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

iPhone X

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 1001 posts

Re: iPhone X

#261

Post by balls187 »

FireBeyond wrote: post #193
balls187 wrote: post #174

$1000 for higher fidelity snapchat features. I love my iphone camera, and if the upgrade program isn't too terrible, I will get the iPhoneX, but call me underwhelmed. The implementation of faceID seems really poorly thought out. I can unlock my phone, and navigate it before focusing my attention on it. I feel like "attention to unlock" is going to cause an increase in distracted driver related incidents.

"This is an image straight out of the camera, with no post processing. All we've done is apply a Portrait Filter to fade out the background." Uhhh, I guess that doesn't count as post processing, then.

These days, after the rise of dSLRs, post-processing is something that occurs after the image is saved to memory.

Raw sensor data to JPEG undergoes incamera processing. Cameras typically only allow small oversight of that process, so many photographers prefer to shoot RAW, and do 100% of the processing via post-processing.

Re: iPhone X

#262

Post by vlunkr »

aeturnum wrote: post #100

Could we have a modicum of skepticism in repeating press releases? >Thanks to this new design, the iPhone X is sealed for water and dust resistance. So the iPhone 7, which does not use this design, was not water and dust resistant? I know this is a meta point, but it's annoying. Apple can say whatever they like in their releases, but it would be nice to have people familiar with the domain do a smell test on the cont…

I don't think they said that it wasn't.

Re: iPhone X

#263

Post by MaysonL »

chris_7 wrote: post #115
bennettfeely wrote: post #18

How does Face ID work with identical twins?

Do identical twins actually have identical faces? Some of their facial structure must be shaped by diet, exercise, life in general, right?

Recently saw a video made by identical twins whom I knew back in the '60s, and their faces differed much more than they did at that time.

Re: iPhone X

#264

Post by bhnmmhmd »

balls187 wrote: post #174

$1000 for higher fidelity snapchat features. I love my iphone camera, and if the upgrade program isn't too terrible, I will get the iPhoneX, but call me underwhelmed. The implementation of faceID seems really poorly thought out. I can unlock my phone, and navigate it before focusing my attention on it. I feel like "attention to unlock" is going to cause an increase in distracted driver related incidents.

This.

There are multiple scenarios where not looking directly at the phone comes handy. You mentioned the driver scenario, but there's more.

E.g before bed, I don't wanna look directly to my phone as it's annoyingly bright.

Or sometimes I want to use the phone while it's still in my pocket (for example, click Next Song ...).

Re: iPhone X

#265

Post by xvolter »

Are they aware that "Surgical‑grade stainless steel" means extremely cheap? Surgical‑grade stainless steel is designed to be single-use. They advertise their phone as having steel that is good enough to use once?

Re: iPhone X

#266

Post by pier25 »

I think those screen rounded corners and the cameras space at the top is one of the worst ideas Apple has ever had.

When they showed a video playing in landscape I could only facepalm.

Re: iPhone X

#267

Post by X86BSD »

45h34jh53k4j wrote: post #240

I am not interested in the X model without TouchID. FaceID provides a less secure authentication method than TouchID. * Sleeping victims * Attacker holds the phone to your face Its not as simple as using the 'wrong finger'. You only have one face. This is awful, Apple. What were you thinking?

Clearly you have no understanding how it works and did not watch the keynote.

Re: iPhone X

#268

Post by theshrike79 »

the_duke wrote: post #147

Is it just me or does the big fat shiny frame on the iPhone 10 completely destroy it's aesthetic appeal and kills the 'infinity' effect? It looks really clunky to me.

"Looks clunky" and you've only seen some rendered images of it on screen :D

Re: iPhone X

#269

Post by garblegarble »

yladiz wrote: post #253
balls187 wrote: post #174

$1000 for higher fidelity snapchat features. I love my iphone camera, and if the upgrade program isn't too terrible, I will get the iPhoneX, but call me underwhelmed. The implementation of faceID seems really poorly thought out. I can unlock my phone, and navigate it before focusing my attention on it. I feel like "attention to unlock" is going to cause an increase in distracted driver related incidents.

> I feel like "attention to unlock" is going to cause an increase in distracted driver related incidents. Aren't you not supposed to use your phone when driving, and it is specifically against the law to do so in a lot of places? In any case, it's as distracting as using your phone currently because it seems that it doesn't have to be pointed directly in front of your face, as long as it gets a decent look at it.

>Aren't you not supposed to use your phone when driving

I know that when driving if we need something on my phone, my girlfriend uses it and I just put my finger out to unlock with my attention still solidly on the road

Post reply on HN