I don’t really understand the use case for this, but then again there are plenty of features for which this is true. Happy for the people who will use it if it’s true though.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone 13 May Feature Apple Watch-Inspired Always-On Display
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
To me that seems like a massive waste of battery. The phone is most of the time in my pocket, unless I actually use it, so why should the screen be on?
Apple should focus on improved battery life, instead of this kind of stuff. Remember when batteries lasted a week? I know the phones had less features but in 15 years development we regained almost no battery time.
Apple should focus on improved battery life, instead of this kind of stuff. Remember when batteries lasted a week? I know the phones had less features but in 15 years development we regained almost no battery time.
During my 3 year ill advised rebellious steak I switched to android. Samsung Notes. 3 versions.
I never understood always on then and I don’t now. It’s redundant. Maybe someone gets use out of it but really how much harder is it to just tap your phone screen and see your notifications there?
then again I’m a guy who doesn’t get Do not Disturb features. I can ignore my phone plenty fine without having to noodle through a series of settings menus to create the perfect DND notification batch.
I never understood always on then and I don’t now. It’s redundant. Maybe someone gets use out of it but really how much harder is it to just tap your phone screen and see your notifications there?
then again I’m a guy who doesn’t get Do not Disturb features. I can ignore my phone plenty fine without having to noodle through a series of settings menus to create the perfect DND notification batch.
Tell me one product that was original to Apple? Also something that causes revolution is revolutionary and steam Deck presales numbers are enough to show it is.
Apple // - First consumer computer
Mac - First
The Mac - first GUI based personal computer
The MacPortable - first portable computer with built in pointing device
PowerBook 500 - first laptop with a trackpad
iPhone - first smartphone
There are others, tons of software for example. Technologies like QuickTime, QuickDraw 3D, etc. New materials for its products, new manufacturing technologies, the list goes on. Heck just look at their list of parents. While not all of it may be new, some of it absolutely is.
As for Steam Deck presale numbers, they pale in comparison to well just about anything. IF the numbers (around 100k) are remotely true, and with scalpers trying to suck a lot of them up they are probably inflated, it doesn’t even come in close to what say, the Nintendo WiiU did in presales. And that was a flop of a product. The Switch had presales in the millions. The Steam Deck is fine, but it’s not groundbreaking, not even close.
You see you are cherry picking but those minor enhancements does not make a first.
Apple II - First Consumer Computer, Nope - First Consumer computer was Altair 8800, the first commercial Basic by Microsoft was written for this computer. Apple II can be called the first Personal Computer for consumers.
Mac - The Mac - First GUI Computer? Nope, The first GUI computer was Xerox Alto. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto
The MacPortable - First portable computer with a pointer sure, but not the first Portable computer period. The First Portable computer was Epson HX-20.
PowerBook 500 - first laptop with a trackpad ? sure, but not the first Laptop, the first laptop was Epson L3S.
iPhone - first smartphone ? Nope! First Smart Phone was 02 XDA it was launched in 2002 these were windows mobile PDA phones, a full 5 yrs before iPhone. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O2_Xda#/media/File:HTC_Wallaby.jpg
It definitely had the bug of a smart phone.
So much wrong here. Next time you might want to do some basic research.
1. The Altair 8800 was a microcomputer for hobbyists, not a consumer PC. It had to be programmed by the user, and it’s output was a series of lights, absolutely nothing like a consumer PC.
2. The Xerox Alto cost the equivalent of $100,000 and was contained inside a cabinet, again not a personal computer. Less than 2,000 we’re made for laboratories and universities
3. Never said it was the first portable so your point is irrelevant.
4. Again, not what I said so your point is irrelevant.
5. None of those were true smartphones. No multi-touch screen, no desktop browser, limited app capabilities, completely unlike the iPhone. They were proto smartphones at best. The iPhone was unique and groundbreaking and literally changed the direction of mobile phones. Nothing remotely like it came before.
So 5 swings, 5 misses, you got five strike outs. And completely ignored the other areas I brought up. Maybe next time don’t make absolute declarative statements, particularly about areas you clearly are not well versed in.