New Apple Lust Objects for 2010 and onward

i've seen it described as "sensor-laden"

like, think about that and look at what mark gurman's learned about healthbook. that app is gonna be able to organize info about a bunch of aspects of your health. what if the iwatch was able to monitor not only sleep but blood glucose levels and a bunch of other things

let me find that tim cook clip from last year's allthingsd conference

from the man himself: http://bit.ly/1hF0nuV

well, and walt mossberg

anyone think aperture will get updated sometime this decade?

The only Internet April Fools joke I fell for this year was also the cruelest: http://theapertureblog.com/2014/04/01/apple-finally-releases-aperture-x/

i dont think theyll be an iwatch, or at least i dont think it will be a watch, or like an iphone on your wrist, there may be something that goes around your wrist, if they make something thats like a watch and a phone thats when you know theyve lost it, all in all tho i dont think people really want to wear these wearables, like sure they cld do lots of cool things but are they cool things people actually want to do

there may be something that goes around your wrist

this is 100% happening. no question. see mark gurman's reporting: http://9to5mac.com/author/markgurman/

http://9to5mac.com/2014/02/07/from-fashion-to-fitness-the-experts-behind-apples-wearable-future/

if they make something thats like a watch and a phone

i doubt it will be a phone. i think it'll be a peripheral to an iphone. think of it like an old school ipod to a mac. apple's not afraid of making non-standalone devices.

the only way they'd make it both was if they thought somehow this was gonna be the thing that disrupted (forgive me) the iphone, and it doesn't look like that's gonna happen. like, it won't.

that being said, of course this could still tank, which would be bad for tim cook even if it perhaps wouldn't effect apple too too much since they'd still be churning out new ipads and iphones

the only thing a watch wld be good for is sensors like fitbit, like obvs especially if its a peripheral its useless for anything else when u can just pull yr phone out of yr pocket, and just because they hired a bunch of dudes and are working on something doesnt mean itll ever see the light of day

but even a device like fitbit i think is only appealing to a p low % of the population, single digits, like people are supposed to be all into monitoring their vital signs when they cant even get their asses up to excersize once a week

the only thing a watch wld be good for is sensors

tim cook directly talks about this in that link i posted above. also, i'm tellin' you it's gonna happen. i waste a lot of time on this shit and everything's pointing in that direction. he promised a new product category this year. there's no indication that anything else is ready for release except a revamped apple tv, and ppl r gonna be pissed if that's what he meant by a new category. (he didn't)

hockenberry's thing about how they might do a ring or whatever is wrong

there's no way

but even a device like fitbit i think is only appealing to a p low % of the population, single digits, like people are supposed to be all into monitoring their vital signs when they cant even get their asses up to excersize once a week

― lag∞n

you could be right here, although i think this will be far more advanced than any of the existing things on the market.

if they release some coney ass device where look u can check ur txts on it im divesting myself of all my imaginary apple stock

markers, i dont believe you this isn't happening

well check back later this year. latest rumors seem to indicate a september launch.

http://9to5mac.com/2013/07/18/apple-stacks-iwatch-team-with-sensor-fitness-experts/

Never trust anything Mark Gurman or any other Mac rumor site posts

2013 Rumor Retrospective: 'All the leaks were...'

I've been writing Rumor Roundups for nearly two years now. In all that time, only two writers from sites featured in the Roundup have ever contacted me directly:

In mid-2012, Rene Ritchie of iMore contacted me once to (correctly) point out a regrettable inaccuracy I'd written about one of his site's claims.
Several times over the past few months, Mark Gurman of 9to5 Mac has contacted me via Twitter, and each time he contacts me his behavior becomes more and more... "erratic" is probably the polite way to put it.
On December 19, 9to5 Mac posted a 2013 retrospective patting themselves on the back for their supposed accuracy in the field of Apple rumors. "All the leaks were right," their article claimed. This was an intriguing claim to make, as 9to5 Mac takes the same "throw everything against the wall and see what sticks" approach to rumors as almost every other Apple site out there, and as a result they inevitably post heaps of wildly inaccurate information about Apple's supposed future plans.

When I dared to point out that 9to5 Mac deliberately ignored the dozens of inaccurate stories that it posted during 2013, Mark Gurman challenged me to prove it. I was at the beach in Mount Maunganui, New Zealand when Gurman first contacted me on Twitter. I ignored him at first, but barely two hours later he insisted that I provide him with a list of inaccurate links. I was still at the beach. Sometimes, the real world takes precedence. I assured him I'd get to it in due time.

Naturally, because this is the internet, this was soon followed by a handful of 9to5 Mac readers taunting and harassing me on Twitter. One of them even made a veiled threat about it not being a good idea to "pick a fight" with "9to5 Warriors" because "we don't get much sleep, you know."

Regrettably, I was too busy laughing my ass off to be properly intimidated. But it did provide me with the motivation to do a deep dive into 9to5 Mac's vaunted accuracy - as did Gurman once again prodding me (in a tweet he's since deleted), days after his initial challenge, to provide a list of inaccurate claims his site had made (or passed on).

There is an old Vulcan proverb: "Be careful what you ask for. You may get it."

I examined all of 9to5 Mac's articles between January 1 and December 28 2013. This was 326 pages of content, at 6 articles per page, for a total of 1956 articles.

The tl;dr summary of 9to5 Mac's 2013 track record:

73 rumor articles turned out to be true, and 30 of those were derived from their original sources
91 rumor articles turned out to be either partially or entirely inaccurate, or else completely unverifiable
That gives them an overall accuracy record of just under 45 percent. You'd do better by flipping a coin.

In 2013, 9to5 Mac posted a total of 164 articles that were either purely rumors or else speculative posts based on rumors. This was lower than I expected, accounting for only about 8.4 percent of all articles on their site.

9to5 Mac posted an impressively high 73 rumor articles that turned out to be entirely true, and this included all of the articles derived from their own original sources-a truly impressive and commendable 30 articles in total. 9to5 Mac absolutely does have someone inside Apple (probably several someones) feeding them accurate information.

If that were the whole story, then it'd be time for me to shut up and retire. Unfortunately, 9to5 Mac isn't content to stick with its own trusted sources, and it takes the same "shotgun" approach as everyone else by posting idiotic analyst speculation and Digitimes-derived BS with only occasional nods in the general direction of skepticism.

Let me be perfectly clear: I take no issue whatsoever with 9to5 Mac's reporting of rumors derived from its own original sources. They obviously work hard to get this information, and it almost always turns out to be either wholly or substantially accurate. The problem is, it's hard to sort out these diamonds from the piles of typical "telephone game" nonsense Apple rumors they're buried in.

If 9to5 Mac stuck to reporting only its own, originally-sourced rumors-and if they could rein in the more *ahem* enthusiastic members of their staff-they could easily be the undisputed go-to bastion of all Apple rumors. Sadly, that ain't so.

I wasn't feeling particularly charitable in my analysis of 9to5 Mac's track record (for some strange reason). Therefore, for any story that wasn't derived from their own sources (a "re-reported" article, in other words) or any purely speculative posts, if any detail was ultimately incorrect or simply unverifiable, I counted the entire article as inaccurate.

In 2013, 9to5 Mac posted 91 stories that were either partially or wholly inaccurate. Almost all of them were sourced from analysts, Digitimes, or some other typically unreliable source.

Analysis of 9to5 Mac's record over 2013 provided some interesting insights into the state of Apple rumors as a whole. Predictably, the farther away we are from the date of an Apple event, the less likely a rumor is to be proven true. Photos of hardware, deep dives into software, and leaks derived from original sources almost always bear fruit; re-blogging of analyst speculation and the latest tripe from Digitimes and other "supply chain sources" almost never does. And despite claims that Ming-Chi Kuo is a "typically accurate" Apple analyst, his track record in 2013 is almost the same as 9to5 Mac's; in other words, approximately half of Kuo's predictions ultimately turn out to be either partially or substantially incorrect.

(full info breakdown at the TUAW link)

relevant http://www.macworld.com/article/2142568/iwatch-watch-apple-is-not-here-to-entertain-you.html

where did you get THAT link?

the 'net

Apple has only “60 days left to either come up with [an iWatch] or they will disappear,” analyst Trip Chowdhry told CNBC last month.

like is it because of a magic spell

they are gonna make something that spins the meaning of "watch" to not be associated with a timepiece, if it's a wristband device. like, it keeps watch and lets you watch, but it ain't no timepiece wristwatch

if it's just a lil screen on a band I'll be a little disillusioned. there are a lot of good wrist-mounted sensor packages out there, I guess they could make a better one. but ehhh

what if it's a necklace

if it's just a lil screen on a band I'll be a little disillusioned. there are a lot of good wrist-mounted sensor packages out there, I guess they could make a better one. but ehhh

Nevertheless, this is Apple's typical behavior when it comes to completely new products. Wait for the pioneers to make mistakes and then enter the market so definitively with enough fanfare to make you believe they invented the market to begin with. Anyone remember any of the portable mp3 players that were around before the iPod?

the ipod was their one device that really destroyed the competition.

there was one called the nomad jukebox snakeman

http://bit.ly/1jGbwKv

I had a second generation iPod, but a lot of the alternatives weren't half bad. The difference being that the iPod was better interface-wise and they bought one of the best desktop audio organizers that worked with devices and made it incompatible with all others.

tbh they bought the firmware off the shelf from yet another company

that was all fine and pretty much best-of-breed at the beginning, but it was by far a design and marketing triumph over an actual from-the-roots product development success. probably someone is arguing that's the case for apple with post-return steve jobs, but it was more like a way to jump start their device sales outside the desktop

they started working on it in 2001 and had it out by the fall

didn't they eventually acquire the pixo os?

yeah, I believe so

but it was by far a design and marketing triumph over an actual from-the-roots product development success.

― a strange man (mh), Monday, April 14, 2014 9:46 PM (16 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this is such a terrible computer programmer thing to say u shd be ashamed

haha thank you, you are right

I am ashamed usually

fadell literally said something like "we handed the internals to jony to skin"

so yeah it seems like it was rushed. or at least done much faster than the iphone, which took two and a half years.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/30/magazine/30IPOD.html?pagewanted=all

iwatch leaked photos https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BlO0p9tCMAACL5C.jpg

I bought a Basis B1 watch yesterday - it's kind of ugly but has all the usual Fitbit/Up features and a heart rate monitor. I guess we'll see how it goes.

If Apple could nail a fitness device that interacts with an iPhone (sans the dumber features of the Galaxy watch), it could be huge. Everyone wants to quantify their steps taken and blood sugar constantly etc etc.

i don't really see it, but I won't say it's impossible. as mentioned, the fitness calculators don't seem like a huge market to me (lol 'murica)

http://bytecollector.com/images/thumbs/hp-01_015_small.jpg

Everyone wants to quantify their steps taken and blood sugar constantly etc etc.

everyone but me, i guess?