FileMakerFeller
About
- Username
- FileMakerFeller
- Joined
- Visits
- 75
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 2,491
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 1,573
Reactions
-
Tim Cook calls spatial computing in Apple Vision Pro an 'aha moment' in a user's life
It's amazing how much your argument covers desktop computers as well. Sitting down at a table or desk to operate a machine was unusual behaviour back in the day but, as with typewriters, people happily made the adjustment for the benefits provided.PauloSeraa said:Amazingly, it's the first product Apple has ever introduced that no one actually wants to use. Oh, some people want the experience it unlocks, for sure. But no one actually wants to use the product...they will use it in spite of it. No one actually wants a gigantic, heavy, nausea-inducing, world-isolating headset. Not for anything. And certainly not for what amounts to an iPad strapped to their head. So every single user will be someone who is putting up with that awful hardware in order to get access to an interesting software experience. What kind of potential does that actually have?
I feel like Apple is doing an awful lot of pretending here. And those championing the product are too. Riding the coattails of other confident successes where Apple was right to be confident. There are seeing if they can actually fake the confidence, and create a market as a result. I just don't see it, because you will never fake people into spending $3500+, and you won't fake them into wearing it for any length of time.
No one ever looked at the iPhone and said, "Ugh I have to hold this thing in order to use it?"
No one ever looked at the Apple Watch and said "Ugh I have to wear this thing in order to use it?"
No one ever looked at the HomePod and said "Ugh I have to plug this thing in and put it out of the way somewhere in order to use it?"
No one ever looked at the AppleTV and said "Ugh I have to plug this thing into my TV and watch it?"
These are not objectionable products. The VisionPro is objectionable hardware from the start. People in the microscopic VR community seem to take for granted that shitty uncomfortable hardware is to be expected if you want such an experience. That shouldn't be acceptable to Apple, because it certainly isn't acceptable to average consumers.
When the Mac was released, people who were used to computers scoffed at the need to use a mouse and derided it as an under-powered toy. But within 15 years every desktop computer sported a GUI and a pointing device, despite the compromises that required.
So I'm quite bullish on the future of the Apple Vision Pro specifically and spatial computing in general. As with earlier devices we will see miniaturisation and performance improvements that will make the first generation seem antiquated after a mere decade. Having worn spectacles for 35 years now and having worn a helmet for kart racing I'm not averse to having a potentially heavy object on my head as long as the balance is correct and the experience the object enables brings benefits that outweigh the drawbacks. Nausea is the only troublesome aspect but from all reports Apple have managed to minimise that issue as well as the "world-isolating" aspect of VR headsets, so I expect the product to be quite successful.
-
Thronmax Space wireless mic kit review: an almost-great option for vloggers & more
Was this tested with the iPhone 15 series? USB-C now available! -
Apple considers $2B Apple TV+ streaming rights grab for Formula 1
Sky's coverage is great. I find it jarring to watch an event that has a different commentary and support team (e.g. the Australian Grand Prix where the local broadcast from Channel Ten covers the entire weekend but keeps jumping out to unrelated topics and "tie-ins" that I do not care about).macxpress said:
Why not? The things Apple could do with this would be great. Gotta be better than ESPN, or Sky.M68000 said:F1 is available now as it’s own streaming service. I’ve considered getting it. So this “deal” could mean that eventually the only place to get F1 would be on Apple ?? Not sure i like that.
Currently the video is captured by Formula1 and provided to the broadcasters/streamers for the live commentary (lap/sector times are also provided by F1). There is a limited ability to choose the video source you want and the timing information, but you can watch the race from the car of a given driver and there's now some pretty awesome footage from the helmet cameras.
IMHO, there's no other sport than motorsport that would be a better fit for the AVP - giving you the ability to perceive the action from the driver's viewpoint at whatever time you choose is a great feature. F1, F2, F3, F-E, WRC, Indy, tin-tops on various tracks... maybe even the "flying car" racing that Netflix has a documentary series about. -
Apple considers $2B Apple TV+ streaming rights grab for Formula 1
You mean like Formula-E?williamh said:I don’t think F1 racing is carbon neutral and that’s something Apple cares about. Maybe Apple ought to push or pay to start an e-racing league.
F1 has a goal to be carbon neutral by 2030, but they've still got a way to go. -
Every iPhone screen has a barcode to prevent a manufacturing scam
I respectfully disagree. If Apple wants to track individual parts to minimise the "chop shop" activities then by necessity any repairs need to be logged with Apple. The "authorised repair centre" model gives Apple more control over the data capture and minimises the number of events that are not tracked. Returning the faulty parts also gives Apple the opportunity to analyse them and potentially make changes to their design and manufacturing to reduce problems in the future.darkvader said:danox said:Don’t worry, they’ll have to do the same thing in India and Vietnam too. And probably for almost everything else they make in China or anywhere else, a lot of those etching and markings/codes that Apple puts on all of their devices that are manufactured overseas are probably there for many of the same reasons, they’re not just there to make Lou Rossmann cry iFixit.Louis Rossmann does not care AT ALL about barcodes. What he (and I, and you should) care about is the ability to repair devices. There is NO EXCUSE for screens not to be swappable between iPhones and functionality to be broken. Apple intentionally breaking compatibility should be criminal conduct. If there's a legitimate reason that calibration is necessary (there isn't, but if there was) then the tool to do the calibration should be made available to the public or somebody at Apple should go to jail.There's no excuse for Apple's bad behavior.
All of Apple's efforts to reduce the benefit to thieves have so far been quite successful, and the benefits accrue to all device purchasers. The drawbacks, however, accrue to individuals who are restricted from repairing their own devices or experimenting with modifications.
It's really hard from the outside to determine whether or not the global benefit outweighs the localised costs. We don't see the reduction in thefts other than by anecdotal reports, nor do we see the impact on device longevity, nor the effect of non-genuine parts on device performance. Apple has a lot of those numbers but chooses not to share them. It's easier to track the costs of repair and replacement, and therefore we naturally give those numbers more prominence. But it might be worth remembering that there are trade-offs being made and we don't have all the information required to make a solid judgement.
