CloudTalkin

WTH said:

fastasleep said:

"Do you really think the average Apple user geofences everything he or she owns?" What? You don't "geofence everything", you specify where your Home or Work locations are in your contact card, so you can use location-aware features of Siri, Find My, etc. If you leave an AirTag at work — even if you haven't specified your work location — if it's not moving, it won't make a sound. Per Apple, "When moved, any AirTag separated for a period of time from the person who registered it will make a sound to alert those nearby." If you loan an item to a friend, and that item is going to be moved around, remove the AirTag first. Also from Apple: "If the AirTag is attached to something you’re borrowing and you want to silence these alerts, tap Pause Safety Alerts."

You're claiming Apple's new product will fail because "they'll constantly annoy their users", entirely based on false assumptions due to not understanding how the product functions. Any other speculation beyond that is pointless for that reason alone.

The "real problem" you posit is no more applicable to AirTag than any other tracking device. Guess what, you could already track people with little GPS trackers that work even better than AirTags do. My neighbor retrieved their cat's collar that had a GPS device on it in my yard — were they stalking their cat? Perhaps. If your point is that Apple shouldn't enter this product space, nobody cares, and it's too late anyway. If your point is that Apple will make them "too annoying" and thereby useless, I call bullshit and also nobody cares. If you think this will cause a surge in stalking and violent crimes, I call bullshit.

I concede to most of your points.  I am still waiting for my backordered AirTags to be delivered, so I am not familiar with all the nuances of their behavior.  Thank you for the clarifications.

As to the point I'm trying to make - I completely agree that many other tracking devices as just as "dangerous" as the AirTag when it comes to potential stalking, which is why I find the "AirTags will enable stalkers" stories so irritating.  As someone who wants to use a few AirTags as anti-theft devices, it is frustrating to see so much focus on Apple while other manufacturers are ignored.  My concern is that Apple is going to wind up neutering a much superior device for the sake of satisfying critics who will never be happy no matter what Apple does.

Even an 8 hour minimum time limit isn't going to satisfy the anti-AirTag crowd.  So what's next?  4 hours?  2 hours?  1 hour?  It's all a question of how much further Apple is willing to be pushed.

Regardless, I've decided that the best approach may be a hardware modification, by removing the speaker magnet altogether.  It seems relatively straightforward, and would make the AirTag far more useful for anti-theft.

WTH said:

fastasleep said:

Are you both forgetting that your devices know where your home is, assuming you've set up your own contact card properly? Do you not ever use geofencing like "Hey Siri, remind me when I get home to feed the cat"? You and your devices have relevant location data which mitigates your manufactured problem here.

Okay, then how about an example where you loan a friend some item, or leave it at work, or at a family member's house, or some place that you haven't geofenced?  My manufactured problem is no less relevant than your manufactured solution.  Do you really think the average Apple user geofences everything he or she owns?

The real problem is this - it is impossible for Apple to separate the intended function of the AirTag from situations where it could be abused.  As many have pointed out, even 8 hours is more than enough time for a stalker to locate you.  A tracking device is a tracking device - you can't make it a "good" tracking device without making it useless.  It's like trying to make a knife that will cut food but somehow can't be used to cut other things.  The only way is to dull the blade to the point where it can't cut anything.

Apple is headed down the path of making the AirTag useless because it will wind up constantly annoying its users.  And I expect that Sidewalk-enabled Tile trackers will never get one paragraph of mention in a Washington Post article.

mike1 said:

AppleInsider said:

Current AirTag anti-stalking measures cause the accessory to play an alert when separated from their owner within three days. Now, it'll play at a random time window that's between eight and 24 hours, CNET reported Thursday.

That seems problematic. So, the tag in my suitcase that is stored in a closet could start to play an alert if I am away for as little as 8 hours?! That would be every single work day. My wife will hit me over the head with the suitcase after she tracks down the annoying sound and I get home from work.

tmay said:

CloudTalkin said:

thedba said:

AppleInsider said:

In terms of shipment numbers, Samsung is thought to be producing 80 million units of the display for the new iPhone, with between 120 million and 130 million total OLED panels anticipated to ship to Apple in 2021. For LG, it is apparently aiming for 30 million units for the "iPhone 13," and a total of 50 million overall for the year.

Those numbers are just mind blowing. 
This is one reason why Apple could not put Pro motion in the iPhone 12 Pro. The sheer numbers required by Apple to put into their flagship devices is just staggering.
Before someone says "Yeah, but Samsung sells more phones",  I don't think they sell as many brand new flagship devices as Apple.

The numbers are impressive.  Apple sells a lot of phones.  The volume of phones is not a reason that Apple didn't put high refresh panels in the 12 Pro.  Samsung had the capability to provide the panels for the 12 Pro/Max.  Apple chose not to put the panel in the 12's.  Whatever their reasoning, it wasn't due to lack of capacity.  

Why would anyone mention Samsung selling more phones?  It would be an irrelevant factoid.  Samsung Display makes panels, not phones.  Don't let petty fanboyism color your commentary.

Samsung didn't even deliver its first VRR screen in a Galaxy model until August of last year, too late for Apple iPhone 12. I could also make the argument that, while Samsung sells more phones, its ASP is reportedly just until $300, while Apple's iPhone is somewhere in the mid $850's. This is a pretty good indication that Apple does in fact sell more premium phones, and would also need quite a bit more VRR LTPO OLED screens than Samsung would require for its own products.

(Samsung's unit marketshare is approximately 20 percent, while Apple's iPhone is approximately 16 percent, a 25 percent advantage over iPhone).

So where have all of those VRR LTPO OLED displays been going to if Samsung had enough production for even just Apple's iPhone 12 Pro Max?

No reported shortage because Apple didn't want to create it by specifying it for any iPhone 12 model?

I have provided a link to Samsung's first Galaxy with VRR LTPO OLED panel;

https://tekdeeps.com/samsung-details-first-ltpo-oled-screen-for-smartphones-with-vrr/

"Samsung details first LTPO OLED screen for smartphones with VRR

August 12, 2020

Samsung announces that it is the first with an OLED screen for smartphones with variable refreshment. This allows seamless switching between refresh rates, saving the battery. Presumably it concerns the ltpo technique. The Galaxy Note 20 Ultra (preview) is the first device to get this."

thedba said:

CloudTalkin said:

thedba said:

CloudTalkin said:

thedba said:

CloudTalkin said:

thedba said:

AppleInsider said:

In terms of shipment numbers, Samsung is thought to be producing 80 million units of the display for the new iPhone, with between 120 million and 130 million total OLED panels anticipated to ship to Apple in 2021. For LG, it is apparently aiming for 30 million units for the "iPhone 13," and a total of 50 million overall for the year.

Those numbers are just mind blowing. 
This is one reason why Apple could not put Pro motion in the iPhone 12 Pro. The sheer numbers required by Apple to put into their flagship devices is just staggering.
Before someone says "Yeah, but Samsung sells more phones",  I don't think they sell as many brand new flagship devices as Apple.

The numbers are impressive.  Apple sells a lot of phones.  The volume of phones is not a reason that Apple didn't put high refresh panels in the 12 Pro.  Samsung had the capability to provide the panels for the 12 Pro/Max.  Apple chose not to put the panel in the 12's.  Whatever their reasoning, it wasn't due to lack of capacity.  

Why would anyone mention Samsung selling more phones?  It would be an irrelevant factoid.  Samsung Display makes panels, not phones.  Don't let petty fanboyism color your commentary.

Any links as to why Apple chose not to include pro motion into the iPhone 12? 

As for the irrelevant factoid comment, I disagree when sites like the Verge, amongst many, tell us about the beautiful displays that Samsung (and some others) put on their phones/tablets while Apple is still using boring LCD or more recently boring 60Hz OLED panels.
Fact remains, if Apple cannot secure tens of millions of certain component for their new iPhones, then that technology is simply not going in and will have to wait for at least a year. 

There may be other reasons too and do share if you have them.

I have no idea why Apple didn't put LTPO panels in the 12 series, but it wasn't due to an inability to secure panels.  Samsung had the capacity.  Pure supposition: Samsung could have required too high of a minimum order guarantee for the LTPO panels.  Apple has already had to pay Samsung twice for missing order minimums on the regular panels.  Starting fresh on the 13 series might make the minimums more palatable.  Who knows.  

You're conflating sites reporting about Samsung phones with info about Samsung panels.  Panels looking good and panel manufacturing are not the same thing.  SDI makes the panels for Samsung and Apple.  Whether Samsung Electronics sells more phones is irrelevant with regards to the panel manufacturing discussed in the article.  Again, it's simply unnecessary fanboyism.

Asking questions isn’t fanboyism. 

Here’s a link to one YouTuber’s analysis stating amongst several possible reasons, supply (others being price, battery life, etc.)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pb-CGAkRrkM
Rene Ritchie also talked about it in one of his videos.

You say you don’t know but then state with certainty that Samsung Display had the capacity. 

So where’s your link asserting that SDI had the capacity but Apple didn’t want to for other reasons?

Bud, you didn't ask a question.  You made declarative statements.  1. You said Apple didn't use LTPO because of their staggering numbers.  2.  You went all fanboy talking about someone saying Samsung sells more phones.  Totally unrelated to panel manufacturing.  Nary a question to be found.  

Samsung's capacity is my opinion.  Anecdotally, if they had a pane shortage, it would have been in the news... a lot too since rumors were flying hot and heavy about the 12 receiving LTPO panels.  Even after the 12 didn't get the panels, there was never rumor regarding a shortage of them.  Is that 100% confirmation?  Nope, but I can't ever recall SDI being in a panel deficit.  I've never heard of them not being able to deliver on panels either. Make of that what you will.

Those numbers are just mind blowing. 
This is one reason why Apple could not put Pro motion in the iPhone 12 Pro. The sheer numbers required by Apple to put into their flagship devices is just staggering.

Above is my original post.  

I said, this is one reason…. Never said it was the only reason. 

Then you chime in, with guns cocked and firing the “fanboy” accusation. After several exchanges you keep using the term “fanboy” but never provide any evidence to support your argument that it’s definitely not SDI’s incapacity to provide those panels to Apple in the required numbers. 

Finally we get a sort of admission, that it’s only your opinion. 

I’ll change my stance if you provide me with evidence/links that what you’re saying is true. Calling me a “fanboy” and then saying “it’s only your opinion”, will have the exact opposite effect.