AppleZulu

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?

This is so laughable I’ve got to wonder if Apple isn’t intentionally “leaking” info to Kuo’s sources just to prank him. 

Rogue01 said:

AppleZulu said:

Siri is currently better than the peanut gallery claims. 

No, it is not.

Siri, play Tom Petty.  Siri: Playing music by MC Hammer.
Siri, play 'name of playlist'.  Siri: Sorry, I can't do that.  Siri cannot even play a playlist because she can't figure it out.
and my favorite
Siri, give me directions to 'address'.  Siri: I cannot do that while you are driving.  WHAT?  That is the whole point of Siri and that is the message that came up in CarPlay.

Sorry, but Siri is not any better than day one.  So many basic things that Siri can't do.  Here is what I found on the internet.  Yeah, whatever Siri.  And the AppleTV Siri is even worse, and so is the Mac Siri. You don't even know what to ask it because Siri is different on all devices.

I’ve asked Siri all of the above and got the correct results. 

saarek said:

AppleZulu said:

Honestly, it’s remarkable how long Steve Jobs’ reality distortion field remains in effect after his own death. 

The perception that he introduced new, fully-formed, instantly successful category killer products on an annual basis continues unabated. This is, of course, the driving force behind the perpetual lamentations about incrementalism at Apple. 

Turn off the RDF, and you’d realize everything at Apple has started at a slow burn and moved along at an incremental pace thereafter. Even the iPhone took years to become an instant success. 

The gloomy predictions in this article seem largely based on some features not showing up yet in the current iOS beta. I personally wouldn’t recommend selling your stock based on that. Either way, this stuff takes time to get right, and then when it does, everyone forgets about the half-baked competition that was supposed to be ahead of the curve. 

Siri is currently better than the peanut gallery claims, and in my experience, the occasional regressions where Siri stumbles on something that used to work usually turn out to be the result of back-end updates that come before a boost in Siri power or features. 

Lost in the grousing about iPhone 16e and MagSafe is the fact that the included hardware didn’t skimp on its ability to handle ‘Apple Intelligence.’ That’s because that’s what’s coming in the immediate pipeline, and they’re not going to sell a new iPhone that can’t handle it. Apple’s decisions about the 16e likely would’ve been different if the delays predicted in this article are accurate. 

I think that it's fair to say that people have a right to be frustrated here. You've got to remember that Siri first shipped in 2011, Apple had first mover advantage and it failed to deliver on the original promisses. In 2014 it was eclipsed on day one by Amazon's Alexa and was further pushed into also-ran status when Google Assistant launched in 2016. 

Yes, for super basic queries, Siri does just fine. But, after nearly 14 years of being on the market, you'd think that they'd have caught up by now. 

Think of Apple Maps. When it launched, it was rightly called out for being a mess and for being an inferior replacement for Google Maps. It took a few generations, but I've not heard the average person bitch about Apple Maps for years now.

Consider where iOS is today and what it can do now against iOS version 5. Yes, Siri has moved on a bit from iOS 5 too, of course it has. But it's still absurdly basic and poorly received by the masses in comparison to the competition.

People can be frustrated if they want, but the claims that Siri is 'far behind the others' are probably overblown. In fact, just a year ago, google dropped 17 features from its assistant in order to "focus on quality and reliability." It doesn't take much digging around in Android forums to find that those users are not necessarily giddy about how great Android Assistant is. Apple has nonetheless kept Siri's focus somewhat narrower than competitors, notably because Apple isn't mining your data and using Siri to sell you crap. The commitment to privacy and security surely prevents Siri from doing some things that others can do, but I'm not convinced that the gap is as wide as some claim it is. 

I use Siri successfully every day. I have an idea what it can and can't do, and I have a basic sense of what the back end is probably doing to respond to requests and queries, so perhaps my expectations are different than others. 

Honestly, it’s remarkable how long Steve Jobs’ reality distortion field remains in effect after his own death.