flaneur
About
- Username
- flaneur
- Joined
- Visits
- 107
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,579
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 4,526
Reactions
-
Foxconn exec's social media post claims high rejection rate for 'iPhone 8' OLED screens
You're looking at it wrong. As usual.rogifan_new said:If this leak is legit that is one fugly phone, especially the front. It’s so bad it has to be fake, no?
Can't be judged from a flat photograph — has to be held in the hand. Suspend judgment.
-
Laurene Powell Jobs's Emerson Collective buys majority stake in The Atlantic
No, as Marshall McLuhan pointed out endlessly (in the 60s and 70s, so everybody should know by now), as one medium obsolesces another, the former becomes an art form, and it is self-consciously valued and preserved.cali said:But WHY? Isn't print dying?
A recent example is the analogue vinyl disc recording. It will live on among those who can appreciate the medium. In the case of print, it's really the style of thinking that print embodies that will be preserved as an art form. The Atlantic is a prime example. I think Powell Jobs gets it.
-
NBC adds single sign-on support for Apple's iPhone & iPad
It's just the best thing that's been on NBC in many years, and probably the only reason they've had any ratings growth at all recently.thrang said:Can you leave the politics out of your images?
It's not about politics, it's about mass therapy in response to a planetary emergency.
-
Schiller refutes book's account that he demanded physical keyboard in early iPhone
Apple invested many millions, maybe in the hundreds, on IGZO production, and it took several long years to bring to fruition. The results began to show on the thinner iMacs first, then on the thinner MacBooks. Note that there is still room on the iMac for older ports.avon b7 said:
No disrespect taken.flaneur said:
I mean no disrespect when I say you're still full of it on this issue. You are not thinking of the larger picture on Apple's design mandates.avon b7 said:StrangeDays said:
What possible evidence do you have of that? Sounds like wishful thinking.avon b7 said:
Something similar surely happened with the new MBP. I'm convinced that internally, Apple was divided on the thinness issue.slurpy said:Even if he did...and? I'm sure every single kind of idea and course of action was discussed and thrown around when developing the iPhone. Steve Jobs did a shitload of 180s himself. He didn't even want an AppStore. Even if Schiller thought a KB might be best at some point in time, I'm not going to hold that against him or pretend he's unfit for the job because of it.
Also, I don't trust a word that comes out of Faddels mouth. It's well known that he consistently exaggerated his role and accomplishments at Apple in order to bring more legitimacy and hype to his new company (now sold out to Google of course).
Evidence is not required.
However, judging by the content of this article, we'll have to wait around 10 years for someone to spill the beans on what really happened during the design phase of the new MBPs and how it passed through executive approval.
Perhaps we will see the Jony Ive unauthorized biography at some point.
We already have rumours of competing MBP designs at Apple (fighter vs bomber) and supposing those rumours have some truth in them, it is very reasonable to suspect that the 'thin at any cost' design is far from universally backed at the company. Then we have someone from HP going on record last year (during the backlash) and claiming that they carried out a lot of research and found that a lot of people preferred thin without compromises. As a result, HP is trying to cater to both markets. I doubt Apple's own research brought back differing results. The difference is on the executive side. A decision was taken and they had to run with it. Apple is not a company of options. Look how long it took them to finally release a large screen iPhone.
In the case of the larger-screened phone, it was the lack of production capacity for making LTPS screens in enough quantity to supply Apple's needs for the 6 and 6 Plus, up until the time they finally could introduce them. Look it up. Apple was already using 70-75 percent of the world's capacity of LTPS screens before the larger screens arrived. The myth that it was a design choice to resist larger screens was fostered by Apple's PR on one-handed use being ideal, but you don't have to believe and parrot this narrow interim spin from marketing-think. The real reason was production determined.
In the case of the thin MacBook Pro, you are not thinking largely enough about the cluster of mandates that came available with the availability of sufficient production of oxide-backed (IGZO) screens. The energy savings from the IGZO backplane allowed for less backlghting and more efficient heat management. These, along with the availability of USB 3, allowed for the shrinkage in all dimensions. No self-respecting, honest engineer would throw away—waste—these space savings just to accomodate the antiquated, oversized USB legacy port.
If there was any argument from retrograde thinkers on the engineering/design team, as you imagine, you're going to have to produce evidence to be taken seriously. Or even from the marketing side, but that would be still easy to dismiss as retrograde thinking.
Hardware rules. Enjoy the progress.
Where necessary, Apple has made multimillion dollar investments to assure it has enough production capacity at any given time. When you have a couple of years, know where you're going and know what you want, it makes sense. If you really can't get what you would like then use a different technology. Don't hold off if you think you are losing sales.
We have all seen the slide saying something along the lines of 'we don't have what our customers want'. We have all heard the 'large screens won't sell' line.
Your spin on the new line is nice but doesn't tell the whole story. It just didn't need to be so thin and it is time stop talking about 'legacy'.
The new iMacs come with current ports which now include USB-C.
The point I'm making is that the mandate to shrink wherever possible is, always has been, an overriding principle of good electronic engineering since the dawn of the solid state transistor. No engineer at Apple with any professional pride is going to make a notebook thicker than it has to be. If you don't see this, you just don't get Apple, or Ive, or Jobsian thinking.
LTPS, on the other hand, may not have been seeded by Apple as much as IGZO, I would assume because it was developed by companies outside their leverage. But that story hasn't been told, as far as I know.
-
Apple's Tim Cook talks HomePod, AR, personal legacy & more in new interview excerpt
Tim Cook is a visionary, moreso than any other CEO I've ever heard of, when it comes to the big business picture, and that includes basing your success on doing good in the world.
Part is derived from his global supply chain and strategic marketing management, part from the vision of Steve Jobs and Apple, and part from his own native intellgence.
