- Last Active
tht said:Beats said:I was underwhelmed with the M1 Mac reveal. Yeah I know it has a bad ass Apple processor and bad ass software support but I expected more from the company who invented the Mac.
Here’s what I expected
1. Apple modem or at least support for cellular networks.
2. App Store funnel for all applications. (Probably too late for this now)
3. A revolutionary new design. Maybe a new touchbar, FaceID, a hinge that can place the MacBook flat for Pencil support and drawing etc.
One of the main points of Apple Silicon Macs was that they didn’t run hot.... oh yeah and also noiseless.
2. As long people can side load, the App Store just isn't going to be a thing on macOS. Apple can make the App Store a popular place if they published some popular apps maybe, but they are reluctant to do that.
3. I don't think there is a "revolutionary" design in the cards for a PC, not like the OG iPhone was. It's all iterative refinements. A foldable, with robust display covers, will be coming, but I don't think that's a revolution. You are still operating it like a laptop or a tablet, except the keyboards and tracking devices will be virtual. I do think they need to put more work in with keyboards, both the software versions on iPads, the ones in laptops, and external ones. It's something used all the time, a primary UI device, and continued optimizations and maybe experimentation would be nice to see.
Eg, I'd like them to offer 2-row, 3-row ortho-linear software keyboards on iPadOS. Something that would yield more display area for apps.
4. The next revolution is probably AR. Obviously Apple has been hinting so for ages now.Beats said:One of the main points of Apple Silicon Macs was that they didn’t run hot.... oh yeah and also noiseless.
Then, we will see how it goes when the large Apple Silicon laptops arrive.
Ok, so 3nm is a limit. Or 2 or 1 or 0.5.What do chip makers do next? How else do you keep improving processors beyond some gimmicky feature that doesn’t do anything except distinguish this years product from last year’s? Even if Moore’s law is doomed I can’t believe that increasing processing power is going to become completely stagnant in the next 5-20 years.
GeorgeBMac said:jumpcutter said:It is nice that Apple constantly improves the various functions and apps but not the battery life! 18 hours of charge still does not qualify as an "all-day battery." I do not understand, Apple supposedly has all these great innovative minds but can not build a better battery. Other watch companies like Fit Bit and Garmin have developed batteries that hold up to 5 to 14-day charge. Garmin has even a solar version! What is the problem with Apple other than wanting to overcharge for their products with inferior technology and trying to amaze everyone with their apps which is nice but with crappy battery life? Apple amazes me with their apparent lack of innovation and false claims of great watch sales. I would like to get a titanium version of the Apple Watch but the battery life has stopped me from buying one. Garmin fenix 6 has a titanium version for the same amount of money as Apple's titanium version but better battery life. Sorry Apple, I know this is not the first time anyone has commented on the apparent weakness of the Apple Watch. It does not matter how pretty you built a house but if the foundation is weak it will still falter! The battery life is the foundation of the watch as far as I am concerned! I know people will call me a troll and whatever. I do not care! Even the Apple salespeople wish for better batter life!To get the battery life that a Garmin or FitBit does you would have to lower the screen quality as well as lower the functionality down to their level. Plus, some of the Garmins pickup extra battery life simply by being extra huge.The functionality I get from my Apple Watch far out weighs the 45 minutes or so that I spend to charge it in the morning. Other than that it's on my wrist 23 hours a day 7 days a week.This, in a nutshell.If Apple or anyone else could make a battery that lasted 24 hours with significant hours at a high current draw economically then it would be available already. Such a battery probably can be made, but it would be ridiculously expensive and it’s lifespan may be shorter that current batteries. Apple isn’t the only device developer who could use such a battery but no one has it. You either lose features or you need to recharge more frequently.
SoundJudgment said:Now, throw in Blood Glucose levels and you'll have the Triple Crown of detection.