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

The Apple Watch

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 300 posts

Re: The Apple Watch

#251

Post by timcederman »

bane wrote: post #231
clarky07 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lucky for gruber, Apple has released an awful lot of good products recently. iPhones have stupid customer satisfaction numbers. They aren't the most valuable company in the world by a mile because everything they release is crap. Obviously Gruber is a big fan of Apple, but your criticism of him is a bit harsh. I assume he didn't spend a lot of time comparing it to Android wear because he hasn't spent a ton of time us…

Gruber is terrible. I'm completely unapologetic about my opinion about him. He's everything that's wrong in tech news today. He's been able to carve a niche for himself preaching to a choir of folks with large disposable incomes by providing unashamed regurgitation of Apple's marketing bullet points so that people can reinforce their beliefs by having another bullet point that they made the right technology purchase.…

Totally baffled by your mindset. Why is Gruber terrible and everything wrong with tech news today? Compared to Engadget et al he seems reasonably fair and balanced. Please point me towards something he's written that's objectively biased or bad.

Re: The Apple Watch

#252

Post by 72deluxe »

aesthetics1 wrote: post #181
72deluxe wrote: post #176

He is wrong in this article: CDs did not suck. Compressed audio sucked, unless you had NIHL and love reduced dynamic range and poor attack transients. I am glad CDs are still around to stop this MP3 slime from washing away all the uncompressed audio!

Apple wasn't marketing them to the audiophile - they came with cheap white earbuds, not Sennheisers. CDs did suck for the mainstream consumer. Consumers are still opting for streaming music over high-quality FLAC tracks saved to their phone/PC/etc. I think you meant to say: He was wrong as far as my use case was concerned.

Yes, you're right. It is entirely my own use-case, and hopefully CDs aren't going away!

In my defense, he said "CDs sucked" when he should have said "CDs suck in my use case" :-)

Re: The Apple Watch

#253

Post by 72deluxe »

xal wrote: post #189
72deluxe wrote: post #176

He is wrong in this article: CDs did not suck. Compressed audio sucked, unless you had NIHL and love reduced dynamic range and poor attack transients. I am glad CDs are still around to stop this MP3 slime from washing away all the uncompressed audio!

You need to read this: https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

Very informative, thanks. I avoid 192kHz and record everything at 24bit 48kHz when I'm recording (I would like some hard disk space left, particularly if you're recording 24 tracks at once); 96kHz is only really useful in live applications as you obviously get half the latency which is important if you're flinging audio from one side of the arena to the other.

But with regard to the content within the audio file, uncompressed is obviously superior to compressed. It is particularly apparent on decent speakers, not earbuds.

Re: The Apple Watch

#254

Post by [deleted] »

timcederman wrote: post #251
bane wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gruber is terrible. I'm completely unapologetic about my opinion about him. He's everything that's wrong in tech news today. He's been able to carve a niche for himself preaching to a choir of folks with large disposable incomes by providing unashamed regurgitation of Apple's marketing bullet points so that people can reinforce their beliefs by having another bullet point that they made the right technology purchase.…

Totally baffled by your mindset. Why is Gruber terrible and everything wrong with tech news today? Compared to Engadget et al he seems reasonably fair and balanced. Please point me towards something he's written that's objectively biased or bad.

[deleted]

Re: The Apple Watch

#255

Post by leni536 »

seanflyon wrote: post #151
t0mbstone wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brilliant! With that said, though, I believe that the movement of the actual atoms making up the mechanical hands is still happening in an "infinitely smooth" sense, although the way we measure and observe that movement (via reflections of light or perhaps some other type of electromagnetic radiation) may be limited.

Assuming movement is continuous and not in discrete units. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length

Please don't misinterpret the Planck length. Please don't interpret it in any way, it's right in the wiki article:

>There is currently no proven physical significance of the Planck length;...

It's just dimensional analytical playing with some fundamental physical constants. Physicist believe that this scale length may have some connection with the yet to be discovered laws of quantum gravity. It has nothing to with the "finite resolution of the universe". There is no evidence that the universe has finite resolution.

Re: The Apple Watch

#256

Post by lmm »

gaius wrote: post #140
EA wrote: post #13

“You’ll still be able to do with Apple Watch what you do with your current watch: tell the time (and if you want, the date) at a glance and trust that it’s accurate.” ...if you return your watch to a charging station daily. He goes on: That said, compared to a traditional watch, daily charging is terrible. Before entering into the smartphone market, I charged my cellphone less than 100 times per year. Now, I have to…

Doesn't it seem a little weird that you adapt your life around your gadgets rather than vice versa?

Humans are much better at adaptation than (so far) the things we build. I remember being surprised at how many things I was doing through a smartphone UI - and then I realised it's not because that's the only thing I can do, it's because that's the only way these services can understand me.

Re: The Apple Watch

#257

Post by lultimouomo »

atonse wrote: post #217
prawn wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is he really being that critical if he observes their product would fail without something it already has? I know it's not a direct comparison, but you wouldn't call me insightfully critical if I noted that a car was not a compelling device without wheels.

Yes but this analogy only holds true if every other car has hexagonal wheels, and the apple watch "car" has circular ones.

Yes but this makes the analogy a criticism of other cars, not the Apple one.

Re: The Apple Watch

#258

Post by [deleted] »

DigitalSea wrote: post #201

Is John Gruber ever non-biased in his pieces about Apple? Given his history with the company, I feel like with Gruber we never ever get the real deal. Every article on every Apple product announcement starts out feeling well-intentioned and non-objective, but then always seems to segue into a subtle praise piece. I am not hating on him, he still makes some great points and he puts considerable amounts of effort into…

[deleted]

Re: The Apple Watch

#259

Post by EliRivers »

I enjoy the perfect 60 FPS smoothness of Apple Watch’s second hand — a smoothness no mechanical watch could ever match.

How can the the smoothness of an actual, physical piece of metal smoothly rotating in a circle at a constant angular velocity be "out-smoothed" by a 60 FPS simulacrum?

Re: The Apple Watch

#260

Post by josteink »

EliRivers wrote: post #259

I enjoy the perfect 60 FPS smoothness of Apple Watch’s second hand — a smoothness no mechanical watch could ever match. How can the the smoothness of an actual, physical piece of metal smoothly rotating in a circle at a constant angular velocity be "out-smoothed" by a 60 FPS simulacrum?

Lots of mechanical clocks have hands and seconds which ticks one unit at a time, and doesn't move in a smooth movement. But that's obviously done intentionally through the mechanics and requires extra effort to "implement", so it's not a sign of a "low" quality watch either.

Not sure what Gruber is hinting at here honestly.

Post reply on HN