Apple unveils 64-bit iPhone 5S
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/business/computer-generate...
I just cant take this section seriously.
But now we need mobile OpenCL too.
I was actually pretty excited about the prospect of an affordable iPhone, but it appears that the 5C, which is essentially an iPhone 5 that's cheaper to produce, is still going to cost at least $400-500 without a contract. There simply isn't $400 worth of technology in the iPhone 5C.
Edit: It's even worse than I expected. The 5C is available unlocked for $549 only through T-Mobile. At $649, the 5S is a reasonably priced luxury, but at just $100 less, the 5C is a ripoff.
It's disingenuous to pretend that a phone is cheap because it's $100 on-contract. If I signed that contract the phone would cost me $1300 more than what I pay using a Galaxy Nexus on the same towers that AT&T subscribers use. So basically, Apple is telling consumers that an ugly lump of plastic and glass containing last year's technology is worth more than a 13" Macbook Air 2013.
What I can't help but wonder is, am I ever going to be truly surprised or excited by one of these?
-Improved Security -Increased Speed -Updated to version 7
I'm sure the fingerprint scanning will be great from a UX point of view, but I was really hoping for an edge to edge screen, a built in 3D printer, or something that makes me go "wow, I didn't think you could do that".
- The original iPhone / iPod Touch.
- The iPhone 4.
- The MacBook Air (the generation that introduced the 11").
The 4S/5/5S not so much, and I don't plan to buy any of these.
Shifting to 64-bit makes a lot of sense for future-proofing.
Of course, it is possible to address more than 4GB in a 32-bit operating system with processor extensions, if you limit the address space of processes to 4GB (see e.g. PAE). I don't expect that we'll see many applications needing more than that soon. Maybe games?
(RubyMotion creator, follow the thread:) https://twitter.com/lrz/status/377486518719623168
Pointers nowadays are not just used for addressing things.
It'll also enable tagged pointers, which will probably speed up Objective-C code and encourage people to move away from using primitives types.
...unless the phone becomes more and more of a gaming platform.
I just "upgraded" my 3GS to the latest OS. Before that, I had 3-4 days of standby time. After that: about 18hours.
Apple: You can get the finger.
1. That phone is NOT old. Who says we should buy a new phone every time some company wants to make some cash? The thing worked great and there was absolutely nothing that needed to be changed.
2. I do NOT want to be part of a throw-away society that benefits nobody but some company. Our planet does NOT have unlimited resources, yet we keep throwing away electronics like there's no tomorrow.
This STINKS!
The consumer expects "upgrades" to actually upgrade the device, as in "making it better" not worse.
And: Apple prevents us from downgrading once we understand the surprise we got, after pushing for "upgrades" all the time.
Also, the consumer needs updates to keep the devices bugs/security holes patched.
If they did what they probably should have done, your phone would have reported, "Sorry, this update is not supported by your device," when you tried to install the latest iOS version. Then we'd be treated to even more wailing and gnashing of teeth from people who feel entitled to perpetual updates. Apple literally can't win here.
Edit: I will agree that they could 'win' by the simple expedient of permitting OS downgrades. There's no reason they couldn't let you revert to the last version you were happy with.
Just don't do it.
Thankfully, my wife's iPhone 4S is about as fast as it was when she got it, because she hasn't done any OS upgrades on it at all.
Unlike the Mac OSX upgrades, iOS upgrades seem to slow down the devices. iOS upgrades turned my 3G into an unusable mess. The same happened with my iPad 1.
My iPhone 4 slowed down noticeably with iOS 6.0, and even though I stopped upgrading after 6.0.1, it's been getting progressively slower-- and 95% of what I do on my phone is email, rss and browsing.
It's their strategy to push us to consume ever more goddamn iPhones. We need to stop that.
Nobody said that. Apple can "advance" software for the newer devices and just patch the security holes for the older ones. Nobody's asking for downgrades.
If Apple let you downgrade the OS easily, I probably wouldn't be nearly as pissed about it.
--edit-- In retrospect, I feel like a fool for plunking the extra $ for the 64GB model, thinking that it would help 'future proof' my purchase.
I think that at this point, you can stop using a 4 year old phone. Or, if you insist on using it, you shouldn't complain if modern software doesn't run 100% on it.
You sound like an Apple salesman. Who the hell says 4 years is old? It worked PERFECTLY WELL.
> Or, if you insist on using it, you shouldn't complain if modern software doesn't run 100% on it.
It's Apple who pushes consumers the whole time with "upgrades". Besides, all the consumer is asking for is security patches. If "upgrades" do effectively downgrade the product, then why do the produce this "modern software"? Because the want to sell the latest iPhone.
Usually, your carrier, who after three years or so will toss you a new phone for free, in exchange for renewing that contract.
What do you want from Apple? For them to support every single phone in different ways? Security patches for the first iPhone but no new features? Same for the 3GS? And if customers with the 3GS complain about having no new features, well then, let's do ANOTHER fork and do security patches + features. Why then, let's do that for every single model.
Four years is old. That's the difference between having a kid and watching them go off to school. If you can't buy a new phone after 4 years, then don't. But quit bitching that it isn't rainbows for you.
Nobody ever said that.
> What do you want from Apple?
What is that question? I said what needs to be done: Stop downgrading my product with so-called "upgrades". It's just common sense, really.
> Four years is old.
Yes, for rich people who don't care about resources because they are not affected by the scarcity. A phone is old when it doesn't fulfill the consumer's needs.
The sensor is complex enough that I very much doubt you could just use a printout of a fingerprint to fool it.
EDIT: as to sensor complexity, if it can be built into a home button, it'll be implemented on other fingerprint readers. Before long, people would be collecting fingerprints using this kind of advanced sensors..
And no one has ever found exploits in mobile devices that allow data that is supposed to be locally stored to be remotely accessed.
It will be interesting to see just how secure that data is.
EDIT: ??? why the downvote? I thought I was just answering the question.
So I guess add around another $350-400 to each of those of offline/without contract prices.
16GB - $649, 32GB - $749, 64GB - $849
5C 32GB $649
Even the NSA called apple "Big Brother" and they called Apple customers "Zombies"
---
I mean, if the NSA is calling it out for us in their slides... and this thing is now tracking all motion data - along with health-app tie-ins.... the NSA may as well offer medical insurance.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/09/nsa-steve-jobs_n_38...
(Edit: Referring to the fact that the touchscreen on some Lumias can be used with gloves.)
Yes. Absolutely. How is this so controversial?
My laptop lets me enter a password, or use a fingerscan. 99% of the time I use a fingerscan, but I have had it malfunction (the driver died or something) in which case I used the password. I very much imagine the iPhone 5S will try to drive a similar use.
It's "too much trouble" with a screen code when you have to do it every single time you grab your device. If you have a fingerprint alternative for the overwhelming majority of cases, yes it would make security more likely.
You clearly don't understand the target audience. An either-or setup for unlocking their phone is already way too complicated, especially for the average iPhone user. Steve Jobs would have never allowed such a gimmicky feature.
If I could bypass it with a quick fingerprint scan that would be brilliant, and that is what Apple is going for. I'm going to guess they do okay in the whole glove situation.
But wait, there's a new "cheap" iPhone that's targeted at those other markets, right? Oh nevermind, that one doesn't have a fingerprint sensor.
The world isn't the northeast.
Either way, this shows how committed Apple is to making its own ARM CPU's, and dismiss any rumors that Apple would use Intel's chips in iPhones or iPads in the future (which was a very unlikely and crazy idea to begin with). If anything, Apple would start making $700 Air-like machines with 64-bit chips soon (maybe next year), and still be as profitable as they are with the real $1,000 Air (since Intel is charging them about $300 for the Haswell CPU).
I, for one, would love to know if this information is stored just on the device (securely?), transmitted and under what circumstances.
Mag stripe is dead, I don't support payment technologies that continue to promote it - Square, Shopify POS, etc. The USA is way behind on implementing EMV. (I know, Shopify is Canadian)
If you don't support magstripe technologies you're ignoring the entirety of the richest country in the world?
Mag stripe is horribly insecure and developing new technologies around it because of easy to perform a transaction will only allow fraud to continue to exist. In Canada, I question every merchant that does not support chip technology.
USA merchants are reluctant to change. The rest of the world is moving on with or without them.
Could you explain why it is a bad thing?
Copy/paste from article: Pretty much every other developed country got rid of magnetic stripe cards years ago, and many countries are multiple generations beyond that tech. In the UK and much of Europe, the "chip and PIN" card, properly called the EMV (for "Europay, MasterCard and Visa"), is dominant; it's a regular plastic card, but it's embedded with a tiny computer chip that serves as authentication in conjunction with a regular four-digit PIN. The EMV system is much more secure than the magnetic stripe card; when it was introduced to France, the country saw an 80% reduction in card fraud. (It was introduced in 1992, by the way. The France of 20 years ago was more advanced than the US is now.) The benefits: authentication is far more sophisticated than reading a simple magnetized strip; it incorporates actual encryption protocols like DES, the Data Encryption Standard.
The chief vulnerability of the EMV system? IT STILL HAS MAGNETIC STRIPES. EMV cards have a magnetic stripe so they can be used in dumber, slower countries, like the US, which can't read the chips. The only real hack of the EMV system relies on transferring information from the magnetic stripe, rather than the chip.
If USA had adopted EMV technologies, when the criminals attempted to perform a transaction with their mag stripe fraudulent cards, the system would recognize it as an EMV enabled card based on the mag stripe track data. The fraudster would be forced to use the chip on the card, and their whole scheme fails.
In short: Because the EMV wasn't accepted at these machines, mag stripe is used as a backup. If they had used EMV, they would have forced that option and not accepted mag stripe.
The two-part attack is only how they stole the cards in such a mass manner and increased their limits - They could have stolen all the mag stripe data with skimmers and cameras.
Even though others are working hard to protect payment technologies, it does nothing to help countries who fall behind.
EDIT: Program a BLANK CARD? I'm sorry, are you suggesting that it would be easy to obtain encryption keys from Visa/Mastercard/Interac etc? Do you know what you're suggesting?
Also, you keep insisting that if USA adopted EMV, this would not have happened. But this operation was global, thieves used ATMs in Russia, Japan, Britain, and Canada among others.
To answer your question though, I guess it would be possible, but they would need to skim the card data RIGHT at the time of card production in the personalization machine as it holds the proper encryption keys - nearly impossible. Banks typically don't do their own manufacturing (I don't know of any bank that does) and these systems are typically disconnected. This is worlds apart from what they actually did - dumping or generating mag stripe data, including the PIN Offset and writing the data onto cards like library cards, or hotel room cards.
In addition, with EMV, the card is encrypted and verified using the issuer's public key, as well as the Certificate Authority's public key. Even further, Visa/Mastercard have their own multi-tier encryption that gets applied to the cards.
I'm really getting over my head in the manufacturing process, but it is incredibly more complicated and secure than the old mag stripe days.
That's not really a reason to do things.
...they're reaching new lows if that's a marketing point.
Wait, you asked if they 'cared'? Of course they care - it's a larger number than everyone else at the offices' iphone has.
also wait for mainstream media to catch up, we'll see titles like: 'apple invented the first 64 bit processor'.
But there are people lined up at the local Apple store to get a marginal upgrade to a increasingly uninteresting non-status smartphone product so what do I know?