Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT

lumafield.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 137 posts

Re: Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT

#21

Post by kayodelycaon »

user_7832 wrote: post #11
plugin-baby wrote: post #6

> significant differences that have implications for performance and safety This seems to refer to charging safety, but the thing that makes me fork out for genuine headphones is ear safety - I _assume_ Apple tries to protect from damaging sound levels and frequencies, and could be held to account in a way that counterfeiters could not.

> Apple tries to protect from damaging sound levels and frequencies, and could be held to account in a way that counterfeiters could not. I doubt Apple tries this too much, or that they could be held accountable. There is the volume alert thing, but that (partially) works with 3rd party headphones too (though it's likely much more inaccurate). Android phones too give a warning if you set the volume very high for head…

There’s a headphones safety section in the sound settings on iPhones for reducing loud sounds and setting a maximum decibel limit.

Re: Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT

#22

Post by baz00 »

somehnguy wrote: post #12
baz00 wrote: post #4

I'd be interested in some fake airpods if they lasted twice as long and sounded 80% as good. Literally I get perhaps a year out of a set of genuine bought at Apple Store airpods before the case gives up or one airpod goes muffled or craps out. After a year Apple don't want to know or care unless you have AppleCare. Decided I wasn't going to fish out for a fourth set, so I bought some Sony ones for £20 with a wire bet…

AirPods or AirPods pro? My current set of AirPods Pro have long outlasted my original set of AirPods in terms of battery longevity. Both very heavily used. It seems the switch from pouch cell (in regular AirPods) to button (in Pro) made a huge difference.

I killed two sets of plain Airpods. The Pros I bought crapped out after 14 months of ownership.

They do get used heavily but no excuse at that price.

Re: Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT

#23

Post by SoftTalker »

filleokus wrote: post #16

I really enjoy these scans that have been popping up lately, so cool to see inside of things! Are there any intellectually property issues related to publishing these? I've had a piece of (probably false) information stuck in my mind about how industrial design can be IP protected in some way, making it problematic to publish x-rays without licensing. Which I've thought of as another silly example of IP gone mad. But…

I would not think so. It's really no different from doing a destructive tear-down of something you bought and making a video about it.

Re: Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT

#24

Post by lostlogin »

syntaxing wrote: post #20

That updated viewer is a absolutely awesome, I like how you can go through the part layer by layer.

Medical images are much like this - if you have any interest, it’s quite easy to get a DICOM viewer and get a few patient scans.

I recommend Horos and Osirix, though I’m a Mac user. And MRI of course, not CT!

Re: Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT

#25

Post by EwanToo »

filleokus wrote: post #16

I really enjoy these scans that have been popping up lately, so cool to see inside of things! Are there any intellectually property issues related to publishing these? I've had a piece of (probably false) information stuck in my mind about how industrial design can be IP protected in some way, making it problematic to publish x-rays without licensing. Which I've thought of as another silly example of IP gone mad. But…

I have a similar probably false memory of schematics having copyrighted writing embedded in them so the layout can't be reproduced without a breach of copyright.

Re: Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT

#26

Post by baz00 »

latchkey wrote: post #7
baz00 wrote: post #4

I'd be interested in some fake airpods if they lasted twice as long and sounded 80% as good. Literally I get perhaps a year out of a set of genuine bought at Apple Store airpods before the case gives up or one airpod goes muffled or craps out. After a year Apple don't want to know or care unless you have AppleCare. Decided I wasn't going to fish out for a fourth set, so I bought some Sony ones for £20 with a wire bet…

It sounds like what you have found out is that not all Apple hardware is worth the hype. Personally, I have the beats fit pro. While still owned by apple and benefiting from the same chip integrations, these have held up just fine for me for a few years now of daily use.

Yes I could write several pages of diatribe about my shitty Apple experiences recently.

Re: Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT

#27

Post by lazycouchpotato »

plugin-baby wrote: post #6

> significant differences that have implications for performance and safety This seems to refer to charging safety, but the thing that makes me fork out for genuine headphones is ear safety - I _assume_ Apple tries to protect from damaging sound levels and frequencies, and could be held to account in a way that counterfeiters could not.

There was this incident in the news last year.

> Apple Facing Lawsuit After AirPods Allegedly Ruptured Child's Eardrums With Amber Alert

https://www.macrumors.com/2022/05/17/apple-airpods-pro-amber...

Re: Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT

#29

Post by figomore »

lostlogin wrote: post #24
syntaxing wrote: post #20

That updated viewer is a absolutely awesome, I like how you can go through the part layer by layer.

Medical images are much like this - if you have any interest, it’s quite easy to get a DICOM viewer and get a few patient scans. I recommend Horos and Osirix, though I’m a Mac user. And MRI of course, not CT!

I recommend InVesalius (multi platform).

Re: Real vs. fake AirPods with industrial CT

#30

Post by fortran77 »

plugin-baby wrote: post #6

> significant differences that have implications for performance and safety This seems to refer to charging safety, but the thing that makes me fork out for genuine headphones is ear safety - I _assume_ Apple tries to protect from damaging sound levels and frequencies, and could be held to account in a way that counterfeiters could not.

Well, I don't want a lithium battery exploding, leaking, or catching fire in my ear, either.
Post reply on HN