charlesn
About
- Username
- charlesn
- Joined
- Visits
- 116
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 5,289
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 1,404
Reactions
-
Apple confirms that Apple Intelligence Siri features are taking longer than expected
CNBC is reporting that the Siri improvements are now delayed til 2026. That's the headline of the article currently running on the website. This (obviously) would mean an entire year of additional delay beyond a launch date that was already pushed out nine months from when A.I. Siri was first announced. My "Apple memory" goes back to roughly 1990 and I can't ever recall something like this happening before--a product announced for debut nine months later (that in itself is rare enough) and then blowing by that debut date by a full year. So I guess AI Siri now debuts in time for its sweet sixteen--but you really have to wonder if Apple is ever going to be able to fix Siri. smh. $166 billon in cash on hand and we can't do this? For context: just Apple's cash, if it were a separate company, would rank #90 on the list of the 100 most valuable companies.
-
iPhone fold predicted to launch in late 2026 with no Face ID
Actually, it's not bold at all -- it reflects the now six year history of expensive folding phones like the one rumored to be coming from Apple. The lack of need beyond that of a small niche has been proven by the lack of sales success after six years of trying. Hey, if niche iPhones were of interest to Apple, they would have kept the Mini in the lineup, which is a form factor with a very devoted albeit smaller fan base.muthuk_vanalingam said:
First off, there is no need for a folding iPhone. - That is a pretty bold claim to make.AppleZulu said:Just for the record, let's consider some of the many reasons why Apple is never going to make the phone Kuo describes here.
Remember that Apple's modus operandi in creating new product lines is to make something that people didn't realize they wanted by bringing together feature sets in novel ways. They do not release "me too" devices that offer bells and whistles that others have released. They don't add complications and software bloat while bringing little new utility.
First off, there is no need for a folding iPhone. The device described above offers nothing beyond the brief novelty of saying "look, it folds!" There are already other manufacturers' devices that do that, and they're not exactly category killers.
The screen size described above is essentially a standard iPhone screen doubled to make it roughly square. This brings an added aspect ratio to support, without serving any particular purpose. The square aspect ratio would be like having an iPad mini with the bottom third of the screen lopped off. You could have more app and folder icons on the screen, but that's about it. A virtual keyboard spread across the bottom would be too small to type on with ten fingers, and would add extra stretch when trying to tap at it with your thumbs. The double-wide device would be harder to hold with one hand while tapping with the other hand's index finger. Viewing a standard 16:9 video would add nothing over a standard iPhone, because it would be essentially the same size viewing area, letterboxed in either orientation. An old 5:4 video would be larger, but that's about it.
The addition of an external screen would add bloat to iOS, which would now have to support multiple screens on the same device. That iOS bloat would have to be carried on all iPhone models, even as it adds nothing to the rest of the line. An outer screen would be more vulnerable to damage, because a folding device would make using a protective case impossible. The same issue would also make the device's hinge vulnerable to damage from dropping. This is particularly suboptimal because the hinge would be the structurally weakest point in the device, so dropping the device would be more likely to result in catastrophic damage.
The "limited space" reasoning for a reversion to Touch ID is of course preposterous. Were there any truth to this backwards step in security, it would be because the addition of an external screen would also necessitate the addition of a second Face ID module, whereas a Touch ID module on the side could serve both screens. Still, taking a backward step in tech on a profoundly more expensive iPhone would be anathema to Apple's normal approach to things.
This brings us to the cost of the device, which is suggested to range roughly between the price of a MacBook Air and the price of a base model MacBook Pro. Where would be the demand for a novelty iPhone that costs as much as a Mac? People balk at the price of the Vision Pro, but at least that continues to be something fundamentally different after the first week of use. After the immediate novelty of a folding iPhone wears off, what would be its purpose?
-
iPhone fold predicted to launch in late 2026 with no Face ID
Tune in again in late 2026 when Kuo punts the release date to late '27 or early '28. This is a phone for a target market that doesn't exist--expensive folding phones from other manufacturers have already proven that over the past five years. Sure, "nice to have" a phone that can unfold to about the screen size of an iPad Mini for those occasions when you want that. But the price you pay to get it--in addition to the literal dollars--in size, weight, fragility and a small "daily driver" outer screen the size of the iPhone Mini's screen--will make it a small niche product for Apple, too. It will get a ton of press, no doubt--followed by predictably poor sales.
-
Apple's extortionate upgrade prices can't stop the MacBook Air being a bargain
Well... this is a bit of fortune cookie "wisdom" from Steve that doesn't even reflect his own experience. Jobs v1.0 at Apple was arguably about great products and the sales/profits definitely did NOT follow. One main reason the board fired him was his insistence on championing the Lisa and Macintosh, neither of which were selling well. So there's that. And then sales/profits did not really follow Steve's creations at his next venture, Next. So there's that, too. Third time as CEO was obviously the charm for Jobs, when he sold Next to Apple and returned to helm what became a very profitable company.DAalseth said:If you keep your eye on the profit, you're going to skimp on the product. But if you focus on making really great products, then the profits will follow.
I have increasingly been feeling that Apple under Tim Cook has forgotten this.
In terms of "skimping on products" under Cook, what would you cite as examples of that?
-
Apple's extortionate upgrade prices can't stop the MacBook Air being a bargain
"Usually the configuration you get for the lowest price of any Apple device is at the very best just about adequate, and usually not even that."
So my question for Mr. Gallagher is pretty simple: which base models of Apple devices have you bought or borrowed from Apple, then tested as your daily driver for a while and at what tasks did you find them "usually not even adequate?" Because there are actually a few online reviewers who make it a point to buy and use the base models of Apple devices, just to see how far they can be pushed, and I have yet to read of any base model that can't execute, without breaking a sweat, ANY task that a base model buyer might throw at it. That includes the usual suite of common business applications, as well as video/photo/audio editing, so long as the latter three are being done on a hobbyist basis and not professionally. It goes without saying that if your work (or personal passion) includes applications that are processor or memory intensive, then the base models aren't for you, nor were they ever intended to serve your needs. (In fact, maybe the Macbook Air, itself, isn't for you and a Pro would make more sense.) But there is a whole target market of buyers for which the base model makes perfect sense and is as much computer as they will ever actually need.
