wigby

SpamSandwich said:

Kids will buy them because for some bizarre reason they like Snapchat. Incidentally, the name of the company is Snap, their service is Snapchat.

I'm not even sure about that. I have yet to hear an owner of these glasses explain a compelling reason for others to buy them except for the fact that they are hard to acquire. Snap has created a successful product but only through scarcity. Now that they are available online to all, I think we will see the true demand for these camera glasses.

chasm said:

Is it really too much to ask that you include the word "Rumor" or similar language in your headline? Because that's what this is. Ming-Chi Kuo was *way off* on his last round of predictions, though he has made some good guesses in the past. Please stop stating speculation as fact in headlines. Journalism 101, guys.

I agree in theory but not in practice. I'm tired of going to rumor sites 6 months in advance of the actual product release and having to disseminate the actual rumor because the headline writer is forced to produce linguistic gymnastics in order not to get sued, misinterpreted as gospel or any other confusing interpretation of he story. I'm on a rumor site so tell me the rumor as if you're the guy telling me an exclusive at a party or even in confidence. Even if people do believe this rumor is 100% true, they cannot act upon it so it presents no actionable or illegal consumer product issue to anyone. It's simply fan fiction for now. We're all adults so why not distill stories down to their core and not their literal truths? That would be a job for editorials and opinion pieces, not regurgitated telephone game. Telephone game is fun but no one at the end of the line expects the truth for that is the real fun.

As far as practice, I suspect its mostly to maximize SEO with Google. Use any words like "rumored" or "reported" or "believed" in your headline and you're fighting a million other rumor headlines and not the news. This might be a form of click bait by some standards but it is not the same as fake news. Wake me up when the headlines really fool people just before a product is actually released. Please don't reference the election in any way in your reply. Thanks.

Are people still playing this?

Steve Jobs would've never allowed this.

Tim Cook needs to be fired.

Apple is doomed.

Is AI the Pokemon site now?


Now that we got that out of the way, can we begin the real discussion?

jbdragon said:

Rumors are just that. Until there's a official announcement from Apple, I don't believe any of it. This far out they're still generally pretty wrong. Still like 7 months to go before they're released. As it gets closer to launch, more of the rumors turn out to be true, but this far away, no! Many of these rumors you hear year after year. Hey maybe it'll become true this year.

Why is everyone criticizing this as a rumor? You're on a rumor site. What else do sites like this offer that a simple Google search couldn't if you don't care about Apple rumors? Since you're here, why not discuss the merits or likelihood of this rumor and why? 

This seems like a very un-Apple like rumor until you consider that Jony Ive is bored and also the man responsible for the 20th Anniversary Mac and gold Apple Watch Edition. The only part of this rumor that doesn't ring true to me is the price. I think it will be at least 3x or 4x more expensive than the most expensive iPhone and if it truly delivers on distance wireless charging, all glass design, integrated Touch ID behind screen, tiny or no bezel and possible AR features, I would easily pay $2000-$3000. It also seems obvious to me that the regular iPhone 8 models won't contain all or any of these advanced features so this will become the ultimate flagship edition. The high price allows Apple to retain their profits while also meeting the lower demand from such a high priced device. I don't see a downside except looking like a douche for shelling out thousands of dollars for a phone that does everything a much cheaper smartphone already does.

thedba said:

eightzero said:

macxpress said:

Oh but remember, ApplePay is a failure! Nobody uses this....

People don't realize nothing like this just takes off. When you do a major change like this it takes quite a while to get everyone on board (Retailers, Banks, and Customers). It doesn't matter who is CEO of Apple or who is running it. This is a huge undertaking for everyone involved. This will succeed in time...patience people! Patience!

Yes, but I sure wish there was a way for AAPL to incentivize the retailers into accepting ApplePay. Week after week I go to my grocery store (where I spend more dollars and have more transactions than anywhere else):
 
"You take ApplePay yet?"
 "<shrug> don't know."
 "Can you tell your boss a customer would like it?"
 "<shrug> <rolls eyes> would you like help out sir?<deeps sigh, looks at line forming>" 

If you ask the clerk about Apple Pay, he/she may not know. Do they have contactless payments (aka tap and Pay)? If yes, then by definition Apple Pay works. Ever since Canadian banks got on board, most of my day to day shopping is now done through Apple Pay. I would say the ratio is now between 60-65%, all through Apple Pay.

Apple Pay requires tap to pay hardware but that doesn't mean it will work. There is a software switch that must be turned on in order for it to work. I've been to many contactless POS retailers. Some know about about Apple Pay and some do not. I have not been able to use Apple Pay in either of these establishments but once they do set it up, it just works and is great.