sagan_student
About
- Username
- sagan_student
- Joined
- Visits
- 67
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 445
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 188
Reactions
-
New Genmoji ad showcases creations that definitely were not made with Apple Intelligence
I do think Apple’s need for control (which I do appreciate) over the entire user experience may play against them in the generative space. Choosing to pick benign objects, shapes, animals, etc it does a very good job of. But I can’t for the life of me get it to make an image of me giving an annoyed or disgruntled or angry or mad or sad or any other expression other than pure joy and jubilation. Even something like giving a thumbs down is apparently a faux pas in Apple’s generative AI world. I get one maybe two images with a thumbs down with a huge smile on my face and the rest are giving a thumbs up with a huge smile on my face. What’s the point of this if I can’t generate what I want. It’s one thing to be directed and coerced about how to manage files or how to interact with a UI but limiting the images created in my likeness to only ever being happy is something that I am finding very disconcerting.
-
Apple Vision Pro won't break 500k sales in 2024, even with international expansion
I disagree. For starters you’re making an assumption of what YOU deem Apple to think. But that aside, I can see logic in the hypothetical of why Apple chose this route and how this plays out for Apple.miiwtwo said:sorry, to apple 1.2billion is a big fail, and you know it as a fanboy,If there is to be a mass consumer model of this device then there better be content, otherwise you fail like so many before it. People not affording one yet is not the same as people jumping on board only to be disappointed when there’s nothing that can be consumed on it. By pricing it and selling it the way they did they attracted those who could afford and test to see how this product can help and improve their workflow. Let the professional types carve out how this fits into their niche.As that is happening, you, Apple, work on improving production costs, learn about how people use the device, fine tune the GUI, determine what can be discarded, and give time to developers and filmographers and others to slowly build up content. Such that when it is time to release a consumer version, there will be enough consumables for people to keep them on the platform so that more developers, media companies, etc start to produce content.But who knows? 🤷🏼♂️ Like you, I’m just on the sidelines with no first hand knowledge of what is happening in that department at Apple. Either way, I have difficulty seeing that Apple would not have considered what is currently playing out here.
-
Apple Vision Pro won't break 500k sales in 2024, even with international expansion
Agreed!NYC362 said:Oh no... Apple might only sell 300,000 (a guess) AVPs... at roughly $4000 per sale, that's just $1.2billion in revenue for the year.
I think Apple should just close up shop on that news.
Seriously, some of these stories are just ridiculous. Did anyone really think that over half a million people were going to shell out over $4000 for a first gen product? This AVP is in many ways, the prototype. It provides the platform for future development. It provides Apple with a ton of feedback on what a second or third generation should be, as well as a lower cost model. It provides developers with a real platform to produce apps for the spatial environment.
First gen products are always super expensive and often don't sell very well. How many people spent $15,000 (it was somewhere in that neighborhood) on the first gen 42" flat panel televisions about 30 years ago? ($15k in 1997 is oner $28k today).
We're just six months into Apple Vision Pro... let's talk in about two or three years to see how it's doing.Shifting paradigms and habits is no easy feat. Getting people to buy into a full screen smartphone that could mostly do what a computer could is easy compared to the leap that Apple is attempting to do with spacial computing.They are currently still in the process of changing a user paradigm with the iPad (which is also more difficult than that of the iPhone) and that has been a decade and still going on. -
Apple Watch soars above the rest of the smartwatch crowd with high customer satisfaction
Originally had a Series 2. Before getting one my wife asked why did I need one and I remember saying I don’t, but it would become one of those things that simply gets integrated into routine and before you know it, it’s something you use all of the time. She replied with, fine. I want one too. Flash forward to the release of the series 7; it carved out a huge space in our lives that we both upgraded from the aluminum to the steel. One of the many things I appreciate about the watch is the ability for me to not have my phone with me at all times. Working out, it’s just my watch and AirPods. One the golf course having a round of party golf, it provides me my yardage, scorecard, ability to play music, and buy rounds off of the drink cart; all while never pulling out my phone. Apple truly did nail the why and how one would use a device on your wrist.
-
Meta cuts another 10,000 jobs in 'year of efficiency'
I am in agreement with much of what you say and I just wanted to add that I find it dumbfounding that a quarter of their staff was redundant and inefficient. This is definitely not a hallmark of a well run business. Have they offered any reason other than these blanket statements of redundant and inefficiency? I find it difficult to believe that a company that has this much fat to cut, understands any other part of their business well. 🤷♂️dewme said:Restructuring I understand. Companies change focus or decide to abandon products that under-perform, consolidate operations, etc.But efficiencies and redundancies? Does anyone else wonder why a company would have kept personal around that it describes as being in those roles in the first place?As a business, even when the money is flowing and the bottom line is looking fabulous, wouldn't you still want to focus on optimizing and reducing unnecessary work and waste? Isn't the tolerance of inefficiency and waste totally against the whole premise and principles of things like Lean and continuous improvement?
