chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,426
|
Post by chinacat on Nov 22, 2019 6:06:01 GMT -8
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,426
|
Post by chinacat on Nov 22, 2019 9:01:30 GMT -8
|
|
4aapl
Moderator
Posts: 3,632
|
Post by 4aapl on Nov 22, 2019 10:46:42 GMT -8
Just a "wait to buy, the next one will be even better". I've only had face-id fail once that I remember, possibly with a hat on, or a bike or chainsaw helmet more likely...I remember there was something strange. It has worked with sunglasses on just fine, but ski season will see about a face mask/goggles/helmet. OTOH, that's no different that touch-id not working, since you have gloves, and sometimes even with them off the fingers were too dry or cold. So the question is, why would Apple put touch-id back in, except if it were to have both and then give users the choice of using one or the other, if they don't like the concept. Or maybe it just goes a step beyond, such as turning on the phone in your pocket or on the table, to use it with something else like the watch, airpods, or future devices. There are sometimes I would prefer touch id, but that's more about having it not come on automatically. That was the case this morning, where I tried out a sleep monitor app and so had the iPhone next to me, but decided to get up at 5am and didn't want the screen coming on and waking anyone. While an edge case, and more of a problem when we were on vacation, it still bugs me a little. Likewise it was nice to have just a little bit of light from the screen when getting up on vacation, but if the screen was faced down it would turn off. Back with an actual button, neither of these were an issue. Change happens, just like the move from firewire to USB on the iPod, and the change of the middle button click on the iPod. While the end result might not be perfect in all aspects, at least we know that Apple puts a lot of thought into it.
|
|
|
Post by firestorm on Nov 22, 2019 11:27:38 GMT -8
Thank you for posting this. I agree with most of what the author says, and I believe that we were better off before social media, but it is impossible to turn back the clock. I find myself constantly enraged by much of what I read on Facebook (and in the Dungeon here), but I'm making a conscious effort not to engage in futile, time-wasting, vicious arguments. Nobody's mind has ever been changed by any of this crap, since we all arrive at this point in life with our own background of values and experiences. I would like to see Apple create a rival to Facebook that is part of their media package and which would not be ad-driven and which would have built-in vigilance against Russian bots, but I'm probably dreaming..
|
|
ems
Member
Posts: 97
|
Post by ems on Nov 22, 2019 11:48:24 GMT -8
I would like to see Apple create a rival to Facebook that is part of their media package and which would not be ad-driven and which would have built-in vigilance against Russian bots, but I'm probably dreaming.. They've tried that before (Ping), and even earlier (e-world). Maybe it was before its' time... still, there's no point - without ads there's no money in it. Apple has better things to do (hardware) than waste time with the navel-gazing of so-called social media.
|
|
|
Post by firestorm on Nov 22, 2019 11:55:15 GMT -8
I would like to see Apple create a rival to Facebook that is part of their media package and which would not be ad-driven and which would have built-in vigilance against Russian bots, but I'm probably dreaming.. They've tried that before (Ping), and even earlier (e-world). Maybe it was before its' time... still, there's no point - without ads there's no money in it. Apple has better things to do (hardware) than waste time with the navel-gazing of so-called social media. It could be one of those services that would help keep people in the Apple ecosystem, but Facebook is so well-established that it probably couldn't work. There is also the problem that a lot of know-nothings prefer the Microsoft and Google and Samsung ecosystems.
|
|