Last Active
  • Google premieres Stadia, an online cross-platform game streaming service

    It actually doesn't matter what Google shows during a presentation regarding latency, and I'd expect it that latency to be low since they would be "close" in geography and infrastructure to the server. Latency is a byproduct of the individual's (frequently unique) combination of hardware and connective network services - it's why Youtube is fast for some and not others - not because Google's Youtube servers or CDN are poor.

    People still can't understand why their battery loses charge performance over time, some can't even grasp the basics of day-to-day network traffic. So while I congratulate Google for having the courage to put out a service like this (and the demand it will create for improving network latency) it's just not something which aligns well with the target market of gamers. Especially when considering that this is a service which will enable people with lower disposable income to get involved (typically the same people who have budget internet.)
    Time of day and Internet traffic affects latency and bandwidth more than any of those things you mentioned. I have 100 mbit/sec FIOS in NYC which is great except when it's not. There are times when Youtube barely works so I check the little 'How is my connection?' and Youtube shows me that everyone happens to be on Youtube at the same moment which creates a terrible experience for all, especially someone trying to initiate a new stream.

    I'm not saying that this will fail or cannot be technically done, I'm just saying that there are some things that Google cannot control so users have to be prepared for some letdowns.
  • Apple's AR glasses arriving in 2020, iPhone will do most of the work

    And if ( a big IF ) the AR Goggles has a sensor to scan in hands to interact with the 3D AR objects, then this is what Apple should have released in the very first place! Apple's idea of using an iOS device to hold up for AR use is asinine and I have never, I mean, NEVER seen anyone locally hold up an iPhone or iPad just for that. The only exception would be the Ingress game in my experience which is AR, a bit older than Pokemon Go and doesn't require holding up a phone in front of an object or location.

    Another concern I have is that the AR Goggles will most likely need to be recharged which makes it the 5th device with a rechargeable battery ( iPhone, iPad, Watch, AirPods and now this one ) running on Bluetooth. 

    I suspect the AR Goggles will probably go for close to $300-400 alone when and IF they release it in 2020, depending on the market situation. 
    Apple chose to use the phone as the platform and display because the alternative was Google Glass and HoloLens. One was a commercial failure and the other is way out everyone's price range except for enterprise. In these past few years, Apple has learned a lot about AR precisely because they went with the iPhone and iPad as platforms. Using hands freely for gesturing and other things was always their mission but the technology just wasn't there a few years ago and it arguably still isn't based on Magic Leap reviews I've seen.

    Recharging any any discreet device is just something we have all come to accept and deal with. It is much better than the alternative of a physical tether and besides, taking off your glasses and putting them on an AirPower charging pad sounds like a simple way to deal with the charging issues and make a lot of extra money for Apple.

    $300-$400 is Apple Watch pricing. This is a new category with much more going on in the way of sensors, battery tech, wireless connectivity, cameras and display. It will not be sold for less than $699. It might not be great 1st or 2nd gen hardware or software but will sell millions and temporarily push Apple into the forefront of AR. The only question is will the developers and general consumers embrace Apple's AR in the same way that they have done so for iPhone, iPad and Apple Watch?
  • Apple removes Siri team lead as part of AI strategy shift

    k2kw said:
    I don't buy the Siri is sooo far behind. Not for one minute. The entire issue is really about what access you give these intrusive home listening devices. They are toys at this point. You ply a song, you look up weather. what exactly are they doing to change your life? And I ask honestly. The Google and Amazon devices are happy to rummage through your life to find connections. Giving the device access to everything you write, all your address, your locations, your work and children ETC, yes. It will 'seem' smarter. It's just a better spy isn't it?

    Outside of this forum I’ve never met any one who didn’t think Siri was a pathetic joke.   More a pain to use than worth trying.   I actively try to stay away from Miss Annoyance.   Alexa on the other hand works great and was cheap.  
    Who are you talking to, tech reporters and product testers?

    I've never met any regular iOS/Siri user that thinks Siri is a joke. They might if they did a full comparison with other voice assistants but most users just don't care either way. Once you know the limitations (all of them have many limits) of voice assistants, you either figure out how they benefit your life in a small way or you just don't use them. There is no magic assistant that works for everything.
  • Apple exec admits Qualcomm was the only option for 4G in the iPhone for years

    cornchip said:
    Admitted? was it a secret?
    Right. Also, I’m not clear on how that bolsters Qualcomm’s case. It seems like they were the only game in town and still decided to abuse that position. 
    And all of the tech blogs have the same shoddy reporting and reader reactions. Not sure if it's symptomatic of Apple tech blogs or just tech bloggers' inability to analyze legal proceedings.
  • Waze celebrates 'Tim Cook Day,' says Apple Maps' botched launch led to success

    I'm not part of the brain-dead "fire Cook!" crowd but those 2 events are reasons to get him or someone at Apple fired.
     Scott Forstall comes to mind.

    Keep in mind at the time Waze was not a great mapping app, but getting full access to the Google APIs made it so. Waze requires constant user attention, it's distracting and not a great fit for Apple's vision, but it is perfect for Google.
    This is a good point and the reason why I tried Waze for a few hours and then bailed on it. I found Waze to be just too dangerous to fully utilize while driving. Like all Android software, there are too many tweaks, alerts and hands-on time required instead of just focusing on what users really want and need.