rols

wlym said:

"Rather than Adobe trying to hype up the Healing Brush as the reason to pay for an all-new Photoshop"… Except Adobe's now doing something worse, with little recourse for subscribers: pushing out half-baked, buggy software, with new "features" that few are asking for while very often ignoring the bugs each new release adds to the list. Back in the days when I could buy Photoshop (and Illustrator and Indesign), I could wait out a buggy release or ignore one whole "upgrade" entirely. Now, if a colleague or customer automatically updates their version(s) of Adobe CC, I have to as well or I won't be able to open their files (Photoshop is more forgiving than AI or ID in this regard). In general, the "features" are getting less and less useful (Photoshop reversing SHIFT to constrain proportions is one egregious example) as well but I imagine Adobe needs to offer a bullet point list of "new!" every now and then to justify the expensive subscription. I guess they have little to lose as they have a monopoly on industry essential design software for the foreseeable future. So, after years of paying Adobe for a subscription, the moment I decide not to pay anymore, I can no longer open a single file I created in their software. How is this fair? Why are you cheering?

I thought this was a fair synopsis of many of the things wrong with Adobe's subscription model and by inference a lot of other subscription models too. I refused to purchase Adobe CC subscription because it would lock me into paying forever to continue to be able to open files I'd created when I did have said subscription. Adobe used to have to actually improve their software so that people would upgrade at least every now and again, and I didn't mind that. If I didn't want shiny new feature X and hadn't bought a new camera, I could just use stick with the version I had until I did. Now if you want Adobe you have to subscribe (apart from Photoshop Elements which can still be bought) and their incentive for improving the software is diminished. 

I've found FaceID much better in almost every way. I often have wet hands either from cooking/washing up or just finishing a workout and TouchID was terrible in those cases. That was common enough that FaceID really shines. I also find the whole interface motion much more intuitive, the number of times I pressed the home button and thought it was too soon, pressed it again and ended up with Siri or Apple Pay instead of an opened phone was .. quite large. Now I just put a thumb on the screen and move it around and it feels very natural. 

It's not just the initial unlock which is better, for apps which used to require touch ID to unlock the app you'd see the touchID symbol, then have to place your thumb to authenticate. Since you're already looking at the screen, FaceID starts scanning you and moves though the process before you really notice it happened and without you having to do anything except keep looking. 

The only instance in which FaceID is worse for me is phone lying on the desk I'm sitting at. I can't unlock it in-place which I used to be able to do with an index finger on the button, I have to tilt it up enough to face me so I can scan my face. I don't know if that's something software may be able to fix with the current hardware or it will require an even larger dot projector/scanner which can look 'sideways'. Even with that less-optimal case, I find FaceID better than TouchID ever was. 

Blunt said:

Apple nailed it. You can tell by counting the trolls.

You can tell by what actually happened in the market. I'll take Singapore as that's where I live. The pre-orders and telcom-orders were, as usual, dominated by scalpers buying the max of 2 units in the hope of making a quick buck. But Apple kept enough back for line-up that there was no point in paying over RRP, and with the flood of telcom (non-returnable) phones the scalper market collapsed. The scalpers returned their phones, Apple offered them same day for in-store pickup, most of the rest of the scalpers saw the game was up and returned them and lots of people didn't bother to pick up their telco sets (even less valuable as they couldn't be returned to Apple). It was a virtuous circle. 

A few, very few, made a quick buck. Most scalper phones were DHL delivered and hand-returned and then sold to real customers. 

Kudos to Apple for perfect pricing and the nimble-ness to get phones they knew would be returned intact back out for same-day pickup. The scalpers will try it again next year but the game is up, the more who play, the less anyone has a chance to win. Happy for all the real customers who picked up a phone this weekend at, or below, RRP, which they actually want to use.