mac_128

Folio said:

AT&T with Time-Warner not only got a major film studio, but TV studio, gaming production, back catalog, and host of other things. As DreamWorks showed it's a tough biz, even starting with major creative talent. Amazon got lucky with the Manchester by Sea award winner. (Is that what spurred Munster's crazy comment?) Yet I've warmed up to the idea of Apple dipping into content. Everyone's doing it. And you can argue with Apple's history with music, not to mention Pixar, it's not too far a stretch from its culture. Its distribution system set up seems to call for it. Not only greases the likelihood of internal hits finding audiences, but allows leverage in negotiations with other studios, or Amazon, ATT, etc. I'm pretty sure Tim Cook is stepping carefully and won't allow culture to swoon over movie stars to the detriment of programmers.

It's the back catalogue that's really important for a startup streaming service. That's all HBO and Showtime had in the beginning. Netflix was a DVD rental company. Same with Amazon. Unfortunately, the ATT deal signals a major problem for streaming movie companies, in that like Disney will start doing next year, they will be pulling their catalogue out of third party deals and reserving them solely for their own digital streaming services. That's one of the reasons ATT bought TimeWarner. Apple is a little behind the 8-ball with respect to providing content customers will find compelling enough to subscribe to. The same customers already are spread pretty thin with Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, HBO Now, CBS AA, Sony, et al. Disney will be a huge draw for parents, who may decide they no longer need a service they're subscribing to. ATT will be the same -- WB is already launching a DC Digital streaming site with a major new slate of shows, and ATT is likely to order the best new shows for its own digital platform as well. Apple needs something to compete.

macxpress said:

GG1 said:

The Lightning cable is both elegant (mechanically and electrically symmetrical) and robust (thick "tongue"). USB-A is probably the worst connector, as it appears mechanically symmetrical but is not due to the offset tongue (it is not reversible). USB-C is symmetrical but still has that fragile tongue.

If Apple do change the Lightning connector, I hope it is an iteration on it, and not a change to USB-C.

You do know that USB-C can plug in either way right? Its no more fragile than the lightning connector. I actually think its stronger because it doesn't have something sticking out. This is how the Lightning Connector should have been IMO, rather than have something sticking out. 

Of course it still has something sticking out. The difference between Lightning and USB-C is if the cable plug is broken off the device, the damaged USB-C tab in the port will require a motherboard swap to fix. The Lightning port will likely be fine and you’ll just need a new cable.

mike1 said:

rare comment said:

mac_128 said:

mike1 said:

brucemc said:

Doesn't seem to make any sense to change away from Lightning.  As noted, it is possible for iPhones to have fast charging provided it is a USB-C at the other end and the right power adapter.  What other benefits are there (other than "I don't have to carry a separate cable for my other theoretical devices...")?

I would say the next move Apple makes is to do away with such a port completely - going with inductive charging completely and high speed wireless.  That might not be for a number of years, but switching to USB-C on the iPhone itself seems an "un-Apple" move.

Wireless charging is not for everyone. Personally, not being able to use the phone or iPad while it's charging is a major problem for me.

To be clear, you’re saying you’re against this because you think you can’t use an iPhone X while it’s charging?

I think mike1 is saying that wireless charging means one cannot easily use a phone while charging whereas wired charging means one can use the phone while charging.  Which is absolutely correct and a big part of many people's workflow.

What he said.

mazda 3s said:

mac_128 said:

mike1 said:

brucemc said:

Doesn't seem to make any sense to change away from Lightning.  As noted, it is possible for iPhones to have fast charging provided it is a USB-C at the other end and the right power adapter.  What other benefits are there (other than "I don't have to carry a separate cable for my other theoretical devices...")?

I would say the next move Apple makes is to do away with such a port completely - going with inductive charging completely and high speed wireless.  That might not be for a number of years, but switching to USB-C on the iPhone itself seems an "un-Apple" move.

Wireless charging is not for everyone. Personally, not being able to use the phone or iPad while it's charging is a major problem for me.

To be clear, you’re saying you’re against this because you can’t use an iPhone X while it’s charging?

For me, yes. I have a wireless charger on my nightstand for my iPhone X and a 10-ft Lightning cable that I also use for charging. I usually fall asleep in bed flipping through my iPhone. Considering that I normally doze off somewhere in between browsing on my phone, the wireless charging pad has become useless to me -- I just wake up with a dead phone by pillow. But when I plug it in to the charger at night, I can still lay in bed, browse, fall asleep, let it charge and wakeup in the morning with a topped off device.

The only time I really use the wireless charger is in the car, where I am not actively using the phone.

Got it. I'm not sure I agree 100%. All it does is introduce a pad to the end of the Lightning cable a person is already using, and more or less requires them to use it on a flat surface. In most cases, the use of the device is limited by the cord length anyway. For instance, I have a cord on my kitchen counter which just reaches the center of the countertop from the wall below it. So I am pretty much forced to use the Lightning stand it's plugged into, or lay it flat on the counter with the cord plugged directly in. The cord also forces me to orient my iPhone in a particular direction, usually determined by which direction the cord is coming from, and that doesn't always work when using it upside down. A charging pad allows the phone to be oriented at any angle. In the past, I have used the charging adapters on some Starbucks counters, allowing me to recharge my iPhone while using it without carrying any additional cords or adapters with me. I believe the iPhone X is natively compatible with it, requiring nothing extra. 

At the moment, there's not a lot of choice in the matter with a charging pad. However, and I'm surprised Apple didn't introduce it this way, a magnetic charger like the one the Apple Watch uses would solve all these problems. A little round puck on the end of a Lightning cable would snap to the back of the iPhone at any angle. In the interim, a simple snap-on case with a built-in charging pad would likewise solve the problem. Not sure what's available, but I know there's at least a few out there for those who have adopted wireless charging strategies for their iPhone X. I would hope that by the time Apple removes the Lightning connector, they'd have worked out the wireless charging solution to address these issues.  I had thought the Smart Connector was going to be that solution, but perhaps not.

matrix077 said:

eriamjh said:

Hey Siri, pause my workout. 

Hey Siri, end my workout.  

Who needs buttons?  

Besides, solid state doesn’t mean touch sensitive like Touch ID.  It can be force sensitive meaning it can work wet or through gloves.  

Soon you don’t even have to say Hey Siri. Just “Pause my workout”.

Yes I agree. If Siri is to succeed, she’ll really need to become contextual. And the gym is a great place to use voice commands. People are already talking on their phones while they workout, or singing along to music. As AIs take off and become more reliable, and people get used to the convenience of voice commands, we’re going to see a lot more people using them in public spaces, where it’s appropriate, as the norm.

Eric_WVGG said:

The “flat button” on my watch kind of sticks. I do a lot of bouldering, suspect that sweat plus chalk dust are to blame. (Climbing is also responsible for a nice little scrape up in the corner, guess I’ll be going with stainless steel for the sapphire screen next time...)

Yeah, solid state buttons may be the way to go here if they’re reliable. I wonder if the “Digital Crown” will go as well. There’s really no reason for it, if they’re going with solid state buttons and turn the bezel itself into a touch scroll bar. The only drawback is water, but that’s true now. I imagine the Taptic Engine could be used to trigger a scroll bar by taps, in much the same way clicking along the length of a scroll bar advances the screen without the smooth scrolling action on the Mac.