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

iPhone 7

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 1001 posts

Re: iPhone 7

#501

Post by ihuman »

AceJohnny2 wrote: post #214

I was really curious how they'd handle wireless audio. In my experience, Bluetooth is slow to pair, connect, and glitchy in common environments. So I find it very indicative that the new Airpods do not mention Bluetooth, and the Beats Solo3 cryptically mentions "Connections: Bluetooth, Wireless" on its product page [1]. Sadly, I don't expect them to open their tech to 3rd parties soon :( [1] http://www.apple.com/shop…

From the video, I got the impression they're using their own custom radio solution, that allows them to more easily pair. We don't know much about the reliability of the new mechanism, however.

Edit: I am wrong

Re: iPhone 7

#502

Post by jclarkcom »

rajacombinator wrote: post #166
slg wrote: post #5

I still can't get over the headphone jack. Apple does have a good record of abandoning technologies at the right time (floppies, CDs, Flash, etc) but the biggest difference is that those technologies were all on the downward slope of their popularity when Apple made the move and all had solid replacements available at the time. The headphone jack is just as popular today as it has ever been and it is still more conve…

Apple headphones are super poor quality as well. I can get some Chinese ones off Amazon for $10 that absolutely destroy the Apple ones.

Can you point me to one? I've tried nearly a dozen of Chinese clones and they all suck compared to apple's. I hate to pay $30 for headphones but ended up going back to apple.

Re: iPhone 7

#503

Post by Synaesthesia »

niftich wrote: post #370

This is a Nice Device. You can read my other comments lamenting the headphone jack, this comment isn't about that. The screen is beautiful. The two cameras are a clever trick that I hope work as well as advertised -- and their cameras have been historically very good. Splash resistance is overdue , but appreciated. But A10 is a bit of a disappointment [1][2], only as powerful as the A9X. Do they have any new hardware…

A9 is amazingly fast - benches like twice as fast as every other phone out there. With Apple's great SSD it's a pretty powerful package for a phone. Instead they have lower power consumption now which I think is a fair call.

Re: iPhone 7

#504

Post by theshrike79 »

rajacombinator wrote: post #166
slg wrote: post #5

I still can't get over the headphone jack. Apple does have a good record of abandoning technologies at the right time (floppies, CDs, Flash, etc) but the biggest difference is that those technologies were all on the downward slope of their popularity when Apple made the move and all had solid replacements available at the time. The headphone jack is just as popular today as it has ever been and it is still more conve…

Apple headphones are super poor quality as well. I can get some Chinese ones off Amazon for $10 that absolutely destroy the Apple ones.

Please provide links to these absolute destroyers.

Re: iPhone 7

#506

Post by arihant »

redial wrote: post #241
alkonaut wrote: post #71

They claim the plus as "optical zoom" and talk about a 2x factor. Do they mean it can switch between a wide and tele focal length? That isn't "zoom" (at least not in the normal sense) - it's just two focal lengths with a switch. Did I understand the feature correctly?

> it's just two focal lengths with a switch. Which is what zoom is. Only that in a normal zoom, the 'switch' is a slider.

It's not. Teleporting from point A to B is not same as walking from A to B.

Re: iPhone 7

#507

Post by [deleted] »

takeda wrote: post #286
SurrealSoul wrote: post #25

Honestly if you had an iPhone 6 why would you upgrade? Better battery life is cool, and it being waterproof is novel. However, its basically the same phone for the end consumer.

How waterproofing is novel if pretty much all competitors already did it?

[deleted]

Re: iPhone 7

#508

Post by robotresearcher »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #315
acomjean wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't get over the headphone jack either. Another dongle to loose. Tons of headphones obsoleted. Can't charge while listening. Laggy audio. more batteries in the world. They're ok with a bulge for the camera but not headphones? I work in a lab and a phone with headphones is standard equipment on the commute and work (for at least part of the day). I would seriously move off iOS if I was making music with it. If onl…

The difference between camera and headphones is that the latter consume useful space inside and extra lenses for camera do not. Probably it also has to do something with new waterproof feature (different design of case, more holes to secure etc).

An extra camera assembly does take up space in the case. Notice the iPhone 7 does not have a second camera, but the larger 7+ does.

Re: iPhone 7

#509

Post by webXL »

tdy721 wrote: post #215
qnk wrote: post #134

The high-gloss finish of the Jet Black iPhone 7 is achieved through a precision nine-step anodization and polishing process. Its surface is equally as hard as other anodized Apple products; however, its high shine may show fine micro-abrasions with use. If you are concerned about this, we suggest you use one of the many cases available to protect your iPhone.[1] I think I'd go for the Black one instead. [1] http://ww…

I never use a case for my phones. Honestly, I kinda like the way phones "wear down". It's mine, and I scratched it up a bit, no problem.

I put an Apple case on my iPhone 6 when I got it and recently took it off and the side screen swipes work a lot better. It was clearly designed to be used without a case, so it's strange that they sell them. Oh yeah, they make 20,000% profit on each one :P

I just worry about scratches though because I always sell my phones when I'm done with them.

Re: iPhone 7

#510

Post by Rezo »

I'm disappointed by how boring the two-camera solution in the 7 Plus is. I was really hoping they were going show something interesting, like fusion of the two sensors through computational photography into one, with better low-light performance and less noise through downsampling. Or take +1 & -1 exposures simultaneously for a greater dynamic range.

Instead we got a button to switch from one lens to the other, for a 2x optical zoom. That's it. 99% of the time that second sensor and lens will do absolutely zilch. The computational bokeh appears to only use the 56mm lens for the actual photo, and the other lens to capture a depth map to compute the fake bokeh. This is hardly any better than the existing fake bokeh solutions shown many times before on Androids, Nokias and in iOS apps over the years that do the same, except it's a bit faster. The whole thing feels like just another checkbox feature, with very little actual value.

Post reply on HN