Which type of user are you?
    Just maybe he was the one in the middle?

    You know, low, mid, high?

    It's upsell. Trying to spin it any other way is foolish IMO.
    Not half as foolish as an Android user trying to bag on Apple on an Apple site all day, but that's just my opinion.

    Let me revise my terms -- Apple sells three other models (7, 6s, SE) that have options for 32gb. 32gb, which is by definition the low-end capacity. The new 8 and X are flagships phones and come in 64gb and 256gb. 64 is double the low-end capacity and is by definition medium-capacity, and 256gb is high-capacity. Thus the flagship devices come in medium- and high-capacity only. So now that they've eliminated low-end on the flagship devices, you're going to complain about there not being a mid-medium-capacity? That's beyond reason.

    It's just proof that no matter what, people will complain. Even if they're using Android knockoffs and have no intention to buy any of the new devices.

    It's still upsell. However you paint it.

    And you obviously haven't been paying attention today. I have been praising Apple, in part, just for what you mention (the new price spread). I even defended the notch and haven't had anything much to say on the price of the X.

    Yee ha!
    Why do you think Apple needs the 6S? Who cares if there is a $200 price difference between the SE and the 7? What happened to good > better > best?
  • Reply 130 of 436
    glynh said:
    So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
    So you can look at the screen to read time, date, battery, signal strength, notifications etc without unlocking it?

     Maybe Apple should offer an option to go directly to the Home screen with FaceID for those that want it.


    Yes they should. If I want to look at my lock screen I just push the sleep/wake button. Does that no longer work with the X?
  • Reply 131 of 436
    glynhglynh Posts: 108member

    bitmod said:
    The constant face scanning is actually a major turn-off and not something I want. 
    It's actually a lot faster and more convienent to click the home button while pulling the phone out of your pocket and straight to your ear, than bringing the phone to your forward looking face and swiping up before bringing to your ear. 
    Surely the only reason you would want to take it out of your pocket and bring it straight to your ear is to answer a phone call and for that it would be ringing with a rather large Slide to Answer button wouldn't it?
    netmage
  • Reply 132 of 436
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 1,594member
    How do you answer a phone call at night?  Do you have to open the light?
  • Reply 133 of 436
    tzeshan said:
    How do you answer a phone call at night?  Do you have to open the light?
    infrared scan.
    SpamSandwichmacseekernetmage
  • Reply 134 of 436
    glynhglynh Posts: 108member
    schlack said:
    Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow. That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells. I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
    $1150? You're the lucky one!

    Here in the UK the 256GB will be £1149 and a further £199 if you want AppleCare+ bringing the total to £1348 or the dollar equivalent of $1780

    I'm betting there are countries out there where it might be more expensive still...
  • Reply 135 of 436
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    MplsP said:

    For those bemoaning the "High Price" of the iPhone X...

    A loaded iPhone 8 Plus costs $45.75 per month under the IUP.  A loaded iPhone X costs $56.16 -- $10.41 per month more for the very best!
    That's exactly how companies want you to think about it - divide what you're paying into smaller, more frequent amounts to make it seem smaller. The bottom line is you're still paying over 40% more to get an iPhone X vs an iPhone 8. Even more than that if you finance it with a credit card like a lot of people unfortunately do. 
    40% What?

    iPhone 8 Plus - $799
    iPhone X - $999

    That's only 25% more.

    You can't compare the X to the 8.  The X has a much bigger screen.  Its like crying that the 100 inch TV cost so much more than the 60 inch TV.
    Yes we can compare the X to the 8 because both have the same screen width: just 375 logical pixels. Stop fooling yourself.
    No you are the one fooling yourself.

    The X screen has much more volume than the iPhone 8.

    You act like only screen width matters.
    You talk like a merchant selling legumes in a village market. This is not the number of pixels that matters, the aspect ratio matters much more than the number of pixels.
  • Reply 136 of 436
    Let’s talk about the camera new ability: portrait lightning and 3D scene. Are there any real world tests yet?
  • Reply 137 of 436
    jdwjdw Posts: 567member
    sog35 said:
    And no, the Notch will not disappear next year.  It will take at least 3-5 years to hide all those sensors behind the display.
    3-5 years as opposed to 2-4 years or 1-3 years or 10-12 months or another "let's pull it from the sky" figure?  Can any of us here imagine Steve Jobs ever saying something ridiculous like that at Apple in the design stage? "Well guys, I'm not gonna put an extra burden on you because I know it's gonna take 3 to 5 years before you're able to do that."  Ha!

    Where there's a will, there's always away.  The one thing about Steve Jobs was he helped motivate that "will."   Thinking like yours merely defends the status quo.  Stop thinking about where the Puck has been and start racing toward where you know it will be. 

    iPhone XI... No Notch. No Compromises.
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 138 of 436
    loquitur said:
    avon b7 said:
    sog35 said:
    jasenj1 said:
    sog35 said:
    The iPhone X is the most amazing single piece of hardware EVER. EVER.
    It doesn't have a memory card slot. Maybe not important to you, but important to many.
    nope.

    memory card slot is important to a very very small percentage of iPhone users.
    I think opinions would change if Apple added a memory card option and justified it by saying the technology wasn't right for us until now. ;-)
    You mean like http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/2236.html? (As an old geezer, I like the "ear trumpet jack" best!

    At the risk of dating myself -- found this when cleaning the garage:



    SpamSandwichavon b7melgrossfastasleepjasenj1
  • Reply 139 of 436
    melgross said:
    REALLY? REALLY? People were CLAPPING when Schiller told them that you now can't access your MONEY or any of your personal info without FACIAL RECOGNITION?

    Are you still going to be clapping when the government takes away YOUR ABILITY TO ACCESS YOUR OWN MONEY because it considers you a "terrorist threat" or says you have an "illegal" political view?



    Steve Jobs would NEVER have condoned this BIG BROTHER crap, you know it. This is the creepiest thing since the fingerprint BS in the iPhone 5, 6 and 7. Apple is changing for sure, and not in a good way.

    I don't want to have to wear a watch that reports how healthy I am and how much money I have to "the cloud." You might as well ask how much SLAVE LIFE a person has left in them.
    You really live up to your screen name don’t you?

    what are you talking about? Do you even know? Apple is going for more security, not less. You know that you don’t have to use any biometric security if you don’t want to. You can stick to the password.
    "Rumor has it" that Apple couldn't get the fingerprint scanner in the display technology to work, so I'm hoping this means a future version of this phone actually will have such a capability. A combination of Touch ID, Face ID and password would be pretty hard to beat.
    netmage
  • Reply 140 of 436
    What I find very cool, but which wasn't hyped much by Apple at the event yesterday (perhaps due to difficulty keeping up with the demand for the X as it is without mentioning it), is that the iPhone X is only a little larger than the non-plus iPhone 6,7,8's. Per Apple's iPhone 7 and X tech specs, the iPhone X is only 5.3mm taller, 3.8mm wider, and 0.6mm thicker than non plus iPhones (get your mm rulers out and see just how small a difference that is!). Yet it has a 5.8" diagonal screen compared to the iPhone Plus's 5.5" diagonal. So, you get a screen larger than the Plus's, but with nearly the body size of the smaller iPhones. That's exciting to me, since I found the non-plus iPhone 6,7,8 sizes to be the sweet spot for holding in the hand with decent screen size. So, I'd love to jump up to that size if it wasn't for the price. Still love my 6s. (Hopefully iOS 11 doesn't bog it down.)
    jmgregory1GG1netmage
Sign In or Register to comment.