Maybe the three strikes and you're out rule should apply? But seriously, it wouldn't be hard for the software engineers to shoot in 1080P landscape even while holding in portrait and just be zoomed in to a faux portrait to frame the subject, so that the actual saved video is still landscape.
Oh, and that video, as horrible as it is (was it even shot on an iPhone?) makes me want my black SS that much more
With current sensor technology in nearly all cases (a few rare counter-examples now exist) it is nearly impossible to do what you are suggesting. The issue is the time it takes to get data off the sensor into the buffer and compressed. The sensors in the phones can not be read all at once, they have to be read one line at a time. This takes time, per line. Second, the more data, the more work it is to compress. So the solution to both problems at once is to take fewer lines, skipping every X lines on the sensor to get something close to or exactly 1920xwhatever width. Well guess what? This is done on hardware and cannot be switched in direction. The hardware is designed with readouts in one direction only.
So no, sorry, it's not a trivial matter of engineering, it's actually a very non-trivial matter to get this working at all in the first place, especially on such low powered, low cost devices.
Now, there are some sensors that can do global shutter, full read-out and these are used in higher end dedicated devices for high quality 4k recording and such, but, the hardware isn't even remotely close to fitting in a phone.
So don't expect this kind of behavior to change any time soon.
----------
It's hilarious to me that people are arguing about a high end watch related product being "overengineered."
That's the basic DEFINITION of all mechanical watches today. Since the invention of the quartz "movement" (yes technically there is a molecular-level movement but still, basically it's solid state) all mechanical watches are overengineered for their purpose.
The link bracelet apple has designed if ***** awesome! If you don't think so, don't buy it. I, for one, am super stoked to have it. I've always worn link bracelets. I can change the links myself, but, it's a pain in the ass without question. People saying you can do it "easily" have a seriously messed up idea of what "easily" means. You have to get the pin pusher out, wrap the watch awkwardly around it, push out the pin, and then, depending on the type of bracelet, you have potentially a bunch of tiny loose pieces to keep track of and then replace perfectly when you push the pin back in.
Nothing about that is easy. Even if I only have to adjust my link band 1-2 times a year (mainly due to temperature's effect on the daily fluctuation of my wrist size) it will make me very happy that I never have to worry about the idiotic process of adjusting the band.
This band isn't even remotely over-engineered. It's appropriately engineered to make a commonly necessary task easy to perform. You may only ever need to do it once, but, so what? It will be done stress free. In fact, knowing that adjustment is trivial, you may very well find yourself doing it more often instead of just accepting a slightly misadjusted band until you get the motivation to go to the jeweler or buy and learn to use the tools to do it yourself, for your band (because there isn't just one linkage design.)
Frankly, imho, this band and its design is THE star of the show for this product line. It's a high end product selling for far less money than the watch industry would typically offer something like this. Ironically, and with the tech community completely at a loss to realize it, the bands and their design (in most cases) are likely to be the most disruptive aspect of the Apple Watch in relationship to the broader watch industry. This kind of convenience, from the super easy-to-remove band lugs to things like the flush butterfly closure and simple band resizing, are things that have been considered impossible or simply high end luxury in the rest of the industry until now.
Over-engineered? If you think the link band is over-engineered, you probably shouldn't buy any kind of computing device, as surely your paper, quill, and abacus can handle all of this nonsense without even requiring electricity!
----------
I was under the impression Apple was not going to add/remove links or swap bands during appointments.
Yes, this is what has been reported, and the OP is totally off base. The reason appointments will be required in reality is because the Apple Store as it is would be impossible to manage if everyone could just come in and start jamming their arm-sausages into any random watch. It's merely a matter of maintaining order and dealing with logistics of the mass interest that is predicted (at least 25% of americans interested in buying, based on surveys so far, that's like 80 million people.)
Also, the appointment requirement is temporary. When initial interest dies down, appointments will go away, though one-on-one interaction at the store will surely still be required for trying things on, but, not likely for just buying.
----------
I don't think anyone really is. It's a cool thing, just might not be totally necessary for the majority of people out there. Hence several people having said it might be "over-engineered". But, if it simplifies Apple's distribution of watches and makes it easier for people get a good fit, then it's a good idea.
My only reservation would be that the more complicated parts you put into something, the more chance of failure. Same way I feel about the aforementioned Glidelock clasp on my Submariner. It's cool as heck, but with a proper fit, it offers nothing over my other non-Glidelock Rolexes. But it is an additional point of possible failure with all the small parts.
Says the person intentionally wearing a mechanical watch full of completely unnecessary design complication and moving parts when it could just be a quartz "movement."
Isn't the idea of complex mechanical design working elegantly for a long time part of the appeal of a mechanical watch in the first place? Or maybe it was just a fashion purchase... which is fine, but, one must at least be consistent with their concern over mechanical complexity, I'd say.
