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

381–390 of 1001 posts

Re: iPhone X

#381

Post by AsyncAwait »

vlunkr wrote: post #262
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.

I think he's saying that because the iPhone 7 was also water resistant, it cannot be that the new one is so due to the new design, given the old one allowed for it too.

Re: iPhone X

#382

Post by aeleos »

Osmium wrote: post #361
pritambarhate wrote: post #322

Do you think phones are a "done" thing? I mean what we are seeing these days is more of an evolution than revolution. With iPhone X I think we know what the phone industry will move towards for next 4 years. All these features are cool and somewhat exciting but nothing groundbreaking that will change computing/communications forever. VR was supposed to be the game changer but it appears that it will also take around…

> Do you think phones are a "done" thing? I mean what we are seeing these days is more of an evolution than revolution. It's always been an evolution. What we're seeing now is a trend towards cellular everywhere, and device-agnostic services (same phone number on your Apple Watch as your iPhone). The next shift seems like it will be greater situational awareness in your devices -- your device can understand its surro…

It wasn't always an evolution. Despite all the apple "oh we changed everything look at us" they really did. And for the first few years after that everything was changing so fast it was a revolution. But it has since slowly died out and I guess new technologies with faster innovation will become the new iphone revolution

Re: iPhone X

#383

Post by theshrike79 »

briankirby wrote: post #341
jnwatson wrote: post #286

Wouldn't Face ID allow a stolen phone to be easily unlocked? Just put the stolen phone in a different container (with a hole for the camera/sensors) and point it at the victim. My daughter likes to "steal" my phone to play games on it. With touch ID, she can't. She wouldn't have a problem if the phone has Face ID.

What about just printing out a photo and placing it in front of the camera? Does it have some way of understanding depth?

Yes. Please bother to even read the linked article before commenting.

Re: iPhone X

#384

Post by Markoff »

samrohn778 wrote: post #294

iPhone X has not been authorized as required by the rules of the Federal Communications Commission. This device is not, and may not be, offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until authorization is obtained. What does this in disclaimer section means?

they are promoting it before pasing through FCC certification, maybe they wanted to keep it secret since FCC data is publicly available and that would basically reveal their design and specs

Re: iPhone X

#385

Post by mschaef »

pritambarhate wrote: post #322

Do you think phones are a "done" thing? I mean what we are seeing these days is more of an evolution than revolution. With iPhone X I think we know what the phone industry will move towards for next 4 years. All these features are cool and somewhat exciting but nothing groundbreaking that will change computing/communications forever. VR was supposed to be the game changer but it appears that it will also take around…

> Do you think phones are a "done" thing?

The basic pattern of mobile phone design was more or less settled in the 80's with the DynaTac, and the phones leading up to (but not including) the original iPhone were all refinements of that same original pattern. The same thing happened with smart phones: the original iPhone set the pattern and then there've been a number of refinements ever since.

I'm not saying the refinements aren't huge improvements (particularly when viewed collectively over a period of 10 years), but just that the basic pattern is relatively fixed most of the time.

> All these features are cool and somewhat exciting but nothing groundbreaking that will change computing/communications forever.

Personally, I'm not that excited about a world where there are are continual 'groundbreaking changes that will change computing/communications forever'. There's a lot to be said for consolidating the gains made in these periodic steps up in functionality, and taking the time to understand the new capabilities offered by each.

Re: iPhone X

#386

Post by Kevin_S »

tcfunk wrote: post #364

Suddenly a 128gb iPhone 6s for $549 sounds like a heck of a deal...

I actually think I might pick one up. In fact I may look for a 2 for 1 deal on the 6s.

I'm headed back to Apple after having an Android ever since my IPhone 4, I'm just done with Android. I love my 6s work phone.

I think I'll just be choosing between the 6s and a 7.

Re: iPhone X

#387

Post by Eric_WVGG »

thegayngler wrote: post #287

I wasn't really excited about AI and ML until I saw this iPhone X and the stuff they were doing with the Animojis and the Facial Recognition Tech. Whew! I may have to study AI/ML

I think we're going to look back on that "animoji" bit as a turning point in modern entertainment. It's a silly, even dumb little feature, but look at what's really going on there: realtime near-Pixar-grade facial expressions.

Someone's going to build a toolkit that lets kids make their own CG movies with friends acting out all the roles. That's gonna be nuts and is just the start.

Re: iPhone X

#388

Post by avn2109 »

sunsetMurk wrote: post #309
ctdonath wrote: post #284

Projector-based 3D face recognition. Nifty. Shines an IR dot pattern onto the face, recognizes with that, works in the dark. Seems on continuously, wonder how much power draw.

I'd bet ~30 days with this in the public's hands we will see headlines like "How to beat iPhone's facial recognition with X". There are some crafty folks out there--

Also, what happens when I shave my big beard off? :( Or grow it bushier?

Re: iPhone X

#389

Post by sailfast »

joeld42 wrote: post #316
KZeillmann wrote: post #308

How does the "Home" gesture work with games that require gestures? If someone has a game that requires flicking items upward from the bottom of the screen, will that now be impossible? I don't have an iPhone, but I'm assuming that games like Flippy Knife and Flip Master, currently #1 and #2 on the Play store, could run into issues.

A swipe up that starts past the edge of the screen is already a different gesture than a regular swipe. It works the same way as the current phone (swipe up from bottom brings up the "control center").

Yes, but I've seen this control center option get buggy when apps require similar low-swipe gestures. It would be quite frustrating to deal with this without a home button option. Nevermind how annoying it would be if (god forbid) your screen cracked a bit and lowered the touch fidelity slightly.

Re: iPhone X

#390

Post by kelnos »

_m8fo wrote: post #73

I wonder how well Face ID works with dark skinned people. Dead serious. Historically facial recognition has had a tough time with dark skinned folks. The inclusion of an IR camera should mitigate, if not solve this, but I'm curious to the accuracy in practice.

My understanding is that the issue with people with dark skin is that the camera has less to go off of because there's less light reflection. Face ID shouldn't suffer from that problem since it uses an IR camera.
Post reply on HN