You won't answer the key question because we both know the answer.
Oh, you really were serious about those stupid questions. Fine, you asked, "Are you actually trying to tell me if the watch sold 15-20m units they wouldn't have released the numbers?"
One second, I need to gather myself after laughing so hard at such ridiculousness.
[several minutes later]
Yes, I believe that if Apple sold 15-20 million of any new HW product in a 9 week span of time I'm sure they would they made a statement.
What you fail to understand with your stupid query is that 1) it would be impossible to have sold that many of any new Apple HW category in that time frame regardless of people willing to buy it because the supply was not there, 2) Apple sold all the supply they had of Watch, 3) that they clearly did state during their quarterly call that i) it exceeding their exceptions, ii) exceeding the iPad and iii) the iPhone for that same time on the market, and iv) that sales were growing in speed, and 4) that they set this a year ago so there was no a) "going back on anything" or b) "hiding sales after the product flopped because Cook is too worried about gay stuff", 5) that the other hardware category saw a dramatic spike in revenue, and 6) that your stupid fucking hypothetical in no one way means they A) would done so or that it means — as you foolishly claim — that the sales are bad.
What I'm envisioning is my Watch + Siri as a voice-based remote:
"Hey Siri: close my garage door."
"Hey Siri: raise the indoor temperature by 3 degrees."
"Hey Siri: make my dog stop barking."
(That last one will depend on Apple's future release of PetKit.)
That offers a slight shortcut, but it's still not ideal. One of the biggest issues with Siri isn't that she doesn't correctly hear what you say, but that she isn't smart enough to correctly parse what you mean as easily as a dedicated voice activated device could. For example, if the remote control for the next Apple TV had a microphone and button that relayed to the Apple TV that talked to the Siri servers then a command like "Play" "Open ESPN," or "Set reminder to record Review with Forrest MacNeil" might make sense, but if we're talking about Siri on Watch, iPhone or iPad those same commands would have to be parsed for context first. "Play" may assume you want the Music app (or whatever the last app on that device was doing) to play, and not the TV. "Open ESPN" might not mean the channel on the TV, but the app on the device you're using for the remote, and "Set reminder to record Review with Forrest MacNeil" may assume you want to simply put an item into the Reminders app that will sync with iCloud, not a DVR setting.
Siri will get more intelligent but I don't see her being able to get that much smarter than quickly that would make a dedicated remote with voice commands obsolete. In fact, my Amazon Echo is worlds better than Siri and a big part of that it's a stationary device that you only interact with in a particular way.
Some possibilities:
The new AppleTV comes with a enhanced remote -- with the new iPod as an optional, more advanced remote.
The new AppleTV remote sends voice, via WiFi, to the AppleTV -- where the Siri analysis is performed -- better recognition, faster, more precise
The AppleWatch could also send voice to the AppleTV as above. Same with iPhone, iPad, iPod.
Siri is called differently to perform different classes of functions, e.g. Hey Siri; Hey TV; Hey Home ... I'll let you guys do the fanout *
While not likely until AppleWatch 2, the new Xpoint chip could be used -- giving the Watch a significant RAM/Storage boost using less battery. The Xpoint chip is designed for things like pattern recognition -- and that's what Siri do!
* you to AppleTV voice input: "Hi-Ho TVrino, Play me some Youtube"
Near the peak. The Rolls Royce Merlin was the peak.
Actually, the Griffon was a follow up to the Merlin and was the last engine type of the family in production and saw a long service life in the Avro Shackleton.
It was considerably more powerful than the Merlin and had a counter-rotating prop version developed though it didn't go into production.
Oh, you really were serious about those stupid questions. Fine, you asked, "Are you actually trying to tell me if the watch sold 15-20m units they wouldn't have released the numbers?"
One second, I need to gather myself after laughing so hard at such ridiculousness.
[several minutes later]
Yes, I believe that if Apple sold 15-20 million of any new HW product in a 9 week span of time I'm sure they would they made a statement.
What you fail to understand with your stupid query is that 1) it would be impossible to have sold that many of any new Apple HW category in that time frame regardless of people willing to buy it because the supply was not there, 2) Apple sold all the supply they had of Watch, 3) that they clearly did state during their quarterly call that i) it exceeding their exceptions, ii) exceeding the iPad and iii) the iPhone for that same time on the market, and iv) that sales were growing in speed, and 4) that they set this a year ago so there was no a) "going back on anything" or b) "hiding sales after the product flopped because Cook is too worried about gay stuff", 5) that the other hardware category saw a dramatic spike in revenue, and 6) that your stupid fucking hypothetical in no one way means they A) would done so or that it means — as you foolishly claim — that the sales are bad.
Well I would respond to that but your abusive language and having to report it I really shouldn't.
Oh, you really were serious about those stupid questions. Fine, you asked, "Are you actually trying to tell me if the watch sold 15-20m units they wouldn't have released the numbers?"
One second, I need to gather myself after laughing so hard at such ridiculousness.
[several minutes later]
Yes, I believe that if Apple sold 15-20 million of any new HW product in a 9 week span of time I'm sure they would they made a statement.
What you fail to understand with your stupid query is that 1) it would be impossible to have sold that many of any new Apple HW category in that time frame regardless of people willing to buy it because the supply was not there, 2) Apple sold all the supply they had of Watch, 3) that they clearly did state during their quarterly call that i) it exceeding their exceptions, ii) exceeding the iPad and iii) the iPhone for that same time on the market, and iv) that sales were growing in speed, and 4) that they set this a year ago so there was no a) "going back on anything" or b) "hiding sales after the product flopped because Cook is too worried about gay stuff", 5) that the other hardware category saw a dramatic spike in revenue, and 6) that your stupid fucking hypothetical in no one way means they A) would done so or that it means — as you foolishly claim — that the sales are bad.
Well I would respond to that but your abusive language and having to report it I really shouldn't.
You reported me because I used a "curse word" or because I called out your stupid comments accurately as being stupid. Note: I never once referred to you as stupid, only your comments.
PS: Another stupid thing you did was quote the comment you reported :facepalm:
The new AppleTV comes with a enhanced remote -- with the new iPod as an optional, more advanced remote.
The new AppleTV remote sends voice, via WiFi, to the AppleTV -- where the Siri analysis is performed -- better recognition, faster, more precise
The AppleWatch could also send voice to the AppleTV as above. Same with iPhone, iPad, iPod.
Siri is called differently to perform different classes of functions, e.g. Hey Siri; Hey TV; Hey Home ... I'll let you guys do the fanout *
1) That is what I'm expecting.
2) Would it use WiFi or BT, since BT would use less power and B Tfor Siri from the Apple Watch to iPhone seems to work plenty fast. In fact, it feels like it works even faster and better, which doesn't really make sense and yet I and many other Watch owners have experienced that.
4) That's certainly a possibility, and one that I like, but my gut feeling is Apple doesn't want to have a bunch of different "Hey …" services in place.
While not likely until AppleWatch 2, the new Xpoint chip could be used -- giving the Watch a significant RAM/Storage boost using less battery. The Xpoint chip is designed for things like pattern recognition -- and that's what Siri do!
Off topic for this thread but since you brought it up I do wonder if XPoint is fast enough to be used RAM for video and apps, and if its number of write cycles is high enough to be used that way.
Oh, you really were serious about those stupid questions. Fine, you asked, "Are you actually trying to tell me if the watch sold 15-20m units they wouldn't have released the numbers?"
One second, I need to gather myself after laughing so hard at such ridiculousness.
[several minutes later]
Yes, I believe that if Apple sold 15-20 million of any new HW product in a 9 week span of time I'm sure they would they made a statement.
What you fail to understand with your stupid query is that 1) it would be impossible to have sold that many of any new Apple HW category in that time frame regardless of people willing to buy it because the supply was not there, 2) Apple sold all the supply they had of Watch, 3) that they clearly did state during their quarterly call that i) it exceeding their exceptions, ii) exceeding the iPad and iii) the iPhone for that same time on the market, and iv) that sales were growing in speed, and 4) that they set this a year ago so there was no a) "going back on anything" or b) "hiding sales after the product flopped because Cook is too worried about gay stuff", 5) that the other hardware category saw a dramatic spike in revenue, and 6) that your stupid fucking hypothetical in no one way means they A) would done so or that it means — as you foolishly claim — that the sales are bad.
Well I would respond to that but your abusive language and having to report it I really shouldn't.
You reported me because I used a "curse word" or because I called out your stupid comments accurately as being stupid. Note: I never once referred to you as stupid, only your comments.
PS: Another stupid thing you did was quote the comment you reported :facepalm:
You reported me because I used a "curse word" or because I called out your stupid comments accurately as being stupid. Note: I never once referred to you as stupid, only your comments.
PS: Another stupid thing you did was quote the comment you reported :facepalm:
No I reported you because of your overall condescending attitude towards many of the members here. Also you tend to use the word "stupid" a lot when talking about myself or others. The curse word was just an added reason. I have really thick skin so your attitude really has no impact on me. If you can't debate an issue rather then attacking someone because you don't agree with their standpoint then you and several others on this site should simple avoid the internet. I watched you and @anantksundaram tag team a member in this thread yesterday, the protection the internet is a great thing for guys like you two because if you said half the stuff you say online to someone in person you would get your heads knocked off your shoulders.
Little men sitting behind their computers, that about sums you two up.
I have really thick skin so your attitude really has no impact on me.
And yet you've done nothing but demonstrate the opposite.
If you can't debate an issue rather then attacking someone because you don't agree with their standpoint then you and several others on this site should simple avoid the internet.
I did debate you, as seen by repeatedly quoting and pointing out where and why your comments were foolish… just as I'm doing now.
Little men sitting behind their computers, that about sums you two up.
You just referred to two posters as "little men." That is an ad hominem personal attack. The intelligent solution would be two argue why you feel that mine and [@]anantksundaram[/@]'s rebuttals are incorrect, even attempting to point out why you feel our positions on the Apple Watch are stupid, but you've instead chosen to attack us. Do you not see the irony is crying wolf and then being the wolf? Now let me demonstrate to you what having a thick skin actually means: I'm not going to report your personal attack because I don't care if you attack me.
The new AppleTV comes with a enhanced remote -- with the new iPod as an optional, more advanced remote.
The new AppleTV remote sends voice, via WiFi, to the AppleTV -- where the Siri analysis is performed -- better recognition, faster, more precise
The AppleWatch could also send voice to the AppleTV as above. Same with iPhone, iPad, iPod.
Siri is called differently to perform different classes of functions, e.g. Hey Siri; Hey TV; Hey Home ... I'll let you guys do the fanout *
1) That is what I'm expecting.
2) Would it use WiFi or BT, since BT would use less power and B Tfor Siri from the Apple Watch to iPhone seems to work plenty fast. In fact, it feels like it works even faster and better, which doesn't really make sense and yet I and many other Watch owners have experienced that.
4) That's certainly a possibility, and one that I like, but my gut feeling is Apple doesn't want to have a bunch of different "Hey …" services in place.
While not likely until AppleWatch 2, the new Xpoint chip could be used -- giving the Watch a significant RAM/Storage boost using less battery. The Xpoint chip is designed for things like pattern recognition -- and that's what Siri do!
Off topic for this thread but since you brought it up I do wonder if XPoint is fast enough to be used RAM for video and apps, and if its number of write cycles is high enough to be used that way.
2) it could be BT but not BTLE (slow, small packet size)
4) alternately: "Siri set myEcobee3 to 65 degrees"; "Siri Show TV ..."; "Siri I'm home"; "Siri Play Music ..."; "Siri What's a boustrophedonic printer?" ...
As I Understand the Xpoint it would be more than fast enough to be used as RAM on the Apple Watch -- IDK of any Watch Video & most apps are now limited by the communication between the Watch and iPhone. There is not enough Storage/RAM on the current Apple Watch to make more than a few resident 3rd-party apps feasible.
The writes on Xpoint can be more granular - write a bit or a byte - as apposed to read a block then rewrite the block. It is purported to have a much longer life (and Apple has Anobit tech to extend that even more).
It may, or may not be OT for this thread -- there is nothing that says that Apple needs/plans an annual refresh cycle for the Watch -- or even a tick/tock cycle. I suspect that at least 1 new Apple Watch will be on the market by Mar 2016 -- and could use Xpoint memory if available (or be upgradeable when available)
As I Understand the Xpoint it would be more than fast enough to be used as RAM on the Apple Watch -- IDK of any Watch Video & most apps are now limited by the communication between the Watch and iPhone. There is not enough Storage/RAM on the current Apple Watch to make more than a few resident 3rd-party apps feasible.
The writes on Xpoint can be more granular - write a bit or a byte - as apposed to read a block then rewrite the block. It is purported to have a much longer life (and Apple has Anobit tech to extend that even more).
It may, or may not be OT for this thread -- there is nothing that says that Apple needs/plans an annual refresh cycle for the Watch -- or even a tick/tock cycle. I suspect that at least 1 new Apple Watch will be on the market by Mar 2016 -- and could use Xpoint memory if available (or be upgradeable when available)
Here are some reviews of XPoint and Apple Watch that you (and others) may not have yet seen…
You reported me because I used a "curse word" or because I called out your stupid comments accurately as being stupid. Note: I never once referred to you as stupid, only your comments.
PS: Another stupid thing you did was quote the comment you reported :facepalm:
No I reported you because of your overall condescending attitude towards many of the members here. Also you tend to use the word "stupid" a lot when talking about myself or others. The curse word was just an added reason. I have really thick skin so your attitude really has no impact on me. If you can't debate an issue rather then attacking someone because you don't agree with their standpoint then you and several others on this site should simple avoid the internet. I watched you and <a data-huddler-embed="href" href="/u/29883/anantksundaram" style="display:inline-block;">@anantksundaram</a>
tag team a member in this thread yesterday, the protection the internet is a great thing for guys like you two because if you said half the stuff you say online to someone in person you would get your heads knocked off your shoulders.
Little men sitting behind their computers, that about sums you two up.
If you're referring to me I appreciate your concern but I've had plenty of discussions with [@]SolipsismY[/@], and [@]anantksundaram[/@] throughout the years, and sometimes it's amicable and sometimes heated but I have the utmost respect for them. The truth is that I was in the wrong.
No I reported you because of your overall condescending attitude towards many of the members here. Also you tend to use the word "stupid" a lot when talking about myself or others. The curse word was just an added reason. I have really thick skin so your attitude really has no impact on me. If you can't debate an issue rather then attacking someone because you don't agree with their standpoint then you and several others on this site should simple avoid the internet. I watched you and <a data-huddler-embed="href" href="/u/29883/anantksundaram" style="display:inline-block;">@anantksundaram</a>
tag team a member in this thread yesterday, the protection the internet is a great thing for guys like you two because if you said half the stuff you say online to someone in person you would get your heads knocked off your shoulders.
Little men sitting behind their computers, that about sums you two up.
Aw... Can't tell the difference between you and what you say being called "stupid"? Because there is a subtle difference, trust me. People who get emotionally entangled in their own opinions cannot tell the difference, and take criticism of their opinions as criticisms of them personally.
But if you're complaining about a "condescending attitude," well, frankly, grow a thicker skin. This is the internet. The big league, not training camp, to use a baseball analogy. If you aren't comfortable having your posts challenged, maybe this isn't the right place for you. There are plenty of anti-Apple forums out there full of like-minded people who will help you confirm your biases and ignore your flawed arguments. Perhaps someone else can recommend one.
The moderators know the difference between thinned-skinned complainers who flag posts because they can't take what they dish out, versus mean-spirited, intentionally disruptive, hate speech, or personal attacks. In other words, they have common sense.
I invite you flag which ever posts you feel fits this criteria. Including this one. I trust the mods to make the right choice.
... but I've had plenty of discussions with [@]SolipsismY[/@], and [@]anantksundaram[/@] throughout the years, and sometimes it's amicable and sometimes heated but I have the utmost respect for them.
Ditto! And usually, we all try to be on-topic and well reasoned.
As I Understand the Xpoint it would be more than fast enough to be used as RAM on the Apple Watch -- IDK of any Watch Video & most apps are now limited by the communication between the Watch and iPhone. There is not enough Storage/RAM on the current Apple Watch to make more than a few resident 3rd-party apps feasible.
The writes on Xpoint can be more granular - write a bit or a byte - as apposed to read a block then rewrite the block. It is purported to have a much longer life (and Apple has Anobit tech to extend that even more).
It may, or may not be OT for this thread -- there is nothing that says that Apple needs/plans an annual refresh cycle for the Watch -- or even a tick/tock cycle. I suspect that at least 1 new Apple Watch will be on the market by Mar 2016 -- and could use Xpoint memory if available (or be upgradeable when available)
Here are some reviews of XPoint and Apple Watch that you (and others) may not have yet seen…
PS: Now that I had any doubt, but I'm glad you and your family enjoyed Tim's Vermeer.
I've seen both those posts & they are rather vague in some areas (speed, latency, durability and costs).
AIR, on another AI thread it was asserted that by replacing the SRAM/Flash storage (no DRAM on the Apple Watch) -- they could increase Storage to ~256 GB and RAM to ~8GB while reducing battery power.
I've watched Tim's Vermeer 2/12 times -- my daughter & 1 grandson looked in ...
I've been to several major museums -- Louvre, Prado, etc. I never saw a Vermeer. It is so much advanced of the paintings of the day. Totally impressed!
You won't answer the key question because we both know the answer. So instead of a long post I will make it simple. Given Cook's previous statement about not releasing Apple Watch numbers are you actually going to try and tell me if the numbers were a benefit to Apple and it's shareholders he would have not done a 180 and released the numbers? That's a fairly simple question.
Second I was making several hypotheses : "a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation."
That come to a fairly reasonable conclusion given the limited evidence. Apple has a problem right now and that problem is Apple needed the Apple Watch to be their next blockbuster product. Right now as far as the market is concerned Apple is a one hit wonder right now and that wonder is the iPhone. Apple is the iPhone and if the iPhone numbers slump at some point so will our stock.
Of course the defenders on the forum will come siting numbers about growth, profits and how big and power Apple is, and all that is true. However at one time it was also true for Microsoft, GM, IBM, GE Capital and many others.
Blah blah blah. How can you come to a valid conclusion with limited evidence? And might I add it's not really evidence as Apple didn't release numbers. Btw, smart investors rather have $$$ than units sold as a metric.
Blah blah blah. How can you come to a valid conclusion with limited evidence? And might I add it's not really evidence as Apple didn't release numbers. Btw, smart investors rather have $$$ than units sold as a metric.
I know, right? "iPhone is Apple's one hit wonder" is the new "Apple is doomed" narrative. As if Apple wasn't profitable before 2007. And Apple not releasing Watch numbers only "proves" what they already believe. Funny how that works. Funny how they lack the self awareness to see it.
I know, right? "iPhone is Apple's one hit wonder" is the new "Apple is doomed" narrative. As if Apple wasn't profitable before 2007. And Apple not releasing Watch numbers only "proves" what they already believe. Funny how that works. Funny how they lack the self awareness to see it.
Stock dropped because the iPhone didn't reach the number Wall Street wanted. It didn't drop because Mac, iPad or "other sales" didn't met expectations. The "Apple is doomed" got old a long time ago find a new catch phrase.
Blah blah blah. How can you come to a valid conclusion with limited evidence? And might I add it's not really evidence as Apple didn't release numbers. Btw, smart investors rather have $$$ than units sold as a metric.
Easy others are coming to the opposite conclusion with the same limited evidence. That's why it's a hypothesis. Well I'm sure your idea of a smart investor is rather subjective.
Aw... Can't tell the difference between you and what you say being called "stupid"? Because there is a subtle difference, trust me. People who get emotionally entangled in their own opinions cannot tell the difference, and take criticism of their opinions as criticisms of them personally.
But if you're complaining about a "condescending attitude," well, frankly, grow a thicker skin. This is the internet. The big league, not training camp, to use a baseball analogy. If you aren't comfortable having your posts challenged, maybe this isn't the right place for you. There are plenty of anti-Apple forums out there full of like-minded people who will help you confirm your biases and ignore your flawed arguments. Perhaps someone else can recommend one.
The moderators know the difference between thinned-skinned complainers who flag posts because they can't take what they dish out, versus mean-spirited, intentionally disruptive, hate speech, or personal attacks. In other words, they have common sense.
I invite you flag which ever posts you feel fits this criteria. Including this one. I trust the mods to make the right choice.
I believe I have a fairly thick skin, I'm sure my ignore list doesn't even come close to yours. I flag posts rarely but I do if they are a violation. Funny how the little group is coming out to defend each other and you are saying I don't have thick skin? So if the mods have common sense why are you posting this too me? Clearly they will decide what are violations and what aren't.
Comments
Oh, you really were serious about those stupid questions. Fine, you asked, "Are you actually trying to tell me if the watch sold 15-20m units they wouldn't have released the numbers?"
One second, I need to gather myself after laughing so hard at such ridiculousness.
[several minutes later]
Yes, I believe that if Apple sold 15-20 million of any new HW product in a 9 week span of time I'm sure they would they made a statement.
What you fail to understand with your stupid query is that 1) it would be impossible to have sold that many of any new Apple HW category in that time frame regardless of people willing to buy it because the supply was not there, 2) Apple sold all the supply they had of Watch, 3) that they clearly did state during their quarterly call that i) it exceeding their exceptions, ii) exceeding the iPad and iii) the iPhone for that same time on the market, and iv) that sales were growing in speed, and 4) that they set this a year ago so there was no a) "going back on anything" or b) "hiding sales after the product flopped because Cook is too worried about gay stuff", 5) that the other hardware category saw a dramatic spike in revenue, and 6) that your stupid fucking hypothetical in no one way means they A) would done so or
Some possibilities:
While not likely until AppleWatch 2, the new Xpoint chip could be used -- giving the Watch a significant RAM/Storage boost using less battery. The Xpoint chip is designed for things like pattern recognition -- and that's what Siri do!
* you to AppleTV voice input: "Hi-Ho TVrino, Play me some Youtube"
AppleTV: "Here ya' go:"
[VIDEO]
Actually, the Griffon was a follow up to the Merlin and was the last engine type of the family in production and saw a long service life in the Avro Shackleton.
It was considerably more powerful than the Merlin and had a counter-rotating prop version developed though it didn't go into production.
Oh, you really were serious about those stupid questions. Fine, you asked, "Are you actually trying to tell me if the watch sold 15-20m units they wouldn't have released the numbers?"
One second, I need to gather myself after laughing so hard at such ridiculousness.
[several minutes later]
Yes, I believe that if Apple sold 15-20 million of any new HW product in a 9 week span of time I'm sure they would they made a statement.
What you fail to understand with your stupid query is that 1) it would be impossible to have sold that many of any new Apple HW category in that time frame regardless of people willing to buy it because the supply was not there, 2) Apple sold all the supply they had of Watch, 3) that they clearly did state during their quarterly call that i) it exceeding their exceptions, ii) exceeding the iPad and iii) the iPhone for that same time on the market, and iv) that sales were growing in speed, and 4) that they set this a year ago so there was no a) "going back on anything" or b) "hiding sales after the product flopped because Cook is too worried about gay stuff", 5) that the other hardware category saw a dramatic spike in revenue, and 6) that your stupid fucking hypothetical in no one way means they A) would done so or
Well I would respond to that but your abusive language and having to report it I really shouldn't.
You reported me because I used a "curse word" or because I called out your stupid comments accurately as being stupid. Note: I never once referred to you as stupid, only your comments.
PS: Another stupid thing you did was quote the comment you reported :facepalm:
1) That is what I'm expecting.
2) Would it use WiFi or BT, since BT would use less power and B Tfor Siri from the Apple Watch to iPhone seems to work plenty fast. In fact, it feels like it works even faster and better, which doesn't really make sense and yet I and many other Watch owners have experienced that.
4) That's certainly a possibility, and one that I like, but my gut feeling is Apple doesn't want to have a bunch of different "Hey …" services in place.
Off topic for this thread but since you brought it up I do wonder if XPoint is fast enough to be used RAM for video and apps, and if its number of write cycles is high enough to be used that way.
Stupid is as stupid does, no?
You reported me because I used a "curse word" or because I called out your stupid comments accurately as being stupid. Note: I never once referred to you as stupid, only your comments.
PS: Another stupid thing you did was quote the comment you reported :facepalm:
No I reported you because of your overall condescending attitude towards many of the members here. Also you tend to use the word "stupid" a lot when talking about myself or others. The curse word was just an added reason. I have really thick skin so your attitude really has no impact on me. If you can't debate an issue rather then attacking someone because you don't agree with their standpoint then you and several others on this site should simple avoid the internet. I watched you and @anantksundaram tag team a member in this thread yesterday, the protection the internet is a great thing for guys like you two because if you said half the stuff you say online to someone in person you would get your heads knocked off your shoulders.
Little men sitting behind their computers, that about sums you two up.
And yet you've done nothing but demonstrate the opposite.
I did debate you, as seen by repeatedly quoting and pointing out where and why your comments were foolish… just as I'm doing now.
You just referred to two posters as "little men." That is an ad hominem personal attack. The intelligent solution would be two argue why you feel that mine and [@]anantksundaram[/@]'s rebuttals are incorrect, even attempting to point out why you feel our positions on the Apple Watch are stupid, but you've instead chosen to attack us. Do you not see the irony is crying wolf and then being the wolf? Now let me demonstrate to you what having a thick skin actually means: I'm not going to report your personal attack because I don't care if you attack me.
2) it could be BT but not BTLE (slow, small packet size)
4) alternately: "Siri set myEcobee3 to 65 degrees"; "Siri Show TV ..."; "Siri I'm home"; "Siri Play Music ..."; "Siri What's a boustrophedonic printer?" ...
As I Understand the Xpoint it would be more than fast enough to be used as RAM on the Apple Watch -- IDK of any Watch Video & most apps are now limited by the communication between the Watch and iPhone. There is not enough Storage/RAM on the current Apple Watch to make more than a few resident 3rd-party apps feasible.
The writes on Xpoint can be more granular - write a bit or a byte - as apposed to read a block then rewrite the block. It is purported to have a much longer life (and Apple has Anobit tech to extend that even more).
It may, or may not be OT for this thread -- there is nothing that says that Apple needs/plans an annual refresh cycle for the Watch -- or even a tick/tock cycle. I suspect that at least 1 new Apple Watch will be on the market by Mar 2016 -- and could use Xpoint memory if available (or be upgradeable when available)
Here are some reviews of XPoint and Apple Watch that you (and others) may not have yet seen…
PS: Now that I had any doubt, but I'm glad you and your family enjoyed Tim's Vermeer.
If you're referring to me I appreciate your concern but I've had plenty of discussions with [@]SolipsismY[/@], and [@]anantksundaram[/@] throughout the years, and sometimes it's amicable and sometimes heated but I have the utmost respect for them. The truth is that I was in the wrong.
Aw... Can't tell the difference between you and what you say being called "stupid"? Because there is a subtle difference, trust me. People who get emotionally entangled in their own opinions cannot tell the difference, and take criticism of their opinions as criticisms of them personally.
But if you're complaining about a "condescending attitude," well, frankly, grow a thicker skin. This is the internet. The big league, not training camp, to use a baseball analogy. If you aren't comfortable having your posts challenged, maybe this isn't the right place for you. There are plenty of anti-Apple forums out there full of like-minded people who will help you confirm your biases and ignore your flawed arguments. Perhaps someone else can recommend one.
The moderators know the difference between thinned-skinned complainers who flag posts because they can't take what they dish out, versus mean-spirited, intentionally disruptive, hate speech, or personal attacks. In other words, they have common sense.
I invite you flag which ever posts you feel fits this criteria. Including this one. I trust the mods to make the right choice.
Ditto! And usually, we all try to be on-topic and well reasoned.
I've seen both those posts & they are rather vague in some areas (speed, latency, durability and costs).
AIR, on another AI thread it was asserted that by replacing the SRAM/Flash storage (no DRAM on the Apple Watch) -- they could increase Storage to ~256 GB and RAM to ~8GB while reducing battery power.
I've watched Tim's Vermeer 2/12 times -- my daughter & 1 grandson looked in ...
I've been to several major museums -- Louvre, Prado, etc. I never saw a Vermeer. It is so much advanced of the paintings of the day. Totally impressed!
Blah blah blah. How can you come to a valid conclusion with limited evidence? And might I add it's not really evidence as Apple didn't release numbers. Btw, smart investors rather have $$$ than units sold as a metric.
Blah blah blah. How can you come to a valid conclusion with limited evidence? And might I add it's not really evidence as Apple didn't release numbers. Btw, smart investors rather have $$$ than units sold as a metric.
I know, right? "iPhone is Apple's one hit wonder" is the new "Apple is doomed" narrative. As if Apple wasn't profitable before 2007. And Apple not releasing Watch numbers only "proves" what they already believe. Funny how that works. Funny how they lack the self awareness to see it.
I know, right? "iPhone is Apple's one hit wonder" is the new "Apple is doomed" narrative. As if Apple wasn't profitable before 2007. And Apple not releasing Watch numbers only "proves" what they already believe. Funny how that works. Funny how they lack the self awareness to see it.
Stock dropped because the iPhone didn't reach the number Wall Street wanted. It didn't drop because Mac, iPad or "other sales" didn't met expectations. The "Apple is doomed" got old a long time ago find a new catch phrase.
Blah blah blah. How can you come to a valid conclusion with limited evidence? And might I add it's not really evidence as Apple didn't release numbers. Btw, smart investors rather have $$$ than units sold as a metric.
Easy others are coming to the opposite conclusion with the same limited evidence. That's why it's a hypothesis. Well I'm sure your idea of a smart investor is rather subjective.
Aw... Can't tell the difference between you and what you say being called "stupid"? Because there is a subtle difference, trust me. People who get emotionally entangled in their own opinions cannot tell the difference, and take criticism of their opinions as criticisms of them personally.
But if you're complaining about a "condescending attitude," well, frankly, grow a thicker skin. This is the internet. The big league, not training camp, to use a baseball analogy. If you aren't comfortable having your posts challenged, maybe this isn't the right place for you. There are plenty of anti-Apple forums out there full of like-minded people who will help you confirm your biases and ignore your flawed arguments. Perhaps someone else can recommend one.
The moderators know the difference between thinned-skinned complainers who flag posts because they can't take what they dish out, versus mean-spirited, intentionally disruptive, hate speech, or personal attacks. In other words, they have common sense.
I invite you flag which ever posts you feel fits this criteria. Including this one. I trust the mods to make the right choice.
I believe I have a fairly thick skin, I'm sure my ignore list doesn't even come close to yours. I flag posts rarely but I do if they are a violation. Funny how the little group is coming out to defend each other and you are saying I don't have thick skin? So if the mods have common sense why are you posting this too me? Clearly they will decide what are violations and what aren't.