melgross

It would have been interesting to see what sales and profits would have been if iPhones weren’t late. If it were equal to last year, it would have added another $7 billion to the number. As sales seem to be hopping since they did come out, with Apple being surprised that the Pro is selling much better than expected, iPhone sales could have been even higher. So Apple could have hit $72.7 billion, or even higher. Everyone else was much higher. iPhone sales could have been too. But people stopped buying, as they always do before a new phone comes out, with no new phones to make that sales drop up, as usual.

22july2013 said:

h4y3s said:

A silicon atom is only about 0.21 nm, so a 5nm process might be the limit for a while!

Yes, but there's also the issue of how those atomic spheres are packed. It's like packing baseballs in a box, there are different ways to pack them.

Silicon has a crystalline structure. That’s about it. You can “strain” the silicon, or dope it, but you can’t change the basic structure much. And it’s not just silicon. The biggest problem is the copper and other materials needed. There’s only so much that can be done. At these small sizes, there is the volume problem, and the distance oroblem. That is a structure has more boundary to volume as the size goes down. The difficulty here is quantum mechanics. The Uncertainty Principle. Electrons traveling through the circuitry has a certain chance of leaving the circuit altogether. The narrower the fabrication feature, the closer to the edge any given electron is, and the more likely it will tunnel through the insulation, and end up somewhere else, where it isn’t wanted. There are diodes (tunneling diodes), and other electronic devices that use this effect deliberately. But we don’t want it in a chip.

fred1 said:

Any idea why Apple doesn’t make known battery sizes? It seems like something people want (and deserve) to know. 

Nobody “deserves” to know any of the specs. You can’t go by battery size to directly estimate battery life. That’s why Apple gives a much more useful set of battery life specs. By comparing them model to model, and year to year, you know what to expect. Battery size isn’t helpful. We also know that iPhones need a substantially smaller battery than comparable Android phones for the same battery life. That’s mainly due to the known inefficiency of Android, due to decisions Google made way back in the development, which they’re finding very difficult to alter now.

also look at reviews at reliable sites such as Arstechnica and Anandtech. They have comparative battery life charts. Additionally, they make mention of the fact that Apple’s battery life specs are more accurate than competitors, and are often somewhat conservative.

While I don’t have them, I would have liked to see the ability to charge Apple’s wireless AirPod cases as well. For $150, one would think that’s included. I have had, for the past two years, a Chinese wireless charger that charges my iPhone, standing up, my Watch on a small pedestal, and a cradle for the AirPods. This is made from very nicely finished anodized aluminum. And all this costs just $35. It even has two USB A outlets to charge external devices, such as my iPad overnight. High power, no. But it’s used for overnight charging, and Apple didn’t have high power charging for the phone, and the watch charges at just 2.5 watts, though maybe this year’s model charges slightly higher.

if a newer model comes out with support for these new phones, for twice the price, I will buy it. Too many of these brand name chargers are overpriced. After a few months, a number of them have their price cut in half, which shows what they’re really worth.

i just checked the Belk8nnoutvrurther, and it does have a spot for the AirPods. Ok, that’s a plus, though it’s still too expensive.

GeorgeBMac said:

melgross said:

mcdave said:

melgross said:

1,000 years from now, when our personal assistant will be hovering right near us talking directly to our brain, she will be eagerly awaiting her next upgrade.

Surely you mean 50 years from now, when our personal assistant is us.

She’ll be looking for a more interesting peripheral.

We won’t see that kind of advance in 50 years. AI has turned out to be much more difficult than thought. Back in the early ‘50’s, it was believed, by scientists working on it, that human-like intelligence would be accomplished in a few years. Here we are, almost 70 years later, and we’re not much further along.

besides, hovering without noisy and fuel inefficient power sources is something we may never get. Hence, 1,000 years.

Not to dispute your point, but Elon Musk is developing a system called Neuralink where thoughts will, eventually be able to trigger an action.  That may be coming at that assistant from the back door, but for those with spinal paralysis it could be life changing.   But, then, where does it stop?

"We are designing the Link to connect to thousands of neurons in the brain. It will be able to record the activity of these neurons, process these signals in real time, and send that information to the Link. As a first application of this technology, we plan to help people with severe spinal cord injury by giving them the ability to control computers and mobile devices directly with their brains. We would start by recording neural activity in the brain’s movement areas. As users think about moving their arms or hands, we would decode those intentions, which would be sent over Bluetooth to the user’s computer. Users would initially learn to control a virtual mouse. Later, as users get more practice and our adaptive decoding algorithms continue to improve, we expect that users would be able to control multiple devices, including a keyboard or a game controller."

https://neuralink.com/applications/

Currently it appears it is at the stage where, after implanting the Neuralink in a pig they can exactly predict the movement of her legs from her thoughts.  I suspect that actually moving her legs (or a mechanical substitute) may not be all that far away.   But, after that, it could be controlling some external device -- like one of his cars?

This is nothing new either. Let Musk be the first to try it. We’ve had similar work done for over a decade, where patients with artificial ARM’s and hands can control them using thought. Again, nothing new that Musk is really doing. He’s full of it .

but that’s still way way down the list of artificial intelligence, which is completely different.