fvp4 wrote: » They haven't been touting iPad as a replacement for the Mac, they have been clear about that for years, clearly the point of continuity is as a companion for the Mac. Thats all they want.
whippet wrote: » I am far from an audiophile - but just tried a couple of Atmos / Lossless tracks on my iPhone 12 Pro and AirPod Max ... and I can really notice the difference.
DubDJ wrote: » I’m using the AirPods Pro’s so I’m obviously not able to try proper lossless. I can say I hear a small improvement. Not night or day or anything, but the music feels warmer if that makes sense.
DubDJ wrote: » The Spatial Audio works as expected, turning your head makes it seems like the audio is coming from the side. I’d tried it once before with Apple TV, it’s much handier with music though.
Creamy Goodness wrote: » 5. Disappointed - but deep down knew - at the iPad updates. I thought we would have been shown why the new iPad Pro's got M1 chips, we didn't. The iPad updates though are nice quality of life improvements at the same time though. With a lot of this stuff a lot things can be both true.
Creamy Goodness wrote: » It's mad how times have changed, 4-5 years ago this thread would have been 10-15 pages deep, it's now sitting at 3. Which is what I'd expect for the week before an event. This probably lends itself well to Murpho's point on what can be done that's truly ground breaking. A few of my thoughts though: 1. Overall a good show and a lot of features do seem reactionary to the pandemic, some of them won't catch on but the improvements to FaceTime like screen sharing etc will make family tech support calls much easier. 2. Updates to iOS are now more blurred than ever, if one OS (macOS/iPadOS/WatchOS/iOS) gets a feature, they all get said feature in some shape or form. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, just muddies the message and probably helps that "meh" feeling some people are having. 3. A lot of the things mentioned from being a zoom competitor to text detection to OMGZ Apple has reinvented a VPN are all things that other platforms have done for years and done better in some and worse in others but more importantly there's an Apple version now and users have the choice in choosing. Apple Maps has come a long way, I still but heads with it's Places of Interest data say 1 in 5 times, but beforehand it was 4 in 5 times. This is enough of an improvement in Apple Maps as it excels in everything else "for me". I still have the choice of opening up Google/Waze/etc if I so wish and I still do for certain locations. 4. Lossless and Spatial are good additions, nice to get them at no extra cost. 5. Disappointed - but deep down knew - at the iPad updates. I thought we would have been shown why the new iPad Pro's got M1 chips, we didn't. The iPad updates though are nice quality of life improvements at the same time though. With a lot of this stuff a lot things can be both true. I have thoughts on the developer stuff as a developer but that'll bore the arse everyone :pac:
Unicorn Milk Latte wrote: » Mostly agree. Seems like it's mostly improvements of what we already have this year. Nothing as fundamental as, say, APFS a few years ago. As of your developer perspective: please don't hold back. I often find that what is going on 'under the hood' much more interesting than the end user facing announcements.
Unicorn Milk Latte wrote: » Lossless will not work with any wireless headphones. Limits of the Bluetooth spec... The only way to realistically determine the difference between lossless and lossy is to do a blind test. One tool to do that is Apple's free AUlab, available here. I did that a few years ago, and, while I was able to often identify which is which, I found that AAC is surprisingly close to lossless audio. Impossible to hear the difference, unless you have very good speakers or headphones. The audible difference between cheap and good speakers is much larger than the difference between 256k AAC and 16bit/44k wav (as in CDs). When it comes to 'hi-res' uncompressed audio - there is a difference between 16bit and 24bit - every recording studio uses 24bit during recording and mixing, then, as a last step, reduces word length and dithers, to get 16bit. The bit depth determines the dynamic range (quietest to loudest signal), sample rate determines which frequencies are available (44k sample rate > highest available frequency is 22kHz, just above the limit of a young person's hearing). With sample rates, theoretically there should be no audible difference between hearing 44k and 96k if the converters are designed properly. But some converters are designed to sound better at 96k, for marketing reasons. Anything higher than 96k can actually be detrimental for the audio quality. (Source: pdf from Dan Lavry, who designs high end converters widely used in professional recording studios). When you upsample audio that was recorded at 44k, there is, obviously, no improvement - you cannot recover ultra high frequency content that is not there in the first place. AFAIK, most professional recording studios still record at 44k (48k for film), with some using 88k or 96k. 192k is not common with professionals. And - most microphones used in the recording studio don't pick up much, if anything, above 22k. Most specs of microphone list 20-22k as upper limit.
peteeeed wrote: » the sound improvement is very noticeable on my dolby atmos soundbar when playing music from the apple tv 4k box
drogon. wrote: » I guess we have to agree to disagree. But when you sell an iPad with 16GB of memory and a desktop chip in it; one would expect the software to be inline with the hardware.
awec wrote: » lol. It’s awful. It’s at least 10 years behind google. I have to say of all the things Apple do, by a massive distance maps is by far the worst. As for whoever said Maps is as good as Google in Ireland, I’ve some snake oil here I’d like to sell you. Apple Maps, in 2021, is the worst maps product on the market. It’s not even close.
murpho999 wrote: » Sorry but you just seem to love bashing Apple apps. I've seen you on here plenty of times here stating that Apple Music, Podcasts and Maps are garbage, rubbish etc. You seem to dismiss any updates and changes immediately as rubbish. I've been using Music for a numbers now and I find it excellent. Maps, had very well at launch that we all know about and cost senior management their jobs but to say that it's 10 years behind Google and the worst map product on the market is just hyperbole. The app has improved no end over the last few years. It navigates well also has a pretty natural and normal sounding Irish navigation voice. It's new "Look around" feature whilst not fully complete, is slicker and faster than Google's Street view. I think they've done a good job and it will only get better and the competition is good as it keeps Google making improvements too.
awec wrote: » It is absolutely rubbish. Yea I'm not a fan of Music and I accept that's my opinion, but Maps is just a very poor product. Saving an address and then looking it up just does not work. I open Maps, search for my address, it finds it no problem. I then click the button to save it to my contact. Then I go to my contact, click on the address that it saves and it can't find it in Maps! The exact same address, type it in manually it works fine, open it from contacts it doesn't work. It's not a weird address either, completely normal number streetname and eircode address. My work address has been there years. Google no issues. Apple struggles. If I save it, it doesn't work at all. Apple Maps thinks my car is parked 1.2km away right now. In reality it's parked in my driveway. This stuff is just basic and it doesn't work. Google works flawlessly, every time. They are miles behind. If this wasn't made by Apple it'd be slated, but because it has that Apple label on the front it gets a bit of a free ride.
awec wrote: » I really wish they'd release iMessage for Androids, especially with their new privacy push. I don't know a single person who uses iMessage and the biggest reason it's not widely adopted is that it only works on Apple products. It is the best placed service to replace WhatsApp if they opened it up and I reckon there's loads of opportunity there. It's good enough that I'd switch to using it if they made it available, but it's not good enough that people will buy an iPhone to get it. It doesn't make any sense to me why it's restricted to Apple products, but maybe it's a lot more popular in the states than it is here and they are happy with their lot for now.
murpho999 wrote: » iMessage wins hands down but even iPhone users here keep resorting to What's App.
awec wrote: » I really wish they'd release iMessage for Androids, especially with their new privacy push.
Gregor Samsa wrote: » I'd say we won't see the fruit of the M1 chips in iPads until more (or most or all) of the line move over to them. If they were to do it now, it would effectively fragment the line into two platforms with different capabilities.
Unicorn Milk Latte wrote: » Wait, isn't that a contradiction? Why would anyone who decides to use Android care about privacy? The whole business model of Google is that you exchange your private data for a 'free' service, like Gmail or Android, so it can be monetised for advertising. To be clear - I'm not criticising Google's business model. To offer 'free' email, under the condition that the email content can be harvested for advertising, is a perfectly legitimate way to do business. Google does not, by any means, make their practices a secret, and if users consent, all is fine.
ReginaldSmythV wrote: » The best messaging app will be whatever one the majority of your contacts are on. For the vast majority that’s WhatsApp. There’s no point in using something where you can’t message anyone.
murpho999 wrote: » The most used app may not mean the best.The point is that an awful lot of iPhone users here use What's App instead of iMessage whilst in the US it's the reverse.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/87962ff026856470eacf12f9c3179c90.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1a76cb640f98d9dcd3d00bb9366a306.svg)
