I remember when Apple used to be innovative.
I wouldn't say they aren't innovative anymore. Apple Pay, Apple Watch, new Apple TV, shipped 4 new microprocessors in 2016, arguably fastest phone on the market, and the list goes on. It is true that they aren't innovating on the really cool new stuff as quickly as they used to. Also, Jobs had a very high IQ and believed he could change the world. Traditionally, CEOs don't usually have IQ's as high as a Jobs or Musk. Cook is very good at maximizing revenue, not necessarily an innovator (which short term isn't a bad thing for Apple).
Without jumping into the hyperbole train, I think the tone of "used to be innovative" concerns the end-marketed product. When the iPhone came out, everyone had to take notice and now it is a ubiquitous product around the entire world. That's incredible and probably a once-in-a-generation development.
New processors and processes are awesome—but they evolve and change over time. For many people, it's unfortunately not exciting even though it involves many engineers.
To me, the current announcements of Apple feel like the Dell/IBM/Microsoft of previous years. I want my computer to be fast, but I don't want to pay attention to an i9 processor or how many gigs of RAM are in my phone. I imagine that many others are the same way, hoping for a wholly new product to jump on rather than seeing the Apple-version of things that exist.
And there it is... the cliche "I remember when Apple used to be innovative" shitpost.
Are you kidding me? It's ridiculous to me that everyone focuses ONLY on the hardware they're introducing, which even then is still better than the hardware their competitors are putting out. ARkit? Core ML? Maybe you were asleep during those demos, but if you weren't, you're out of your goddamn mind if you don't think Apple is innovating.
Those are dev specific feature introductions. I guess what Brennan was referring to, and what most of the people were looking forward to, were direct consumer innovations. Or are you going to use ARkit or ML directly ?
I didn't mean to trigger you into creating new account to express yourself.
Honestly disappointed that it isn't shipping with 3rd party skills at launch. Coming in at a price point higher than Google's or Amazon's smart assistants without support for stuff like Spotify or TuneIn is a pretty huge dealbreaker, even if the speakers are better than its competitors.
Moreso considering that Google or Amazon could just put out high end versions of their products tomorrow and be better than the Homepod.
They have airPlay, so I assume any app on your phone can cast to them (but you're going to lose some quality in that transaction I'm sure.)
That's pretty weak, it relies on my phone needing to be a base for the operation, whereas Chromecast is decentralized, allowing the device to pull the feed directly from the internet itself.
Plus Google Home already ships with Chromecast, which has had multiroom support for like a year now.
Man, you hit the nail on the head. I have a Google Home (bought for a project and then loved it) and the third-party support is what makes it great. I'm sure that audiophiles will bitch about the speaker, but it's pretty fantastic for everything from classical to rap.
I am still rocking my iPhone 5 and MacBook Pro 2013 models. I adore the history of Apple, but haven't felt the need to buy something new in a number of years now.
Take my money Apple. Take it all.
Damn. I don't like the idea of having an always-on microphone in the house, and as such Amazon's Echo and products like that don't interest me. But that's a nice looking speaker... I'm a little torn.
Honestly, Apple is the one company with one of these Always-On Speakers that I'm comfortable with. Apple's business model isn't (unlike Amazon and Google) about selling your data, it's about selling you hardware.
The microphone isn't technically always on. The on device processor listens for the "Hey Siri" command before handing off any audio to their servers for language processing. I think it was Tim Cook who made a specific point of this in the keynote yesterday. Given the fight they put up with the FBI over hacking the iPhone, I'm confident they have privacy as a key feature of ANY of their devices.
Yep—on top of that, Siri processes the command locally (I believe) and only sends it off if she recognizes it. Other than those instances, there's never data relay to Apple at all.
Oh, and it's encrypted, of course.
That's certainly good to know
Cool, can I think at it?
... I'm not sure if I've missed it, but can we still play our own music on this or are we tied to music on Apple Music?
Gonna guess Apple Music only, OS X Siri is artificially limited to Apple Music only when iOS Siri can play things off the device just fine.
I would assume you'd be able to cast your own music to the HomePod using AirPlay 2.
Their technology is still pretty innovative in my opinion. I really didn't like the design of the Homepod at all but the tech behind it is pretty impressive. Also, how many times or ways can you improve on the actual design of an iPhone? I think they are going with the saying of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".