Jony Ive: Debut of iPhone X Technology on 10th Anniversary of iPhone is a 'Wonderful Coincidence'

[mabhatter]

Sure, and it’s called iPhone X because old apps hardcoded tests for iPhone 95 and 98.

What were they going to call it iPhone 9... like Mac OS 9? And X is so cool and edgy. So will the next one be XI (like Star Wars), or X2 like Final Fantasy, or Y like Pokémon?

Also scary to think there are probably apps and code out there that still key by “OS = 9*” it’s almost twenty years!!!
[doublepost=1507741234][/doublepost]

A non-contact UI? Why is that even a goal for a phone? It’s a phone. We hold it in our hands. Why would we want to avoid contact? I understand offering it as an option but not with eliminating contact as a goal.

What’s next? Eclusively using eye tracking for UI interactions? Love to see the optometrist reports of eye strain for that one.

They are clearly aiming for an iPhone in the shape of the “Obelisk” from 2001. It’s devoid of all interfaces, perfect in dimensions, and imparts evolution to all near it.

Except it needs to come in White or brushed aluminum and have rounded corners... because Apple can improve even evolution!!!

 

[whyamihere]

"Ive revealed that Apple is already working on next-generation designs that improve upon the iPhone X"

Well that settles it... everyone should just wait for the iPhone XI (so I can get the X sooner of course)

 

[DevNull0]

Wow, Ive thinks Apple users are idiots.

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

Like I said before, I've is a smart man.

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

I look at any old iPhone now and think "actually... nothing's *really* changed all that much, has it?" Apart from the disappearance of the Home button, there's very little superficial difference in either the hardware or the software.

The fact that we have gone from barely usable mobile performance to a CPU that rivals a quad core i7, and a camera that was barely usable and is now at least comparable to a decent dslr, I think it’s turned into one of the most iterative products in the best of ways. Not much has changed, but everything is better. That really goes to show how forward thinking the first iPhone was.

 

[apolloa]

Imagine in ten years when we look back on this like we look back on the iPhone 2G now...

I suspect it could be a case of ah I remember Apple....

As for Ive, he is stupid, a coincid nice... yeah right mate... well considering it may very well not actually be on sale till next year, I suggest he keeps quiet about the iPhone X...
[doublepost=1507749880][/doublepost]

Yes he is serious.
Do you think if they had this technology ready one or two years ago, they would wait risking the competition to approach?

You don’t know business.
YES, this technology being ready on an iPhone IS a coincidence with the tenth anniversary.

Even Apple can’t afford a technology like this in the drawer for one or two years.
It was a coincidence a technology like this being ready with the tenth anniversary.

Erm? Apples business model is to copy everyone else and claim they do it right..

 

[DevNull0]

The fact that we have gone from barely usable mobile performance to a CPU that rivals a quad core i7, and a camera that was barely usable and is now at least comparable to a decent dslr,

The i7-8700k has a geekbench score of 29,233. And that's a fairly inexpensive consumer grade CPU. Workstation i7's are a lot more powerful.

The A11 Bionic in the iPhone X is 10,069. And keep in mind the whole i7 computer is cheaper than the iPhone X. The A11 Bionic is hardly a rival. The thing is Apple has been putting cheap gimped CPUs in their macs for the past few years to pretend the iPhone is closing the gap while jacking up their margins.

As for your comment about the DSLR, all I can do is laugh and point out you must never have seen a picture from a DSLR. I have an almost 10 year old Nikon D90. Comparing it to the iPhone 7 is like comparing a 4k TV to VHS. The DSLR images are razor sharp, the pictures pop off the page and look vibrant because of the detail. The iP7 photos, by comparison are are dull and fuzzy. People thought VHS looked good back in the day too; but once you get used to DSLR quality it's painful to look at iPhone (or any cell cam) pictures.

Blurring the background doesn't mean it's SLR quality. I've got the expensive glass that can do it; and while the effect has its place, it has nothing to do with image quality.

 

[melendezest]

Stuff like this is what annoys me about Apple as a company.

GTFOOH.

 

[dampfnudel]

Can't wait for iPhone X 2. Or will be it iPhone 11? Or iPhone XS ?

I think it will be called iPhone 11 since they're calling the X iPhone 10. iPhone Xs or XI would look dumb. Then again, iPhone X2 or iPhone Series 2 could be somewhat okay as a way to move away from the old nomenclature.

 

[CarlJ]

X just naturally and coincidentally followed 8. - Ive

Well, sure, in base 9 Roman numerals.
[doublepost=1507755328][/doublepost]

I think it will be called iPhone 11 since they're calling the X iPhone 10. iPhone Xs or XI would look dumb. Then again, iPhone X2 or iPhone Series 2 could be somewhat okay as a way to move away from the old nomenclature.

As a random guess:

• X will be followed by XI, XII, etc, in Roman numerals, setting the premium model off from the iPhones preceding it and from the then-current main line models.
• The 8 will be followed by the 8s, 9, 9s, and somewhere along that path (before they inconveniently reach "iPhone 10"), they'll just drop the numbers, and it'll be this year's "iPhone", the same way they talk about "iPhone SE" and "MacBook" without attaching a number. This will happen as the public's attention, if not their actual purchases, shifts more to the X series.

Eventually we'll have the "iPhone XIV" (numbered premium line), the "iPhone" and "iPhone Plus" (normal and large sized main line), and the "iPhone SE" (small sized main line). And the premium line will continue to get features first, that they can't yet build economically in quantities approaching 400,000 a day. As those features get get debugged and streamlined in the premium model, they'll migrate to the main-line phones and new fancy features will appear in the premium phone.

 

[dampfnudel]

Well, sure, in base 9 Roman numerals.
[doublepost=1507755328][/doublepost]As a random guess:

• X will be followed by XI, XII, etc, in Roman numerals, setting the premium model off from the iPhones preceding it and from the then-current main line models.
• The 8 will be followed by the 8s, 9, 9s, and somewhere along that path (before they inconveniently reach "iPhone 10"), they'll just drop the numbers, and it'll be this year's "iPhone", the same way they talk about "iPhone SE" and "MacBook" without attaching a number. This will happen as the public's attention, if not their actual purchases, shifts more to the X series.

Eventually we'll have the "iPhone XIV" (numbered premium line), the "iPhone" and "iPhone Plus" (normal and large sized main line), and the "iPhone SE" (small sized main line).

I think there's a good chance the SE line will be dropped. As for the rest, the question I have is if there is an iPhone 9, will it look the same as the three-year-old iPhone 8 design (which would be four-years-old by then) or significantly different? Personally, I think Apple's lineup should be like this:

- iPhone XI or 11 in two sizes (Plus model added) at $100-200 less than X prices

- iPhone 8/8 Plus at reduced prices

- Maybe continue offering the SE, upgrading the A9 to an A10. Big maybe.

 

[KAZphoto]

The i7-8700k has a geekbench score of 29,233. And that's a fairly inexpensive consumer grade CPU. Workstation i7's are a lot more powerful.

The A11 Bionic in the iPhone X is 10,069. And keep in mind the whole i7 computer is cheaper than the iPhone X. The A11 Bionic is hardly a rival. The thing is Apple has been putting cheap gimped CPUs in their macs for the past few years to pretend the iPhone is closing the gap while jacking up their margins.

As for your comment about the DSLR, all I can do is laugh and point out you must never have seen a picture from a DSLR. I have an almost 10 year old Nikon D90. Comparing it to the iPhone 7 is like comparing a 4k TV to VHS. The DSLR images are razor sharp, the pictures pop off the page and look vibrant because of the detail. The iP7 photos, by comparison are are dull and fuzzy. People thought VHS looked good back in the day too; but once you get used to DSLR quality it's painful to look at iPhone (or any cell cam) pictures.

Blurring the background doesn't mean it's SLR quality. I've got the expensive glass that can do it; and while the effect has its place, it has nothing to do with image quality.

I could be mistaken but I’m pretty sure he was just talking about how far the tech has come. I use an i7 and DSLR for my work everyday, which I actually pay my mortgage with, but I can still admire what iPhones are capable of now and it is in my pocket every where I go. One should not feel insecure about a high tide lifting all boats. People now more than ever have access to some nice tech to produce great work whereas they could not afford it if they wanted to. These types of rants remind me of people insisting that digital will never take over film. I don’t seem to hear much of that these days...

 

[Leguna24]

I suspect it could be a case of ah I remember Apple....

As for Ive, he is stupid, a coincid nice... yeah right mate... well considering it may very well not actually be on sale till next year, I suggest he keeps quiet about the iPhone X...
[doublepost=1507749880][/doublepost]

Erm? Apples business model is to copy everyone else and claim they do it right..

Are you drunk or a non-english speaker?
Either way, I get what he is talking about, doesn't take too much to understand the point that he is making.

 

[apolloa]

Are you drunk or a non-english speaker?
Either way, I get what he is talking about, doesn't take too much to understand the point that he is making.

To which point do you claim I’m intoxicated about because you disagree with my opinion? Perhaps you could explain a bit more rather then throw accusations about?

 

[Black Tiger]

Based on chatters with Apple employees, Touch ID was dropped last minute due to yield issues. It wasn't suppose to be that way. But I would like to see a discussion on why they thought it's okay to drop TouchID and go 100% with FaceID.

Does anyone honestly believe this rumour? Does the face ID tech really look like something that they threw together at the last minute? It is a central feature of the phone. To suggest that they somehow stopped and redesigned the whole phone and the software gestures simply because they couldn’t get a sensor under the glass doesn’t make any sense. There is zero purpose to integrating touch id into the screen in the first place.

 

[kyykesko]

[doublepost=1507715487][/doublepost]Don't you mean NOVEMBER 3?

Do you mean 1pm?
[doublepost=1507788497][/doublepost]

Over the past ten years iPhone has transformed from a simple telephone/internet/music device to become something much more integral to daily life.

Over the past ten years iPhone has transformed into a device that relies on constant recharge to stay operational. To celebrate that they keep adding new items (airpods, watch etc) you can also charge constantly so you don't feel betrayed when you can actually use one of those devices for a short period of time between charges - at least you have something else charging, too! Yay, progress!

 

[Black Tiger]

1. iPhone
2. iPhone 3G/3GS
3. iPhone 4/4s
4. iPhone 5/5s
5. iPhone 5C
6. iPhone 6/6s
7. iPhone SE
8. iPhone 7
9. iPhone 8
10. iPhone X

 

[DevNull0]

I could be mistaken but I’m pretty sure he was just talking about how far the tech has come. I use an i7 and DSLR for my work everyday, which I actually pay my mortgage with, but I can still admire what iPhones are capable of now and it is in my pocket every where I go. One should not feel insecure about a high tide lifting all boats. People now more than ever have access to some nice tech to produce great work whereas they could not afford it if they wanted to. These types of rants remind me of people insisting that digital will never take over film. I don’t seem to hear much of that these days...

I do agree with what you're saying, but that's not what the poster I replied to said. His opinion is that the iPhone CPU "rivals a quad core i7". Which is just Apple marketing fud fuelled by the gimp CPUs Apple has been putting in macs the past few years.

He said the iPhone camera is "now at least comparable to a decent dslr". That is just an absurdly stupid thing to say no matter how much better an iPhone 8 camera is compared to a 2007 iPhone camera. The way you put it is fair, the way that post put it, it's again spouting Apple marketing fud without having ever seen a DSLR photo.

You're also right about a rising tide lifting all boats. The reality is the Apple CPUs are faster because other companies create better fabs; because other companies design better silicon modules and Apple is able to take advantage of that (at the same cost as the previous design). Apple doesn't design camera modules, they buy them, and their vendor improves them every year. This is how technology is supposed to work, it's great for the consumer and it's exactly what Apple should be doing. But to listen to people like that previous poster, Apple alone moves heaven and Earth every year to magically come up with amazing new improvements.

 

[KAZphoto]

I do agree with what you're saying, but that's not what the poster I replied to said. His opinion is that the iPhone CPU "rivals a quad core i7". Which is just Apple marketing fud fuelled by the gimp CPUs Apple has been putting in macs the past few years.

He said the iPhone camera is "now at least comparable to a decent dslr". That is just an absurdly stupid thing to say no matter how much better an iPhone 8 camera is compared to a 2007 iPhone camera. The way you put it is fair, the way that post put it, it's again spouting Apple marketing fud without having ever seen a DSLR photo.

You're also right about a rising tide lifting all boats. The reality is the Apple CPUs are faster because other companies create better fabs; because other companies design better silicon modules and Apple is able to take advantage of that (at the same cost as the previous design). Apple doesn't design camera modules, they buy them, and their vendor improves them every year. This is how technology is supposed to work, it's great for the consumer and it's exactly what Apple should be doing. But to listen to people like that previous poster, Apple alone moves heaven and Earth every year to magically come up with amazing new improvements.

I’m sure it rivals an old i7 processor lol. Def not the same but I could see them being comparable to a machine when doing basic tasks. An i7 will really only help with tasking work, which is why I have one. Yet I don’t seem to use my iMac until editing photos or what not anyway.

I would def say the phone cameras are encroaching dslr quality, however they are still not quite up to snuff unless shot in great conditions. I feel quite confident you couldn’t pass a blind test when picking out some photos. And the fact people would have to look closely tells you how close the gap is getting. Only people with a decent trained eye can see. Regular consumers sure can’t tell the difference. And they have features that would sure be great in a DSLR. I can’t lie, the iPhone showing DOF in real time is pretty awesome. Yes DSLR will always have its place, but the iPhone undoubtedly squashed the point and shoot camera market. I stopped carrying a G series Canon around a long time ago when the phone cameras started getting so good. Now it’s just if I feel like carrying around my DSLR or not. What DSLR are you shooting with now? Just curious. I’ve been Canon since forever. Cheers.

 

[dude-x]

Does anyone honestly believe this rumour? Does the face ID tech really look like something that they threw together at the last minute? It is a central feature of the phone. To suggest that they somehow stopped and redesigned the whole phone and the software gestures simply because they couldn’t get a sensor under the glass doesn’t make any sense. There is zero purpose to integrating touch id into the screen in the first place.

FaceID was not thrown together last minute. That was not what implied. TouchID was suppose to be in the final product as a another layer of security (and i suppose familiarity) but since they could not get the yields, they gave up on it and decided to say the Future is Now... One interesting thing that came from the event is that TouchID has a 1 in 50,000 chance of a false positive, compared to Face ID, so it looks like they're trying to justify the lack of TouchID with stats.