Sanctum1972

cg27 said:

StrangeDays said:

cg27 said:

And while Apple Watch now can alert you to noisy high decibel surroundings, I hope this is merely a baby step towards Apple offering...

full fledged AirPod hearing aids,

which I’ll call AirPodEars.

Only Apple has the cachet to overnight rid the perceived stigma of wearing hearing aids (which prevents many folks from even considering them, let alone the high cost of purchase and battery replacements).

Not only that, by virtue of Apple designing them they could actually be fashionable, just as eye glasses are.

And coupled with AppleWatch and/or iPhone control, the AirPodEars would be far simpler, superior and cheaper to purchase and operate.

Come on Apple, I’m sure this must be in development.

A friend has an iPhone app-controlled hearing aid. It is so small I didn’t even notice it until he pointed it out. That being said, I have zero expectation for Apple to build this first-party. Just like how they don’t build printers, scanners, or many other specialty accessories. 

I don’t disagree that Apple hearing aids might seem too niche, however:

+ On average 10,000 Americans turn 65 EVERY day, and this baby boom generation will need plenty of hearing help

+ It bears repeating: Only Apple has the cachet to make hearing aids acceptable to the vast majority with no stigma, so much so that they wouldn’t need to be hidden or tiny but rather obvious like AirPods, thus allowing better and rechargeable battery life without the need for expensive battery replacements

+ Replacing $300 AirPodEars would be a lot cheaper than the $2000 or more aids cost now (each for the better ones)

+ In fact, if they look identical to AirPods or AirPod Pros, no one would know if they were regular AirPods or hearing enhancers.

- The only negatives I can see for Apple is that the demographic tends to be older (thus generally less hip) and having lead the way with iPods and everyone blasting music in their ears Apple might be overly sensitive to being associated with helping cause the hearing loss in the first place

+ Apple could offer these readily.  Medical device approvals shouldn’t be that difficult with Apple’s R&D capability 

+ Apple would be admired for turning a major stigma inside out (from scourge to fashion statement, if one so chooses)

I'm born deaf myself with severe hearing loss on the left and profound on the right, wearing only one digital hearing aid on the left side. I've literally grown up with the HA with a box in a shirt pocket with wires  ( think headphones ) from the late 70s all the way to BTE ( behind the ear ) design and can say that digital hearing aids are now the standard. I loved the analog aids due to their bass and volume sound quality, not to mention that they were a lot cheaper in the range of $500-800, sometimes $1,200 for a pair at the most. However, they've been phased out mostly in favor of digital which has to be programmed by the audiologist. My current digital hearing aid is from Phonak and cost about $1,200. Just for one. Fortunately, insurance coverage was available and I have a very good audiologist. 

Also, hearing aids are considered 'medical' devices that can be covered by insurance, or if one can afford to pay in cash/credit. An Apple designed hearing aid would require approval to be covered by insurance as a medical device. My problem is with the actual design of AirPods that go right into your ear canal in contrast to the BTE design which is a lot more stable and more powerful ( think Beats Pro headphones with ear hooks ).

And you literally have to have a earmold cast for the hearing aid to fit into your ear properly. Also digital hearing aids that are controlled by an iPhone concerns me in that if you lose the phone, how do you control the HA? 

Most importantly, for a hearing aid to work for the person with hearing loss, a hearing test must be done by an audiologist to determine the level of loss and which type of HA works best. Therefore, Apple's 'one size fits all' solution won't work. Consider this. Analog hearing aids are like amplifiers but they're designed to work with someone's specific hearing loss or deafness as they all differ for each person. Trust me, I've tried the 'in your ear' hearing aid years ago and it didn't sound good to me and that was because it wasn't powerful enough to provide 'oomph' and didn't match my hearing loss. This is why I cannot use the regular EarPods that came with the iPhone as they don't fit in my ear at all and have to rely on a HATIS headset that uses telecoil to block out the background noise entirely and only focuses on the audio ( shaped like a hook a wire straight to the headphone jack  or adapter ) or use a bluetooth receiver with an 8 hour battery with a neck loop that can stream music or audio ( ie. movies, video calls, etc ) straight from any iOS device or PC. I got the receiver from the audiologist which usually costs over $100. 

Cochlear implants, OTOH, are a huge issue right now with the deaf community as an ongoing debate ( which has been viewed for years as a method of identity eugenics of sorts ) and mega expensive which I've heard horror stories about. I've seen the effects of it from a very old classmate I grew up with years ago and felt bad for him when he couldn't hear for two weeks post surgery, waiting to get proper activation. 

So in short, if you have vision needs ( ie. astigmatism or such ) with glasses, you go to an eye care professional for this. Same thing goes for hearing loss/deafness. I don't see Apple having the ability to design a hearing aid in an AirPod style design. 

And lastly, I do NOT see a practical use for AR goggles to replace the phone for the deaf or hard of hearing. Not one bit. Consider the fact that every deaf person I've known relies completely on texting or video calls to communicate. With AR goggles, it would not solve a long distance phone call as they cannot see each other. You need a camera so that they can see each other's sign language 'face to face'. Even if they're in public, I've heard stories how some have used special iOS live transcription apps to capture conversations in public to communicate. I use app such as Sign or Cardzilla where one types in large text and flashes the message across the room as you hold up the phone, especially handy in noisy environments like nightclubs or such. It works every time.

Plus, they have certain criteria when you use sign language on screen by wearing dark clothing so that the hands can be seen by contrast, especially if they're using a VRS ( video relay service ) who have call operators on screen to follow strict ASL protocol. I don't sign much as I was originally taught to speak orally in an audist program as ASL wasn't allowed at the time but these days, I'm still learning some of them to catch up and use in case of an emergency. 

But I would love Apple to build a small bluetooth device that clips on a shirt or stays tucked in clothing as a method to stream iOS music/audio to your hearing aid. There was a outdoor company ( this is the firm: https://www.outdoortechnology.com/ ) that made a rechargeable dongle with a clip and had an iPod like wheel with audio controls but with a headphone jack. Because where I live in New England, products like these are popular for outdoor activities. All you had to do was clip it to your belt or shirt and jack the old school headphones to it and walk around the house listening to music. This product came around around 2011-2012 ( I think) long before AirPods were a thing. And even if I'm driving, wind noise from the car door ( usually with closed windows ) usually masks my voice and I can't always raise Siri to access the map and I've wished there was a small bluetooth microphone to clip to my jacket so I don't have to scream for Siri.

NOTE: by the way, there are some hearing aids that are rechargeable but aren't cheap and most commonly require a battery which you can buy online or at a store, or audiologist. I use a size 675 for this and get huge packs from Amazon from a German company which is cheaper than what you get in the store. 

2nd NOTE: I want to mention that a local AR player on Ingress for iOS crossed my path a few times and once I met him in person, he had an in the ear headset for his phone to make calls. I noticed that he kept it in his ear the whole time and he mentioned that he uses it to 'pick up' the conversation with his phone that's set on the table or in front of people. I suggested he talk to an audiologist due to his hearing loss and see if he can get insurance to get a new hearing aid without relying on the headset but I haven't seen him in over a year or so. The point is that headsets such as AirPods are NOT a replacement for hearing aids. 

franklinjackcon said:

It may not have been obvious too all but Microsoft aren't actually trying to sell Windows 1.0 so a review of it probably isn't necessary

Exactly. This article or review blog was almost off the point because this was about M$ turning it into a game mentioned at Bleeding Cool. See here:

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2019/07/09/microsofts-stranger-things-3-inspired-windows-1-11-app-chock-full-of-games-galore/

That's what this is about. Windows did exist in '85 but in a different way. It was designed to be used at the store online via Windows 10. So I think whoever wrote this subjective piece didn't get the memo nor dug in further to get the actual truth in why this campaign by M$ was created. 

AppleExposed said:

I've feared this day and it's finally come.

I saw it coming and was bound to happen. Going independent is the most natural thing to do rather than be 'ball and chain' ed to Apple for life. 

AppleZulu said:

Sanctum1972 said:

davgreg said:

rcfa said:

firelock said:

If Apple offers this it will be essentially a “desktop” iPad aimed at artist studios, designers, architects, etc.

Yeah, at which point it simply should run macOS.
If you want to run iPad apps, there’s Catalyst and full-screen-mode.
The whole point of the restrictive touchUI is gone once screen sizes go up.

No, there is a niche that it would fill nicely.
The Surface Studio from MS is there. 

I would love an iPad OS desktop device that can tilt down for pencil use or be upright with all the proper connectivity and a regular power supply.

I would not mind that if that were to happen. I would rather they remove the camera from the iPad Pro, block all games, and make it 'creator' edition only for visual art/design, photography, etc. That would be a nice counter to the Surface Studio. If one wants to shoot images or videos, use the iPhone or actual camera and transfer the images to it. Not that hard. 

Why would Apple look to a competitor's product that isn't remotely as successful as their own iPads and MacBooks and come to the conclusion that they'd like to ditch their approach in favor of that? It seems pretty clear that Apple doesn't see a need to "counter" a less successful product.

Also, you don't have to use the camera or install any games on your iPad if you don't want to. What purpose would it serve for Apple to remove features from their pro model that are available on their less expensive devices? I can only imagine the mocking internet chatter if Apple released a "creator" edition iPad Pro while claiming that removing the camera from it is a special feature for artists and photographers. That makes a lot of sense.

The idea is that a larger iPad Pro that's 17 inches works better for creatives due to large screen estate while the Surface Studio is about 25 inches ( screen size ) because one can view an entire document all at once and with better multi-tasking. An iPad mini wouldn't cut it, not even a 9.7 iPad. 11 inches or 12.9 is close but needs to go bigger. And the reason I suggest removing the camera is to keep the cost down and make the iPad more 'focused' and less distracting in terms of workflow. It doesn't make sense to shoot videos or images from an iPad camera when in most cases the iPhone lens appear to be better. So why bother? The only very few people I've seen who dared use an iPad to shoot videos are parents at the local fencing tournaments, based on my experience. The others used their phones or actual camera gear, even a GoPro. 

There's nothing 'less successful' about the competitor's products because they're already out in the market and I know a professional artist who uses an XP-Pen has a 16 inch screen ( Wacom competitor ) which is cheaper and does get the job done. It doesn't make it 'less successful'. It just has its specialized use which works for him. Have you ever seen comic book artists in conventions? I have and they draw from 11 x 17 illustration boards which is the industry standard. It's old school but they still use them. And yes, I'm aware some are already working with digital tools between Wacom, Apple, XP-Pen, Huion, etc. I used the same board myself and even worked on Clip Studio Paint app on the desktop and iOS platform with custom page settings. 

Metriacanthosaurus said:

"Ive was dissatisfied with how Apple has concentrated more on operations than on design since Tim Cook took over from the late Steve Jobs"

I mean...this could not have been more clear or more obvious to everyone on the outside looking in. No one wants to admit or acknowledge it...but the exact worst thing that could have happened (Apple losing its "DNA", the spirit that Steve Jobs infused) is exactly what happened in short order from Tim taking over. Operations above all else. It really is that simple. Apple continues to pretend outwardly that this has not happened, because their legacy depends on it...but it is of course exactly, and quite simply, what happened.

Thank you! That's a major point right there that people cannot seem to grasp. 

matrix077 said:

Sanctum1972 said:

matrix077 said:

Sanctum1972 said:

matrix077 said:

foregoneconclusion said:

I find it hard to believe that Cook not visiting the design studio as often as Jobs would be "dispiriting" to Ive. It seems more likely that Ive just missed having Jobs provide his own specific input. It's not like Ive isn't smart enough to understand that Cook isn't going to be a clone of Jobs and may not believe he has as much to offer when it comes to providing critiques of the designs. That's not actually a standard skill for business executives.

Exactly. If Cook, who’s not design-savvy, visiting the studio as often as Jobs it will be more harmful than beneficial, or at best just pointless. We operate best when we operate on what we know best. 

And Ive wouldn’t listen to Cook’s input on design anyway so what’s the point?

The point is Cook is the CEO and he's supposed to sign off on the final design (s ) of the products involved. That was the problem. I saw this coming YEARS ago. It seems the blame should be on Cook and Ive both. Because of Cook's corporate culture behavior and lack of interest in the products, Ive didn't get the feedback he needed. It's very important for a CEO to grow a pair of balls to keep someone like Ive in check but Cook didn't do that. 

And I'm going to quote what another source said that wasn't mentioned on this forum: 

• Ive was “dispirited” by Tim Cook who “showed little interest in the product development process,” according to sources speaking to the WSJ. This helps explain why Cook, who comes from operations, sometimes appears to be seeing products for the first time in the hands-on area after Apple events (like the photo at the top of this article).

The bolded part is shocking to me. How the F could a CEO see products for the first time in a hands-on area after events. For the FIRST TIME?!?? If this is true, this is extremely disturbing. Ive shouldn't be blamed due to being dispirited on Cook's lack of interest or minimized visitations to his design department. I had a feeling this is what has been happening over the years. I'm a professional creative and can smell 'creative burnout' by observing things like this. It's not about operating best when we operate on what we know best. It's about feedback, communication and getting it right. Cook wasn't doing that and so delegated Ive to give the 'green light' on his own to the final versions. It basically tells me that Cook is lazy and didn't want to deal with the creative responsibilities which is now handed over to Jeff Williams. 

The buck stops at the CEO's desk. Everything that goes on in a company must be approved by the top. However, I don't agree with Ive's idea about turning the Watch into a fashion accessory so it's hard to tell what exactly he had in mind to keep the device relevantly updated on a regular basis to retain value compared to the Health/Fitness focused aspects of today's Watch. The Health/Fitness approach is what should've been done in the very first place. That's on Cook and it's his fault for not reigning Ive in to keep in check and get real. Cook's lassez-faire approach is what screwed the whole thing up. And stacking half of his executive staff with Operations backgrounds is a huge mistake on Cook according to a recent Tweet by Ryan Jones.

Despite the lack of design or creative background that Cook has, it's his job to go down to the design department to see what they were working on in advance and put them in check in case of any issues. You have a CEO who has no creative vision nor ability to SEE the flaws or have any interest in the 'creative process' of the products. Because of Ive's dispirited and low morale at his job, Cook is part of the problem. 

Cook can not operate as Jobs. He can only operate as he is. The point is people who wants Cook to do everything as Jobs did doesn’t put their brains to do the job. 
From what happened we can assume that Cook think Williams is a much better person to handle this ID situation than him and I think he’s right. 

If that was the case considering the bolded part, why didn't Cook delegate that ID situation to Williams in the FIRST place, knowing that he didn't have the creative background? Why did he wait so long to do this now? It means one thing. He wasn't the right guy in the first place. If he were this operationally smart, he would've done so originally years ago. I'm not suggesting Cook is like Jobs but rather he isn't the right guy. Apple needs a 'products' guy right now, not a bean counter. The CEO's job is to 'green light' the final versions of the products way in advance and if there are flaws, he needs to call it out and get them back to the drawing board. That's what Jobs did. 

Now you didn’t make sense. Do you want Ive to report to Williams?

Consider this. The current heads of Industrial Design and Human Interface now both report to Williams and not Cook. Making Jony a Chief Design Officer was a mistake, IMO, that is if he wasn't comfortable making the final calls and not the CEO. Tim should've had Jony stay in ID and then keep him reporting directly to him for final approval. Or if Cook wasn't confident in his creative feedback or showing lack of interest in products, he should've had Williams oversee Jony's department and the Interface team in the first place without promoting Ive to CDO. At least Williams was apparently interested in the products' development process. 

slurpy said:

Sanctum1972 said:

slurpy said:

radarthekat said:

I’m so looking forward to this launch and the months following.  It will break again in the hands of consumers.  And again and again.  And for those who don’t have mechanical issues with the beast, they will have in their hands a too small phone display when folded and a too square tablet when unfolded.  A compromised product design in a market where a product’s physical design has for years been touted as essential to success.  Good luck, Sammy.  You’re gonna need plenty.  

Not to mention that Android is absolutely and positively complete shit as a tablet OS. You're really getting the worst of all worlds here. A massively thick smartphone with huge bezels that looks like it came out in 2003, and a trash tablet. But hey, it folds. 

AT LEAST SAMSUNG HAS BALLS, NOT LIKE APPLE WHO CANT INNOVATE ANYMORE /s

Samsung has balls but it's not the only one. Other competitors are getting bolder unlike Apple that's slow as molasses these days. Sure, they may follow the mantra 'slow and steady wins the race' but it can also bite them in the ass. You can't take too long to 'get it right' so Apple needs to get moving with whatever X product they're stuck with in the pipeline. However, keep in mind that Samsung has been trying to move away from Android and use the open source Tizen OS, but ended up with Samsung One OS if I recall. 

And also foldable phones are not a new concept. LG, if I recall, did something similar with a side flip phone called the enV that opens up like a book with a physical keyboard and held horizontally way back in 2003-2004. In that sense, Samsung is going back to that idea but with a smartphone this time around using a foldable screen. Even T-Mobile's Sidekick was designed in similar fashion which was quite popular with deaf people that I know ( Blackberry ultimately became the favorite when Sidekick got phased out until the era of smartphones with touch screens became standard ). 

"Slow as molasses these days"? Sorry, but you're completely full of shit and objectively wrong. Did you watch the last WWDC? Does that look like a company sitting on their ass? Not sure how anyone and assess the breadth and depth of those announcements and claim Apple is "slow as molasses". They're more efficient and productive than they've ever been, and that doesn't have to be defined as shitting out a new hardware form factor every month just for the hell of it. What product out there is actually more advanced than the latest iPhone in a meaningful and overall way? Apple makes serious products, backed by a serious vision and serious software. It knows that what it sells is purchased by hundreds of millions of people, and it doesn't lightly take introducing something new to market that shits on that by being half-baked, simply for having temporary bragging rights. It seems that's exactly what you want Apple to do. Every aspect of their devices, including the performance, biometrics, screen technology, software, ecosystem, reliability, design, etc is still the very best of class. You may have products that have higher specs in a couple areas, (screen resolution, etc) but I have yet to see anything as a superior overall package, and since you haven't named anything, I doubt you can either. All their mobile products, including the iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, and their included technologies,  are still the very best of class. 

I have no doubt Apple has folding shit in their labs. I also have no doubt that they won't release anything until they have an extremely convincing argument to consumers about why that product deserves to exist, and why it is meaningful. That's the way it should be. It seems you're happy for them to panic and release trash as a reactionary measure to others. This is what makes people lose consumer confidence in a company and its products. Apple's software, services, ecosystem, and hardware updates in the last couple of years have proven that they're not "slow as molasses" and that they're firing on all cylinders. No doubt they have some mind-blowing stuff in the pipeline, but I'll trust their release schedule compared to trolls like you without an ounce of patience or perspective, nor any understanding of what has always made Apple great. Your post could have been written anytime in the last 20 years (Apple has always been disciplined and intentional in releasing products) and it would always have been dead-wrong, as it is today. People said the same thing when the market was being flooded with shitty tablet, then shitty smart watches, demanding why Apple didn't have anything to offer. It's because what they were working on, and what they eventually released, was a leap ahead of anything else.

Well done for never having understood a thing about Apple or how it operates. 

As for " firing on all cylinders", that's a Tim Cook line. I astutely remember him saying that several years back. Are you defending him? As for being a troll, hardly because I've been around Apple products for years since the 80s. I've used Macs for my creative/design work in the last 25 years now. Even if they don't appear to panic, they hide it under the hood and mind you, Apple is not made of stone so it's bound to have cracks. All companies do. 

The problem with Apple is with their current narrative on products and if you think Apple is going to be this eternally perfect, think again. It's made up of flesh and bone that can wither away, quit, or retire. About 10 years from now, most of the 'old guard' will be long gone and the company's direction might lose sight of its vision once again. I'm not one of those Apple ass kissers and am realistic enough to see that it won't stay on top forever. Have they been slow as molasses? I think it has been. Take a look at how long it took them to get rid of the butterfly keyboard, as an example, out of consumer complaints and backtrack to what made the keys work well. 

There are some Apple products that don't impress me that could've been done much better the FIRST time around. They did screw things up design wise in the last several years with form over function for the most part. 1st gen iPad Pro, for instance, had the Pencil charge by the port when the Surface Pro has a magnetic strip on the side for it. The iPad Pro came out after Tim Cook publicly poo poohed the Surface Pro, green lights that particular 1st gen design, and then about 3 years later, Apple comes out with a new model that has a magnetic Pencil to hold on the side, EXACTLY the way the Surface Pro had the first time around. That's a 180 degree reactive turn by Apple. Why would Cook pooh pooh the Surface Pro and then 3 years later, go the magnetic charge on the side for the Pencil and go with a flat edge hardware design that harkens back to the iPhone 4/5? And look at iPad OS. Why didn't they do this in the first place for the iPad Pro? This tells me that something was wrong under the hood at the company. I watch how it behaves, not how much it made or how its stock is doing. 

And now with Jony leaving, the question remains whether Apple will return back to function over form or stay the course, so we'll know by next year or so, give or take, if what Jony said about his disappointment with Cook not caring about the product design process is true. I don't care how much money Apple has in its coffers or how its stocks are doing. All I care about is what's going on underneath the hood in the company. 

So in that sense, will they come out with a foldable device? Probably. But by then, they'll likely be late to the game which may or may not work out. Just because it's Apple doesn't mean each of their products will turn out to be gold and instant hits. That halo effect has been worn out. How Apple behaves publicly is all optics and PR. Look at how Apple is on its knees begging the White House to be exempt from the trade war over their Mac Pro situation recently. Or look at how Apple just apparently disbanded the AR team, some time after Tim Cook proclaimed AR as having great potential in one interview. 

In the end, Apple is going to have challenges ahead. 

beowulfschmidt said:

dysamoria said:

This is still an entirely pointless concept. No one needs a foldable screen and no one will make one that isn’t compromised in one (or multiple) way or other.

A "folding" phone could be good, if "folding" including the capability to roll up in the the form factor of a pen or such.  Like a better version of the comm devices in Gene Roddenberry's Earth Final Conflict series of a few years back.

Earth Final Conflict? I remember it. Excellent show. Don't forget WestWorld, which I haven't seen yet but heard about the 'foldable phone' in the series that's eerily close to reality.

radarthekat said:

I just want to say something about the price, and maybe bring back some memories for those who’ve been around a while.   I remember the day, as clear as if it were yesterday, when John Jurewicz (author of UltraVision) showed up at work one morning with his new Compaq 386 portable.  A cool $12k+.

There's one problem with that. This is a portable computer for $12,000. NOT a desktop. There is a difference. And yes I do remember the high prices back in the 80s and 90s.