charlesn
About
- Username
- charlesn
- Joined
- Visits
- 114
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 5,210
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 1,389
Reactions
-
Apple Watch loses steam as global smartwatch shipments dropped in 2024
Exactly. And how does Counterpoint come up with such precise numbers for Apple when Apple doesn't release this info. Well... wait for it... "that's a secret." Yes, just like the tooth fairy, you simply have to believe in the proprietary methodology which, you know, they can't possibly reveal!danox said:Counterpoint with their semiyearly Apple is doomed in some way posting….
That said, I would be surprised if this reported downturn in sales wasn't accurate. Functionally, the last few generations of Apple's watch have been doing all you need it to do and all it's capable of doing, at least for now. The design hasn't changed all that much over time, so minus compelling new features or new design, there's not a lot to drive new sales or upgrades from older models. I think everyone knows the holy grail for a new burst of sales would be accurate blood pressure and glucose monitoring, but that tech is still not here. Yeah, yeah, Samsung already offers a useless, crap version of it, but I'm talking about features that actually work and do so accurately.
-
iPhone 17 Pro Max may get thicker than the iPhone 16 Pro
That may be because these are the first renders I've seen in which the camera bar is just a wider version of the camera bump we have now and for that reason looks pretty "normal," one could even argue better because it's a more balanced look to have the bar traverse the whole width of the phone instead of a bump in one corner. If we're going to have a camera bar--which still seems highly unlikely to me because it begs the question, "Why?"--keeping the clear acrylic material of the current bump looks a helluva lot better than the fugly half aluminum/half glass frankenphone monstrosities that we've seen previously.apple4thewin said:The more I see the mock iPhone 17 photos, the more it grows on me and looks normal. -
Apple confirms that Apple Intelligence Siri features are taking longer than expected
Yes and no. Siri (which stands for Speech interpretation and Recognition Interface) was a start-up company acquired by Apple in April of 2010. You are correct that it was first released in an Apple product in October of 2011 when it debuted in the iPhone 4s.saarek said:Well, Siri launched back in 2011 with the iPhone 4S and it's been a moaned about disappointment since then. Might as well continue the trend.
-
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?
