airnerd

This is the future Apple needs to keep exploring.  Let others try to put cameras and games on watches, I want to see more health related monitoring.  Even if it means more wearables, perhaps a ring that interacts with the watch.  Then branch from there beyond watches and move more into the home diagnostics, partner with CVS who is trying to do this as well.  Make blood monitoring more affordable and more simple.  Bring custom healthcare to the masses!

Apple is probably the only company in the world that has the capital, the user base, the trust, and the world reach to be able to do this.

gatorguy said:

airnerd said:

gatorguy said:

StrangeDays said:

gatorguy said:

Rayz2016 said:

With the feature enabled, Google sends not only what the user says when a keyword is spoken or a device is activated -- but the sound recorded a few seconds before the actuation

How can it record sounds before it was activated?

Another example of the "always listening but not sending to a server" is the song recognition feature in the new Pixels. Yes that on-board microphone is always "listening" but without a connection to Google servers. All the recognition in done directly on the device with no need for any data sent to Google. But if the user then wants to get more information, perhaps read up on the artist, see what else they've got, maybe start a radio station using that song as the basis they can actively request a server connection to accomplish those actions. 

How does the Pixel analyze heard media without talking to a server of audio fingerprints for matching? There’s a local copy of these fingerprints on every Pixel? 

Yes there is. Approx. 20 thousand of them which will get updated as new music comes out. All song recognition is done on-device with zero data sent to Google.

Sounds like data space that will continue to grow and take up more space the longer you own the phone.  Good thing the Pixel 2 has swapable storage...oops.  

How much space do you believe those song fingerprints use on the device? As for swappable storage if you are one of those that requires it in your smartphone don't buy either a Pixel2 or an iPhone. There are models that offer it but those two don't.

Space is space, and if you don't control it then that's not a good thing.  Sure all OS's will take up space but I don't use Shazam and wouldn't be too thrilled with space being consumed for a gimmick that I don't use.  
And I am not wanting expandable storage and that wasn't my point in any shape, form, or fashion.  In no way did I claim to want that, so let's avoid tangents.  

gatorguy said:

StrangeDays said:

gatorguy said:

Rayz2016 said:

With the feature enabled, Google sends not only what the user says when a keyword is spoken or a device is activated -- but the sound recorded a few seconds before the actuation

How can it record sounds before it was activated?

Another example of the "always listening but not sending to a server" is the song recognition feature in the new Pixels. Yes that on-board microphone is always "listening" but without a connection to Google servers. All the recognition in done directly on the device with no need for any data sent to Google. But if the user then wants to get more information, perhaps read up on the artist, see what else they've got, maybe start a radio station using that song as the basis they can actively request a server connection to accomplish those actions. 

How does the Pixel analyze heard media without talking to a server of audio fingerprints for matching? There’s a local copy of these fingerprints on every Pixel? 

Yes there is. Approx. 20 thousand of them which will get updated as new music comes out. All song recognition is done on-device with zero data sent to Google.

Sounds like data space that will continue to grow and take up more space the longer you own the phone.  Good thing the Pixel 2 has swapable storage...oops.  

I have multiple Echo devices in my house because I like the functionality it offers.  However the Tap I have as the main contact point is a piece of junk and while I trust (for some reason I'm not able to explain) Amazon more than Google, I don't want either really listening to me all the time. 

Which is why Apple needs to hurry up and sell the HomePod.  Then I hope they sell some cheaper slave units to the HomePod that can be used through the house like I use dots.  I trust Apple to not be listening and selling what I say or do like Amazon and google certainly will.  I don't have Nest cameras or thermostat for this very reason.  I have a smart Honeywell thermostat and other closed system web video cameras that while aren't as cool as the Google offerings I trust a lot more.  


Zero chance I would put a google listening device in my house. This is a perfect example why.  They patch was probably "oh crap, the light came on so they know we are listening.  let's patch that".

My only question about this is if Uber was allowed unprecedented access in order to make their Apple Watch app better, why does it still suck?   They should be banned just because it doesn't appear to have any use.  All I can do is tell it where I am an request a ride.  What about where I'm going or a price?  


disclaimer:  This is not hating on Apple or the AW, it's hating on Uber.