mattinoz

slow n easy said:

This story is not correct. I ordered the Milanese Loop with my Series 10, so it's not true that it can only be ordered with the Ultra. Also, why would it add $199 to the cost of the Ultra when the band only costs $99. Also, it only added $50 to the cost of my Series 10. The base price of my Series 10 Titanium is $749. Ordering the Series 10 Titanium with the Milanese Loop, brings the total to $799, which is the base price for the Ultra. It's a trade-off. The titanium case and sapphire glass make it extra durable and scratch resistant, but it's also much thinner than the Ultra and even has a slightly larger screen.

DAalseth said:

I’m going to have to side with those that are critical of the VP and Apple’s handling of it. It’s really cool tech, but it seems to be going nowhere fast. I don’t see it taking off like the iPhone or the Mac did. There isn’t enough content or enough uses for it. It also may be a great immersive experience, but for a third of the price you can get a couple of big high def monitors and do everything you want. Maybe someday it will reach its potential, but not in the near, or even medium term.

I would not be surprised if this ends up a repeat of the Mac/Windows history. Mac was superior, but Windows was cheaper and you could do more with it. When the VP was released I said call me in five years when it was more mature. I’ll hold to the five year timeline, but would not be at all surprised if the dominant VR/AR system at that point is not Apple’s. They are dropping the ball for all the reasons you outlined above. 

apple4thewin said:

iPad mini should be with a A18 chip and the regular iPad with an A17. But then again everyone seems to agree that the production yield is terrible for the 1st gen 3nm chips. With 8th gen iPads already being unable to use some apps and games and 10th gen also 2 years old at least a spec bump would be appreciated (since it uses a A14 unlike the A15 in the mini).

headfull0wine said:

appleinsideruser said:

blastdoor said:

headfull0wine said:

I’m waiting for the new Mini to come out to replace my 27” intel iMac. I don’t want to drop $3k+ on a Mini and Studio Display, but I want retina scaling and I REALLY don’t want a 24” screen. So what’s a guy to do?

The absence of the 27” iMac is likely driving more Mac Mini sales. I also suspect most will go outside the Apple ecosystem for a monitor rather than shell out for the Studio Display. Lost opportunity for Apple. 

I also was coming from a 27” iMac. 

I tried a cheaper display but I couldn’t stand the downgrade from the display in my iMac. So I sprung for the Studio Display. It seems like it should be less expensive, yet obviously I was willing to pay. 

Yeah, me too. Couldn’t stand the thought of a display downgrade from my 5k iMac. Got a cool 3D printed stand to attach the Mac mini vertically to the ASD stand. Neat and easily movable too.

I was also hoping to mount the Mini to the back of the display. Hopefully with the new smaller form factor, this will be even easier and cleaner to mount. 

… or they come out with a 27”+ iMac. One can dream.

twolf2919 said:

Not a very convincing article.   The author has no evidence that Apple is actually readying a ring.  Sure, Apple has been filing patents for ring-like devices for years, but it does that even when it has no current plans for one.  It's called research. 

The author goes on about how the ring has do something better than the existing devices - but never actually gives an example of what that could be.  All he manages is examples of a ring assisting other devices in doing an existing function more seamlessly.  That's hardly a recipe for assured success.  Especially when the  tradeoff for getting a slightly enhanced function (e..g . more accurate heart rate monitoring when both Apple Watch and this ring are worn together), is the up-front cost of that ring as well as the continued 'cost' of having to charge yet another device.  We don't mind charging our phones every day because it provides us with lots of functionality we otherwise would not have.  Same with the Apple Watch.  But is the ability to gesture with a ring vs. pushing a button on the watch or phone enough for you to find the time to charge that ring every day (or every n days)?  I doubt it.

This equation will change only when something like Apple Glass gets released.  Unlike the Vision Pro, Glass will be worn all day and its market might be as huge as the iPhone because it'll let you do all the things you do on your iPhone without taking your iPhone out of your pocket.  To do that, gestures - e.g. with a ring - will become vital.  But it might come bundled with Apple  Glass instead of being its own product.