koop
About
- Username
- koop
- Joined
- Visits
- 41
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 3
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 337
Reactions
-
Is Apple getting Siri-ous in the face of Amazon's Alexa Echo?
I bought two Echos last year. They are often one of the most used tech products in the apartment, simply because they do useful things like control lights, set kitchen timers and play music. The importance is that Echo is a complete product, with a refined skillset that's not hard to use and manage. The thing wont change how you talk to a computer, and it's probably not that much smarter than Siri in many respects. But the actual fact there's a speaker that's always sitting there and ready to go to play music, control lights, check weather, play radio stations and even do some nice amazon centric stuff like ordering, checking orders and playing Amazon books is more than useful.
The moral of the story is that Apple probably doesn't need to sit on their hands here. Google Home isn't taking the smart speaker market by storm despite being more conversational and capable. These products aren't about complex conversations and scifi dreams of talking to your home, they are meant to be utilities and make life a bit more convenient around the home. Apple should be putting their dedicated speaker out as soon as possible.
-
Nintendo's 'Super Mario Run' for iPhone requires a persistent internet connection for play
-
New research data shows iPhone at top of sales charts by vendor across most of the world
apple ][ said:anantksundaram said:And everybody condescendingly bloviates that "fake news" is an affliction of Trump supporters (which, of course, it is).... No, it's endemic. It's all around us, from both the Right and the Left.
When I hear the term 'fake news', I immediately think of CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, New York Times etc. The mainstream media is the #1 culprit behind fake, BS news and lies.
I find it funny that those same outlets are now worried about so-called 'fake news'. They can all kiss my ass. They're not needed anymore, and their game is up. The charade is over, they can all go to hell, or even better, they can go out of business, and then go to hell.
I'm sure Mark Levin, Sean Hannity and Rush would be proud. -
Super Mario Run for iPhone coming Dec. 15, unlocked for $9.99
sog35 said:SpamSandwich said:Probably well designed, but there's really no excuse for Nintendo to not have nearly their entire back catalog on iOS by now. They must really hate to make money.
Which is DUMB. Nintendo has been horrible with hardware since the N64. Plus hardware is a massively risky model. They could easily transfer that risk to Nintendo.
What Nintendo needs is an incentive to move exclusively to iOS/TVOS. Cook needs to write a BILLION check to Nintendo. He makes the offer and the shareholders will pressure Nintendo to sign.
Cook needs to present Nintendo with a $1 Billion check for exclusive rights to Nintendo's classic games.
On top of that, we don't actually know the valuation of Nintendo's classics as an exclusivity deal. Nintendo's classics are regularly sold in their 3DS eshop, their Wii U eshop and are now bundled into hardware like the NES Mini that is sold out everywhere. What kind of revenue stream those classics provide, and the value of keeping them exclusive to Nintendo systems is unknown.
It's a reality fans have to accept. If you want Nintendo's best, you buy their hardware. Besides the Switch looks pretty cool.
-
Google's Pixel XL priced like Apple's iPhone 7 Plus, but it lacks numerous key features
qwwera said:koop said:I think people here aren't going to like this, but iOS/Siri is more of a liability for Apple than it's ever been since the first iPhone. Pixel is basically trying to sell itself on software and artificial intelligence. They are selling this as their A.I. phone. You can giggle about the spec wars, but you're missing the big picture that Google has surpassed Apple in software years ago, and Google is going to drive their "information" advantage into a hardware war that wont be about who has the faster CPU or most RAM.
I can only imagine in 2030 it's really about what company has the bigger server farms, artificial neural networking and machine learning algorithms that determines which product makes consumers lives the easiest. Not some display resolution or wide color gamut.
Google has the long game here. We're still figuring out what Apple has besides their phone at this point.
The truth is that Google is far better at services. But Android itself is a major liability. Who in their right mind would spend what the Pixel costs with not just inferior specs, but running the liability that is Android. From a purely value equation, a consumer is risking their privacy, risk malware, and risk a purchase that will most likely not be kept up to date and abandoned in a a few short years as precedent has shown. And all in an uglier package.
Google is fantastic at services and will no doubt continue to exceed in that, but the vessels to their services in Android is a major problem. No amount of specs in hardware or free services will offset that fact for people who are willing to pay for a premium product. It HAS to be a premium product to have a premium asking price.
And those great Google service are also available in a truly premium product like the iPhone. So again, who in their right mind would pay a premium price for a second rate product?
As long as any device runs Android it is not a premium product, it will always be a second rate product. Look at Samsung, a company truly able to compete hardware wise with Apple, ...but their Galaxy line no matter how great their hardware, are always seen as second rate to the iPhone for that very fact. That it runs a second rate software. A shiny package can't change that.
Android looks destined to be an OS for a low margin, low cost commodity gadget than what Samsung or the Pixel pretend it to be.
I think we have a different interpretation of 2 years of guaranteed updates being short. Not as long as Apple, but not short.
We just have to disagree on Android being a second rate product. I'm reading into you saying that because iOS is exclusive to a phone, and Android is not, that the Pixel phone can not be considered a premium product. I think that interpretation is shallow as well.
I would listen to Sundar Pichai's at the beginning of the Pixel announcement to get some idea of why Google decided to release their own branded device.
I would also stress that Google Assistant will likely never be built into an iPhone in any meaningful way, just like Google Now isn't. Not until Apple opens up the ability to switch default voice assistant that also attaches to different APIs, until Apple is willing to let Google talk to different services, as well as replace functions Apple has under lock and key, they will continue making devices with their vision for information delivery and artificial intelligence.