twolf2919

lowededwookie said:

Remember when Apple was sent to court by the makers of this system because of the 30% fee asked by Apple to help pay for the infrastructure?

Apple should tell everyone complaining about this hypocrisy and let developers know they are actually getting a good deal.

Unity didn't send Apple to court - I think you're referring to Epic.

Anyone else think the 15 Pro is a bit underwhelming?  In terms of new hardware based features, it's an action button and 5x zoom (which rumors forecast to at least by 6x).  Sure, there's the usual SoC performance improvements - mostly geared towards gamers an professional photographers - that are expected every year and the expected change to the USB-C connector (with the rumors of the base iPhone 15 models only getting the slower USB speeds and only the Pro models getting 10gb/sec).  That's pretty much it.  Well, there's the use of titanium, making iPhones lose a small bit of weight (10%?).

The only bright spot is the trade-in.  If you have an iPhone 14 Pro Max, you might be able to trade it in for the 15 Pro Max for, maybe $200-300.  With such good trade-in an upgrade might be worth it, even if the improvements are so limited.

I honestly can't remember if iPhones have come with chargers and cables as of late (since the box was small I'm guessing not).  Apple ought to include those with the iPhone 15.

As another poster already complained, I fail to see how speed/accuracy improvements warrant the moniker "significant upgrade".  The only thing that'll make an Apple Watch upgrade significant, at this point, is the addition of a new sensor or, as another poster suggested, the addition of satellite SOS (perhaps only in the Ultra model as that feature might require significant power/battery?).

My previous Apple Watch was the AW6 and I vowed not to get a new one until the watch included a new sensor - e.g. blood pressure, body temperature, or glucose - none of these were added, but they did the only other thing for which I'd shell out for an upgrade: a bigger screen & battery in the introduced Ultra.  There have been no rumors about new sensors, so....

Seems kind of odd to see this headline just a couple months after ChatGPT et al put AI into the spotlight.  What are the odds of Apple just happen to need some AI servers at this time - especially, if they've been working on AI for years, as Tim Cook suggested.  To someone more cynical than I, it might seem as if Apple is trying to show in any public way they can that they're not behind on AI.

I hate to beat a dead horse to death, but if Apple had developed some worthwhile generative AI over the years, would Siri be in such a sad state?  I mean, it's been 12+ years since this digital assistant appeared on Apple's platform.  Has anyone noticed any huge improvements in those 12 years?  After a few years, I've pretty much been giving up on my hopes for it and been using it mainly to set an occasional timer or to check on the day's weather.  In the last couple years, I've added asking Siri to turn lights on/off for me.  Anything beyond that, is just too much of an exercise in frustration.  Siri mishears or needs an Internet connection for the most mundane requests  (e.g. requests for stuff that's on my friggin' phone!).  I've never expected Siri to engage in serious two-way conversations, but even asking simple follow-up questions to a previous question have mostly been beyond its ken (I think recently some rudimentary capability was added there for some limited scenarios).  If Apple has spent billions and years on AI, they sure haven't gotten their money's worth with Siri.

 AI, of course, is in a lot more things than just conversational AI - Apple has applied it successfully to its object recognition in Photos, voice transcription, and probably other areas.  But Apple's best known AI representative - Siri - remains as dumb as a stone.