KGI: TrueDepth Camera Gives Apple 2.5 Year Lead over Android Competitors

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,003
It will take Apple's Android competitors up to two and a half years to replicate the functionality and user experience of the TrueDepth Camera in the iPhone X, KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo told investors in a note shared this morning. In a previous report, Kuo predicted it would take one to two years for competitors to catch up, but having watched Apple's official technical demonstrations in detail, it's now believed it will take longer to replicate the user experience.

The TrueDepth camera will give Apple a solid technological lead throughout 2018 and 2019, leading Kuo to say KGI has "full confidence" in the iPhone's growth prospects in the high-end smartphone market over the next couple of years despite iPhone X constraints in 2017. KGI Securities has revised its 2017 iPhone X shipping estimates from 40 million to 30 to 35 million units, but Kuo says the firm stands by its "positive outlook" on shipments of future iPhones equipped with the TrueDepth Camera.
 

nutzo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
7,380
They are assuming this TrueDepth camera actually works, that people want it, and it's simple enough that the average iPhone user can actually use the feature....

I forgot, none of that actually matters to the typical iPhone X buyer. As long as they have this newest, top of the line, shinny fashion accessory that they can take out of focus selfies with, all is good.
 

jnemesh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
1,084
Fair enough, it took Apple 3 years to get fast charging, edge to edge OLED screens, wireless charging (but not FAST wireless charging), and face recognition after Samsung launched these features!
 

RogueTadhg

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
1,527
They are assuming this TrueDepth camera actually works, that people want it, and it's simple enough that the average iPhone user can actually use the feature....

I forgot, none of that actually matters to the typical iPhone X buyer. As long as they have this newest, top of the line, shinny fashion accessory that they can take out of focus selfies with, all is good.
From what I read, the reason the TrueDepth didn't work in the demo was because other people were demoing it and they failed the TrueDepth test causing the demo to go wonky.

In any event, it's just a fancy facial camera to me. Wireless charging is the one I think most consumers will appreciate.
 

collegeboy69us

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Messages
5,256
I think it's hilarious people are pissing themselves over wireless charging... it's been around for years with android.

I equate apple with the "Pimp my ride" of phones... they take a bunch of shit that's been done before, put it all into some phone and then think they are some kind of genius for inventing it.
 

Krazy925

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
6,504
I think it's hilarious people are pissing themselves over wireless charging... it's been around for years with android.

I equate apple with the "Pimp my ride" of phones... they take a bunch of shit that's been done before, put it all into some phone and then think they are some kind of genius for inventing it.
Then Google recopies it and it's all you guys can talk about.

See most recently missing headphone jacks, soldered batteries, and no SD card slots. The hate is always palpable around here when Apple does things, but they generally have good implementation of things that have been around before.

Where are all these Android users that are using Androids face unlock?
 

otherweeb

Gawd
Joined
Jan 8, 2016
Messages
860
Then Google recopies it and it's all you guys can talk about.

See most recently missing headphone jacks, soldered batteries, and no SD card slots. The hate is always palpable around here when Apple does things, but they generally have good implementation of things that have been around before.

Where are all these Android users that are using Androids face unlock?

I tried, but do you know how annoying it is to unlock an android with your face? That's why Steve Jobs invented thumbs!
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,284
How much quality does one really need in ones hipster restaurant food shots and duckface selfies?

If I'm doing anything more than taking a very basic picture, I'm using a real camera anyway, not a cellphone no matter how good it is.

Don't get me wrong. I like improvements, and if something is better, that is great, but I don't see the camera ever being a major point of differentiation in a phone. It's just not that important of a feature.

Honestly, it really wouldn't be a huge deal to me if my phone had no camera at all...
 

Krazy925

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
6,504
I tried, but do you know how annoying it is to unlock an android with your face? That's why Steve Jobs invented thumbs!
I can imagine it's slightly more annoying than doing it on your iphone. Fairly par for the Android course.
 

snowcrash

Gawd
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Messages
712
Then Google recopies it and it's all you guys can talk about.
See most recently missing headphone jacks, soldered batteries, and no SD card slots. The hate is always palpable around here when Apple does things, but they generally have good implementation of things that have been around before.
Where are all these Android users that are using Androids face unlock?
If conservatives do it, it's ok. If liberals do it, absolutely not ok. We're now a nation of black and white. There are no in-betweens. You're either with us or against us.
 

dyzophoria

Gawd
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
946
I doubt that, the true depth camera is basically a small kinect, its just other phone companies did not invested in it (and I am having my doubts they would for now) since having a fingerprint reader in the screen itself is more of a priority from what I read way back (and I kinda like this tech more than facial recognition system)
 

collegeboy69us

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Messages
5,256
Then Google recopies it and it's all you guys can talk about.

See most recently missing headphone jacks, soldered batteries, and no SD card slots. The hate is always palpable around here when Apple does things, but they generally have good implementation of things that have been around before.

Where are all these Android users that are using Androids face unlock?

Face unlock has been around for a while too for android -- nobody uses it on android because it's a gimmick being pushed for what people perceive as the selfie generation. There's nothing wrong with copying features of XYZ, but I'd have a lot more respect for apple if they pushed their build quality instead of some fluffed up "courage" piece about removing headphone jacks.

And don't confuse "good implementation" for features dumbed down and stripped out so any technologically retarded person can use it. Cricket phones designed for the elderly aren't good phones by any measure, but they work well for people who just can't be bothered to learn anything new.

The thing outside of any technical side of an argument is that apple knows it's userbase, people who will buy it thinking it makes them cool/hip/trendy. I can fully admit this applied for the first few years it was out, these days though? I see someone with the latest iPhone and the first thing I think of this loony tunes picture:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_0_ynVlwAg9U/Sq0cuxqOrsI/AAAAAAAAG7g/PPdycQdBVHE/s400/Screenshot1+11.jpg

Apple is a lot like that burnt out government employee at the DMV, back in the day they might have been a star. These days? They do the bare minimum to fullfill the job requirement because they know their pension kicks in, in a few years.
 

Krazy925

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
6,504
Face unlock has been around for a while too for android -- nobody uses it on android because it's a gimmick being pushed for what people perceive as the selfie generation. There's nothing wrong with copying features of XYZ, but I'd have a lot more respect for apple if they pushed their build quality instead of some fluffed up "courage" piece about removing headphone jacks.

And don't confuse "good implementation" for features dumbed down and stripped out so any technologically retarded person can use it. Cricket phones designed for the elderly aren't good phones by any measure, but they work well for people who just can't be bothered to learn anything new.

The thing outside of any technical side of an argument is that apple knows it's userbase, people who will buy it thinking it makes them cool/hip/trendy. I can fully admit this applied for the first few years it was out, these days though? I see someone with the latest iPhone and the first thing I think of this loony tunes picture:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_0_ynVlwAg9U/Sq0cuxqOrsI/AAAAAAAAG7g/PPdycQdBVHE/s400/Screenshot1+11.jpg

Apple is a lot like that burnt out government employee at the DMV, back in the day they might have been a star. These days? They do the bare minimum to fullfill the job requirement because they know their pension kicks in, in a few years.
So it's a useless feature in your opinion? Then why brag about how you did it worse, first. No one uses it on Android because it was implemented poorly, now let's see if Apple has more luck.

My build quality on the iphones is at least as high as any of the Android devices I've used. Especially Samsung.

You call it dumbed down so any retard can use it. Well looks like if they don't dumb it down Android users won't use it because its trash.

I'll take dumbed down and works over whatever it is Android is doing today.

Android users are like the mentally challenged kid in class screaming "I did it, YAAAAY!"
 

Spidey329

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 15, 2003
Messages
8,683
So it's a useless feature in your opinion? Then why brag about how you did it worse, first. No one uses it on Android because it was implemented poorly, now let's see if Apple has more luck.

My build quality on the iphones is at least as high as any of the Android devices I've used. Especially Samsung.

You call it dumbed down so any retard can use it. Well looks like if they don't dumb it down Android users won't use it because its trash.

I'll take dumbed down and works over whatever it is Android is doing today.

Android users are like the mentally challenged kid in class screaming "I did it, YAAAAY!"


Can you point to the doll where Uncle Android touched you? It's ok, this is a safe space.
 

raz-0

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 9, 2003
Messages
4,917
Dear god the whining.

I have a hard time believing that competitors would take 2.5 years to replicate the behavior of the camera. It's a mini kinect basically, and we already had a few unsuccessful funky camera setups out there already and integrated fairly rapidly.

Having it be available to the base android OS natively on the other hand could take a while. Unless google wants something similar in the next next pixel phone. (since the next on seems to be done enough it's probably feature complete already)
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,284
Dear god the whining.

I have a hard time believing that competitors would take 2.5 years to replicate the behavior of the camera. It's a mini kinect basically, and we already had a few unsuccessful funky camera setups out there already and integrated fairly rapidly.

Having it be available to the base android OS natively on the other hand could take a while. Unless google wants something similar in the next next pixel phone. (since the next on seems to be done enough it's probably feature complete already)


Yeah, sounds like a stretch to me too.

I also don't quite understand why they'd want to replicate it. It seems like a useless gimmicky feature.

Stick to and improve the basics instead. We don't need any more gimmicks.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
665
I'll stay on the S7 Edge for a while yet. Apple does not convince me, neither does the S8. I'm interested to see what the S9 brings, but I suspect I might skip that as well. Phones have gotten good enough to keep for a number of years, IMO.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,284
I'll stay on the S7 Edge for a while yet. Apple does not convince me, neither does the S8. I'm interested to see what the S9 brings, but I suspect I might skip that as well. Phones have gotten good enough to keep for a number of years, IMO.


Agreed. The only downside is the miserably short support lifecycles most phone makers have. These are essentially pocket computers today. There is no reason why they should be supported for shorter time spans than a PC desktop.

We need to really pound the likes of Qualcomm for not properly supporting the underlying hardware that many phones are based on with long term drivers on updated operating systems, and we need to really pound the Android distribution model. They need to move to a PC model, where google provides a finished OS, OEM's don't alter it, and all updates are pushed directly from Google to the end user devices, without the involvement, knowledge or consent of either the carriers or the handset OEM's.

There is no reason a phone shouldn't be actively supported with at least monthly security updates for 10+ years.

I want my phone to be more like my computer, not my computer to be more like my phone.
 

Biznatch

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
2,224
Until china produces clones of the same hardware they are producing for apple and sells to their competitors like they do with the rest of the IP stupid companies send there for manufacturing?....
 

daglesj

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
5,590
Until china produces clones of the same hardware they are producing for apple and sells to their competitors like they do with the rest of the IP stupid companies send there for manufacturing?....

China can turn that stuff around in two weeks.
 

Raguel

n00b
Joined
May 14, 2016
Messages
12
Odd my Surface Book and Intel RealSense camera have been doing 3D depth mapping with solid face recognition just fine for about 2.5 years.

Oh and my Asus Zenfone AR seems to have a 3D depth camera along with the extra processing logic to offload the point cloud data already. And it somehow it is running Android. Must be from the future I guess,
 

WarriorX

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 18, 2006
Messages
2,182
I will never use face unlock. Pass code or pin is more secure. What prevents someone to use your face to unlock against your wishes? At least with a pass code I have to give it or it has to be broken.

If it ever comes to Android it better be optional.
 

daglesj

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
5,590
This is like 2013 when it was -

NFC is the future!!! NFC will save the world! NFC is the most important tech in the world!

Next day the new iPhone comes out without NFC.

The day after -

NFC isn't that important. Who uses it anyway?
 

nutzo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
7,380
Then Google recopies it and it's all you guys can talk about.

See most recently missing headphone jacks, soldered batteries, and no SD card slots.

And I'll never buy a phone with those features.
 

MDboyz

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 2, 2002
Messages
307
The purpose of the article is to make sure apple customers do not feel stupid for spending $1000 on the phone.
 

Saist

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
305
I'm struggling to actually find a point in this "Cool Story" from Krazy; but here's my shot at it.

So it's a useless feature in your opinion?

Not just opinion. Provable fact.

Here's the thing Krazy. Most bio-metric security systems are easily bypassed by the very nature of their bio-metric usage. The kinect-style mapping features have to account for various different shades of skin, eye position, eyelid-position, and other facial muscle positions in order to be functional in a wide range of lighting conditions. A phone that only unlocks for somebody's face when they are in a fluorescent-lit room with wide-open eyes isn't very useful. So question here: can any Apple or Android picture unlock system accurately determine whether or not the image that is being used to unlock... is a printed 3D model... a person who is awake... a person who is asleep... or a person who is dead?

Also: what's to stop a legally authorized agent of a government entity from simply holding a picture-locked device up to an owners face for an unlock?

The point here is simple. Bio-metric unlocks like fingerprints, pictures, and 3D mappings are useless features to somebody who actually needs or just desires basic security. It's like the encroachment of "sudo" against "su" in the Linux space. One approach makes it very easy to wreck a Linux box... the other actually requires having to input an actual password.

Which one is more secure?


Then why brag about how you did it worse, first.

I would not have called the post bragging...

No one uses it on Android because it was implemented poorly, now let's see if Apple has more luck.

Incorrect assumption and correlation. "Nobody" uses facial unlock on Android because the average Android user is, based on market-share, more likely to either be interested in security in general, or doesn't have money to throw around at the latest and greatest and have to make do with what they can afford.

Those buying affordable Android phones like the Huawei Honor Series; LeEco's LeMax 2; UmiDigi's; and Xiaomi's aren't going to fret over having the latest and greatest hardware updates. They just want a device that works.

Those who are buying Android because they actually have an investment in security procedures and practices are not going to stray far from passcodes or pattern unlocks that require some form of input from an authorized user.

Apple's introduction of a facial unlock system isn't going to change the market for several reasons. The first is that the Iphone X is horrendously expensive. Sure, Apple will sell out it's production run, but let's be honest here. Apple's talking hundreds of thousands of Iphone X's and a few million Iphone 8's. Android is talking about BILLIONS of devices going through activation in the same time span. Not to put too fine a point on the subject; Apple's the small krill in a sea of whales. Huawei alone sells more phones than Apple... and that's just one company without a worldwide household imprint. The only reason Apple get's away with being called a market leader is that Apple marketing only pitches it's flagship device against Samsung's flagship device.

To frame this in HardOCP terms; that would be like AMD and Nvidia both only describing the success of their graphics cards by just the Vega 64 and 1080 TI card sales alone. No person reading HardOCP or visiting the HardOCP forums would remotely call such a comparison a realistic viewpoint of the actual market. Like it or not; in terms of world-wide cell phone usage; Apple has about the same markeshare as Windows Phone 8.

My build quality on the iphones is at least as high as any of the Android devices I've used. Especially Samsung.

And?

Okay. This used to be a pretty fair point. Build quality on Android phones circa Samsung's Galaxy SII used to be terrible. Getting a decent build quality in a phone pretty much meant having to buy a flagship. Except technology hasn't stood still. The molding and manufacturing techniques to make cell-phone shells have advanced to the point where even titanium and ceramic bodies are feasible at ~$500(US) price-points. Build quality in a $300~$500(US) phone is hardly an issue now; and companies like Huawei and Umidigi (aka Raiding-Sharp's-parts-bin) keep proving that good build qualities can be had on ~$200 phones.

So... Apple has good build quality? I think that's more a factor of where ODM Hon Hai Precision is at in their process capability rather than a reflection on Apple itself.

You call it dumbed down so any retard can use it.

... I've worked through quite a few different UI's in my time. Outside of taking some more pot-shots at Got-No-Organization-Messy-Experience I'm not really aware of any current device UI that is completely inane, insane, or just flat broken as to be unusable. Activating facial recognition on Android phones should be as simple as going to settings and security; then following prompts on the screen.

Has Apple dumbed that down? Probably not.

I suspect an Apple user will still have to go to their settings; click on security; and then follow the prompts on the screen.

Well looks like if they don't dumb it down Android users won't use it because its trash.

I'm still trying to parse this sentence.

Android users didn't take to facial recognition as an unlock because it was a gimmick that didn't actually secure their phone.

Now, I fully expect that you'd like to make some comment as to the effect that the inability of the Android facial unlock to secure a phone was due to some limitation of the camera system and or User-Interface prompts. I harbor no doubt that a quick Binging of the net, because you wouldn't use Google or DuckDuckGo, would certainly find you some person or another who posted somewhere that they couldn't get their facial unlock to work at all.

Bully for you. Congrats on being able to navigate the web. Antecedents do not make a proof of such a claim.

What I can prove; very quickly; is that unscrupulous governments already do not hesitate to physically restrain a person and then physically apply the bio-metric locked device unlock. E.G. locking somebody in a chair and then physically forcing the person to put their finger on the finger-print sensor. All facial unlock does is just mean that an interrogator no longer has to bother with taking the locking mittens off.


I'll take dumbed down

Yeah. We... We got that.

and works

... you must be fun at word contradiction parties.

over whatever it is Android is doing today.

Excellent chance to make a point on how Google has slowly lost the plot on what Android is supposed to be and what Android is supposed to do.

You didn't make that point though. In fact I'm still struggling to figure out what point you were trying to make.

If you really are interested in something that works; I'd suggest checking out Plasma-Mobile: https://plasma-mobile.org/

Android users are like the mentally challenged kid in class screaming "I did it, YAAAAY!"

... wait for it...

Can't refute any point, decides to try to troll.

Cool story bro.

yeah.

Um.

Not just refuted.

Slammed, burnt, owned, pwned, creamed, splattered, left you writhing in agony?

Yeah. I did that.

Here's the thing Krazy. Don't say "Cool Story Bro" after trolling somebody with a mentally challenged kid comparison. All that does is just invite the whales swimming in the background to step in and have a nice big chomp on your krilly rear end.
 

daglesj

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
5,590
I'm struggling to actually find a point in this "Cool Story" from Krazy; but here's my shot at it.



Not just opinion. Provable fact.

Here's the thing Krazy. Most bio-metric security systems are easily bypassed by the very nature of their bio-metric usage. The kinect-style mapping features have to account for various different shades of skin, eye position, eyelid-position, and other facial muscle positions in order to be functional in a wide range of lighting conditions. A phone that only unlocks for somebody's face when they are in a fluorescent-lit room with wide-open eyes isn't very useful. So question here: can any Apple or Android picture unlock system accurately determine whether or not the image that is being used to unlock... is a printed 3D model... a person who is awake... a person who is asleep... or a person who is dead?

Also: what's to stop a legally authorized agent of a government entity from simply holding a picture-locked device up to an owners face for an unlock?

The point here is simple. Bio-metric unlocks like fingerprints, pictures, and 3D mappings are useless features to somebody who actually needs or just desires basic security. It's like the encroachment of "sudo" against "su" in the Linux space. One approach makes it very easy to wreck a Linux box... the other actually requires having to input an actual password.

Which one is more secure?




I would not have called the post bragging...



Incorrect assumption and correlation. "Nobody" uses facial unlock on Android because the average Android user is, based on market-share, more likely to either be interested in security in general, or doesn't have money to throw around at the latest and greatest and have to make do with what they can afford.

Those buying affordable Android phones like the Huawei Honor Series; LeEco's LeMax 2; UmiDigi's; and Xiaomi's aren't going to fret over having the latest and greatest hardware updates. They just want a device that works.

Those who are buying Android because they actually have an investment in security procedures and practices are not going to stray far from passcodes or pattern unlocks that require some form of input from an authorized user.

Apple's introduction of a facial unlock system isn't going to change the market for several reasons. The first is that the Iphone X is horrendously expensive. Sure, Apple will sell out it's production run, but let's be honest here. Apple's talking hundreds of thousands of Iphone X's and a few million Iphone 8's. Android is talking about BILLIONS of devices going through activation in the same time span. Not to put too fine a point on the subject; Apple's the small krill in a sea of whales. Huawei alone sells more phones than Apple... and that's just one company without a worldwide household imprint. The only reason Apple get's away with being called a market leader is that Apple marketing only pitches it's flagship device against Samsung's flagship device.

To frame this in HardOCP terms; that would be like AMD and Nvidia both only describing the success of their graphics cards by just the Vega 64 and 1080 TI card sales alone. No person reading HardOCP or visiting the HardOCP forums would remotely call such a comparison a realistic viewpoint of the actual market. Like it or not; in terms of world-wide cell phone usage; Apple has about the same markeshare as Windows Phone 8.



And?

Okay. This used to be a pretty fair point. Build quality on Android phones circa Samsung's Galaxy SII used to be terrible. Getting a decent build quality in a phone pretty much meant having to buy a flagship. Except technology hasn't stood still. The molding and manufacturing techniques to make cell-phone shells have advanced to the point where even titanium and ceramic bodies are feasible at ~$500(US) price-points. Build quality in a $300~$500(US) phone is hardly an issue now; and companies like Huawei and Umidigi (aka Raiding-Sharp's-parts-bin) keep proving that good build qualities can be had on ~$200 phones.

So... Apple has good build quality? I think that's more a factor of where ODM Hon Hai Precision is at in their process capability rather than a reflection on Apple itself.



... I've worked through quite a few different UI's in my time. Outside of taking some more pot-shots at Got-No-Organization-Messy-Experience I'm not really aware of any current device UI that is completely inane, insane, or just flat broken as to be unusable. Activating facial recognition on Android phones should be as simple as going to settings and security; then following prompts on the screen.

Has Apple dumbed that down? Probably not.

I suspect an Apple user will still have to go to their settings; click on security; and then follow the prompts on the screen.



I'm still trying to parse this sentence.

Android users didn't take to facial recognition as an unlock because it was a gimmick that didn't actually secure their phone.

Now, I fully expect that you'd like to make some comment as to the effect that the inability of the Android facial unlock to secure a phone was due to some limitation of the camera system and or User-Interface prompts. I harbor no doubt that a quick Binging of the net, because you wouldn't use Google or DuckDuckGo, would certainly find you some person or another who posted somewhere that they couldn't get their facial unlock to work at all.

Bully for you. Congrats on being able to navigate the web. Antecedents do not make a proof of such a claim.

What I can prove; very quickly; is that unscrupulous governments already do not hesitate to physically restrain a person and then physically apply the bio-metric locked device unlock. E.G. locking somebody in a chair and then physically forcing the person to put their finger on the finger-print sensor. All facial unlock does is just mean that an interrogator no longer has to bother with taking the locking mittens off.




Yeah. We... We got that.



... you must be fun at word contradiction parties.



Excellent chance to make a point on how Google has slowly lost the plot on what Android is supposed to be and what Android is supposed to do.

You didn't make that point though. In fact I'm still struggling to figure out what point you were trying to make.

If you really are interested in something that works; I'd suggest checking out Plasma-Mobile: https://plasma-mobile.org/



... wait for it...



yeah.

Um.

Not just refuted.

Slammed, burnt, owned, pwned, creamed, splattered, left you writhing in agony?

Yeah. I did that.

Here's the thing Krazy. Don't say "Cool Story Bro" after trolling somebody with a mentally challenged kid comparison. All that does is just invite the whales swimming in the background to step in and have a nice big chomp on your krilly rear end.



Basically it boils down to most Android owners can tell shit from Shinola.
 

Evil_SPanKY

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Messages
318
I will never use face unlock. Pass code or pin is more secure. What prevents someone to use your face to unlock against your wishes? At least with a pass code I have to give it or it has to be broken.

If it ever comes to Android it better be optional.

Here here. With a passcode lock method, you CANNOT be forced to unlock your phone outside of a warrant (at least in US). With ANY biometrics based lock scenario, you already gave up that right can can be compelled to unlock it upon request and without a warrant. Plus with face unlock, they don't even really have to ask you but just hold it up to your face to do so. Utterly stupid!
 

HeadRusch

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
1,571
Its worth mentioning that Apple is really just a marketing company right now......they release the same device every year with asthetic and occasionally functional upgrades and try to convince you that the thing they released years ago is now rubbish. They will do this as long as people keep buying into it.

But nobody is really doing (that I am aware) much more with their phones than they were 2-3-4 years ago. Text, Mail, Chat, Browse, GPS, cheap games and occasionally a telephone call. Apple gives you more silly features, yet won't give you the ability to not have to charge the phone every 12-24 hours.
Samsung does this, all phone companies do this. Now they are trying to sell you watches, basically a baby version of the phone. Tim Cook is the kind of man who gets up on stage and puts people to sleep, he's not the abrasive asshole who you wanted for your best friend...like Steve Jobs was......and so
the hype balloon of Apple has been slowly deflating ever since his passing.

We live in an age when people beg on GoFundMe to pay for some life-emergency that any normal, thinking person would have prepared for...."OMG my dog hurt his paw and hte vet says it will be $800, please help us!".and then 2 days later post 30 shots to Facebook of their brand new Tesla. The iPhone 8 was literally "phoned-in", nobody wants a copy of the 7....I am genuinely curious about the X.
Curious as in "I expect the normal group of douchebags to line up for it because their lives allow them that luxury" but what about month 2, 3, 4, 6.

Full Disclosure: I own ipads and my family is on apple phones...old, bought-used apple phones. I respect what apple USED to do, but I do not respect what they are doing today: Milking it for all its worth without providing anything of real substance for the users. Emoji's? How about a battery and internals that work
for 24 hours under constant use. Seriously, Apple, try holding a focus-group outside of San Francisco for once.
 

fadedlogic

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 7, 2016
Messages
274
How much quality does one really need in ones hipster restaurant food shots and duckface selfies?

If I'm doing anything more than taking a very basic picture, I'm using a real camera anyway, not a cellphone no matter how good it is.

Don't get me wrong. I like improvements, and if something is better, that is great, but I don't see the camera ever being a major point of differentiation in a phone. It's just not that important of a feature.

Honestly, it really wouldn't be a huge deal to me if my phone had no camera at all...


To you, photography is a hobby of mine that I enjoy immensely. Rarely is it practical for me to drag along my DSLR on business trips. Current generation camera phones do any amazing job for such a tiny package. As the old adage goes: the best camera is the one you have with you. Modern cellphone cameras have allowed me to significantly improve my composition skills and capturing some fantastic shots. Camera performance is one of the first features I look at on a cellphone. They all do a great job for calls, texting, and emailing.
 
Top