5 posts • joined 14 Feb 2008
Only Apple can decide if tehy want to deliver the required info
Imho, the analysis is nonsense, though the conclusion appears correct. What people really want and need is a copy of their iPhone's "notification system" on a watch, that presents the information in an abridged, legible form. None of the watches presently offered or announced have this.
Why? Because the notification information is simply not output by the iPhone. Only some info, like SMS and caller ID, are transmitted via Bluetooth, in order to interact with hands free systems.
And the only company who could change that is Apple. Hence, it is Apple's responsibility to develop an appropriate watch or movement with the needed functions.
Only by this approach, all new apps that deliver information via the notification system could automatically be integrated into the watch's functionality.
By providing a movement instead of a complete watch, watchmakers would be enabled to integrate such movements into complete watches, from the cheap 300 Dollar Timex variant, to the 5000 Dollar Panerai variant; including individualized clock faces in the individual watchmakers' layouts.
Has anybody noticed that OS development has more or less stalled in recent years? OSX is based on a system that first emerged in 1988, Linux and Solaris are remakes of an even older system, and Windows, well, you know that.
Boy, when I remmeber all those fancy ideas how computers should work we hadback then, and all the concepts that eventually never made it to the PCs of the world.
I attribute these baby step develoments without real, underlying progress to the increasing complexity. The entrance barriers are just too high, cost wise, but also project management wise.
So, I hope that Apple will use a significant part of this money to develop a next generation operating system. They will need the money for this task.
according to a very very rough calculation, that might cost around 30 bio USD. So, Apple would still have the money to develop OX XI :-)
Frustrating though, is that "serious" companies probably will not be willing to rely on hacked iPhones. TomTom comes to mind, who intend to write a car navigation prog, but might stumble over the licence agreement. And what about hardware development, now that Apple seems quite unwilling to open up the Bluetooth stack? Will anybody invest in an "illegal" solution for e.g. an external keyboard, or a hands free device including Bluetooth transmission not only of music (A2DP?!), but also of control commands?
Far from a solution
RRRoamer: The uran estimated to exist on this planet will only last for about 70 years, if used for electrical energy production. As only about 10 % of all our primary energy consumption are presently electricity, using nuclear power for the provision of every kind of energy required (heating and transportation etc) would reduce this time frame to about 7 years. Not really future proof, imho.
AI Jones: I have made a guesstimate for the requirements of wind turbines for producing all of the primary energy consumed in Germany, and ended up at about 3 million turbines. That will be close to ten such facilities per square kilometre.
Overall: Aside from the effect on carbon dioxide emissions, I do not think that humanity should use an even larger proportion of the available land masses, and should instead reserse as large areas as possible for "wilderness". At 6.5 billion people, we are devastating the whole planet, even without additional energy production from plants.
Maybe Sahara could be used for producing solar based energy, which in turn could be used to produce e.g. methanol directly from air carbon dioxide; but I am not sure.
- Asteroids as powerful as NUCLEAR BOMBS strike Earth TWICE YEARLY
- Review Ubuntu 14.04 LTS: Great changes, but sssh don't mention the...
- Got Windows 8.1 Update yet? Get ready for YET ANOTHER ONE – rumor
- Feature Reg man builds smart home rig, gains SUPREME CONTROL of DOMAIN – Pics
- HTC mulls swoop for Nokia's MASSIVE Chennai plant