applebynature

Emergency video sharing absolutely will NOT be compatible with Emergency SOS via Satellite. You repeatedly state and imply that one would be able to send video through the satellite communication feature, but that is not the case. Emergency SOS Video sharing will only work through cellular or wifi connections. This announcement has ZERO to do with satellite. Did you even read the press release? "Satellite" is mentioned 0 times.

beowulfschmidt said:

Xed said:

What a PoS. What's interesting is that drivers who have hit a bicyclist almost never get in trouble for the accident unless there's gross negligence involved, or they already had something else outstanding, like a suspended license or a warrant out for their arrest.

I'm mostly convinced that this is because many, if not most, cyclists either don't know the rules of the road to which they are subject, or just don't care, which often makes the accident the cyclist's fault, and not the driver's.  As a cyclist myself, this pisses me off greatly, as those types ruin it for everyone.

Numerous studies have shown that cyclists are at fault in only 13-25% of accidents involving motor vehicles, with studies saying, on average, that just under 19% of accidents are the cyclist's fault. I think your entire attitude in that comment is anti-cyclist and espousing widely and falsely held beliefs that cyclists do not respect the road. I'm not a professional cyclists, I don't even have one of those skin-tight cycling outfits or pedals that clip into special shoes, I road bike once or twice a week for exercise. But the vast majority of cyclists that I know or encounter are extremely aware of their surroundings, are careful, and above all, they all know they are to abide by the rules of the road just like a car should, and for the most part they do. I can't think of a time when I've seen someone flagrantly disobeying road rules/law, other than rolling through a stop sign at a 4 way stop within a neighborhood with no cars nearby (which the motor vehicles also do, but with greater frequency, speed, carelessness, and unawareness). If you want to talk about whether motor vehicle drivers or cyclists are more prone to disobey traffic laws, it is without a doubt motor vehicle drivers. Let's not continue to perpetuate this anti-cyclist attitude with little to back it up.

This is pretty neat, but you still have to launch the app then keep it in the live activities island for as long as you want it running. A feature that androids have is you can set it to run completely invisibly in the background at all times whenever your phone is on. It then silently makes a note of every song that's ever playing around you at all times so that you can go back at any time and look up the name of what was playing at a particular time and place without EVER having to worry about launching the app or wondering if it's running or having it constantly take up space on your island. Now that's pretty cool.

robin huber said:

One think I noticed was that the light seal was not perfect around my nose. The guy fitting me asked about it and advised me to shift the strap higher in the back. That helped marginally, but once into the demo I no longer noticed it. Looking at pictures of the unit it is clear that the light seal stops before going over the nose bridge, so I guess a complete seal was never intended. 

I had the EXACT same experience. Tons of light pouring in around my nose and it was suggested to move the strap up which I did, which barely helped. I can NOT imagine that is how it is supposed to fit. I would NEVER buy this thing with a fit like that. Also I had it adjusted extremely tight to minimize the nose gap ever so slightly and that just made the whole thing uncomfortable...and I still had light coming in.

Other than that, I was just generally disappointed by the demo. As an Apple fanboy I had very high expectations and they were absolutely not met. The passthrough was extremely mediocre. The field of view was very small, almost no peripheral vision at all. The only things that I really enjoyed and even made me smile were the immersive video demo and the example home videos in 3D. 

Rogue01 said:

applebynature said:

Yup, we've known about the required facial scanning for proper fit since June.
I'm curious how big of a fiasco it's going to be to go into an Apple Store to demo a unit. They should do it by appointment with a required face scan before the appointment so everything is ready for you to try out. If they're just allowing everyone to come in to wait around in the store for one of the scarce demo units to be available, then having to go through a fitting and set up process along with being trained how to use it, man that will be a disaster with the time involved and so many waiting around to try it. But on the other hand, I can see people going to the store to try it out and being told, oh you have to make an appointment, the next one is in 3 weeks, and that not going over too well with customers either, so who knows.

At $3,500, no one is really interested in this at all.  So probably won't be any lines of people waiting to try it because people would rather spend $3,500 on anything else.  This product does not solve any problems and AR/VR has never been a popular item for decades.  People don't want to wear googles to run apps or watch movies.  The battery is about 2 hours unless you are physically tied to a power source.  Apple created something that no one really has any desire for.  Maybe super rich people that have nothing better to spend money on.  No one bought iPod Hi-Fi, and that was only $349.  No one bought the $10,000 Apple Watch Gold either and Apple said you had to have an appointment to see it.  The iPhone captured the smartphone market.  This captures no market at all.  Big difference.  I love Apple and have been using Apple products since 1989, but you have to wonder why Apple even made this product when consumers are not really into that product category at all.  Very few consumers use AR for games.

And remember, most consumers wear prescription lenses so another $150 for special lenses will a big deal breaker, especially when prescriptions typically change year after year for people that do wear glasses.

Interest in buying it will be low; yes you are right on that point, and certainly wrote a lot in support of it; however that has absolutely nothing to do with the masses of people that will want to try this thing (nor will that change the fact that this will sell out). Interest in trying out the newest and one of the most technologically advanced consumer products on the market? Will be HIGH. Who the hell wouldn't want to try this thing out? Hence my speculation concerning the demo process (not how many people have any desire to fork over that kind of money).