User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » General Discussion »

Apple's ADD or Lack of Focus


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
Apple's ADD or Lack of Focus
Page 6 of 10 First Previous 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10  Next Thread Tools
drewprops
Magnificent Basturd™
sagacious-d
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Atlanta
 
2016-11-16, 00:58

You people are nuts!

This book finally shows innovation in an arena that most people have forgotten: physical books.

I'm telling you, watch for the next MacBook Pro to be an ACTUAL book.

We live in an age of wonders.

Way to GO, Tim Cook!!! Way to GO!!!!




...

Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon.
Captain Drew on Twitter
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2016-11-16, 03:24

Again, how does a photo book by a non-Apple employee (Andrew Zuckerman) adversely affect Apple's core business?

Is Apple's core business desktop PCs? Nope. At this point it's still iPhones because iPads are down and the Apple Watch never was. It's why iPhones will always be released around the beginning of October. Back-to-school PC sales opportunities would have been late July/August, which they missed.

Apple's future is murky, but if you're constantly complaining about how Apple isn't stuffing marginal Intel CPU updates into new desktops annually, then you're pretty much looking backward and not forward. It's like this entire forum is 10 years behind in some ways. Still complaining about PC hardware. Heh. You should be more worried that Apple has failed its autonomous car initiative. You should be pissed that Apple has failed to negotiate the big networks/cablecos (they're the same thing at this point.) You should be annoyed Apple (or anyone else) hasn't figured out touch on the desktop.
  quote
El Gallo
Formerly “MumboJumbo”
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
 
2016-11-16, 08:10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene View Post
Again, how does a photo book by a non-Apple employee (Andrew Zuckerman) adversely affect Apple's core business?

Is Apple's core business desktop PCs? Nope. At this point it's still iPhones because iPads are down and the Apple Watch never was. It's why iPhones will always be released around the beginning of October. Back-to-school PC sales opportunities would have been late July/August, which they missed.

Apple's future is murky, but if you're constantly complaining about how Apple isn't stuffing marginal Intel CPU updates into new desktops annually, then you're pretty much looking backward and not forward. It's like this entire forum is 10 years behind in some ways. Still complaining about PC hardware. Heh. You should be more worried that Apple has failed its autonomous car initiative. You should be pissed that Apple has failed to negotiate the big networks/cablecos (they're the same thing at this point.) You should be annoyed Apple (or anyone else) hasn't figured out touch on the desktop.
Couldn't we be upset about those things ANNNNNND be pissed that Apple can't manage to just update some internals on their PC line or update some software?

It is just sort of crazy how this is working out. It goes beyond lack of focus and into outright neglect. They don't even need to handle some of this stuff at this stage. They are so large they could simply have subcontractors handle it and say yes or no to a proposal. If they don't give a crap anymore just have Quanta or whoever else is building it just design it as well. We could be complaining about it being a little too PC like or whatever and have machines that are updates more than once every three or four years and by updated we don't mean new designs, we mean something as basic as a faster processor or larger HD.
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2016-11-16, 10:35

Yeah if Apple considers desktop PCs to be obsolete and not worth keeping around, why not show some "courage" and just kill them off instead of letting them sit around like an unwanted, freeloading roommate? If they consider their desktops to be worth selling, they should at least bump the specs once in a while. They'd still make a killing, as new components often cost the same as or less than old ones, and they could keep their markups just as high as always. Doing so would maybe draw less ire from the small number of people who actually care about their desktop offerings.

I dunno, maybe they figure anyone who's stuck with them this long is never going to leave, so why bother trying to please them?
  quote
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2016-11-16, 15:21

I really don't understand the grousing about the book. If you're not in the market for a $200 coffee table book, then don't buy it. It's not like they made the decision to produce this book instead of ever updating the Mac Pro.

If this is something nobody wants, how come there have been multiple similar books published by other parties? For all the talk of how Apple is up their own asshole with this, here are just small excerpts of the rapturous descriptions of Iconic, taken from its own site:

Quote:
ICONIC takes the reader on a breathtaking tour of some of the most visually stunning and important products from one of the most loved brands in the world.
Breathtaking! Visually stunning! One of the most loved brands in the world! Wow, Apple is really — oh, wait, I forgot, it's not Apple writing that.

Quote:
Iconic: The Classic Plus Edition is a Classic Edition that ships with a beautiful Kivar black slip case. Kivar is a black tactile decorative covering with a soft matte finish that is strong and durable. This gives your book an extra stand out on your book shelf with a bold look that is beautiful and luxuriously appealing to the touch.
Luxuriously appealing!

Quote:
For the mega Apple fans and enthusiasts, the Ultimate Edition includes a magnificent white Cromwell Aristo Grain clamshell case with a custom embedded LED that triggers a pulsing sleep cycle on movement, two original 8.5" x 11" prints and a letter of authenticity from the author.
Yes, the magnificent case literally has blinking LEDs for your bookshelf. For the mega fans. And it comes with a letter of authenticity, in case people think you bought one of those fake copies of Iconic.

And the ultimate edition isn't actually the ultimate edition. If you're a "true Apple fan," as opposed to merely a mega fan, you'll get the special edition:



Quote:
The book must be level on the surface you are placing it on, and the book must be placed precisely flush within the slipcase before being inserted into the custom case. When you receive the Special Edition, you will see a special instruction page that highlights this. You will need to make sure that you follow these directions otherwise there is a chance the dust jacket could get caught on the edge of the custom case.
Nothing says "design" like a book that requires special instructions to open and close.

This is going to sound super snobby, but Iconic feels like someone who had never seen a $250 art book got to make their idea of what a $250 book would be like. It's a stack of gimmicks to make it feel "fancy" and valuable. Blinking lights! Metal covers! Certificates of authenticity! Four editions, each more "limited" and "deluxe" then the last! Slipcases inside of slipcases! Wow!

Apple's offering is — as one would expect — vastly superior. It's incredibly understated in comparison, of course. No slipcase, not even a casewrap or dust jacket, because it's a book stripped to its essentials. It's a book-shaped book. All of the "excesses" of its production — custom papers, custom inks — are there to serve the photography. It's a fancy book done right. Given the market for books of Apple product photography, should Apple have not made their superior option available? If it was gifted to employees as a holiday gift, or if it was only sold at the Campus Store, these things would be hitting eBay so hard that $200 would look cheap.

$200 is not cheap, of course. This is, to be sure, a luxury item, more stainless steel link bracelet than iPod touch. But the pricing is not at all out of line with other art or photography books, even ones that weren't made to such exacting standards. There is no "Apple tax" here. I think there's this idea, from people who perhaps aren't very familiar with art and photography books, that Apple took a book that "should" cost forty dollars max and thirty on Amazon and is instead charging $200 for it because Apple. After all, who ever heard of a $200 book? It's utterly ridiculous!

To put it politely, I don't think people who believe this book "should" be cheaper have any idea of how books are made and certainly any idea of how books are sold. I'm not saying Apple is losing money on these, but I don't think they're making as much money as people are convinced they are. Custom inks are expensive. Custom papers are expensive. And of course hundreds of pages of Andrew Zuckerman photography is expensive. This reads more like a labor of love to me than something intended to be a high-margin profit generator.

There's talk that the optics would have been better if Apple partnered with an established art book publisher to put this out, so it wouldn't look like Apple was selling their sheep $300 ads. But for what it's worth I totally believe Ive when he says that if they were going to ever actually finish the "archive book" they would have to treat it like an Apple product and do it their way, with their persnicketyness and perfectionism, and make something they could really be proud of. I think they wanted to make the book a beautifully designed Apple product in its own right, not because it would offend their sensibilities to put their masterworks in a substandard vessel, but because they think all things should be beautifully designed. They're designers, after all. It's the same reason they're spending a zillion dollars on "frivolous" things like miles of curved glass at Apple Campus 2. It's not about building a monument to how awesome they are, it's that designers like nicely designed things.

and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong

Last edited by Robo : 2016-11-16 at 16:03.
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2016-11-16, 17:13

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robo View Post
There's talk that the optics would have been better if Apple partnered with an established art book publisher to put this out, so it wouldn't look like Apple was selling their sheep $300 ads.
That right there. Apple is already seen as hopelessly snobby and elitist; this makes it look like they are selling it right alongside iPads and MacBooks (which they are, sort of).

I mean, you are right. They're a company with a very heavy focus on design and they can do whatever they want. It's silly to really go after them for doing this - after all, most people who heavily criticize Apple are just looking for a reason to.

That doesn't make it any less ridiculous of a product. I'm sure the quality of the book is outstanding.
  quote
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2016-11-16, 18:55

I think a ridiculous product would be a similar book from Microsoft or Samsung. I think with Apple, the claim that the book provides value is much stronger.

There's another argument, not that Apple shouldn't be selling their superior design monograph but that they shouldn't have even bothered to produce one in the first place, that even an hour of Jony Ive's time spent thinking about this book is too much when he should be glue-gunning Xeons into Mac Pros or whatever. But I think that argument is also weak, and the reason why is that Apple is a company made up of people. This means that, yes, those people have egos and care about things like their "legacy." But much more importantly, it means that those people also leave and retire and die, and new people have to learn Apple's way of doing things. This is of extreme importance to Apple, because Apple's way of doing things has been enormously successful.

Imagine that Jony Ive had decided that he wanted to pass on what he has learned in his career so far, and wrote a treatise enumerating his principles of design. Such a book would have huge educational value, would it not? Not just within Apple, but to the design world at large. It would cause an immediate sensation among the people that care about chamfers and fonts. Jony Ive and his team have shaped some of the most popular products in history and defined and redefined what the very idea of "high technology" looks and feels like. Who wouldn't want to study their guiding principles? Could Apple afford not to document them?

I would posit that this is that book. In a way, it's the least ego-driven design treatise imaginable: rather than pompous paragraphs pontificating on the importance of blah blah blah, it's simple photographs highlighting the end result of those values and in doing so, making the principles themselves clear. It shows, rather than tells, and it shows a great deal.

Viewed as a record of what Apple design is, I'd even argue it would be not just unfortunate for it to be recorded in a less Apple-like form, it would be less accurate as an example. Appleness is making a custom paper and a custom ink so your white can look white and not just blank.

Jony Ive leads the most renowned industrial design studio in the world. If he led an independent Ive & Co., a monograph like this wouldn't just be expected at this point in his career, it would be anticipated. Of course, Jony Ive's studio is owned by Apple, which is its only "client." But that doesn't mean that the people that work there care any less about putting "their book on the shelf," so to speak, and if anything it makes it extra important for that "client" to preserve their values.

and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong

Last edited by Robo : 2016-11-16 at 19:09.
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2016-11-16, 19:05

One of the biggest companies in the world didn't get there by alienating the masses. Apple is less elitist than it is aspirational. Even that's a stretch.

Besides what does elitism have to do with the PC industry being boring and stagnant for half a decade?
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2016-11-16, 20:41

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene View Post
Apple's future is murky, but if you're constantly complaining about how Apple isn't stuffing marginal Intel CPU updates into new desktops annually, then you're pretty much looking backward and not forward. It's like this entire forum is 10 years behind in some ways. Still complaining about PC hardware. Heh. You should be more worried that Apple has failed its autonomous car initiative. You should be pissed that Apple has failed to negotiate the big networks/cablecos (they're the same thing at this point.) You should be annoyed Apple (or anyone else) hasn't figured out touch on the desktop.
Maybe some of us don't give a crap about an Apple car, or automated cars in general for that matter, and cable company deals? What is this 2005? Who still gets cable? As for cars, if Apple designed a car it would most likely be too thin for anyone who weighted over 100 pounds anyway. Frankly I want less automatic crap in my car, I enjoy driving and have no desire not for it to change into some kind of computer entertainment system with big ass screens and useless crap.

Considering that Apple charges top dollar for what they sell, they darn well better have the best, latest and greatest guts out in their machines. As others have said, if Apple wants to ax the Mac, just do it already and stop leaving us hanging.
  quote
Dave
Ninja Editor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bay Area, CA
 
2016-11-16, 22:04

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robo View Post
I really don't understand the grousing about the book.
It's too thick, too heavy, battery is too small, and doesn't come in Rose Gold.
  quote
alcimedes
I shot the sherrif.
 
Join Date: May 2004
Send a message via ICQ to alcimedes  
2016-11-16, 22:27

The gripe is that they've put more thought into this book than their entire Desktop line for the last two years, and they're a computer company.
  quote
Brave Ulysses
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
 
2016-11-16, 23:56

And Apple eliminated Sal soghoian's position.

You may shrug your shoulders but sal is an Apple lifer and true lover of the mac and its users. It's extremely troubling to see Apple show the door to someone who has lived and bled for the mac for the past 20 years and who always put the user first. I remember meeting sal at Macworld ny and he was amazing.... full of energy and passion.

"Business decisions". A company making billions of dollars of profit is cutting expenses by cutting 20 year veterans the same week they release a $300 coffee table book kissing their own asses. Fuck that.
  quote
Kickaha
Likes his boobies blue.
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hell
 
2016-11-17, 00:13

Yeah, that is... troubling.

I met Sal at WWDC '99. (Or was it '98? Brad, you were there...) At the time, he was THE man in industry for automation.

Since then, however, Mac OS became macOS by way of OS X, and AppleScript is no longer the single automation mechanism. Now we have a plethora of Unix based systems to choose from.

But yes. Troubling.

My other brain is hung like a horse too.
#IRC isn't old school.
Old school is being able to say 'finger me' with a straight face.
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2016-11-17, 05:35

Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM View Post
Maybe some of us don't give a crap about an Apple car, or automated cars in general for that matter, and cable company deals? What is this 2005? Who still gets cable? As for cars, if Apple designed a car it would most likely be too thin for anyone who weighted over 100 pounds anyway. Frankly I want less automatic crap in my car, I enjoy driving and have no desire not for it to change into some kind of computer entertainment system with big ass screens and useless crap.

Considering that Apple charges top dollar for what they sell, they darn well better have the best, latest and greatest guts out in their machines. As others have said, if Apple wants to ax the Mac, just do it already and stop leaving us hanging.
Pretty short-sighted.

The Apple car is a practical application for technologies that will drive the company forward. Namely cognitive computing, image recognition, and artificial intelligence in general. Autonomous cars are going to be a huge deal when it comes to battling climate change. They create the potential to redesign our transportation infrastructure.

And who signs up for cable? Roughly 82% of US households still pay for cable or satellite.

That number is stabilizing because cord-cutting still costs money and isn't a seamless experience. It's almost impossible to cord-cut sports. If you still want to watch Westworld or Game of Thrones, you're paying $10/mo for the privilege. If I want Netflix, that's another $10/mo. If i want MLB.tv, that's ~$100 and local games are still blacked out. Apple has the opportunity to use its weight to push media conglomerates around and force them to standardize around a single cohesive subscription format and user experience.

It's your own stubbornness leaving you feeling held hostage by Apple on the desktop side. Buy a Windows PC, build your own exactly how you want it. Make it a Hackintosh if you want to...it's pretty effortless at this point. Or, you know, keep your current Mac and buy whatever's available because such little progress has been made in terms of raw computing power. ThunderBolt 3 is really the only thing that interests me, and even that is not something I absolutely need.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2016-11-17, 09:04

I love how you always tell other people what they should want or need. It's getting old, and just plain annoying.

If fully intend to get a desktop PC. Apple won't sell a computed I'd buy anymore. Still as a long term Mac user that makes me disappointed. Is that so wrong? And I'd hardly call over 30% improvement over the last 3 years, minor speed bumps. Heck people used to get excited about a 10-15% jump and call it a major innovation. Guess what, they are still doing that, you've just become jaded.

As for cars, sure automation has its place, but to say it's going to save the world is BS. It might save good drivers from crappy ones, but it opens up a new can of worms and makes it possible for hackers to completely gridlock all traffic. No thanks, you can have your hack-able death trap.

TV, don't get cable, just Netflix and a few ad overhead services. Don't watch much sports, game of crap or whatever else you are talking about. Don't care.

Last edited by PB PM : 2016-11-17 at 09:17.
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2016-11-17, 12:13

It's a 25% improvement in >5 years when comparing an overclocked 2600K to an overclocked 6700K. You seem to have forgotten that Moore's Law basically meant a doubling in processor performance every 18-24 months before that.

But you're right, I've been jaded about desktop computing for that long, and it has nothing to do with Apple. The fact that you care about nothing but Macs definitely means you should GTFO and move on from Apple. This isn't the brand for you anymore. I stop going to restaurants when the head chef changes. I stop going to bike shops when my favorite mechanic quits. I stop being loyal to brands when they clearly stop making products I want. You want annual Mac updates because you think that's important to you. I don't buy new Macs every year, so it's not important to me.

You know what causes 99% of all traffic jams? Human error.

E: And for the most part, Mac shipments have gone up year-over-year when PC shipments have been in steady decline for a decade. Clearly horsepower doesn't drive sales as much as you think.

Last edited by Eugene : 2016-11-17 at 12:54.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2016-11-17, 12:59

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene View Post
But you're right, I've been jaded about desktop computing for that long, and it has nothing to do with Apple. The fact that you care about nothing but Macs definitely means you should GTFO and move on from Apple. This isn't the brand for you anymore. I stop going to restaurants when the head chef changes. I stop going to bike shops when my favorite mechanic quits. I stop being loyal to brands when they clearly stop making products I want. You want annual Mac updates because you think that's important to you. I don't buy new Macs every year, so it's not important to me.
Every year? Are you kidding? I buy a new machine every 4-5 years. I just think that if Apple is going to charge a premium for their luxury priced products they should at least have the latest hardware available. What difference does it make it is only a 25% improvement over those 4-5 years? The is a noticeable improvement for tasks like video encoding, and other intensive processing tasks. I've never been into overclocking or that, even on the machines I've built, but I might in the future.

I am doing exactly what you are saying, I'm leaving Apple, albeit reluctantly. I enjoy using the OS and many of the apps, but find the products to be lacking in invention in the post Jobs era. I likely will build a hankintosh or at least a dual boot machine.

As for traffic, 99% of the causes are stupid selfish people true. That does not mean I would ever trust a easily hackable, networked, computer to drive for me. Will the computer be less likely to cause common traffic problems? Yup. Is it more likely to cause major traffic problems, outright just miss things (aka recent Tesla cases) and kill people? Yup.
  quote
Kickaha
Likes his boobies blue.
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hell
 
2016-11-17, 13:06

Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM View Post
Is it more likely to cause major traffic problems, outright just miss things (aka recent Tesla cases) and kill people? Yup.
Assertion provided without evidence of claim of 'more likely'.

Citations needed.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2016-11-17, 13:09

Yes, because nobody every turns off automated features in their cars that screw things up, like traction control? How long as traction control been around now? 20+ years and it still gets it wrong from time to time. If automated cars are any better in 20+ years from now, let me know.
  quote
Kickaha
Likes his boobies blue.
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hell
 
2016-11-17, 13:14

So... no evidence of the claim made, just a gut feeling based on a vaguely related body of anecdotes.

Got it.

Sorry, (not sorry) but my tolerance for unsubstantiated opinion being passed off as fact is WAY down these days.

My other brain is hung like a horse too.
#IRC isn't old school.
Old school is being able to say 'finger me' with a straight face.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2016-11-17, 13:16

If you cannot be bothered to look up the Tesla cases on your own that's not my problem, I have better things to do with my time.
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2016-11-17, 13:17

What do you think will happen when 5, 10, 25, 50 percent of human errors are eliminated from the roads? Will incident rates go up or down?

Since you mentioned Tesla, how about comparing how safe a Tesla is vs just about any other car? Teslas are pretty much capable of determining whether a driver is incapacitated and driving them to the nearest ER.
  quote
Kickaha
Likes his boobies blue.
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hell
 
2016-11-17, 13:19

Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM View Post
If you cannot be bothered to look up the Tesla cases on your own that's not my problem, I have better things to do with my time.
Oh no, see, I know precisely what you're talking about. That was not in dispute. Your claim was 'more likely'. I'd like to see some evidence for that claim. Hell, do a basic analysis of the probabilities if you like, that would at least have some basis in data.

As to your 'prove it yourself'... the burden of proof is on the claimant. Always. If your claim has so little import to you that you can't do due diligence on it, why should I take it seriously at all?

Meh. Dropping as not on topic.

My other brain is hung like a horse too.
#IRC isn't old school.
Old school is being able to say 'finger me' with a straight face.

Last edited by Kickaha : 2016-11-17 at 14:24.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2016-11-17, 14:25

Perhaps I figured that most people on a forum like stayed up to date on tech news, from sites like Ars and Engadget, and that I wouldn't need to provide direct links. I guess I was wrong to assume people paid attention to such news.

http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/06/...a-fatal-crash/

http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/09/...rms-of-safety/

http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/05/...ays-otherwise/

Need more or that not good enough for you? To me these systems have a long way, and many years to go before they will be safe enough for the general public. Apple isn't a car company, and I couldn't see them doing any better than other more experienced companies in this field. To me it's a good thing that they are not wasting time on it.
  quote
Kickaha
Likes his boobies blue.
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hell
 
2016-11-17, 15:44

What part of "Oh no, see, I know precisely what you're talking about. That was not in dispute." was unclear?

Three links are not proof or evidence of your claim that automated cars would be 'more likely to [...] kill people'.

1) 'more likely' than what? Today? You seem to be saying that total deaths will go up with automated cars. If not, then your wording is really very poorly chosen. But, here's your chance to clarify.

2) Show your work. "OMG, there were crashes!!" No kidding. Cars crash. Your apparent claim is that under an automated network of cars that total deaths would increase. Provide a reasonable set of assumptions and logic to support this claim. Not three anecdotes. I want to see total deaths now per mile driven, and total deaths per mile driven under current automated guidance. Extrapolate out. State your assumptions. Will the systems improve, or do you assume that the current data is as good as it will get? Will they improve at a steady rate? What's the lowest rate of crashes you think is reasonable even under a 'perfect' system? Are you assuming that people will turn it off? What %? Provide a model that rolls these assumptions together and gives numeric results. Short of that, it's like, just your opinion, man.

In other words, you really did waste your time providing those links. You're flailing your hands about over something that the rest of us are going "Yes, that happened, and.... ?"

Yes, I'm busting your balls, but I'm kind of ridiculously done with letting comments slide. Replacing fact with opinion, and opinion with speculation, and speculation with random BS is not working for anyone any more. It's time it gets called out.

My other brain is hung like a horse too.
#IRC isn't old school.
Old school is being able to say 'finger me' with a straight face.

Last edited by Kickaha : 2016-11-17 at 16:21.
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2016-11-17, 16:49

It's a little disappointing when people on a tech forum can't see that practical applications for AI are the next big thing, and that Apple is behind Microsoft, Google, Amazon, IBM, the auto industry, even game developers. It has ramifications so far beyond self-driving cars.

But yeah, keep getting worked up over 5% year-over-year IPC gains and coffee table books.
  quote
Dave
Ninja Editor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bay Area, CA
 
2016-11-17, 17:29

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene View Post
It's a little disappointing when people on a tech forum can't see that practical applications for AI are the next big thing, and that Apple is behind Microsoft, Google, Amazon, IBM, the auto industry, even game developers. It has ramifications so far beyond self-driving cars.
It's not that I can't see the practical applications, I'm just not sure it's going to have much of an affect locally on my personal "computing devices". Self-driving cars? Check. Washing machines that automatically select the correct settings for whatever laundry I happened to load? Got it. Replacing fast food workers with robots? Well, the merits are debatable, but sure. My mac, though... Is it going to start writing posts on AppleNova for me or something?

When I was a kid, people who did wrong were punished, restricted, and forbidden. Now, when someone does wrong, all of the rest of us are punished, restricted, and forbidden... and the one who did the wrong is counselled and "understood" and fed ice cream.
  quote
Kickaha
Likes his boobies blue.
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hell
 
2016-11-17, 17:47

LOL No, but it might be able to better manage your file space based on how you've organized things in the past. It could provide a pre-loaded set of web pages, like a clipping service, in the morning based on what you normally surf during the day. It might be able to look at prior calendar items, and suggest that you need to make an appointment for your annual dental exam.

Etc, etc, etc.

Deep learning AI is kind of a fascinating arena, and while it may not be obvious what the connections are between an autonomous car and a personal assistant, look at IBM's Watson. They didn't make a system to win Jeopardy, or to handle medical research. They created a general purpose AI, and then train it on various applications. The same approaches are used in autonomous driving, and creating new recipes.

My other brain is hung like a horse too.
#IRC isn't old school.
Old school is being able to say 'finger me' with a straight face.
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2016-11-17, 18:25

Even game devs are moving in on that space.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2016-11-17, 20:16

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene View Post
It's a little disappointing when people on a tech forum can't see that practical applications for AI are the next big thing, and that Apple is behind Microsoft, Google, Amazon, IBM, the auto industry, even game developers. It has ramifications so far beyond self-driving cars.
Not all of us have some overwhelming desire to have our lives run by computers. If you want skynet, or whatever you want to call it, running your life feel free. Considering that people who are far smarter, and on the ball about tech, than us are urging people to slow down and consider the ramifications of AI, it's not something I'm rushing to be part of. The level of connectivity and automation is wonderful, but how far is too far? Maybe I sound like an old fart (I guess it comes with being in my 30's), but as the old saying goes, fools rush in.
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 6 of 10 First Previous 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10  Next

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Using focus() to hide div? MagSafe Programmer's Nook 8 2007-10-31 14:31
Will Apple focus on ergonomics? Satchmo Speculation and Rumors 10 2007-09-17 15:54
OOP learning book with Ruby focus? chucker Programmer's Nook 42 2006-01-27 16:46
Final Cut Express - How do I add a good Soft Focus? Gizzer Genius Bar 0 2005-11-28 08:03


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 15:56.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2019, AppleNova