This is what is called an "official" rumor. These people and their rumors make me sick. Are they really all that desperate for their five "seconds" of fame? There's only a few more months to go for Apple to announce a finished product, so what's the need for this pre-announcement nonsense. It doesn't really mean anything at all. I just don't see who this early information actually helps. Oh, yeah, article writers.
Serious question. If you are so against rumors why are you on a rumor site?
If it's the same clunky-ass optics as in the google version:
Thats a big nope for me.
Four years later?? Highly doubtful. Of course components have improved in the years since. Even the followup Google Glass Enterprise Edition used much more compact hardware in a folding design.
Fake. Someone on reddit says they work for Foxconn and this has to be true? No, it doesn't. This is just a person looking for attention.
I'm one of the moderators on /r/apple. If this employee is hoaxing us, then his evidence is realllllly convincing. We're convinced this guy is a legitimate source based on what he provided us.
My view of what is "legitimate" with factory workers? I need to see photos of the parts from the factory floor that the worker is talking about. - What I will not trust are just the words of some worker who thinks they know everything that Jony Ive is going to do.
I don't believe the AR project will be axed. On the contrary, I actually think it is their most important future core tech project. Bigger than the car in many ways. More core Apple. The biggest tech question here is what level of imperfection they can accept before release.
Light field lens for tight integration between real world and 3D, wide field of view, light weight, great user experience, shades you wouldn't mind keep wearing etc. We have no ideas of how long they've been working on the project.. but none of the competition has got anything within reach yet, it seems. So it's hard to think that Apple somehow has a futuristic lead in the AR hardware technology. I hope they do.
I don't believe the AR project will be axed. On the contrary, I actually think it is their most important future core tech project. Bigger than the car in many ways. More core Apple. The biggest tech question here is what level of imperfection they can accept before release.
Light field lens for tight integration between real world and 3D, wide field of view, light weight, great user experience, shades you wouldn't mind keep wearing etc. We have no ideas of how long they've been working on the project.. but none of the competition has got anything within reach yet, it seems. So it's hard to think that Apple somehow has a futuristic lead in the AR hardware technology. I hope they do.
Do any of their acquistions or patents lead to any potential conclusions in that field? I believe Cook said AR was important, and the last time I recall him making a such a statement was about "the cloud" which led to iCloud and fairly seamless integration between multiple devices.
Do any of their acquistions or patents lead to any potential conclusions in that field? I believe Cook said AR was important, and the last time I recall him making a such a statement was about "the cloud" which led to iCloud and fairly seamless integration between multiple devices.
I searched a bit and found some listed acquisitions in 2016, one of which directly involved AR, another involving emotional analyse tools of face expressions... Then I lost the links and needed to take care of kids, lol..
Foxconn does do research and development, very likely including prototypes, in addition to assembly.
At least for Apple products, R&D is done by Apple. Foxconn only does "research" that pertains to the production of a part. In other words, they might do some optimization on how to produce a certain part faster, to cut cost, but calling it research and development is bit of a stretch.
Foxconn does do research and development, very likely including prototypes, in addition to assembly.
At least for Apple products, R&D is done by Apple. Foxconn only does "research" that pertains to the production of a part. In other words, they might do some optimization on how to produce a certain part faster, to cut cost, but calling it research and development is bit of a stretch.
Do any of their acquistions or patents lead to any potential conclusions in that field? I believe Cook said AR was important, and the last time I recall him making a such a statement was about "the cloud" which led to iCloud and fairly seamless integration between multiple devices.
I searched a bit and found some listed acquisitions in 2016, one of which directly involved AR, another involving emotional analyse tools of face expressions... Then I lost the links and needed to take care of kids, lol..
Why bring back the glowing logo? The solid logo on Macbooks/iPhones looks better, uses no power, is cheaper to manufacture and is one less part to break.
MacBook glowing logos never used extra power. Just a hole in the metal case where the LCD backlight shined through. I miss them.
The reason I've thought they omitted it in the last models was that they planned to move to OLED at some point during this design's lifespan, precluding any display backlight at all.
Foxconn does do research and development, very likely including prototypes, in addition to assembly.
At least for Apple products, R&D is done by Apple. Foxconn only does "research" that pertains to the production of a part. In other words, they might do some optimization on how to produce a certain part faster, to cut cost, but calling it research and development is bit of a stretch.
That is the type of RD that only get your busines into the country. It is not meant to produce anything. It is there just to get Chinese govt satisfied.
Foxconn does do research and development, very likely including prototypes, in addition to assembly.
At least for Apple products, R&D is done by Apple. Foxconn only does "research" that pertains to the production of a part. In other words, they might do some optimization on how to produce a certain part faster, to cut cost, but calling it research and development is bit of a stretch.
That is the type of RD that only get your busines into the country. It is not meant to produce anything. It is there just to get Chinese govt satisfied.
Guessing again? Did you bother to look into those Foxconn research facilities I linked for you? I did. You also probably missed the additional facility Foxconn is building right next door to Apple's October-announced Shenzhen R&D center. For what purpose you may ask? To more quickly build prototypes for upcoming Apple products. http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/AC/Foxconn-plans-new-facility-next-to-Apple-s-in-Shenzhen-sources
Foxconn does do research and development, very likely including prototypes, in addition to assembly.
At least for Apple products, R&D is done by Apple. Foxconn only does "research" that pertains to the production of a part. In other words, they might do some optimization on how to produce a certain part faster, to cut cost, but calling it research and development is bit of a stretch.
That is the type of RD that only get your busines into the country. It is not meant to produce anything. It is there just to get Chinese govt satisfied.
Guessing again?
I know that, because I know people working in a couple of those foreign
centers, and I know what type of job they do.. They still do useful things, but mostly it is just internal support for devs/testing or other things. Any of that could be simply moved completely to the main facility, but then you don't get to claim those nice benefits from a local gov-t. All major companies do have facilities in other countries, if that gives them preferential treatment from local gov-ts. It is just business. So, a company will calls its facility - R&D Center, if that is what that local gov-t wants to hear. But having that vs having an actual full-fledged R&D facility that legitimately produces important and needed results and development, are two completely different things. For the latter, there is California (in Apple's case). You can have just one facility that does 100% research in Cali, or you can have Cali do 99.5%, and China do .5%. No harm done, no important data stolen, but a company gets patronage of the big boys from the Chinese gov-t (who in turn can claim that they bring in investments and foreign companies, prosperity, yada yada) and is able to sell a lot of product.
So to repeat: FoxConn is not the simple contract manufacturer you and some others may think they are.
They aren't. It is just they do need to research better methods of production and ways to optimize cost/time. These are all legitimate concerns, but they have nothing to do with actual design of some particular product Foxconn produces.. I am pretty sure, Apple simply got a dedicated team at Foxconn working to smooth out a transition from small batch production (at Apple during dev stage) into a large scale production(Foxconn) without losing quality or without cranking a whole bunch of defective parts/units.
It makes more sense for Foxconn to have that team, instead of Apple, since it is Foxconn who owns production equipment and has a lot more expertise in manufacturing and assembling.
Just now getting to this after the keynote, didn't want to ruin anything for myself. Seems like Apple finally found KGIs leaker and is having him flush out all the remaining leaked info. I'm guessing we won't hear many more insights from KGI from this point forward.
Those AR glasses seem like they were full fledged. If Apple is likely going to cancel them, it makes me think that there might not be any reasonable way to make AR glasses. It seems like a long shot (physics/physiology-wise) to be able to have a clear image 1/2 inch from your eyeball that integrates with your long-distance vision without straining or needing the viewer to constantly focus and refocus. Even under optimal circumstances, that's gotta put a huge strain on those ciliary muscles.
Just now getting to this after the keynote, didn't want to ruin anything for myself. Seems like Apple finally found KGIs leaker and is having him flush out all the remaining leaked info. I'm guessing we won't hear many more insights from KGI from this point forward.
Those AR glasses seem like they were full fledged. If Apple is likely going to cancel them, it makes me think that there might not be any reasonable way to make AR glasses. It seems like a long shot (physics/physiology-wise) to be able to have a clear image 1/2 inch from your eyeball that integrates with your long-distance vision without straining or needing the viewer to constantly focus and refocus. Even under optimal circumstances, that's gotta put a huge strain on those ciliary muscles.
The source utterly, completely missed everything at the WWDC keynote.
Just now getting to this after the keynote, didn't want to ruin anything for myself. Seems like Apple finally found KGIs leaker and is having him flush out all the remaining leaked info. I'm guessing we won't hear many more insights from KGI from this point forward.
Those AR glasses seem like they were full fledged. If Apple is likely going to cancel them, it makes me think that there might not be any reasonable way to make AR glasses. It seems like a long shot (physics/physiology-wise) to be able to have a clear image 1/2 inch from your eyeball that integrates with your long-distance vision without straining or needing the viewer to constantly focus and refocus. Even under optimal circumstances, that's gotta put a huge strain on those ciliary muscles.
The source utterly, completely missed everything at the WWDC keynote.
...so I don't think he is the leak source for KGI either.
Comments
I need to see photos of the parts from the factory floor that the worker is talking about.
- What I will not trust are just the words of some worker who thinks they know everything that Jony Ive is going to do.
Light field lens for tight integration between real world and 3D, wide field of view, light weight, great user experience, shades you wouldn't mind keep wearing etc. We have no ideas of how long they've been working on the project.. but none of the competition has got anything within reach yet, it seems. So it's hard to think that Apple somehow has a futuristic lead in the AR hardware technology. I hope they do.
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2016/12/26/apple-reportedly-partners-with-foxconn-on-rd-facilities-in-china-and-indonesia/
For a company that doesn't do R&D they sure have a heckuva lotta patents
http://www.patsnap.com/resources/company-innovation-reports/foxconn
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/02/06/taiwans-largest-patent-acquirer-continues-pursuit-of-electronic-innovations/id=54337/
and at least a couple of research centers
http://tass.com/economy/879736
http://apctt.org/nanotech/node/19
They aren't just a contract manufacturer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Apple
http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/AC/Foxconn-plans-new-facility-next-to-Apple-s-in-Shenzhen-sources
In addition to that Foxconn is also getting into chip research and design, partnering with Softbank-owned ARM.
http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/AC/Foxconn-to-enter-chip-market-partner-with-ARM-on-design-center-in-Shenzhen ;
...and that's in addition to their Sharp acquisition where I seriously doubt they'll halt research and development of new display technologies.
BTW the Tass announcement of a Russian Foxconn R&D center would hardly be intended to satisfy the Chinese government.
So to repeat: FoxConn is not the simple contract manufacturer you and some others may think they are.
All major companies do have facilities in other countries, if that gives them preferential treatment from local gov-ts. It is just business.
So, a company will calls its facility - R&D Center, if that is what that local gov-t wants to hear.
But having that vs having an actual full-fledged R&D facility that legitimately produces important and needed results and development, are two completely different things. For the latter, there is California (in Apple's case).
You can have just one facility that does 100% research in Cali, or you can have Cali do 99.5%, and China do .5%. No harm done, no important data stolen, but a company gets patronage of the big boys from the Chinese gov-t (who in turn can claim that they bring in investments and foreign companies, prosperity, yada yada) and is able to sell a lot of product.
It makes more sense for Foxconn to have that team, instead of Apple, since it is Foxconn who owns production equipment and has a lot more expertise in manufacturing and assembling.
Those AR glasses seem like they were full fledged. If Apple is likely going to cancel them, it makes me think that there might not be any reasonable way to make AR glasses. It seems like a long shot (physics/physiology-wise) to be able to have a clear image 1/2 inch from your eyeball that integrates with your long-distance vision without straining or needing the viewer to constantly focus and refocus. Even under optimal circumstances, that's gotta put a huge strain on those ciliary muscles.