AppleInsider podcast gives hands-on impressions of iPhone X, iPhone 8 from Apple's event

Posted:
in General Discussion edited September 2017
In this special episode of the AppleInsider Podcast, Daniel Eran Dilger joins Victor to talk about the Sept. 12 event and what we saw announced: Apple Watch, AppleTV, iPhone 8 and iPhone X. Daniel breaks away from the event to give his thoughts on what's really important that we saw today.








AppleInsider editors Daniel Eran Dilger and Victor Marks discuss:
  • Apple Watch Series 3 - what it is, and Apple's foray into healthcare
  • AppleTV and 4K, and Dan makes the point that it's not just the resolution that matters, it's the other codecs that Apple has included that make the product.
  • The iPhone 8, A11 Bionic, and neural network that make it the very best phone... if not for...
  • The iPhone X. Dan makes the point that it's a huge, sweeping change for iOS users, but by pricing it higher and its potentially limited supply, people who buy one are largely buying in prepared for the changes.
The show is available on iTunes and your favorite podcast apps by searching for "AppleInsider." Click here to listen, subscribe, and don't forget to rate our show.



Listen to the embedded SoundCloud feed below:



Show note links: Follow our hosts on Twitter: @danieleran and @vmarks.

Feedback and comments are always appreciated. Please contact the AppleInsider podcast at news@appleinsider.com and follow us on Twitter @appleinsider, plus Facebook and Instagram.

Those interested in sponsoring the show can reach out to us at advertising@appleinsider.com.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 8
    I'd be very interested to see the FaceID in action in a bright outdoor environment.  Using an IR dot array for depth is a great way to make FaceID more secure but opens it up to IR contamination problems.  The more you rely on depth the more resistant you are to say a face photo but the tighter you make the tolerances the more IR pollution breaks your algorithm.  As an example, take the flash... works great in the dark but you can't tell the difference in the bright light.  The IR dot array will suffer the same problem.  In bright IR (sunlight) you'll lose a lot of definition and if your tolerances are tight (for more security) then you'll have a high fail rate.




  • Reply 2 of 8
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,368member
    I have to take a bit of issue with Dan's closing statements regarding willingness towards speed of change.

    While I'm sure there are some people that resist change for change's sake, for me it is more about whether that change is net-positive or not. I've been following (and working in) tech for over 30 years, and I've changed technologies, operating systems, and platforms many times (having to use all the major ones for most of it). I quickly adapt to change... it's part of my job and in my DNA.

    That said, I feel like a number of the changes Apple has been making over the last few years are more to benefit Apple, at a detriment to the user. In other words, net-negative, even if there is some positive in the mix. Yes, in that case, I do oppose change... and then I'm put into a position of resisting it until I'm forced to comply, rather than eagerly awaiting it.

    That sums up well what my relationship with Apple has been in the last few years. I was once a huge Apple evangelist, and had to constantly guard against being labeled a fan-boy. Now, I feel I'm too often begrudgingly buying my next Apple product because, in the end, they are still better than the competition and the pain of a total switch would be too great. And instead, I now have to defend myself against being an Apple-hater because I'm critical. I just can't win. :)
  • Reply 3 of 8
    For me it is Silver X.. Going to have my finger on The buy botton .... hope i click fast enough .?
  • Reply 4 of 8
    Great summation of the Keynote. I always learn something about Apple from Daniel.

    I knew of Apple purchasing chip design companies (I think on of the first ones was an Israeli company) but didn't make the connection that competitors would not be able to match or 'keep-up' as it were, with Apple.

    Also, the premise that other manufacturers are going to make their phones/tablets based on the cheapest components available and essentially failing to make any money! I kind of new that last one but Daniel said it more succinctly. He mentioned phones, tablets. Another example would be the tiny laptops (can't seem to think of the name). And if you want to go deeper, how about the whole PC industry of the last 25 years. Sans Apple, of course.

    Anyway... great review.
  • Reply 5 of 8
    christopher126 said: Another example would be the tiny laptops (can't seem to think of the name).

    Anyway... great review.
    NETBOOOOOOOOOKS!

    In 2008-2009, everyone was making a Netbook. The Steve Jobs quote (without looking it up) was something to the effect of, "We don’t know how to make a $500 computer that’s not a piece of junk, and our DNA will not let us ship that."

    Which isn't exactly the truth, because they did know how to make a $500 dollar computer that wasn't a piece of junk - it was an iPad. But he knew that people wouldn't see iPad as a computer (and they didn't - they saw it as a very large iPod touch, and didn't get the point of it.)
    cgWerks
  • Reply 6 of 8
    For me it is Silver X.. Going to have my finger on The buy botton .... hope i click fast enough .?
    Good luck! I'm hoping you get exactly the one you want
  • Reply 7 of 8
    cgWerks said:
    I have to take a bit of issue with Dan's closing statements regarding willingness towards speed of change.

    While I'm sure there are some people that resist change for change's sake, for me it is more about whether that change is net-positive or not. I've been following (and working in) tech for over 30 years, and I've changed technologies, operating systems, and platforms many times (having to use all the major ones for most of it). I quickly adapt to change... it's part of my job and in my DNA.

    That said, I feel like a number of the changes Apple has been making over the last few years are more to benefit Apple, at a detriment to the user. In other words, net-negative, even if there is some positive in the mix. Yes, in that case, I do oppose change... and then I'm put into a position of resisting it until I'm forced to comply, rather than eagerly awaiting it.

    That sums up well what my relationship with Apple has been in the last few years. I was once a huge Apple evangelist, and had to constantly guard against being labeled a fan-boy. Now, I feel I'm too often begrudgingly buying my next Apple product because, in the end, they are still better than the competition and the pain of a total switch would be too great. And instead, I now have to defend myself against being an Apple-hater because I'm critical. I just can't win. :)
    I think part of the issue is that we don't always see the net-positive right away.

    For example, Slide to Unlock.

    Slide to Unlock was well understood by everyone, all the way down to toddlers. Across the spectrum of people with accessibility issues and a range of capabilities. Changing it to a press on the home button and reassigning the slide to pulling over the widgets was a big change with very little net positive, unless you really like the widgets. I don't know how many people use them, but there you have it. 

    You might say that this is a change with no net positive, but it's a change that was incremental on the road to iPhone X. It made slide from every side of the device do something - camera to the right, widgets to the left, control center from below, notifications from above, here I am, stuck in the middle with...

    and it prepared us for an iPhone X where it's all gesture-based. 

    Those very young and those with different levels of abilities will have to adapt - and they're no small segment. But there's time- I think we have about 18-24 months before the whole product line is adapted to follow iPhone X in gestures. 

    If there's a net positive, it's that we gain back space for screen that was otherwise lost to physical constraints. I seem to recall Phil Schiller's keynote from about 2012 or 13 where he showed the iPad Mini up against a Nexus 7, and detailed how much of the Nexus' screen was lost to drawing the back/home/multitasking control on screen.
  • Reply 8 of 8
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,368member
    I knew of Apple purchasing chip design companies (I think on of the first ones was an Israeli company) but didn't make the connection that competitors would not be able to match or 'keep-up' as it were, with Apple.
    That's really their ace-card at this point, IMO. It used to be UX/UI back in the day, and just overall great quality products, but that has diminished some.

    vmarks said:
    I think part of the issue is that we don't always see the net-positive right away. ...
    ...
    If there's a net positive, it's that we gain back space for screen that was otherwise lost to physical constraints. ...
    I hear what you are saying, but I wonder how much of that is just our capacity to 'get used to it' vs actual gain.

    It's not that I'm opposed to getting more screen space in the same physical sized device, but I'm not sure eliminating certain things is worth it on the whole. I've really tried to get used to gestures, and I do use them (in fact, going from iPad to my SE, having to double-click the home button to see all apps running is a down-grade), but once you start to get too many, and overlapping ones, etc. it becomes more of a hinderance.

    I find the swipe from edge type, especially when the screen goes to the edge, to often be annoying and it gets confused with a non-edge swipe unless you hold the device just right and do it just right. That's fine for stuff like notifications which you might not use anyway... but I don't like it for core functionality. Physical, felt buttons, dials, etc are excellent UI elements for humans, even if they are virtual (like the more recent home buttons).

    It's a huge loss... the question is whether it's a fair trade-off for more screen.

    Also, maybe Apple has really good edge-rejection, but I think edge-to-edge screen is somewhat a liability if not. I don't want to have to be careful how I hold it so as to generate false-touches. That's one thing I don't like about the newer laptops... the trackpads are too big.

    And, I'll have to experience FaceID, but my gut tells me there's little up-side there beyond screen-space.
Sign In or Register to comment.