This tag has an U1 chip using Ultra Wide Band (UWB) which means that iPhones 11 and above also equipped with those chips will be able to locate those tags from 80m away with a +/-30cm accuracy. U1 UWB uses short pulses at 6.24GHz and 8.2GHz and positioning is done by combining time of flight (ToF) and angle of arrival (AoA).
Apple Introduces AirTag
171–180 of 966 posts
Re: Apple Introduces AirTag
#172This is directly competing with Tile[0] which you can buy 2 for 39.99. I guess the integration with Find My app would be pretty convenient but probably not worth the price difference? [0] https://www.thetileapp.com/en-us/store/tiles/sticker
In addition to what the other commenter said, Tile products are very flaky. The price difference doesn't matter to me, since Tile's products just don't work.
Tile has been complaining for some time that their products are flaky because new iOS privacy measures prevent them from accessing location data while running in the background, even if the user sets the app permission to "always allow."
Re: Apple Introduces AirTag
#173So with this tiny $25 thingy my neighbor can track me in real-time after gluing it to my car? Nice. No, honestly, this is a bit concerning, isn't it?
You didn't read the anti-stalking measures that are built in?
> iOS devices can also detect an AirTag that isn’t with its owner, and notify the user if an unknown AirTag is seen to be traveling with them from place to place over time.
I don't have iOS devices.
> And even if users don’t have an iOS device, an AirTag separated from its owner for an extended period of time will play a sound when moved to draw attention to it.
What is the definition of an extended period of time? One week? Two?
Re: Apple Introduces AirTag
#174The "commercial" they used to introduce this during the event was hilarious and awesome: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbApA2JLZ_c
I interpreted the end as “took psychedelic mushrooms and lost your keys? AirTag’s got your back”.
But maybe that’s just me.
Re: Apple Introduces AirTag
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's wrong with that?
Not the OP, but I would turn it off simply to conserve battery life. I'm still rocking a 6s, and my phone gets slower and doesn't last as long with every update. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the updates, but I'd also like to maximize the battery life.
It doesn't use any battery life compared to turning the screen on.
Re: Apple Introduces AirTag
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's much easier to have a phone that will easily tell you if there is AirTag around you than having an RF detector.
A RF detector costs $15-$25 shipped from china. If RF anti-theft devices become common (either the GSM or the bluetooth variety), I'm sure it'll be part of a thief's toolkit.
The majority of bike thieves in Portland are not going to buy a $15-$20 RF detector because that would have to come out of their meth budget. They are not a tech-savvy lot.
Re: Apple Introduces AirTag
#177I thought one of the big use cases for this was to track stolen items, like a backpack or maybe even a bicycle. But the "anti-stalking" feature will notify someone if an AirTag they don't own appears to be traveling with them. Does this render it useless for anti-theft, then? Since it will just notify a thief that the bike they just stole is being tracked, and they can look for the AirTag and throw it in the nearest…
> Does this render it useless for anti-theft, then?
The other question is: when presented with evidence of stolen property, will the local PD enforce the law and assist with the retrieval of said property?
Re: Apple Introduces AirTag
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
>And even if users don’t have an iOS device, an AirTag separated from its owner for an extended period of time will play a sound when moved to draw attention to it.
So, this prevents some legitimate use cases, for example putting a tag in a suitcase for the flight, because it'll start beeping at some point? A shame. It would've been cool standing at that conveyor belt at the airport and rather than staring at the luggage as it comes, being able to sense one's own stuff. Also, seems that it's not suitable for putting on a cat or dog's collar for the same reason.
Presumably "extended period of time" is several days, not several hours.
Re: Apple Introduces AirTag
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, replaceable batteries in laptops and phones also used to be the status quo and Apple successfully changed that. Just because it’s the status quo wouldn’t prevent Apple from “thinking different”.
> Apple successfully changed that I feel like this gives far too much credit to Apple. Any one company can "think differently" but Apple shouldn't get the blame for all of the other companies following suit. Remember the ads Samsung ran before axing the headphone jack a year later?
We can just blame all the companies for doing X, we don't have to be so selective. Apple and Samsung both removes user replaceable batteries? Well, screw both of them then.
Re: Apple Introduces AirTag
#180I thought one of the big use cases for this was to track stolen items, like a backpack or maybe even a bicycle. But the "anti-stalking" feature will notify someone if an AirTag they don't own appears to be traveling with them. Does this render it useless for anti-theft, then? Since it will just notify a thief that the bike they just stole is being tracked, and they can look for the AirTag and throw it in the nearest…
> But the "anti-stalking" feature will notify someone if an AirTag they don't own appears to be traveling with them.
Another case of your device working against your interests.
I don't care if you have something to hide or not. This just sucks at a fundamental level.