LordeHawk

franklinjackcon said:

I could be wrong but looking at the perspective, it seems a lot of content would end up with black bars along the top and bottom so you end up with the opposite problem that most tall phones have these days. Regardless, whoever can execute this well, will have a very interesting device. It seems like this would be the most logical future form factor if the price/performance/thickness is right.

You’re correct regarding the black bars, this aspect ratio is horrible for cinema formatting.  By extension, I’m not sure what this concept provides, seems like it would canabilize future Note sales.  Individuals that utilize their iPad in a professional manner, would most likely pass on this as it provides no real value outside of replacing 2 devices with 1.  As a professional, I keep my work devices separate from my personal devices and prefer a larger screen when actually doing work.  For example, my work laptop is the same screen size as my iPad Pro, which is fine for mobile work but my iPad is for my side company.  I understand some people would prefer one device, except for not running iOS, personally I prefer this technology for an iPad mini that can become large format.

This technology might never gain mass market appeal or be over quickly, due to augmented reality becoming ubiquitous.  I would rather put on a pair of glasses and have a screen of any size, on any surface, without the limitations of a physical screen.  Not to mention the numerous other features that AR allows.

Last but not least, I applaud Samsung for developing a new material for the “cover window”.  That being said, considering my background in advanced engineered materials, glass cannot currently bend enough for this concept, not even close.  That leaves a specialty plastic with a vapor deposited abrasion resistant coating.  Translated, this will not have a very long service life (max # of bends) nor will it be very durable.  There’s a reason the prototype was unveiled in the dark, and if you believe Samsung’s “design protection statement”, PM me because I have some great real estate to sell you.

You would be shocked at how behind most companies are regarding cyber security.  Very few companies can track real-time infiltration, the logs take a while to go through without expensive software.

Apple is unique, they use off the shelf firewalls and run an internally developed software package for real-time monitoring.

Its local government that irritates me.  They waste massive amounts of money and don’t stay compliant.

edit: partially redacted to not get fired

The massive amount of global red tap withstanding, Apple could do very well if they wanted to enter the 5G equipment market, or launch a global cellular network.  I would prefer an ISP/carrier that values privacy, champions security and is financially motivated to subsidize my iPhone.  Want to sell more phones every year Apple, make iPhones $300 with subsidizes or give me a monthly network credit.  You can call it Apple Wireless+, towers use the new W2000 chip, iPhones could form ad hoc mesh networks to ease congestion, and Apple’s ride hailing vehicles would act as an additional dynamic network backbone.

*mic drop
LOL

It would be a very difficult for the government to prove Apple is harming customers with their App Store. As a generalization, most of the companies complaining owe a large part of their success if not all, to Apple.

I would be interested in data to verify my assumption.

Metriacanthosaurus said:

Lol an Apple AR headset. 

Just like the Apple HDTV. 

The Apple HDTV was never a practical product and Apple’s decision was sound.  How many HDTVs will have AirPlay built in by 2025, never would have happened if Apple was a direct competitor.

AR will be a major platform in the future, it  allows the screens we look at all day to always be visible.  No going back, it’s like giving up the internet forever.  It can be done but the majority will choose AR, not many want to give up one of their senses, even if it’s virtual.

GeorgeBMac said:

hmlongco said:

tux kapono said:

Why is it that an iPhone XS is $999 and an iPhone XS Max is $1099, yet a 13” MacBook Pro is $1300 and a 16” MacBook Pro is $3200.

I have never understood why Apple needs a bigger screen to have a $1100 to $1900 premium on a laptop (85% to 146% markup), while it only needs to be a 10% markup on a phone. It’s like saying a Toyota Yaris starts at $13,000 and the next size up Corolla starts at $24,000 to $32,000. Since when is a slightly bigger version only for the most privileged? Maybe when you start giving dividends to the most privileged, who knows. 

That $1,300 13" MacBook Pro has a smaller screen, a 4-core i5, 8GB RAM, 128GB SSD, Intel Iris Plus Graphics, and 2 TB Ports.

At a $1,000 difference, a $2,300 15" MacBook Pro has a larger screen, AND a 6-core i7, 16GB RAM, 256GB SSD, Radeon Pro 555X Graphics, and 4 TB Ports. 

Seems to me you're getting just a little bit more than a larger screen for your "markup".

That's true.   It's also kind of a shame because some people want the screen without all the other stuff.   All they want to do is work on their spreadsheet.

I just plug my iPad into my MBP and use 2 screens.

Sorry if I’m ruining everybody’s bash on Apple because they make great products that cost more thread...