danox

nubus said:

randominternetperson said:

nubus said:

dewme said:

There’s nothing inherently wrong with Tim or any of the other current crop of presenters when it comes to “getting the word out.” But Applle doesn’t have Steve anymore and nobody could capture an audience quite like he could

Microsoft, Google, Nvidia, AMD, AWS,... they all do live to get that extra energy. None of them have Jobs.

And who watches those? Who is blown away by those?

Those being interested in their products.
The iPhone launch 2024 keynote has been streamed 26 million times on YouTube. WWDC 2024 with all the AI hit 12 million.
The Nvidia GTC launch from 9 days ago is already at 37 million.

Apple holds 10x more followers on YouTube than Nvidia. It doesn't translate into viewers. Yes - some iPhone users have Apple TV but in terms of buzz and getting YouTube views the keynotes from Apple are not selling ticket.

godofbiscuitssf said:

melgross said:

Rogue01 said:

Will it be a live keynote, or another awful cringe-worthy video?  Maybe they will be apologizing for Apple Intelligence instead of trying to push out more half-baked features.  They already blundered with Siri, unless they try and do damage control and more promises of features that won't be ready with iOS 19.

I miss the days when Apple released new software and the features they previewed at WWDC were actually in the release version.  Instead all we get are 'coming soon' and then 'maybe next year'.  I stopped watching the videos because they were nothing more than reading press releases and spec sheets.

The videos are much better than the live presentations. Those tended to ramble and took much longer. Well, I remember that Apple was criticized for trying to get everything in the first release. Be more like Google and Microsoft people would say, and release features when they’re ready and don’t rush them out for an announcement.  Give me a break!

You are definitely in the minority on that one. Live with audience is the sweet spot.  You know those are as scripted and likely even more practiced (you don’t have multiple takes available) than the prerecorded ones.  And the feedback from the audience gives presenters an idea of what the relative interest levels are.  And that can carry forward through the year.   

And yet all the me-too, copycat companies are terrible at it. The most important thing in any presentation is to actually have something (a product) that is a step ahead of the competition, having that product is probably as important as the presentation introducing the iMac, OSX, iPod, iPhone, and the iPad all which were huge leaps forward at the time in comparison to the competition.

Since the iPad’s last for a long time particularly the iPad Pros (6 to 7 years) the big screen iPad if you can afford it is the best buy as a handoff to a relative younger or older perfect in fact, (done it twice).

nubus said:

melgross said:

The videos are much better than the live presentations.

Videos are like not going to that concert or play. There is nothing at stake and presentations are worse for it. We get 10-15 minutes of Mother Nature and too many odd managers from Apple. Nvidia and AMD do live while Apple is to lazy/scared/... to enter the circle.

Live would give us a CEO taking a computer from a manila envelope, a marketing guy jumping to a gym mat showing wireless, and "you get a mouse" moments. It gives us something to talk about while keynotes today are "long build ups and disappointing drops" matching electronic dance music and celebrity funerals. Go live and connect with users.

Apple doesn’t need to do live. They had the master at doing live at one time…… Which is the reason they probably don’t do live anymore the other called competitors are just bad me-too copycats of the original SJ.

mikethemartian said:

Doesn’t Nvidia ration out their server chips because of high demand? Has their relationship with Apple improved?

No, it hasn’t improved what are the odds of that it’s like saying Apple is going to use Intel again, which isn’t gonna happen either, as a previous poster said more than likely, it’s for AI training, but that doesn’t do you any good if you ain’t gonna get delivery before the end of the year, the M5 MacBook Pros will be out sooner before Apple gets any significant number of Nvidia GPUs’s, which again highlights, the fact that Apple is gonna have to roll up it’s sleeves and build them themselves in the long run, (Apple you have to build trucks Servers/Mac Pros too). The flighty nice looking iPhone/laptop/Apple watch/iPad hardware can’t be the only thing you build capturing some of the AI mind share in AI hardware Is more important than selling/having 2% of future iPhones sold being folding iPhones.

Hurts even more because Apple is probably just two generations away from the top spot on the Blender benchmark table. The next uplift (generation) of the ultra M series chip will probably put Apple in the top three on that list using less than 138 watts to do it, somewhere around 11,700.

https://opendata.blender.org/benchmarks/query/?compute_type=OPTIX&compute_type=CUDA&compute_type=HIP&compute_type=METAL&compute_type=ONEAPI&group_by=device_name&blender_version=4.3.0

Apple is also probably two generations away from being able to train using Mac ultras, Nvidia is running into wattage trouble. They’re reaching the end of the line, the era of unlimited wattage increases is coming to an end.

https://creativestrategies.com/mac-studio-m3-ultra-ai-workstation-review/