Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on Jan 10, 2017 3:14:47 GMT -8
|
|
Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on Jan 10, 2017 3:42:30 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by rickag on Jan 10, 2017 4:33:46 GMT -8
Since84, thanks for starting the thread.
A lot of articles about augmented reality, color mr skeptical. Maybe I am getting too old, but the thought of millions of people walking around with AR glasses making videos is just plane creepy. Maybe Apple can take the "creepy" out of the tech.
|
|
|
Post by CdnPhoto on Jan 10, 2017 4:54:40 GMT -8
Since84, thanks for starting the thread. A lot of articles about augmented reality, color mr skeptical. Maybe I am getting too old, but the thought of millions of people walking around with AR glasses making videos is just plane creepy. Maybe Apple can take the "creepy" out of the tech. I've thought about AR. I think there's potential. Try this scenario: You go to a museum or art gallery. The AR will show you additional information on the object / art you're seeing. Maybe show you how the object fit in to the broader world around it. I see a bigger potential for AR personally. Though, like you I don't want to see a bunch of people walking around with AR glasses.
|
|
|
Post by audiosculpture12 on Jan 10, 2017 5:46:57 GMT -8
Imagine apple AR just for car use.
|
|
|
Post by hledgard on Jan 10, 2017 6:03:12 GMT -8
Since84, thanks for starting the thread. A lot of articles about augmented reality, color mr skeptical. Maybe I am getting too old, but the thought of millions of people walking around with AR glasses making videos is just plane creepy. Maybe Apple can take the "creepy" out of the tech. I do not see it either. From what I know of AR, I am not impressed as to its utility. Games, yes - Life, no.
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,428
|
Post by chinacat on Jan 10, 2017 6:52:16 GMT -8
I am not bullish about the general use of AR due to fear of an increase in personal isolation on a physical level, which we have already seen with smartphones, but I thought that this BMW video about auto repair presented one area in which it could prove very useful. I am sure that you can imagine other similar applications, especially for training.
|
|
|
Post by Apple II+ on Jan 10, 2017 7:38:58 GMT -8
Imagine apple AR just for car use. x-ray vision, parking finder, smart speedometer, integrated GPS navigation, hazard alerts, ...
|
|
|
Post by longsince98 on Jan 10, 2017 8:02:30 GMT -8
My life is in a tangential and cross over field to AR. I can promise you all that there's zero chance AR won't be a significant part of life for the general population we know - and in the not-too-distant future. (years - not decades)
|
|
Since84
Moderator
To infinity and beyond!
Posts: 3,933
|
Post by Since84 on Jan 10, 2017 8:12:49 GMT -8
My life is in a tangential and cross over field to AR. I can promise you all that there's zero chance AR won't be a significant part of life for the general population we know - and in the not-too-distant future. (years - not decades) Please elaborate a bit, to the extent you can.
|
|
|
Post by dreamRaj on Jan 10, 2017 8:24:49 GMT -8
If we had a "Pull Numbers Out Of Your Asses" contest, I'd predict 119.99 for this Friday's close and if 120 were to be broken 'comfortably' it would be next week.
Of course, everything goes down the drain if/when that perfectly ill-timed article comes out at the last minute from the far east that iPhone orders are down by 30%!
|
|
|
Post by BillH on Jan 10, 2017 9:23:51 GMT -8
I believe folks here have contacted Tim Cook in the past re: various issues. Could anyone who knows it pass on his email address to me. I'd like to send him a note about an experience with the Apple Store. Thanks. Go AAPL
|
|
|
Post by david on Jan 10, 2017 10:28:25 GMT -8
There was quite a discussion about Consumer Reports review of MacBook pro battery life on AFB not long ago. Here is TechCrunch's look at the results of Apple's investigation into the "report": techcrunch.com/2017/01/10/consumer-reports-turned-off-safari-cache-for-their-macbook-pro-battery-tests/From Apple's response: "... We learned that when testing battery life on Mac notebooks, Consumer Reports uses a hidden Safari setting for developing web sites which turns off the browser cache. This is not a setting used by customers and does not reflect real-world usage. Their use of this developer setting also triggered an obscure and intermittent bug reloading icons which created inconsistent results in their lab. After we asked Consumer Reports to run the same test using normal user settings, they told us their MacBook Pro systems consistently delivered the expected battery life. We have also fixed the bug uncovered in this test. ..."
|
|
|
Post by PikesPique on Jan 10, 2017 10:32:19 GMT -8
CR: Hey, Doc, it hurts when I do this.
Doc: Don't do that.
|
|
Ted
fire starter
Posts: 882
|
Post by Ted on Jan 10, 2017 11:50:06 GMT -8
There was quite a discussion about Consumer Reports review of MacBook pro battery life on AFB not long ago. Here is TechCrunch's look at the results of Apple's investigation into the "report": techcrunch.com/2017/01/10/consumer-reports-turned-off-safari-cache-for-their-macbook-pro-battery-tests/From Apple's response: "... We learned that when testing battery life on Mac notebooks, Consumer Reports uses a hidden Safari setting for developing web sites which turns off the browser cache. This is not a setting used by customers and does not reflect real-world usage. Their use of this developer setting also triggered an obscure and intermittent bug reloading icons which created inconsistent results in their lab. After we asked Consumer Reports to run the same test using normal user settings, they told us their MacBook Pro systems consistently delivered the expected battery life. We have also fixed the bug uncovered in this test. ..." Thanks, David, for this. As suspected, it was Consumer Reports' methodology that was flawed - not Apple's MacBook Pro. To think that CR's testing would discover a problem that Apple's testing didn't sure struck me as highly dubious.
|
|
|
Post by david on Jan 10, 2017 12:09:45 GMT -8
... Tim Cook... his email address ...? tcook@apple.com
|
|
|
Post by mace on Jan 10, 2017 12:21:13 GMT -8
...It's possible and perhaps even probable that there are more switchers from Android to iOS due to the lopsided market share... Is osmosis or diffusion at work? Network effect sucks the juice out of the smaller players. How come iPhone is still around after so many years of having a smaller market share?
|
|
Ted
fire starter
Posts: 882
|
Post by Ted on Jan 10, 2017 12:44:36 GMT -8
...It's possible and perhaps even probable that there are more switchers from Android to iOS due to the lopsided market share... Is osmosis or diffusion at work? Network effect sucks the juice out of the smaller players. How come iPhone is still around after so many years of having a smaller market share? Best product, best customers, best marketing and best brand?
|
|
|
Post by BillH on Jan 10, 2017 13:26:02 GMT -8
... Tim Cook... his email address ...? tcook@apple.com Thanks David. I thought there was a dot or additional character in there for some reason. Appreciate it.
|
|
|
Post by Apple II+ on Jan 10, 2017 13:27:31 GMT -8
"... Consumer Reports ... triggered an obscure and intermittent bug .... We have also fixed the bug uncovered in this test. ..." Getting this bug fixed was worth the negative publicity, IMO. The positive outcome won't get as much attention, but the net of negative and positive publicity plus the fixed bug is a win for Apple and our users.
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on Jan 10, 2017 15:21:43 GMT -8
There was quite a discussion about Consumer Reports review of MacBook pro battery life on AFB not long ago. Here is TechCrunch's look at the results of Apple's investigation into the "report": techcrunch.com/2017/01/10/consumer-reports-turned-off-safari-cache-for-their-macbook-pro-battery-tests/From Apple's response: "... We learned that when testing battery life on Mac notebooks, Consumer Reports uses a hidden Safari setting for developing web sites which turns off the browser cache. This is not a setting used by customers and does not reflect real-world usage. Their use of this developer setting also triggered an obscure and intermittent bug reloading icons which created inconsistent results in their lab. After we asked Consumer Reports to run the same test using normal user settings, they told us their MacBook Pro systems consistently delivered the expected battery life. We have also fixed the bug uncovered in this test. ..." Thanks, David, for this. As suspected, it was Consumer Reports' methodology that was flawed - not Apple's MacBook Pro. To think that CR's testing would discover a problem that Apple's testing didn't sure struck me as highly dubious. But it did discover a problem that Apple didn't know about...and now thanks to CR the bug has been fixed. As long as their methodology has remained consistent over the years it's hard to fault CR for their findings. It just so happened that testing methodology revealed a bug. And they were far from the only ones who noticed battery life issues. Anyway, glad it's resolved.
|
|
|
Post by david on Jan 10, 2017 17:24:00 GMT -8
Thanks, David, for this. As suspected, it was Consumer Reports' methodology that was flawed - not Apple's MacBook Pro. To think that CR's testing would discover a problem that Apple's testing didn't sure struck me as highly dubious. But it did discover a problem that Apple didn't know about...and now thanks to CR the bug has been fixed. As long as their methodology has remained consistent over the years it's hard to fault CR for their findings. It just so happened that testing methodology revealed a bug. And they were far from the only ones who noticed battery life issues. Anyway, glad it's resolved. That's what CR is telling the world, here's todays' CR blurb: "Apple Releases Fix to MacBook Pros in Response to Consumer Reports' Battery Test Results". Apple says "when testing battery life on Mac notebooks, Consumer Reports uses a hidden Safari setting for developing web sites which turns off the browser cache. This is not a setting used by customers and does not reflect real-world usage." Apple is saying CR results would have indicated that Apple MacBook Pro had poor battery life, and those results would have been incorrect. "... this developer setting also triggered an obscure and intermittent bug reloading icons which created inconsistent results". Inconsistent results. Which should have told CR their methodology was bad. If you cannot duplicate data, then the data is probably wrong. Literally, rocket science. Just not the difficult kind. Whether there is, or ever was, a battery problem, is another question. Apparently not, since "After we asked Consumer Reports to run the same test using normal user settings, they told us their MacBook Pro systems consistently delivered the expected battery life." Consistently.
|
|
|
Post by artman1033 on Jan 10, 2017 17:31:28 GMT -8
Notice of 2017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders 1 Infinite Loop February 28, 2017 Town Hall (Building 4) 9:00 a.m. Pacific Time Cupertino, California 95014
|
|
mark
fire starter
Posts: 1,552
|
Post by mark on Jan 10, 2017 20:10:30 GMT -8
There was quite a discussion about Consumer Reports review of MacBook pro battery life on AFB not long ago. Here is TechCrunch's look at the results of Apple's investigation into the "report": techcrunch.com/2017/01/10/consumer-reports-turned-off-safari-cache-for-their-macbook-pro-battery-tests/From Apple's response: "... We learned that when testing battery life on Mac notebooks, Consumer Reports uses a hidden Safari setting for developing web sites which turns off the browser cache. This is not a setting used by customers and does not reflect real-world usage. Their use of this developer setting also triggered an obscure and intermittent bug reloading icons which created inconsistent results in their lab. After we asked Consumer Reports to run the same test using normal user settings, they told us their MacBook Pro systems consistently delivered the expected battery life. We have also fixed the bug uncovered in this test. ..." Consumer Reports - For an organization that prides itself as testing products AS ACTUAL CONSUMERS, even to the extent of going to regular stores and purchasing the products as normal consumers, to mess with a non-consumer setting before testing a device strikes me as somewhat dishonest. What if they also mess with non-consumer settings on other devices that make them appear to be more efficient or better than they really are for consumers? (kind of like VW messed with their emissions settings to "trick" the EPA measurements)
|
|
|
Post by tuffett on Jan 11, 2017 16:53:51 GMT -8
There was quite a discussion about Consumer Reports review of MacBook pro battery life on AFB not long ago. Here is TechCrunch's look at the results of Apple's investigation into the "report": techcrunch.com/2017/01/10/consumer-reports-turned-off-safari-cache-for-their-macbook-pro-battery-tests/From Apple's response: "... We learned that when testing battery life on Mac notebooks, Consumer Reports uses a hidden Safari setting for developing web sites which turns off the browser cache. This is not a setting used by customers and does not reflect real-world usage. Their use of this developer setting also triggered an obscure and intermittent bug reloading icons which created inconsistent results in their lab. After we asked Consumer Reports to run the same test using normal user settings, they told us their MacBook Pro systems consistently delivered the expected battery life. We have also fixed the bug uncovered in this test. ..." Consumer Reports - For an organization that prides itself as testing products AS ACTUAL CONSUMERS, even to the extent of going to regular stores and purchasing the products as normal consumers, to mess with a non-consumer setting before testing a device strikes me as somewhat dishonest. What if they also mess with non-consumer settings on other devices that make them appear to be more efficient or better than they really are for consumers? (kind of like VW messed with their emissions settings to "trick" the EPA measurements) They have reasons to test the way they do, and they have been doing it for years with all relevant devices. Here's a post I came across on Reddit explaining the rationale:
|
|