Dan_Dilger
About
- Username
- Dan_Dilger
- Joined
- Visits
- 54
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 3,480
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 1,583
Reactions
-
Pablo Escobar's brother sues Apple for $2.6B, alleges 'lax' iPhone security
The "foldable gold smartphones" that Escobar "launched" was a scam that offered a device for $350 that buyers never received. It turned out to be an existing folding Android with a gold sticker on it.
A second "Escobar Fold 2" turned out to be Samsung's Galaxy Fold with gold stickers on it, and a few of the devices were sent to YouTubers to create attention for the scam. Escobar was "reselling" the $1800 Galaxy Fold for $400 as part of a pyramid scheme to get sales, not to give away products for less than they cost.
Escobar isn't upset about Apple security of course, it's now "selling" an iPhone 11 Pro with the same fake gold foil remarketing scam. You can send in $499 and see if they send it to you.
TL:DR: YouTube is a fraud racket monetized by a huge search company that doesn't care.
-
How Tim Cook's Augmented Reality vision paid off for Apple
People don't have "exclusive reasons" for buying an iPhone, but Portrait Lighting was a primary feature Apple has been advertising. Apple has sold many hundreds of millions of AR-capable phones, and hundreds of millions of ultra-premium phones that specifically promote selfie-AR features.elijahg said:
Well it's rather difficult to know if anyone has bought an iPhone exclusively for AR. I honestly doubt it, even amongst hardcore Apple fans. I very much doubt anyone on the Android side has explicitly gone out and bought a phone that's good for AR either, so not sure commercially AR has been much of a success. I completely agree phone based VR is pretty dumb, though for a few dollars it was a fun fad for a short time. I agree too that the media's obsession with Apple doing VR is also dumb, it's mostly gaming and as we all know, Apple doesn't like games. Plus the announced VR stuff at WWDC '17 is essentially vaporware at this point.corrections said:
The article is examining the commercial results of two strategies to earn profits, sustain development, and continue building future products.elijahg said:I don't know that AR is really any more popular than VR... I've seen much more hype about AR than VR. I think AR is probably more useful, but VR is more impressive so gets more press coverage. In any case both are pretty cool, but I am yet to see a particularly compelling AR app that has me coming back for more. It's more a tech demo of "look what this does", never to be used again.
It isn't an opinion on whether VR is neat or not.
That said, quite a number of people have gone out to buy real VR headsets that use a PC/console as the processor. And people are willing to pay a fair whack for the headsets too, which does make it a fairly successful niche. Of course if you have an iPhone, you already have everything you need for AR. Which makes it a reasonable value-add, but not sure it really adds a huge draw for consumers.
"The announced VR stuff at WWDC '17 is essentially vaporware at this point" No it isn't. Apple has supported VR content creation on the Mac. Not really VR clients.
When you say "quite a number of people" have bought VR devices, and are talking about a few hundred thousand units, recall that hundreds of millions is a hundred times larger. Also, a high-end iPhone is +$1000, while an Oculus Rift S/Quest is ~$500 and a PSVR with games is ~$350.
-
How Tim Cook's Augmented Reality vision paid off for Apple
Portrait Lighting uses AR face mapping. You can read about it.elijahg said:Also not really sure where DED gets the idea that the portrait modes on iOS are AR, they use AI to do their job, but not AR. The link takes you to AppleInsider's AR page, which only mentions AR in the context of using the lidar sensor for better 3D maps.
-
How Tim Cook's Augmented Reality vision paid off for Apple
The article is examining the commercial results of two strategies to earn profits, sustain development, and continue building future products.elijahg said:I don't know that AR is really any more popular than VR... I've seen much more hype about AR than VR. I think AR is probably more useful, but VR is more impressive so gets more press coverage. In any case both are pretty cool, but I am yet to see a particularly compelling AR app that has me coming back for more. It's more a tech demo of "look what this does", never to be used again.
It isn't an opinion on whether VR is neat or not.
-
How Apple dodged the flop of Android's headset VR
Thanks for trying to summarize the article, but Oculus did "come to mobile," in the form of Gear VR. Listen to Carmack talk about it. There's a link in the article.crowley said:Google Cardboard works pretty well for any VR that you'd want to do with a mobile device, and is compatible with iPhone. The kind of VR that the HTC Vive and Oculus offer isn't coming to mobile for a long while, if ever. There wasn't any need for Apple to rush in.
Newton was on the market for solidly five years. Apple licensed its tech to Motorola and others. It was clear that it wasn't going to fly. Anything you could do with Newton could be done with Palm or WinCE with less money and more third party support. By 1998 investing more into Newton was like investing more into QuickDraw 3D or the Dylan language.jdb8167 said:
The Newton might not have been a flop if Apple had stayed the course. It was estimated that its development cost upwards of $1 billion in 1990’s dollars before it was canceled. To recoup the investment, Apple had intended to create a new independent company, Newton Inc. But when Steve Jobs came back he killed the planned spin out of Newton as a separate company. He probably did this because at the time Apple couldn’t really afford the $10-20 million they had promised to Newton, Inc. (I don’t remember the exact amount.) Once the spin out was canceled nearly 100% of the Newton team quit on the spot.hentaiboy said:Apple has had its flops...
The Newton had a significant number of orders for vertical applications that were never fulfilled once it was effectively killed. We will never know if it could have been successful if Apple hadn’t stopped its development. On the other hand, having stopped the Newton, Jobs laid the path for iOS and iPadOS. If the Newton OS had remained viable, perhaps that doesn’t happen and Apple would not be the same company today.
