bitmod

allmypeople said:

I just want more product category disruptions. Obviously I don't want products for no reason but I would love to see Apple shake up some product categories. I'm disappointed with the HomePod. It's barely a foot in the water and completely ignored home theatre enthusiasts.

HomePod... home theatre enthusiasts? 
  

boogerman2000 said:

mac_128 said:

wood1208 said:

Plenty lightening cables around so it's all good if 2019 iPhone stays with Lightening port. But in future if Apple going to move iPhone to USB-C than sooner is better. I don't see another physical port standard on horizon unless everyone move to Wirless for charging and Data/music transfer.

I don't see any reason ever to move the iPhone to USB-C. Wireless charging is the next standard Apple will likely move to, and drop the exposed port concept from their phones entirely. They've steadily been moving to seal it up completely. For the optional need to make a physical connection for a very small portion of Apple's iPhone base, something like the SmartConnector is likely the way to go. For most customers, wireless will suffice to meet all of their needs, and encourage use of Apple's Cloud services -- which after all is a stated goal of their transition away from hardware focused profits. 

Wireless phones and self doing cars ain’t gonna happen Tim needs to blow out the competition with some battery breakthroughs then we’ll cut that wire for good not before

They have them... at least Panasonic does. Enzyme batteries.
Problem is they will never use it as it would negate the need to upgrade devices. 
Apple and tech in general aren't in the market of 1 and done. They want to sell you the same thing over and over... 

The cheapest new 2018 iPhone you can get in Canada right now is $1228 with AppleCare ($1375 after tax). 
$1375... for the bottom of the barrel 2018 phone. The cheapest possible phone you can get is a 7 for $1100. 

The iPhone most people would like to have is the Xs 256 - which costs $2058 with AppleCare after tax. 

Nice phones? Sure. 
$2058 nice? lol

Throw in a case and your average data plan cost and you are looking at a 2 year $4500 investment. 

$4500 for the new iPhone with the newest features. 

Go ahead and try to defend that.
Business's can't justify that - so forget about 20 somethings paying off student loans, paying that for dancing poo emoji's and Instagram scrolling. 
And before you attempt to point to other offerings - nobody wants to pay $1100 for a near obsolete 3 year old iPhone 7. 

It's beyond absurd. 

"highest-end, high-throughput desktop system, designed for our demanding pro customers." 
In other words... Schiller talked to Pixar.

Schiller: Here is your $18,000 iMac. 
Average Appleinsider fanboi: It really isn't expensive at all, it's what pro's want. 
Average Pro User: Hmmm... which Dell will I buy... 

StrangeDays said:

bitmod said:

“The feature is available in the United States after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration cleared it for sale, making the smartwatch the first consumer device to do so without requiring medical review.”

 Alivecore has the Kardia ECG that works very well and was approved by medical review. I imagine if one was truly concerned about their heart they would go with this device that is far more accurate, vastly less expensive, integrated with real-time medical review by doctors, or transmitted to you own. Even comes with a clip to fit to your smartphone. https://www.alivecor.com
They also support the iwatch.

 The watch probably isn’t accurate enough to pass medical review - thus the legal tie-up in other countries, not so much for the feature, but the ‘marketing’ aspect of it being a medical device. Neither are as good as an 8 point lead at a hospital - but can indicate something isn’t right with rhythm.

What a load of nonsense, per usual. 

- I don't see why the Alivecore portable finger-based ECG would be any more accurate. What is your evidence?
- its $100, not "vastly less expensive"
- it also costs $10/mo for unlimited cloud storage of results
- but it's also a single-purpose device, and requires carrying around, making it less useful than an ECG already in your daily watch
- yes, the Apple Watch ECG is accurate enough to "pass medical review"
- you can transmit your Apple Watch ECG to your doctor
- there is no such thing as an iwatch. 

...you could at least try, you know. 

-  2 leads with larger surface area for 4 points of contact (2 fingers each hand) vs 1 small lead on wrist = better results all day long, regardless of algorithmic interpretation. 
-  $100 vs ~$800 = vastly
-  The Kardia is small and thin and comes with a phone clip, or it fits in a wallet = not less useful, maybe less convenient. 
- Not disputing the watch doesn't have it's place - but it hasn't passed a medical review in Canada, so you can't state that it is accurate enough. A lot of medical professionals don't agree that the Kardia is accurate enough - but may serve as an initial monitor of potential MI or arrhythmia. 
- Alivecore software handles the data, and yes it supports the Apple Watch. 

Explain how the Apple Watch is the "first consumer device...", yet it isn't. Unless you factor in there is no medical review. Yet the Kardia was approved with a medical review. 
Can't have it both ways. 

Try harder to troll me man...