Daring Fireball: The iPhone 4S(daringfireball.net)
daringfireball.net
Daring Fireball: The iPhone 4S
http://daringfireball.net/2011/10/iphone_4s
18 comments
You could replace a few words and that comment would apply to last year's "one more thing": video chat. And many people did make exactly those comments. (Actually most of them said "Apple did it first! Wait, Europe had what a decade ago? Okay, I meant Apple did it best! That's why it'll catch on this time.")
As far as I can tell it's still the same niche users using it for the same niche tasks (talking to kids on business trips, sexting etc.). Nice to have for those that need it, but they mostly had it already via netbooks with Skype.
Likewise, I'm hearing about how this is going to transform computing for people with certain disabilities, when they've apparently just bought the same Dragon software you've been able to buy for years (for transcription, the Siri stuff is apparently semi-distinct).
Don't get me wrong, I like that I can already call up songs in my car by voice with my $100, no-contract, chinese-branded, 600Mhz ARM11 Android phone with a 3rd party, free, ad-supported app. (I amuse myself by practicing my french pronunciation with it too) The gushing just gets a bit old, as does the speculation about what magical powers the A5 must have to enable such wizardry.
As far as I can tell it's still the same niche users using it for the same niche tasks (talking to kids on business trips, sexting etc.). Nice to have for those that need it, but they mostly had it already via netbooks with Skype.
Likewise, I'm hearing about how this is going to transform computing for people with certain disabilities, when they've apparently just bought the same Dragon software you've been able to buy for years (for transcription, the Siri stuff is apparently semi-distinct).
Don't get me wrong, I like that I can already call up songs in my car by voice with my $100, no-contract, chinese-branded, 600Mhz ARM11 Android phone with a 3rd party, free, ad-supported app. (I amuse myself by practicing my french pronunciation with it too) The gushing just gets a bit old, as does the speculation about what magical powers the A5 must have to enable such wizardry.
I think the issue with FaceTime is actually more to do with people finding they don't like looking at themselves, and their appearance on camera. I am of course obligated to here mention David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest.
In the book, people begin to go so far as to buy masks and hologram replications of themselves to look as ideal as possible. This quote sums up the key problem:
"The answer, in a kind of trivalent nutshell, is: (1) emotional stress, (2) physical vanity, and (3) a certain queer kind of self-obliterating logic in the microeconomics of consumer high-tech."
This post on Kottke.org has some nice non-spoiler citations: http://kottke.org/10/06/david-foster-wallace-on-iphone-4s-fa...
As to accessibility you should also keep in mind that Apple has a great track record with that community through their work on the Mac and the iPhone, this is likely to greatly improve it.
In the book, people begin to go so far as to buy masks and hologram replications of themselves to look as ideal as possible. This quote sums up the key problem:
"The answer, in a kind of trivalent nutshell, is: (1) emotional stress, (2) physical vanity, and (3) a certain queer kind of self-obliterating logic in the microeconomics of consumer high-tech."
This post on Kottke.org has some nice non-spoiler citations: http://kottke.org/10/06/david-foster-wallace-on-iphone-4s-fa...
As to accessibility you should also keep in mind that Apple has a great track record with that community through their work on the Mac and the iPhone, this is likely to greatly improve it.
I know someone at work who bought 3 iPhones so he could faceTime with his kids. It's definitely a growing option.
I don't think Facetime's first year was a good measure of it's longer term outlook. The inability to use it with any past iOS products severely limited the launch impact - you were limited to whoever was buying the iPhone 4. With the 4S, just about everyone on an iOS device will have Facetime, and iMessage is obviously an effort to further this sense of a BBM-style device "club" among one's peers.
A lot of people have Macs. Plus Steve said that FaceTime was going to be an open standard, but that never happened. If they thought the network effect was a problem, they sure haven't tried solving it.
The two features aren’t really comparable. It makes no sense to compare the two.
What exactly makes them incomparable? I think it is fairly apt. They were both the "one more thing", both were Apple versions of existing technologies that some people are claiming will succeed mostly cause they are Apple versions, they are really power user features that lack mass adoption currently, both face social mores that make their use somewhat awkward and so on. I think all signs point to Facetime the sequel. A damn good product that is used once or twice to test, a lot by a couple of people, and is mostly inconsequential.
What?! No, certainly not. When FaceTime gets adaption you will not know whether Siri will also be able to get adaption. The reverse is also true. They are completely different features.
For one thing, FaceTime is a multi-party tool which falls victim to the network effect. The first people to get an iPhone 4 had few people they could FaceTime with, so it wasn't very useful to them.
Siri, on the other hand, doesn't depend on anyone else having anything in particular. Siri would be just as useful if you were the only person on the planet able to use it. I think that will make a huge difference in adoption.
Siri, on the other hand, doesn't depend on anyone else having anything in particular. Siri would be just as useful if you were the only person on the planet able to use it. I think that will make a huge difference in adoption.
It wasn't really the features I was commenting on, it's the marketing hype and the reactions to it that are predictable and repetitive.
What "marketing hype"? Being announced last on a keynote?
People attribute special powers to Apple's "marketing hype" but 99% is web generated --articles, posts, comments, user anticipation etc, not from some Apple's marketing campaign.
Except if showing the Facetime and Siri features in its tv ads qualifies as "marketing hype".
In any case, Facetime is an iOS/Mac feature. Noone expected it to catch as much as Skype, if only because there are like 80% more Skype-capable devices out there (like, say, all Windows boxes).
And Apple even made some bad decisions IMHO in promoting it: no OSX client from the beginning, not integrated with other apps (say, iChat), not promoted for PCs bundled with iTunes, etc.
People attribute special powers to Apple's "marketing hype" but 99% is web generated --articles, posts, comments, user anticipation etc, not from some Apple's marketing campaign.
Except if showing the Facetime and Siri features in its tv ads qualifies as "marketing hype".
In any case, Facetime is an iOS/Mac feature. Noone expected it to catch as much as Skype, if only because there are like 80% more Skype-capable devices out there (like, say, all Windows boxes).
And Apple even made some bad decisions IMHO in promoting it: no OSX client from the beginning, not integrated with other apps (say, iChat), not promoted for PCs bundled with iTunes, etc.
When you're hiring Oscar winning directors to make the (series of) adverts based entirely around one feature you're well into "marketing hype" territory.
A few people made the sensible point that Facetime was going to have a hard time displacing Skype due to network effects (and Wifi limitations), or indeed being useful at all for many people without large numbers of iPhone 4 using family and friends who they didn't see face-to-face enough. Many others seemed to have forgot that Skype and other such video chat tech such as iChat even existed in their excitement for this revolutionary technology.
A position I feel they were forced into since this was the big finale "one more thing" in an iPhone announcement, and therefore couldn't be considered a bit of a damp squib if they wanted to maintain face.
A few people made the sensible point that Facetime was going to have a hard time displacing Skype due to network effects (and Wifi limitations), or indeed being useful at all for many people without large numbers of iPhone 4 using family and friends who they didn't see face-to-face enough. Many others seemed to have forgot that Skype and other such video chat tech such as iChat even existed in their excitement for this revolutionary technology.
A position I feel they were forced into since this was the big finale "one more thing" in an iPhone announcement, and therefore couldn't be considered a bit of a damp squib if they wanted to maintain face.
"I don't think we (tech people) appreciate just how magical the public is going to find Siri."
Perhaps. But I as a tech person find it magical. But I showed the video of Siri in action to my wife and she had an immediate, visceral hatred of the idea of talking to the phone like that "If I want to set a bloody alarm, I'll tap the set alarm button thank you".
For context, she's not a luddite, she's tech savvy, though not into tech or its own sake. But I don't think she'll be alone, I think this is a feature that many non-tech people will loathe initially, perhaps for reasons they cannot articulate.
Perhaps. But I as a tech person find it magical. But I showed the video of Siri in action to my wife and she had an immediate, visceral hatred of the idea of talking to the phone like that "If I want to set a bloody alarm, I'll tap the set alarm button thank you".
For context, she's not a luddite, she's tech savvy, though not into tech or its own sake. But I don't think she'll be alone, I think this is a feature that many non-tech people will loathe initially, perhaps for reasons they cannot articulate.
That was the exact opposite reaction of my girlfriend's. She's basically upgrading her iPhone 4 just for Siri.
Context, she's tech savvy but she works as a tax accountant.
I can see using it myself as lot as well, especially for reminders and texting while I'm driving.
@brador I think that may work with Siri actually. People try the more conversional stuff in demo because, let's face it, it's more "magical."
I can see using it myself as lot as well, especially for reminders and texting while I'm driving.
@brador I think that may work with Siri actually. People try the more conversional stuff in demo because, let's face it, it's more "magical."
I'd suggest this is due to the necessity to "converse" with Siri. I don't want to pretend I'm talking to a human when talking to a phone because if I'm on a train/plane I'd look like an idiot.
Instead, if it could understand something along the lines of: "alarm, 5.30, tomorrow" that'd be much better, quicker and simpler than: "Siri, set my alarm for 5.30am tomorrow morning". I don't want to have a conversation with my phone. Get in, get it done, get out. Speed always wins. But then I hate the new dumbed down Google too so what do I know eh.
Siri will flop, the speed is a non-issue for the majority of iPhone owners and the camera just about brings the phone up to spec with it's competitor cameras. If they went for a an iPhone 5 and iPad3 they would have made an absolute killing this christmas.
Instead, if it could understand something along the lines of: "alarm, 5.30, tomorrow" that'd be much better, quicker and simpler than: "Siri, set my alarm for 5.30am tomorrow morning". I don't want to have a conversation with my phone. Get in, get it done, get out. Speed always wins. But then I hate the new dumbed down Google too so what do I know eh.
Siri will flop, the speed is a non-issue for the majority of iPhone owners and the camera just about brings the phone up to spec with it's competitor cameras. If they went for a an iPhone 5 and iPad3 they would have made an absolute killing this christmas.
"If they went for a an iPhone 5 and iPad3 they would have made an absolute killing this christmas."
Yeah, instead they only pre-sold one million of them in 24h.
Yeah, instead they only pre-sold one million of them in 24h.
Well, they may have allegedly pre-sold one million within 24 hours, but they certainly won't get my $1,000+, which still sits by my desk waiting for the iPad3 and iPhone 5. I know two others who won't be upgrading on either product too, so thats another $2,000. Small sample, yes, yet representative of the population I'd say if you exclude end of contract "forced" sales.
So...you're "punishing" Apple by giving them your money next year instead of this year? I bet that will really teach them a lesson.
Well, you'll find business is not that simple. Consider this, In that time I may see an Android phone I like and jump ship. That's then a 2 year lock out during which I won't return to iPhone. Further, having finished my contract by the end of this month, that means they're not taking a cut of contract revenues from me until I get back on, if I ever do. They've effectively lost a customer, along with the cost endured to acquire said customer.
It's the carrier that's been paying back the subsidy from your subscription fees under contract. Apple got their money up-front from you two years ago. Any extra revenue they earned from you was from iTunes/App Store sales, which I'm guessing will probably continue after the contract is over.
You also said you're waiting with your cash in-hand for iPhone5, so looking at competing Android phones isn't even on your radar. Tim Cook loves customers like you.
You also said you're waiting with your cash in-hand for iPhone5, so looking at competing Android phones isn't even on your radar. Tim Cook loves customers like you.
certainly won't get my $1,000+, which still sits by my desk waiting for the iPad3 and iPhone 5
Not sure how smart it is keeping cash lying around to either depreciate or get stolen, but if you're going to wait for the iPad 3 and iPhone 5, you're only going to regret it, because the iPad 4 and iPhone 6 are going to be even better.
Not sure how smart it is keeping cash lying around to either depreciate or get stolen, but if you're going to wait for the iPad 3 and iPhone 5, you're only going to regret it, because the iPad 4 and iPhone 6 are going to be even better.
What's an "end of contract forced sale"? People coming off 2 year contracts today are holding a phone Apple still sells.
Some will transfer to the Android camp. Some will wait it out. I suggest if the iPhone 5 had been shown many more would have taken an upgrade rather than waiting or jumping ship to Android. Hence, it's not that releasing the iPhone 4S was "bad" as such, just that iPhone 5 would have been much much better.
I'm getting the most profound headache trying to create a small instance of the magical thinking necessary to generate the comments you've made here.
I don't even know where to start.
Like, how do you think this works? They have a magical golden goose shitting out new, feature complete design verification test models and they just decided not to "show" you the next one behind the curtain?
Apple is successful because they take their time creating their hits. The 3GS didn't imperil the company and neither will this.
I don't even know where to start.
Like, how do you think this works? They have a magical golden goose shitting out new, feature complete design verification test models and they just decided not to "show" you the next one behind the curtain?
Apple is successful because they take their time creating their hits. The 3GS didn't imperil the company and neither will this.
Which features would an iPhone 5 have? What would make it distinct from the iPhone 4S?
I'm thinking he wanted a new form factor to show that IT'S NOT AN IPHONE4. We're getting into the realm of tail fin marketing.
I actually don't mind the (I assume) 2 year cycle they've got going now, with a new phone 1 year with a follow up "S" model the next.
That way, when people are on their 2 year contract cycles, you either sit on the "new shiny" or the "advanced shiny" cycle, so consumers rarely lose out depending which cycle their contract ends in, since there are pros and cons for both.
I'd say its smart business.
That way, when people are on their 2 year contract cycles, you either sit on the "new shiny" or the "advanced shiny" cycle, so consumers rarely lose out depending which cycle their contract ends in, since there are pros and cons for both.
I'd say its smart business.
What's worrisome is that we're probably at the end of a long stretch where the industrial design drove the sales. From here on in, at least for a while, the innovations are turning inwards. Siri. Better camera. Better power consumption.
It's not like we're launching new networks every year or two, or individual ARM cores are going to make huge leaps in performance.
Have we trained everyone to worship the new/shiny when we're probably hitting a short-term asymptote?
It's not like we're launching new networks every year or two, or individual ARM cores are going to make huge leaps in performance.
Have we trained everyone to worship the new/shiny when we're probably hitting a short-term asymptote?
Isn't that a risk Apple has taken ever since the first iPhones went off-contract in 2009? People have always had the choice to be disappointed in the latest model and jump to whatever they wanted, Android or not.
It looks like Apple has done pretty well in spite of itself. You're always going to disappoint a certain % of people (like yourself).
It looks like Apple has done pretty well in spite of itself. You're always going to disappoint a certain % of people (like yourself).
I had visions of people screaming demands into their phones in public, too. But it turns out you can use Siri by bringing it up to your head, ala a regular phone call, too.
I don't think anyone has suggested that you can't be as terse as you like with it. Somehow I doubt Siri is going to get offended and respond with "Whats the magic word?"
The problem with designing an interface like "alarm, 5.30, tomorrow" is that soon you will start asking for for loops.
>Siri will flop,
Claim chowder.
> the speed is a non-issue for the majority of iPhone owners
Emm, the speed enables better apps, especially better games. It's always good to have. Smartphones have a long way to go yet.
> and the camera just about brings the phone up to spec with it's competitor cameras. If they went for a an iPhone 5 and iPad3 they would have made an absolute killing this christmas.
All the specs people wanted from an iPhone 5 are present, except a new chassis some pundits idiotically predicted. So what exactly do you miss, an increased NUMBER???
Oh, and they already started making an absolute killing.
Claim chowder.
> the speed is a non-issue for the majority of iPhone owners
Emm, the speed enables better apps, especially better games. It's always good to have. Smartphones have a long way to go yet.
> and the camera just about brings the phone up to spec with it's competitor cameras. If they went for a an iPhone 5 and iPad3 they would have made an absolute killing this christmas.
All the specs people wanted from an iPhone 5 are present, except a new chassis some pundits idiotically predicted. So what exactly do you miss, an increased NUMBER???
Oh, and they already started making an absolute killing.
Most people use their phone as...surprise surprise, a phone. Speed is irrelevant to the majority of users I know (non-tech), it's something Steve would not have done, it's an engineers mindset and I suggest it's the future of Apple under Tim. Apple isn't succesful because it has the fastest chips, but that's all it has to offer now?
Further, I'd challenge you to name one non-game app that would be massively improved by a faster chipset over what is currently available on iPhone 4 devices. Just ONE. That should tell you how unneeded a chip upgrade really is.
Further, I'd challenge you to name one non-game app that would be massively improved by a faster chipset over what is currently available on iPhone 4 devices. Just ONE. That should tell you how unneeded a chip upgrade really is.
Except when Steve did it with, drumroll, the iPhone 3GS.
Which was phenomenally successful.
What all the hysterics are missing here is that this is entirely with precedent.
When 3GS was introduced, it was pointed out that the S stands for speed.
Which was phenomenally successful.
What all the hysterics are missing here is that this is entirely with precedent.
When 3GS was introduced, it was pointed out that the S stands for speed.
> Most people use their phone as...surprise surprise, a phone.
Yeah. Back in the day. Or in rural Nebraska.
Nowadays, smartphones are used for tons of things besides calling. I'd even go as far as to say that actual call time is far less than other-use time. Else we wouldn't have TONS of web traffic originating from mobile phones and 300,000 apps in the App Store.
> Speed is irrelevant to the majority of users I know
Are those the same "most users" that use their smartphone "as a phone"?
For those people even a smartphone is irrelevant. They can get by with some dumb device.
Now, speed is irrelevant as a goal in itself. But a faster CPU enables more powerful apps. Without that irrelevant "speed", we wouldn't have the ability to handle 8 megapixel images properly, or edit movies in iMovie mobile to name a few examples. And for 3D games, more speed is better.
> Further, I'd challenge you to name one non-game app that would be massively improved by a faster chipset over what is currently available on iPhone 4 devices. Just ONE.
Just one?
1) Any music app (like Fruity Loops, Beatmaker, Massive, etc) would be able to either play more samples / synthesize more voices = improved polyphony, or synthesize better voices = better sound quality.
2) Any video encoding/editing app, such as iMovie mobile will be massively improved in what it can do.
3) Any drawing app, like Brushes. Most use complicated code to render realistic brush responses and lag when live-painting.
4) Any app written with an "interpreted" layer, from Adobe's flash transcompiled apps to Mono Touch will feel more native. Also, MacRuby will be eligible for iOS apps soon, as the GC problem is solved, and it will greatly benefit from a faster CPU.
Oh, and a faster CPU also does stuff in less time, so if the power requirements per instruction are the same as the previous CPU (which often happens with next generation CPUs), a faster CPU means better battery life.
Basically what you're saying is: "640K should be enough for everybody".
Yeah. Back in the day. Or in rural Nebraska.
Nowadays, smartphones are used for tons of things besides calling. I'd even go as far as to say that actual call time is far less than other-use time. Else we wouldn't have TONS of web traffic originating from mobile phones and 300,000 apps in the App Store.
> Speed is irrelevant to the majority of users I know
Are those the same "most users" that use their smartphone "as a phone"?
For those people even a smartphone is irrelevant. They can get by with some dumb device.
Now, speed is irrelevant as a goal in itself. But a faster CPU enables more powerful apps. Without that irrelevant "speed", we wouldn't have the ability to handle 8 megapixel images properly, or edit movies in iMovie mobile to name a few examples. And for 3D games, more speed is better.
> Further, I'd challenge you to name one non-game app that would be massively improved by a faster chipset over what is currently available on iPhone 4 devices. Just ONE.
Just one?
1) Any music app (like Fruity Loops, Beatmaker, Massive, etc) would be able to either play more samples / synthesize more voices = improved polyphony, or synthesize better voices = better sound quality.
2) Any video encoding/editing app, such as iMovie mobile will be massively improved in what it can do.
3) Any drawing app, like Brushes. Most use complicated code to render realistic brush responses and lag when live-painting.
4) Any app written with an "interpreted" layer, from Adobe's flash transcompiled apps to Mono Touch will feel more native. Also, MacRuby will be eligible for iOS apps soon, as the GC problem is solved, and it will greatly benefit from a faster CPU.
Oh, and a faster CPU also does stuff in less time, so if the power requirements per instruction are the same as the previous CPU (which often happens with next generation CPUs), a faster CPU means better battery life.
Basically what you're saying is: "640K should be enough for everybody".
> MacRuby will be eligible for iOS apps soon, as the GC problem is solved
If I didn't miss any recent developments, that was a misunderstanding from when ARC was leaked as iOS5 having "GC", then it turned out that it was actually compiler-supported reference counting. Which means that MacRuby is still stuck on iOS and doomed on OS X, with some people expecting the GC to be deprecated sooner or later.
With the current App Store rules, I don't see why Matz' C Ruby with 'dl' disabled wouldn't be eligible.
If I didn't miss any recent developments, that was a misunderstanding from when ARC was leaked as iOS5 having "GC", then it turned out that it was actually compiler-supported reference counting. Which means that MacRuby is still stuck on iOS and doomed on OS X, with some people expecting the GC to be deprecated sooner or later.
With the current App Store rules, I don't see why Matz' C Ruby with 'dl' disabled wouldn't be eligible.
uhm.... I'm in rural ND and most people under 30 don't use their phone to talk. Text and Facebook seem to be the main phone uses. It is my understanding that due to the cost of voice, most people in Africa use SMS and not voice.
Re: MacRuby/iOS, you're right, GC problem not solved with ARC after all.
Siri has been out since 2010 on the app store. Is there any reason (other than Apple's push with building it into the operating system) that users will take more notice of it now than they have in the last (nearly) two years?
Building it into the operating system is good enough reason.
This is vastly more capable and polished than the app in the App Store for the last two years. Deep integration with calendar, reminders, location (it looks like they've smoothed over a lot of the awkward permission requests in iOS 4), phone book and hardware (via the home button) makes it a radically different app.
Simply getting it in front of more users might make the difference. It's also a lot more tightly integrated I would assume.
A lot, yes. Apparently you can just hold the phone to your ear in order to activate it.
From the videos I've seen it looks like it launches via holding down the home key and at least for some command separation you need to hit the "talk" button with the Siri application.
There are two options to activate Siri: use the Home button, or just put it to your ear, as if you were talking on your phone rather than to. The second option can be disabled, but it's there and enabled by default.
Hitting the talk button for command separation is optional. It will just wait for a pause.
Integrating it with the OS is the reason users will take more notice now. I'm not sure why you dismiss that, but it's actually a huge deal.
I've used Siri on and off since it came out. It's pretty good. The reasons I don't use it more are precisely the problems that will be solved by integrating it into the OS. First, the app was a pain in the ass to activate, requiring half a dozen taps to get started. This problem disappears on the 4S. Second, the app couldn't do anything with the data on the phone (like send e-mails or check my calendar) because it didn't have access, or at least they didn't build it to. Again, this problem disappears with integration.
The main advantage of something like Siri is convenience and speed. The app couldn't achieve that precisely because it was an app that wasn't built in to the OS.
I've used Siri on and off since it came out. It's pretty good. The reasons I don't use it more are precisely the problems that will be solved by integrating it into the OS. First, the app was a pain in the ass to activate, requiring half a dozen taps to get started. This problem disappears on the 4S. Second, the app couldn't do anything with the data on the phone (like send e-mails or check my calendar) because it didn't have access, or at least they didn't build it to. Again, this problem disappears with integration.
The main advantage of something like Siri is convenience and speed. The app couldn't achieve that precisely because it was an app that wasn't built in to the OS.
I'm not disputing that bulding it into the OS is a big deal, but pointing out that in its 2 years of public release on the app store, Siri didn't see the organic growth of apps like Instagram or Hipstamatic.
Apple has added new features to integrate it more deeply with things like the Calendar and Reminders apps, but at the same time, half of Scott Forstall's demo commands at the 4S keynote were exactly the same as the Siri demo at 2009's All Things D conference.
Apple has added new features to integrate it more deeply with things like the Calendar and Reminders apps, but at the same time, half of Scott Forstall's demo commands at the 4S keynote were exactly the same as the Siri demo at 2009's All Things D conference.
A big part of building it into the OS is that it only takes a single action to activate, instead of the half dozen or so plus a considerable amount of waiting that it takes to activate the standalone app. I believe this will result in a qualitative difference. The app was mostly a novelty that was usually slower and less convenient than doing things directly. The OS service is likely to be considerably faster and more convenient than the other paths that exist for achieving what it can do.
I'll answer with a parallel:
"The secret to ending all poverty and hunger has been hidden deep in the earth's crust for two decades. Is there any reason why digging it out and placing it in Times Square for all to examine (except for the fact that now everyone can see it) will cause people to take more notice now than they did before?"
"The secret to ending all poverty and hunger has been hidden deep in the earth's crust for two decades. Is there any reason why digging it out and placing it in Times Square for all to examine (except for the fact that now everyone can see it) will cause people to take more notice now than they did before?"
I don't get it.
The poster has treated as trivial the most crucial shift in the described circumstance. (And thereby answered his/her own question)
It was a diamond in the rough, it just got de-roughed and as such is more diamond-y. Or it was a really cool product that people over looked, by featuring it prominently Apple hopes to get a lot of reward for very little effort.
Huh? I, for one, didn't even know Siri existed until the keynote.
So I'd say, yes, there is a reason.
So I'd say, yes, there is a reason.
My android phone has been begging me to talk to her for more than a year, but i refuse. It's still deep in the uncanny valley for me. You mentioned yourself that it might be useful in the car, where you are alone and nobody can hear you. Speech is disemmination, not simple message passing. It's literally shouting, when you really should only be whispering. If it was handwriting-recognition or some magical mind-reading or gesture-reading device i 'd use it.
To recap, you haven't tried Siri.
> You mentioned yourself that it might be useful in the car, where you are alone and nobody can hear you.
And what if people can hear you, in the street say? It's not like we don't already TALK to our phones all the time while walking in the street. You think it matters to passers-by if you talk to your boss or Siri?
> It's literally shouting, when you really should only be whispering.
Huh? What do you mean with this bizzaro comparison?
> You mentioned yourself that it might be useful in the car, where you are alone and nobody can hear you.
And what if people can hear you, in the street say? It's not like we don't already TALK to our phones all the time while walking in the street. You think it matters to passers-by if you talk to your boss or Siri?
> It's literally shouting, when you really should only be whispering.
Huh? What do you mean with this bizzaro comparison?
It's all a matter of least effort. I can imagine a few situations where it's handy, but most times the gain in effort to setup a reminder for example is offset by the inappropriateness of the situation. It becomes net positive at times when your hands are not available (the promo video shows people running, cooking, driving)
"I don't think we (tech people) appreciate just how magical the public is going to find Siri."
I think that that is exactly why we (tech people) hate it so much. We like to be in control of what happens, and Siri is all about giving most of that control over to your iPhone.
I think that that is exactly why we (tech people) hate it so much. We like to be in control of what happens, and Siri is all about giving most of that control over to your iPhone.
Not all of us tech people aspire to be system administrator on every single box with an operating system that we own or come into contact with. Eventually you start to realise there are too many boxes and not enough time. I have absolutely zero interest in being able to ssh into my mobile phone - I'm happy to accept that the people who were working on building the mobile phone full-time are going to be doing better work than I can manage to squeeze in outside of my day job.
No kidding! I have enough of a time on my own projects. I don't particularly care about adjusting gamma on my TV or constantly f'ing with the microwave to get it to warm up pizza. Although I enjoy hacking, sometimes I just want stuff to work. I'd rather tinker with something that's going to make my products better rather than spending hours trying to get a phone to do something. I spend enough hours getting molested by Heroku and performing anal exams on obscure Gems and a/b testing and blah, blah, blah. If I wanted to waste my time on a phone, I would have bought Android.
I'd speak for yourself — as a die hard "tech person" nothing in tech gives me a beefier erection than successfully accomplishing science fiction.
Thanks for that mental image.
We do? I'm an geek, using Linux with a custom kernel and a tilling WM, and I never had any real interest in Apple products, but Siri seems fantastic; it's the first time I really want an iPhone feature.
Siri seems to be the dream of every guy who read or viewed sci-fi, where voice interfaces are ubiquitous.
Sure, I'd wish it didn't transmit everything to "the cloud", and I'm definitively not buying an iPhone just for it, but it reached to me like no other Apple product did.
Siri seems to be the dream of every guy who read or viewed sci-fi, where voice interfaces are ubiquitous.
Sure, I'd wish it didn't transmit everything to "the cloud", and I'm definitively not buying an iPhone just for it, but it reached to me like no other Apple product did.
No, it is simply another means of control, like touch input.
Me: “Set an alarm for 9 AM.”
Siri: “It’s set for 9 AM.”
Me: “Change that to 10 AM.”
Siri: “I changed your alarm to 10 AM tomorrow.”
Me: “Cancel that alarm.”
Siri: “I deleted your 10 AM alarm.”
Me: “Thank you, Siri.”
Siri: “Your wish is my command.”
It seems this thing is really fun to use. I can't wait to try it out.
Siri: “It’s set for 9 AM.”
Me: “Change that to 10 AM.”
Siri: “I changed your alarm to 10 AM tomorrow.”
Me: “Cancel that alarm.”
Siri: “I deleted your 10 AM alarm.”
Me: “Thank you, Siri.”
Siri: “Your wish is my command.”
It seems this thing is really fun to use. I can't wait to try it out.
That's incredibly cool, but I think Gruber's point about the problems of third party integration will prove to be crucial.
Me: "Set my facebook status to getting ready to ride the roller coaster at Six Flags."
Siri: ...
Me: "Are there any headlines about my startup on the front page of Hacker News?"
Siri: ...
Me: "What Kindle books do I have on HTML 5?"
Siri: ...
Me: "Play me the latest episode of Glee on Netflix."
Siri: ...
Some of these, like Facebook, could be handled by smart first-party integration by Apple. But in general, any time a new use case comes along, first party integration is going to lag way behind, if it's implemented at all.
I don't mean to rag on Siri -- it's an incredibly cool technology even today, and it apparently works amazingly well. But the more things you can do by picking up the phone and using the touch interfsce that you simply can't do at all with the voice interface, the less I think it will slot right into people's lives and become how they interface with their phone.
Me: "Set my facebook status to getting ready to ride the roller coaster at Six Flags."
Siri: ...
Me: "Are there any headlines about my startup on the front page of Hacker News?"
Siri: ...
Me: "What Kindle books do I have on HTML 5?"
Siri: ...
Me: "Play me the latest episode of Glee on Netflix."
Siri: ...
Some of these, like Facebook, could be handled by smart first-party integration by Apple. But in general, any time a new use case comes along, first party integration is going to lag way behind, if it's implemented at all.
I don't mean to rag on Siri -- it's an incredibly cool technology even today, and it apparently works amazingly well. But the more things you can do by picking up the phone and using the touch interfsce that you simply can't do at all with the voice interface, the less I think it will slot right into people's lives and become how they interface with their phone.
Totally agree here, if this sort of thing gets worked out, I would feel like the future is here. I kind of see a naive way to make an api around that, but the trick to me would make it generic and adaptable enough to allow such a broad range of functionality, as well as conflict handling in a graceful manner. I am totally intrigued...
"Your wish is my command, but you are a little bit confused about tomorrow schedule."
You seem to be having trouble setting priorities. Shall I:
a. Purchase "The 7 habits of Highly Effective People" by Stephen Covey?
b. Purchase "Getting Things Done" by David Allen?
a. Purchase "The 7 habits of Highly Effective People" by Stephen Covey?
b. Purchase "Getting Things Done" by David Allen?
I can't wait to try stuff like this: “Remind me to fix Amy’s glasses when I get home.”
Does its understanding of location extend to more than just home is the address I entered for myself? Exploring its capabilities will be really interesting.
Siri's understanding of context is what makes it so useful. Pair it with Watson and it'd be unstoppable. (Wait, no! We've seen how that movie ends.)
Does its understanding of location extend to more than just home is the address I entered for myself? Exploring its capabilities will be really interesting.
Siri's understanding of context is what makes it so useful. Pair it with Watson and it'd be unstoppable. (Wait, no! We've seen how that movie ends.)
[deleted]
It works based on geofencing, which allows you to specify and label regions.
And that just means keeping your GPS turned on the whole day. Sure, I always dreamed about losing all my battery charge to such an insanely great feature.
You may want to wait and see how this feature really works.
Can we hack it to end every sentence with ", Master" ?
Even though Siri seems to be amazing I wonder whether people will use it much in practice. Voice is intrusive in the environment and annoying to people who aren't part of the conversation. Sitting next to someone conversing on the phone in a public space can be irritating but imagine how jarring it will be if the person next to you barks commands out loud at random intervals.
Him: "Remind me to pick up my dry cleaning."
You: "Huh? You talking to me? No..."
Later: "After picking up my dry cleaning, I want you to book me a flight to Tucson"
You: "I'm finding another seat..."
Him: "Remind me to pick up my dry cleaning."
You: "Huh? You talking to me? No..."
Later: "After picking up my dry cleaning, I want you to book me a flight to Tucson"
You: "I'm finding another seat..."
Gruber addressed this in a footnote:
"You might wonder, Hey, don’t you feel like a jerk walking around the city talking to your phone? But here’s the thing: Siri, by default, kicks in when you hold the iPhone up to your ear, so you can talk to it and it looks like you’re on a phone call."
"You might wonder, Hey, don’t you feel like a jerk walking around the city talking to your phone? But here’s the thing: Siri, by default, kicks in when you hold the iPhone up to your ear, so you can talk to it and it looks like you’re on a phone call."
This was what it was like at the beginning of mobile phones and then again at the start of bluetooth headsets.
People get used to it pretty quickly (but will always hate it on trains and planes).
People get used to it pretty quickly (but will always hate it on trains and planes).
My rule of bluetooth headsets: the more often you wear it (when you're not on a call), the more likely you are a douchebag.
It's held up fairly well, even as bluetooth adoption has increased.
It's held up fairly well, even as bluetooth adoption has increased.
I wonder how they'll handle different grammar constructions in different languages.
For example, in English, "Text my girlfriend that I'm coming home later" would send a message with "I'm coming home later".
However, in Dutch, saying the same thing "SMS mijn vriendin dat ik later thuiskom" should result in a text with the content "Ik kom later thuis", requiring labeling all parts of the sentence.
For example, in English, "Text my girlfriend that I'm coming home later" would send a message with "I'm coming home later".
However, in Dutch, saying the same thing "SMS mijn vriendin dat ik later thuiskom" should result in a text with the content "Ik kom later thuis", requiring labeling all parts of the sentence.
It might not even work in Dutch. From the webpage:
"Siri may not be available in all languages or in all areas, and features may vary by area".
"Siri may not be available in all languages or in all areas, and features may vary by area".
How to determine which of the several 3rd party API's to use seems pretty straight-forward to me:
Me: Search for Japanese food.
Siri: I found these 5 results on Yelp nearby.
Me: Search for Japanese food on Foursquare.
Siri: I found these 8 results on on Foursquare nearby.
If you explicitly request a certain service often enough, then Siri should start to default to it. That's exactly what a real world personal assistant would do. In fact, Apple doesn't have to be that creative. Just do what a real personal assistant would do in any given situation and you should be good.
Also, I would really like some reviewer mention if the iPhone 4S has less of a rolling-shutter issue as the previous iPhones do.
Me: Search for Japanese food.
Siri: I found these 5 results on Yelp nearby.
Me: Search for Japanese food on Foursquare.
Siri: I found these 8 results on on Foursquare nearby.
If you explicitly request a certain service often enough, then Siri should start to default to it. That's exactly what a real world personal assistant would do. In fact, Apple doesn't have to be that creative. Just do what a real personal assistant would do in any given situation and you should be good.
Also, I would really like some reviewer mention if the iPhone 4S has less of a rolling-shutter issue as the previous iPhones do.
This doesn't sound at all like Apple. More likely, they'll determine which services are the best for which type of query, and you'll only be able to use those.
The challenge is specifying which subsets of queries should be directed to the service. Foursquare won't be able to handle appointment requests, but it does handle restaurant requests. How does the Foursquare part of Siri specify this?
Perhaps you're suggesting that all services answer all queries, and then there's some sort of ranking on the results from each service to decide which one responds. Foursquare would give a low score answer to appointment queries, so the calendar app would get preference. This would be the best suggestion I've heard, but requires processing every request against every agent, which may be OK for Apple, but only some independent developers would be able to provide their own hardware. They may have to provide software to run on Apple servers...
Perhaps you're suggesting that all services answer all queries, and then there's some sort of ranking on the results from each service to decide which one responds. Foursquare would give a low score answer to appointment queries, so the calendar app would get preference. This would be the best suggestion I've heard, but requires processing every request against every agent, which may be OK for Apple, but only some independent developers would be able to provide their own hardware. They may have to provide software to run on Apple servers...
Any company that wants to provide "Siri-compatible" services registers on the apple developer website. Apple defines a set of services that it believes customers will be asking for (appointments, location-based recommendations, product-recommendations, weather, stock data, general search, etc...) and each provider can register their API endpoint and the query types they support. It seems that they already do this categorization to determine what to use (the built-in stock app for example) for a given query. Siri-compatable devices will regularly ping apple for a list of supported API endpoints and report back to Apple on how well these endpoints are performing on query speed and user adoption/satisfaction.
That's all just my guess of course...
That's all just my guess of course...
> If you explicitly request a certain service often enough, then Siri should start to default to it.
In other words, just use the code they've already got working in OSX's Spotlight "Top Hit" feature. (Which, oddly, doesn't exist in iOS Spotlight—maybe it requires a larger cache or something.)
In other words, just use the code they've already got working in OSX's Spotlight "Top Hit" feature. (Which, oddly, doesn't exist in iOS Spotlight—maybe it requires a larger cache or something.)
Does anyone know how well Siri performs if your accent is from outside of the States?
I have a friend from Scotland who has just ordered a 4s and is really excited about Siri. I'll be interested to see how it gets on with his thick Dundee accent (especially since I can barely understand him half the time!).
Like this, no doubt:
Burnistoun 'Voice Recognition Lift' Sketch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFcZIY-t1bc
Burnistoun 'Voice Recognition Lift' Sketch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFcZIY-t1bc
Yea this is the problem I'm not sure that they've solved. There are loads of regional accents in the UK, and only one setting in the language options called 'British English'
I'm wondering about that too. It seems Nuance (the platform Siri is built on) supports lots of accents, though I'm not sure how this works on the iPhone. Maybe it uses your regional settings to choose an accent profile?
http://community.nuance.com/blogs/dragon/archive/2009/03/05/...
http://community.nuance.com/blogs/dragon/archive/2009/03/05/...
One of the videos had somebody with a non-US accent -- British, maybe? Can't seem to find it now, though.
http://www.stuff.tv/video/vidcasts/apple-iphone-4s-siri-demo
Also worth noting that evidently Siri's voice can be changed, as well. That was a safe bet, but I hadn't seen it mentioned anywhere.
Also worth noting that evidently Siri's voice can be changed, as well. That was a safe bet, but I hadn't seen it mentioned anywhere.
The voice seems to depend on the language. You seemingly can't explicitly switch it, you only can switch languages. It just so happens that iOS has both 'English' and 'British English' as languages, with female and male voice synthesis respectivly. (Those languages are already built into the current version of iOS as part of VoiceOver.)
If you are German or French you only ever get one voice.
If you are German or French you only ever get one voice.
The idea is to build voice recognition from a large base of samples from different people (male/female, age, accents...).
That's why Google offered GOOG-411, mostly to train their database. And that's why all these solutions include a server-side part, because they need the large sample database that keeps growing.
That's why Google offered GOOG-411, mostly to train their database. And that's why all these solutions include a server-side part, because they need the large sample database that keeps growing.
It seems to work fine for BBC english:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/oct/12/iphone-4s-s...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/oct/12/iphone-4s-s...
I can't wait to see how it copes with British accents. Not just English vs Scottish etc - but the hundreds of variations.
I grew up in the East Midlands and now live in Leeds, 70 miles north. The difference in accents is night and day (although no-one in the UK knows what a Nottingham accent is). There's even a significant difference between a Leeds accent and the next city, Bradford (about 5 miles away).
I really hope Siri has some sort of unobtrusive training built in...
I grew up in the East Midlands and now live in Leeds, 70 miles north. The difference in accents is night and day (although no-one in the UK knows what a Nottingham accent is). There's even a significant difference between a Leeds accent and the next city, Bradford (about 5 miles away).
I really hope Siri has some sort of unobtrusive training built in...
I'm from Scotland so, as you can imagine, we're somewhat less enthusiastic about this kind of technology—it never really works for us.
(see Burnistoun YouTube video linked below)
(see Burnistoun YouTube video linked below)
Ha! It's easy to forget that HN comments aren't in time order.
Here's the post with the link:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3102084
Here's the post with the link:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3102084
I'm more interested in how it handles slang and local colloquialisms.
As a keen cyclist I'm really looking forward to trying Siri, but after reading the footnote I can now actually see myself using it anytime:
"You might wonder, Hey, don’t you feel like a jerk walking around the city talking to your phone? But here’s the thing: Siri, by default, kicks in when you hold the iPhone up to your ear, so you can talk to it and it looks like you’re on a phone call."
"You might wonder, Hey, don’t you feel like a jerk walking around the city talking to your phone? But here’s the thing: Siri, by default, kicks in when you hold the iPhone up to your ear, so you can talk to it and it looks like you’re on a phone call."
Siri paves the way for the display-less phone† - smaller, lower energy use
Context switching could be done like short-cuts: when you open an app it captures (most) shortcuts; and you can reallocate short-cut bindings. These are easy improvements. Just think of both voice and touch interfaces as having grammars.
Wolfram|Alpha's natural language interface is endlessly annoying for me - I think Siri would also get into trouble with more complex requests (but there's plenty of value in it before that limitation comes into play)
†this neologism could well go the way of the horse-less carriage
Context switching could be done like short-cuts: when you open an app it captures (most) shortcuts; and you can reallocate short-cut bindings. These are easy improvements. Just think of both voice and touch interfaces as having grammars.
Wolfram|Alpha's natural language interface is endlessly annoying for me - I think Siri would also get into trouble with more complex requests (but there's plenty of value in it before that limitation comes into play)
†this neologism could well go the way of the horse-less carriage
The humor in some of the responses is a really nice touch; perhaps something I didn't expect from Apple, who is fairly straight-down-the-line with their dialogs and software.
Saying that, it's actually appreciated, and does a great job at attempting to establish an emotional tie with the user.
Saying that, it's actually appreciated, and does a great job at attempting to establish an emotional tie with the user.
The humour is classic Jobs. When he introduced the original Macintosh, it began with a speech synthesizer telling a joke. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2B-XwPjn9YY&feature=relat... forward to 3:20
That was actually written by Steve Hayden (http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story...)
Mr. Macintosh begs to differ:
http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Mister_Macintosh.txt
I also really like that the story proves you to be thoroughly correct about Apple trying to establish emotional ties. Here's hoping that they made that a part of their "corporate DNA".
I also really like that the story proves you to be thoroughly correct about Apple trying to establish emotional ties. Here's hoping that they made that a part of their "corporate DNA".
Some of the humor and personality people detect in Siri may be grandfathered in from Wolfram Alpha, which has stock responses to certain queries. It's particularly good at joining in with movie quotes.
[deleted]
Apple's computer-speech stuff has been humorous since the 1980s. Not surprising to see Siri follow in that tradition.
The Mac's desktop speech recognizer, which is so old most Mac users don't even know exists, even tells knock-knock jokes (in response to "tell me a joke" -- the script it follows is in ~/Library/Speech/Speakable Items). And this has been a feature of Mac OS since the pre-OSX days.
As Gruber says, it sounds much more like the old Apple than the new Apple (see Happy Mac, Dogcow etc).
"The most profound difference between the 4S and 4 cameras has nothing to do with image quality. It’s that you don’t have to wait nearly as long. [...] Even better, image quality is better, too."
Jeez Gruber, make up your mind :P
Jeez Gruber, make up your mind :P
Maybe I'm not running enough apps, but my iPhone 4 has always seemed pretty damn fast getting to 'ready to take picture'.
That said, I'm really looking forward to the additional speed in the 4S and Siri.
That said, I'm really looking forward to the additional speed in the 4S and Siri.
Does anyone know if there are cues that remind the end user to use Siri? (eg. "you haven't used Siri in a week," or something of that nature). This feature, since it is primarily hidden behind the home button, might be forgotten by the average user.
As Mr. Gruber stated, once he got it into his workflow, he missed it when it was gone. However, I think one of the biggest hurdles to mass adoption will be getting it into the workflow of the average user.
Anyone have ideas of how to address this problem? Or do you think the product video is enough?
As Mr. Gruber stated, once he got it into his workflow, he missed it when it was gone. However, I think one of the biggest hurdles to mass adoption will be getting it into the workflow of the average user.
Anyone have ideas of how to address this problem? Or do you think the product video is enough?
Given they have similar situations with finder, multitasking, folders, deleting apps etc. I suspect they're just going to rely on people remembering the feature's there.
I think those are a bit different. For all of the actions you mentioned, there is only one way to complete the task (eg deleting an app). With Siri, you can also accomplish any of its functionality using the traditional UI. Therefore the user has to remember to use Siri.
However, your point is well taken. Maybe I'm not giving the average user enough credit.
However, your point is well taken. Maybe I'm not giving the average user enough credit.
True, I hadn't considered that for a lot of those there isn't any other way.
Loved the ending. "The one and only disappointment I have with the iPhone 4S is that the shutdown spinner animation is still low-res. That’s pretty low on the list of nits to pick."
Shame it can't read emails, but then I guess there is so much crap in an email it just wouldn't read well...
The voice synthesis is really nothing new, it has been part of iOS as VoiceOver (Apple's built-in screenreader, an accessibility feature) for a long time. It certainly wouldn't have any problems reading emails and it seems to me that emails tend to be less random than text messages.
Maybe they wanted to keep the interaction short to give it more flow? Siri doesn't really ever seem to read very long stuff to you.
Maybe they wanted to keep the interaction short to give it more flow? Siri doesn't really ever seem to read very long stuff to you.
True, I guess the modern language used in text messages could cause problems, however with the lengh of signitures and message history indentation that I get in a lot of emails, I could see them being an issue.
OTOH, it could certainly read the subject.
I just hope it can handle accents or at least learn to handle them over time.
So is it legal to hold the phone to your ear and talk to Siri while driving?
An even smaller nit to pick is that nits are ordered by size, not count.
Siri was originally an App, but it took a huge amount of effort to get it to work. I believe the reason the feature is exclusive to the iPhone 4S is due to hardware.
Apple said the processor in the iPhone 4S is the A5. This may be the exact same chip in the iPad 2, or it might be the same class of chip. Apple doesn't detail the internals of their processors, so they can make device specific versions and call them the same thing if they want. Thus, this A5 could have co-processors in it that didn't exist in the one for the iPad 2. Specifically, I remember there begin something about an image co-processor that the camera uses, and it seems logical that there might be some video encoding or at least video feature extraction being done in hardware to enable 1080p video. (a big step up from 720p).
There may well be a feature extraction engine in the A5 to turn the audio recording of your voice into a series of symbols that are much more efficient to send over the wire to the SIRI service.
But, even if there are no co-processors, voice recognition is a very CPU intensive process, and the A5 has another CPU in it, as well as a greatly improved GPU. Either or both may be required for the current version of SIRI (which is more complete than the original) to work.
Thus it literally may be the case that Siri wouldn't run on the iPhone 4.
Apple said the processor in the iPhone 4S is the A5. This may be the exact same chip in the iPad 2, or it might be the same class of chip. Apple doesn't detail the internals of their processors, so they can make device specific versions and call them the same thing if they want. Thus, this A5 could have co-processors in it that didn't exist in the one for the iPad 2. Specifically, I remember there begin something about an image co-processor that the camera uses, and it seems logical that there might be some video encoding or at least video feature extraction being done in hardware to enable 1080p video. (a big step up from 720p).
There may well be a feature extraction engine in the A5 to turn the audio recording of your voice into a series of symbols that are much more efficient to send over the wire to the SIRI service.
But, even if there are no co-processors, voice recognition is a very CPU intensive process, and the A5 has another CPU in it, as well as a greatly improved GPU. Either or both may be required for the current version of SIRI (which is more complete than the original) to work.
Thus it literally may be the case that Siri wouldn't run on the iPhone 4.
There is a signal processor in the iPhone 4 A5. Phil Schiller mentioned it briefly in the keynote when talking about the camera (64 mins in).
Schiller referred to it as an "Image Signal Processor" so it may be that it is custom silicone for used only by the camera but it seems more likely that it is a more general DSP and was badged like this for the presentation.
It is probably a version of ARM's NEON technology:
http://www.arm.com/products/processors/technologies/neon.php
Update: According to wikipedia that's exactly what it is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A5
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4216/apple-ipad-2-gpu-performa...
Also, the corresponding A4 page makes no mention of NEON or DSP:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A4
Interestingly, as this is the iPad A5 being discussed it strengthens the argument for Siri-on-iPad2 (assuming the signal processor is key to Siri working efficiently).
Schiller referred to it as an "Image Signal Processor" so it may be that it is custom silicone for used only by the camera but it seems more likely that it is a more general DSP and was badged like this for the presentation.
It is probably a version of ARM's NEON technology:
http://www.arm.com/products/processors/technologies/neon.php
NEON technology can accelerate multimedia and signal
processing algorithms such as video encode/decode, 2D/3D
graphics, gaming, audio and speech processing, image
processing, telephony, and sound synthesis by at least
3x the performance of ARMv5 and at least 2x the
performance of ARMv6 SIMD
Update: According to wikipedia that's exactly what it is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A5
The A5 contains a rendition of chip based upon the
dual-core ARM Cortex-A9 MPCore CPU with NEON SIMD
accelerator and a dual core PowerVR SGX543MP2 GPU.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4216/apple-ipad-2-gpu-performa...
Also, the corresponding A4 page makes no mention of NEON or DSP:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A4
Interestingly, as this is the iPad A5 being discussed it strengthens the argument for Siri-on-iPad2 (assuming the signal processor is key to Siri working efficiently).
> Also, the corresponding A4 page makes no mention of NEON or DSP
NEON is included in the A4's Cortex A8. In fact, NEON was added back in the 3GS: http://wanderingcoder.net/2010/06/02/intro-neon/
Only the 2G and the 3G don't have it.
NEON is included in the A4's Cortex A8. In fact, NEON was added back in the 3GS: http://wanderingcoder.net/2010/06/02/intro-neon/
Only the 2G and the 3G don't have it.
Apple won't even claim this. They just waffle and avoid the question. I don't know why it is so hard to believe that Apple would do this to give more incentive to buy the 4S. It is the flipside of the famous Google criticism "if you aren't paying, you are the product". With Apple, you get the product, but you are going damn well pay for it. Whereas on my Android my crap prepaid 600 MHz phone runs Voice Actions just fine.
Waffle? Apple never waffles. Apple just says nothing at all.
I have no problem with Apple purposefully limiting Siri to the new iPhone and I don't really understand people who think that because the hardware supports it they should get it.
It would be nice but it's Apple's choice.
I have no problem with Apple purposefully limiting Siri to the new iPhone and I don't really understand people who think that because the hardware supports it they should get it.
It would be nice but it's Apple's choice.
[deleted]
Well, it's Apple's next model since the Grip of Death problem, and no word if it's fixed.
Talking to my phone is nice, and so is a fast camera, but it's tragic that this beautiful sleek device has to be wrapped in an ugly rubber band for me to make a call!
[Edit] Well, this article says it's been fixed with two antennas. I really don't like how they downplay the problem and act like it only affects ham-fisted gorillas. When I have just two bars, griping the bare metal with four fingers is enough to make the signal too weak for communication.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2394178,00.asp
Talking to my phone is nice, and so is a fast camera, but it's tragic that this beautiful sleek device has to be wrapped in an ugly rubber band for me to make a call!
[Edit] Well, this article says it's been fixed with two antennas. I really don't like how they downplay the problem and act like it only affects ham-fisted gorillas. When I have just two bars, griping the bare metal with four fingers is enough to make the signal too weak for communication.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2394178,00.asp
Most people have never used voice recognition beyond shouting "Call Dave Jobs[1] Mobile" in the car. This is going to be perceived as magic, in the same way as the accelerometer in the Wii or the original finger touch interface. Anyone with a 4S is going to be showing this off to their friends, and I can't wait to try it.
There are parallels with people saying 'Touch has been around for years, but people prefer buttons' when the iPhone came out. True - until someone did it right. And now everyone wants touch.
And yes, I know it's been around on Android. But Apple make you WANT to use it. No-one's ever been bursting with excitement to show me their Android voice recognition stuff, and nor have I been wetting myself to try it out.
On the downside for Apple - improvements to the iPhone for the foreseeable future look to be on the software/web server side. They are vulnerable here. Limiting features to new models is going to piss people off, and fighting patent battles on software is much, much harder.
[1] Funny typo - I meant to type Dave Jones. Only noticed this on rereading the post.