cwingrav

The problem is a lack of standardized laws without loopholes. Assessing a large tax bill years later is wrong. Assuming a company is not going to avoid taxes if at all possible is wrong. A company, like a person, will avoid taxes as best it can. Tim is right to stand up for this. I can see how people would be angered with Tim, but I am not and I think that anger is misplaced. BOTH sides of the Atlantic (and world) need to work on clear and fair taxation so companies can operate efficiently; where the largest profits go to the best products and services, not the best accountants and lobbyists. I think this message is probably lost in all the discussion. Too much money is tied up in it all.

1st said:

nice article.  however, disagree with the statement of "Much of the work that Apple needs to do is simply refinement of existing technologies".  The VR and AR are both computational intensive for the hardware/software.  The existing technologies failed following: (1) non of existing vendor control both, even microsoft. components avalibility limited the progress, including weight of battery- major short coming to optimization and scale down the required computational intensity.  if apple follow the existing tech, it will fall into the same trap.  (2) AR and VR application was hindered by illness - true, not only the delay (related to item 1), but also the eye focal range.  Similar problem occur with projective overlay for pilot or some of night vision garggles.  Better understanding of image overlay and human eye integration will required.  (3) Resolution of display image that provide realistic environment at cost still a challenge.  Software may be able to somewhat compensate the short coming, but not all... the edge of the eyes are extremely sensitvie to the movement due to evolution that prevent us to be eaten by predator must be taking into consideration.  (4) application, educational VR are very useful... "XXXX - go" game are fun, but provide a glimpse of what can be achieved... get kids move to support 1st lady's motivation to get amarican fit again didn't get me to pull out of my money from the pocket - money is very tight here.  etc. etc. Apple, please, please learn from the existing technology and see why those guys are fail to delivery and provide us with NEW technology that leap and bound to next level.   i am keep my fingers and legs all crossed ;-).  - may be learn from the insect, only some image part is important? 

I'd like to clarify a few points of yours because I do agree with the article that Apple only needs to refine existing tech. It's all about what Apple intends to do with it.

1) AR/VR isn't too computationally expensive anymore. Sure, to run a PC game it would be, but the iPhone itself is already running 1st person shooters and only the addition of a tracking system would be necessary and that could be handled by a dedicated processor.

2) I can't understand what you meant by your point #1. Can you clarify?

3) Your point #2 is a clarification of the article and that's a good point to bring up. Much of the literature on simulator sickness has concluded that it stems from perception/vestibular miss-match. Things such as high visual flow and tracking system lag severely generate sickness. For most people and applications, these can be minimized through dedicated hardware and a static focal length (cars have people staring at the road at a fairly far distance). The eye focal length issue is just something that can't really be perfectly fixed with any approach that I know of, just hacked (which is kinda what VR/AR is anyway).

4) I'm not sure about your point #3. You are correct about field of view and resolution, but I'm not sure what your point is, in discussing them at the same time. For imbedded imagery, like a car windshield, neither shouldn't be a problem.

Like all things Apple does. It will target something specific, with just the right tech. If it doesn't introduce something that does everything you can imagine, it's probably because the technology does not yet exist. It should be fun to see what they create as I would really like to see our world with embedded imagery and interactive data. The good and useful type, not advertisements for apps...

lkrupp said:

What does an individual actually do with $36 million? Google says his net worth is $785 million. ...

I think a good investor continues to put their capital out there in smart investments to keep the system moving and lubed. Money makes money. As far as spending it personally, I think he's well past that or at least should be. It would be destructive if you tried. For 'after he's gone', I think mega millionaires are doing things like invest in the Gates foundation and such. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have pushed huge sums of money there. Neither plans to pass the bulk of their wealth to their children.

I can't believe how many of these I get in a week. I thought it was just me getting them. Thankfully they are doing something about it.

TurboPGT said:

Because this is what the world is missing? Bendable phones?

No. Next gimmick please. 

I think the eventual use will be in a flip-phone like system where you have a regular phone, and then can flip it open for twice the display space. It's not the bending that is a feature, but the ability to unfold, without bezels, into more pixels and interaction space. That said, if it doesn't have touch interaction on the flipped out part, it won't be useful.