zimmie

The size of the projector and sensors isn't the limiting factor of the size of the notch, the rangefinder base is. Face ID works with parallax. One part (the VCSEL mentioned in the article) emits a grid of dots with known properties. Another part (the IR camera) measures the deflection of those dots from where they should be. The less distance between the dot projector and the camera recording its pattern, the less deflection there is for a given change in depth.

Making the notch narrower while retaining the same depth precision would require a far sharper camera sensor, though only in one dimension. If Apple moved to non-square pixels for the Face ID camera and doubled the horizontal pixel count, they would be able to reduce the width of the notch.

foregoneconclusion said:

cjcoops said: Fiat currency (your US dollars, Pounds Sterling, Euro, Swiss Franc etc ect) also has NO intrinsic value.

These kinds of arguments are pointless. Ultimately, "value" is always just a matter of human perception. Why is a crypto like Bitcoin worth more now than when it was first introduced and there was less of it available? Perception, i.e., "wow, billionaire Elon Musk thinks crypto is valuable so it must be valuable". It's like complaining that the dollar isn't literally backed by gold when the value of gold was backed by...nothing. Gold was just another form of perceived value itself. 

Strictly, gold has intrinsic value because it has utility. For example, it lets you make reasonably corrosion-resistant metal objects, and it has low electrical resistance, both of which have certain industrial applications. The societal portion of its value clearly dominates, because gold is almost always noticeably more expensive than platinum, which is much better at everything we use gold for industrially (more corrosion-resistant, less electrically resistant, and much harder).

Fiat currencies have very little intrinsic value (the metal in coins technically has a small amount of utility; paper money could be burned for heat). Almost all of their value is from the agreement of society that they have value. They are also generally backed by an economically-large entity with an army, which significantly reduces volatility. Zimbabwean dollars have suffered ridiculous inflation, but their volatility is still lower than a lot of stocks.

Instead of a large backer with an army, cryptocurrencies have mathematically provable properties around their supply, which limits inflation, but increases volatility. They have literally no intrinsic value (the numbers involved in Bitcoin aren't even interesting mathematically), just value from other people saying they have value. So they take everything bad about fiat currencies, and they make it worse, all while having slower transactions which consume vastly more energy. They are like stock shares in a company which doesn't make anything and which will never pay dividends.

There is a meaningful difference between repairs and upgrades. Apple has arguably been making repairs easier since the iPhone 6.

Several of their laptops now have the USB-C ports on daughtercards connected by cables to the logic board. Same for Lightning ports on their phones. If a port breaks, it's possible to replace without involving surface-mount soldering. They retain their batteries with adhesive, but they have tabs to pull to release it, and the battery cable isn't soldered to the board. iPhone displays are as easy to replace as they have ever been.

The weird custom screw heads are a pain, absolutely. We already had Torx. Pentalobe is just insulting. Combining security-critical parts (which justifiably need more scrutiny to replace) like the user-facing camera with parts which commonly fail like the screen is definitely bad. I don't see a good way to make it possible to swap cameras without making the screen significantly thicker, though.

Soldered flash is the biggest issue I have with Apple's lineup. SSDs last much longer than people think, but they are still wear components, just like the battery. Replaceable flash would eat into battery space, but with the M1 machines especially, I don't think it would reduce capacity enough for users to care.

RAM very rarely becomes faulty, so calls to move back to SO-DIMMs are about upgrades, not repairs.

You can already do single-item navigation with the current remote by tapping on the trackpad in the cardinal directions. Tap on the right edge, and the cursor moves one element to the right. It has worked like that since day 1. I wonder if you now need to click on the ring to move, or if taps will still work. I haven't had a problem identifying which end of the remote is which, but the improved contrast should help others who have.

I currently use a projector against a wall, so I look forward to finding out if the calibration works for that. My bet is no.

Called it.
https://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/comment/3272073/#Comment_3272073