- maury markowitz
- Last Active
> It's a shame if this is true, because the HomePod does sound amazing
Sure, but my Yamaha stereo with two nice Mirage speakers sounds better. And that setup cost the same as a Home Pod.
It's just too expensive. This is an accessory, it can't cost as much as a full-blown iPad. And everyone knows it.
If you can't do it $199, don't do it. It's not like someone was forcing them to sell one.
So this is great and all, but maybe they should get Siri to work? Last night I tried to get it to call the local pizza shop here in Ajax Ontario, outside of Toronto...
Me: Call pino's pizza
Siri: do you mean Pinot's Pizza in Hamburg?
M: Call pino's pizza in ajax
S: Do you mean (something in toronto)
M: Call pino's pizza in ajax
S: I didn't find any matching restaurants.
Go to google and type in "pinos pizza ajax". Now I'm entirely happy to give Siri the confusion between "pinos" and "pinots". But go to google and type in "pinots pizza ajax".
Maps often completely ignores your current location when making suggestions. I'm sure you've all seen it suggest a location on the far side of the planet when you make even a trivial spelling mistake. Add to that that minor spelling mistakes are impossible to avoid when using voice, and that Apple's location database is based on Yelp and thus hopelessly limited, and you get the horrible mess that is Siri+Maps.
So let's see them fix that, then I'll start reading their other papers.
No amount of 3rd party data is ever going to match Google unless someone starts and PoI database to rival it. Google can crawl the web for a first-pass and then get updates, something no one else is doing (Bing?).A simple example: There are about four Tim Horten's within two miles of my house. Maps knows only two of them. This is not good enough.
"Each speaker is able to connect to up to two sources at the same time, though pair with eight overall."
Can you be more specific as to exactly what this means?
I want to be able to play from my phone, my wife's phone or the iPad.
I've been burned by speakers that only paired with a single device at a time and was annoying to re-pair. Something that "just works" is something I'd buy.
AppleInsider said:It's not clear why the endpiece would have to be so big, though one possibility is the presence of an authenticator chip.
Bluetooth audio is an alternative, but its quality is generally weaker and wireless headphones are often more expensive than wired options.
As to the second statement, sorry, that's utterly bogus. BT sound quality is far beyond the quality of the physical mechanism itself - in other words there is no actual advantage to a cable. You can get really nice sounding BT earphones for $20 on Amazon, ones that are seriously competitive with Apple's in-ear headphones, let alone the buds.
The first time I used a BT headset, from Aukey for $18 if you're looking, I immediately asked myself why anyone would live with a cable. I no longer will, and no one else should either. They snag, get statically charged, pull the phones out of your ear, and demand you be beside your phone. That last one might sound like a joke, but now when i work out I leave my phone on the counter and do a complete workout without touching it once.
sirdir said:Well I guess Cook thinks he makes more money with iPhones. But one thing is true: The less products I can get from Apple, the easier it will be to switch altogether. Windows isn't as bad as it used to be, Android isn't as bad as it used to be... And Apple is on a dangerous way.
Look, cables are a low-margin business too, but you HAVE to sell them. Maybe a router isn't the same level as "have to", but it doesn't seem that far away from it either.
Apple almost died once because they got hyper focused on money. No lesson learned, apparently.
So what exactly do these trackers do, other than heart rate and time? For instance, what does starting an Outdoor Bike run do, exactly?
I assume they have to be started manually, and stopped. So is this just a glorified notepad with HRM recording if that's turned on?