# Siri is a UI game changer



## Janx (Oct 22, 2011)

My wife just upgraded her 3gs to a 4s.  She's discovered all the stupid pet tricks it can do.

Whats not getting a lot of press is what Siri can really do, and how complex and powerful that really is.

Here's an article about Siri's patent.

Unlike ELIZA or Dr. Sbaitso from SoundBlaster's demoes, Siri has contextual memory and a command architecture to hook into application's activities.

This isn't like the general voice recognition to "call Mom" or dictate an email via Dragon Dictation.

Being able to issue useful commands to search for information, and perform actions across a variety of topics is a game changer.

I have no idea if Google Voice Commands can "Remind me to buy milk after work" which will create a reminder and set the alert time to when I finish work (5pm).  If it doesn't know when I get done with work, it will ask and then remember it.

Since Apple has a 230 page patent on the topic of managing this command processing system, Google's going to have to do something ENTIRELY different if they're going to invoke the same functionality.

From the article, the diagrams look like something I would have done (I've pondered this topic informally before, and I'm seeing structures akin to ideas i had). That means if it is defensible, it covers the practical solution set to solving the problem.  Which means a competitor will need a very different strategy (one that might not be viable or require more resources like inventing a SkyNet grade neural network).

Aside from the obvious Star Trek reference to Scotty picking up a mouse and trying to talk to it (an Apple mouse, no less), this is another Star Trek technology finally arriving in a practical form.

As I see FaceTime being nearly unused (I finally used it yesterday to show my wife the BumbleBee Camaro while I was stuck at the dealership for her car repair), because it requires being stuck holding the phone, when in reality I want to talk with headphones so my hands and eyes can do another task (like drive or work a computer).

Siri supports that, because I can perform some tasks without needing to use my hands or eyes.  This is going to expand into more uses, even as I stare at my PC, I could tell it to google this or that, open EnWorld show me this thread, and reply, etc.  Look ma, no hands.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Oct 22, 2011)

_Computer..._

Yep, saw this on G4 and it is Star Trek!


----------



## Umbran (Oct 22, 2011)

It is new, yes.  It is different.  Even clever.

But that doesn't mean folks are actually going to use it so much the game actually changes.  The basic issue I think, oddly enough, is not of the interface, but of power.

Siri, as I understand it, it *not* hands-free.  You have to touch the phone to activate the program, which defeats about half the purpose.  And this is understandable, because having your phone *always* awake, always listening, will kill your battery in short order.

So, you're saved some typing and some mucking about choosing apps, which is nice.  But game-changing?  I'm not sure.


----------



## Aeolius (Oct 22, 2011)

My oldest son, who has cerebral palsy, has used computers since the age of 2 (Macs, naturally). He tends to type with the pinky finger of his right hand. Now, with, Siri, he can press the home button and say "send a text message to dad" before speaking the contents of the text message. This saves home loads of time. 

Other useful tricks I have found for Siri are "How do I get home from here", "What is 15% of $27.73?", and near-flawless dictation into Notes (including transcribing podcasts by placing the phone next to a speaker).


----------



## Asmo (Oct 22, 2011)

I need to get a new phone..I thought your wife´s name was Siri, then I read the article.

Asmo


----------



## IronWolf (Oct 22, 2011)

Umbran said:


> It is new, yes.  It is different.  Even clever.
> 
> But that doesn't mean folks are actually going to use it so much the game actually changes.  The basic issue I think, oddly enough, is not of the interface, but of power.
> 
> ...




I see where you are coming from, but from what I have heard (I haven't actually played with it yet, just reading the various user experiences about the net and such), this does seem like the first step towards voice activation and recognition in computers. Certainly an initial step, but if the biggest hurdle is having to touch the phone to get it to activate that seems relatively minor given the scope of voice recognition and driving your apps with it.

I suspect Apple is "beta" testing it at the moment on the phones. And at some point we'll see it come to the iPads and Apple computers.


----------



## Kzach (Oct 22, 2011)

Aeolius said:


> My oldest son, who has cerebral palsy, has used computers since the age of 2 (Macs, naturally). He tends to type with the pinky finger of his right hand. Now, with, Siri, he can press the home button and say "send a text message to dad" before speaking the contents of the text message. This saves home loads of time.




That's awesome dude. One of the first things I thought about when I read about Siri was that it will be able to help so many people have easier access to computers. Given that an iPhone is a relatively inexpensive device that serves several functions, it also hopefully brings it into the realm of availability for those with low financial resources.

The best thing about it, though, is that now it's 'out there' in the market-place, it will hopefully take hold and be developed and refined even further as well as having applications developed to tie-in to it to expand its capabilities.

The future is bright indeed!


----------



## Morrus (Oct 22, 2011)

Umbran said:


> Siri, as I understand it, it *not* hands-free.  You have to touch the phone to activate the program, which defeats about half the purpose.  And this is understandable, because having your phone *always* awake, always listening, will kill your battery in short order.




I think one needs to think longer term.  At present, Siri is a beta function on a single mobile phone handset.  I've no doubt that the long game involves Siri being on other things - your computer, ostensibly - and able to control a lot of stuff in the house.  Throw your emails up on your TV, record a TV program, change the temperature, that sort of thing.  Those applications of it don't need to worry about the battery power, although they're obviously some way off yet.

I can imagine walking into my house and saying "Siri, set the heating at 17 degrees and show me what movies are showing at the local cinema; ah, play me the trailer for _A Space Odyssey_; OK, buy me two tickets for the 8pm showing and mark that in my calendar."

That sort of stuff is so close to real now, especially with Siri; it's more an infrastructure and partnership thing than a tech breakthough thing.  I think Apple wants to run your household for you. 

I'm finding I'm using Siri a lot at the moment.  It's awesome being able to say to Siri "Invite Al, Neil, Dave, and my wife to Comic Con in London on Saturday the 29th" and have it seamlessly mark the event on my calendar, send a calendar invite to all four recipients (in Sharon's case, because she has an iPhone, it was added to her calendar automatically when she accepted the invitation; in the other three, who don't have iPhones, it sent them emails and they indicated they would be attending; all this info was reflected automatically in my own calendar entry - basic calendar stuff, of course, which everyone can do manually, but it did it all perfectly off that one spoken instruction).

Plus going to bed and simply saying "Wake me up at 8am" was awesome.  As was "Remind me to buy dog food when I leave home" and the phone's GPS knows when I leave that geofenced area is creates and reminds me.  I ask it "When is my wife's birthday?" and it verbally answers "Sharon Morrissey's birthday is on December 11th"; I tell it "Remind me on December 5th to buy my wife's birthday presents" and I know it will do exactly that.  I want to cancel my D&D game?  I simply tell it to email or text everyone and it does.  And its answers from Wolfram Alpha are great.  "How tall is the Eiffel Tower?"; "What is the population of Italy?"; "How many British Pounds is 250 US dollars?"; "Multiply 234 by 12 and add 30"; "How old is Bill Gates?" - for single answer data points, it's very, very good and spits the answer right back at you.

It doesn't do a LOT yet, but what it does do it does well; and its clearly going to be able to do a lot more over the coming months.  It's annoying that location services don't work outside the US yet, though.  I can easily bypass that problem, though, by instead saying "Search Google for Italian restaurants near me" and it does that just fine (it knows where I am).

You can tell I'm a Siri fanboy!

Apple's challenge isn't technological now; it's persuading people to do it.  Folks have historically been reluctant to talk to devices for a variety of reaons (self-consciousness; inaccuracy of voice recognition; etc.) and the way around this is through marketing, not tech.  Apple's gotta get you to feel OK about telling a device to do stuff.  It does that the way it does a lot of its devices - market the hell out of them, make sure they do a few things REALLY well rather than a kitchen-sink approach, and then gradually increase the scope until in a few years you realise that without noticing it you're using it for more and more stuff.  That's how they handled the original iPhone - it didn't do a bunch of stuf that other phones did, but the things it did do it did really slickly, really well - and now compare that the latest iPhones can do compared to that original one.


----------



## Aeolius (Oct 22, 2011)

Kzach said:


> The best thing about it, though, is that now it's 'out there' in the market-place, it will hopefully take hold and be developed and refined even further as well as having applications developed to tie-in to it to expand its capabilities.




Absolutely. Once Apple opens Siri's API to developers, Siri will really shine. Coupled with various INSTEON devices (light switches, thermostats, motion sensors, etc) and a suitable home automation application, you would be able to use Siri to turn on lights, open doors, access security cameras, adjust thermostats, and more. I am currently working on a way for INSTEON to help feed horses.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 22, 2011)

Aeolius said:


> Absolutely. Once Apple opens Siri's API to developers, Siri will really shine.




There's a lot of doubt that Apple will do that.  There'd be a lot of conflicting instructions and app developers trying to claim certain keywords for their app.  How many would want "tweet", for example?  (Bad example, because it'll be able to tweet natively soon with no need for a third-party app).   Does Apple have a "first-come-first-served" application process to grab keywords?  What about keyword squatters?

Alternatively you could tell it which app to use for every instruction, but Apple's kinda not fond of users having to plow through endless settings.  Their credo is to have stuff work right out of the box without setup.

Who knows?  A lot of analysts are saying that 3rd party APIs for Siri will never come.   Maybe they'll figure out a cool, elegant way to handle it.  It would be cool if they did.

But I suspect the future - for now at least - of Siri involves Apple designated functions, apps, and partnerships and not an open developer API.  They might pick a few select apps and work with the devlopers on those ones, though.


----------



## Janx (Oct 22, 2011)

Umbran said:


> It is new, yes.  It is different.  Even clever.
> 
> But that doesn't mean folks are actually going to use it so much the game actually changes.  The basic issue I think, oddly enough, is not of the interface, but of power.
> 
> ...




If you bring the phone to your face, Siri activates.  If you hold the button on your headphones or bluetooth it also activates.  Bear in mind, when I said hands free, pressing a button to activate it is not the same entanglement as having to hold a phone up to my ear to keep talking to you or holding it so FaceTime can see me and I can see it.

I can have the phone in my pocket and my headset on an generally have my hands free to drive or work on something.

As to game changer, my xbox has voice recognition.   It's like playing an old text adventure with 2 word commands.  Siri has natural language recognition which alone makes it easier to use.

Right now Siri is coded to connect to specific apps.  So it is obviously limited in what it can do.  Apple coded it to handle food, movies, appointments, and just about everything else is routed as a search to bing or wolfram alpha.

In theory, Apple could provide an API so Siri can connect to any registered app's command structure.  So that bar can be minimal.  though I think Morrus's point about which app to use muddies that up.

coding-wise, it's basically voice recognition wired up to natural speech parsing (so this technology could be wired up as a search engine). From that, it can recognize whats a command and what's a question.  Questions go to a search engine, commands go to its command matrix.

In the command matrix, it's not as simple as performing a simple action like "Call Mom" which requires no memory, just recognition of the action "Call" and the subject "mom".  Whereas, "Make an appointment for tomorrow" gets recognized and it knows it has missing fields (subject and time) so it will propmpt for them.  The next part (which I'm not sure if it works as I don't get to play with Siri) is "Make a grocery list" followed by your reciting the items for the list which go into Notes.  Then you could tell it "remind me the list when I get to the store".  This requires context memory that you've been workng with the List the entire team.

In a way, lunquistically, pronouns are variables. Short term buckets for the topic of current discussion.  While software likes variables, coding a parsing system to "remember" things is the big deal.  All of this being wired to a command structure gives it the oomp it needs.

In any event, I think it's cool and a good many steps more powerful than Dragon, Xbox's kinect, or the usual voice commands on cell phones to launch a call.

I haven't kept up on voice recognition or natural speech technology.  Dragon had long been considered the king, and it languished for a decade or so.  Its still mostly a dictation software, not a natural speech processor.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Oct 22, 2011)

Android phones have had Voice Commands for a while which are useful as a tool, and with voice commands being out there it hasn't been much of a game changer, and neither will Siri be.

It's useful to getting stuff in when you don't want to use the keyboard, there's less ability for it to understand natural language as you often have to begin sentences with "Navigate", "Call", "Watch" and it's most definitely linked to various Google Services, which some people are fine with and others not so much when you use those functions.  Though for many things you still have to use your hands often to select things from a dropdown after speaking to it.  

I've also read that Google's engineers have certainly been putting some effort into getting voice commands to understand certain accents and languages better, as I imagine anyone from Glasgow might have more problems with the phone even if they sort of speak English.

That last point though is probably going to be something that anyone who makes voice input devices is going to have to work on.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 22, 2011)

Kobold Avenger said:


> Android phones have had Voice Commands for a while which are useful as a tool, and with voice commands being out there it hasn't been much of a game changer, and neither will Siri be.




Yes, we all know Android does voice commands. The iPhone's had it for a while, too.  Siri isn't the same as voice commands; the voice recognition tech isn't the clever bit.  It's the way the user interacts with it plus the natural speech syntax interpretation and interaction that's the clever bit, not the fact that it can take voice commands.  Voice commands (either the old iPhone version or the current Android version) isn't the same as Siri.  It shares an element - voice recognition - but we're talking different things; it's a step up from voice commands. Android devs will be following suit, of course.  Apple just has a bit of a head start.

A crap analogy is comparing Windows to DOS and saying "Yeah, DOS has a computer-monitor based interface which lets you move files, too - computers have been doing that for ages".  OK, yeah, that's a terrible analogy and the jump isn't anywhere near that of Windows, but it's the one that sprang to mind.  It's all about the slickness and integration.

But anyway, it's not like I'm trying to sell you an iPhone!  Apple's approach will appeal to some people (like me) and not to others.  That's cool.



> I've also read that Google's engineers have certainly been putting some effort into getting voice commands to understand certain accents and languages better, as I imagine anyone from Glasgow might have more problems with the phone even if they sort of speak English.




I have a friend in Glasgow who bought a 4S.  He says it's just fine.  He has a fairly strong Glaswegian accent.

It apparently has big problems with Indian, Chinese, and Japanese accents.  But it only supports US English, UK English, Australian English, French, and German so far, with more rolling out in 2012.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Oct 22, 2011)

There's currently an ad for the iPhone with a gentleman of African descent using Siri.  No problems (of course- its an ad).

I'll be cautiously optimistic about it...but I'm not in the market for a smart phone in the foreseeable future.  I just wish they'd have loaded it on things like the new iPad2 (which I AM getting soon) or the updated iPod Touch...  They probably couldn't due to technical issues, but I can still dream.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 22, 2011)

I think the real test is this:  "Am I using it?"

I've owned devices with voice commands before; I've also dabbled with speech recognition software and the like.  I've never found myself using it, though.

I do use Siri.  So, for me, it passes that test: they've done something that made me actually use it.


----------



## falcarrion (Oct 22, 2011)

It will not be long before it hits the Ipad and other apple products. 
Right now I can call people over my Ipad as long as I have an internet connection. Add Siri to the ipad and it opens up what I can do more.
With the Ipad, Siri, and the apple tv things are going to change. 
has anyone tried the Iphone with Siri and the apple tv yet?


----------



## Morrus (Oct 22, 2011)

falcarrion said:


> It will not be long before it hits the Ipad and other apple products.
> Right now I can call people over my Ipad as long as I have an internet connection. Add Siri to the ipad and it opens up what I can do more.
> With the Ipad, Siri, and the apple tv things are going to change.
> has anyone tried the Iphone with Siri and the apple tv yet?




I'm not really familiar with Apple TV. They've done a bad job of communicating what it is to me.

What does one do with Apple TV? And what would one do with the iPhone, Siri, and Apple TV?


----------



## Kzach (Oct 22, 2011)

Morrus said:


> Voice commands (either the old iPhone version or the current Android version) isn't the same as Siri.  It shares an element - voice recognition - but we're talking different things; it's a step up from voice commands.




Yeah, I think that's what people aren't realising here and that's up to Apple to communicate to the wider audience. Apple have had voice recognition built into their OS's for decades. The first Mac that I bought, as opposed to the first one that I owned, was a 6500/300 PowerPC with OS 7.6 and even it had Voice Recognition!



Morrus said:


> I'm not really familiar with Apple TV. They've done a bad job of communicating what it is to me.
> 
> What does one do with Apple TV? And what would one do with the iPhone, Siri, and Apple TV?



Honestly I don't think even Apple know what the heck they're doing with it. It's been a bit of a failure but they keep updating it and pushing it out. I think you can pick one up for under a $100 USD now... just don't ask me what it does


----------



## falcarrion (Oct 22, 2011)

Apple tv is a small box that you connect to your tv. With it you can access your itunes account. You can download movies, play music, etc. Now with the IOS5 you can do air display or play that will mirror you ipad 2. thus you can run your apps on the big screen through the apple tv. You can run you tube, netflix, or any app you have.


----------



## falcarrion (Oct 22, 2011)

You where talking about using Siri to put you emails up on the tv.
Imagine you just saying " Siri mirror ipad, show emails"
OR" Siri mirror ipad, run facetime, call Niel"
and have it all showing up on your large screen tv.

Now if they add a few things to the apple tv such as a mike and 
siri. You could just say "Siri turn on tv, mirror ipad, display emails"


----------



## Morrus (Oct 22, 2011)

falcarrion said:


> Apple tv is a small box that you connect to your tv. With it you can access your itunes account. You can download movies, play music, etc. Now with the IOS5 you can do air display or play that will mirror you ipad 2. thus you can run your apps on the big screen through the apple tv. You can run you tube, netflix, or any app you have.




How does that differ from just throwing your PC display up on your TV via your wireless network (other than it being limited to just the stuff on your i-device rather than everything your PC can do)?


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Oct 23, 2011)

An tv is about streaming video and audio content.

Stream movie rentals from iTunes to your TV,
stream TV show episodes from iTunes to your TV,
stream movie and TV show purchases from your PC or iPad or iPhone to your TV (_Home Sharing_)
stream Netflix to your TV,
stream YouTube and Vimeo to your TV,
stream video and audio podcasts to your TV,
stream sports season passes to your TV (MLB, NBA, NHL, . . .)
stream video or audio apps from an iPad, iPhone, iPod touch to your TV (_AirPlay_)
stream certain games on the iOS device to the TV screen to your TV (_AirPlay mirroring_)


----------



## Morrus (Oct 23, 2011)

Eric Anondson said:


> An tv is about streaming video and audio content.
> 
> Stream movie rentals from iTunes to your TV,
> stream TV show episodes from iTunes to your TV,
> ...




I can do nearly all of that without Apple TV. If it's on my PC I can throw it over to the TV screen.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Oct 23, 2011)

Morrus said:


> I can do nearly all of that without Apple TV. If it's on my PC I can throw it over to the TV screen.



Except AirPlay, totally. If you don't mind hauling your computer to the room with the TV and cabling it to the TV when you want to do that.

Plus, the Apple TV uses a 1/10 of the energy of a single 60W lightbulb and doesn't take up a computer-size amount of physical space.


----------



## IronWolf (Oct 23, 2011)

I like the form factor and energy consumption of the Apple TV, but it doesn't have the means to play media off of network shares in my house right?


----------



## Morrus (Oct 23, 2011)

Eric Anondson said:


> Except AirPlay, totally. If you don't mind hauling your computer to the room with the TV and cabling it to the TV when you want to do that.




They're both in the lounge anyway. And it's a wireless network; no cables involved. All I actually have to do is flip the TV to AV2 on the remote.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Oct 23, 2011)

IronWolf said:


> I like the form factor and energy consumption of the Apple TV, but it doesn't have the means to play media off of network shares in my house right?



Nope. Only media living in an iTunes library on a running PC, or iTunes content streaming from an internet connection.

I've been praying for an update that lets an iTunes library live in a network share. Maybe someday. Just speculation, but it feels like Apple is moving more towards a model where all your content lives in the cloud and the Apple TV would just pull from that.

Just login with your cloud credentials on any Apple device and *boom* you have access to it all no matter where you are, at an Apple TV or at any iOS device or computer with iTunes. No need to a personal storage server. Gives me the willies not having the stuff on my own equipment, I'm controlling that way, but I also like knowing that my stuff isn't at the whims of distractive disasters or thefts.

Bringing it back to Siri, I can see a future A5-powered Apple TV with a mic in the remote powered by Siri. Siri needs an always on internet connection to access the servers that interpret the natural language, and an AppleTV has that. Mmmm.


----------



## Janx (Oct 23, 2011)

So many things to comment on....

iTV can stream off shares, itunes lib, and from itunes store/icloud.

Xbox, ps3, wii do most of the same, except accesss apple stuff (itunes)

You can keep you itunes library on a file server and specify its path as a UNC. I use mine off my NAS share.

Siri on iTV would prolly be quite handy. A new remoteless big screen info center that you can talk to like star trek.


----------



## Fast Learner (Oct 23, 2011)

With an Apple TV (or other AirPlay device hooked up to your TV), you can do this wirelessly:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxj1QuKebdQ]Real Racing 2 Party Play - YouTube[/ame]

With many more such apps to come (including several I'm working on).

There's some very cool D&D stuff one could do with this, too.


----------



## Umbran (Oct 23, 2011)

Aeolius said:


> My oldest son, who has cerebral palsy, has used computers since the age of 2 (Macs, naturally). He tends to type with the pinky finger of his right hand. Now, with, Siri, he can press the home button and say "send a text message to dad" before speaking the contents of the text message. This saves home loads of time.




I by no means say that it isn't a useful tool.  My bother had cerebral palsy as well, and while he could manage typing slowly, I'm certain he could have found a use for it, if my family could have afforded it.

But "has a use" is not equivalent to "complete game changer for everyone"



Morrus said:


> I can imagine walking into my house and saying "Siri, set the heating at 17 degrees and show me what movies are showing at the local cinema; ah, play me the trailer for _A Space Odyssey_; OK, buy me two tickets for the 8pm showing and mark that in my calendar."




With respect... folks have been imagining that for decades.  Asimov wrote of such stuff early in his career.

Here's the thing, as I look at it - my recollection is that Gartner research places smartphone sales, overall, as only 20% of the cell phone market in Q3 of 2010.  The percentage is probably growing, but by no means a majority, and many of those sales are folks upgrading their phones, not new smartphone users.  Many geeks think smartphone penetration is rather larger than it actually is, because geeks tend to be early adopters, so we tend to be surrounded by the things.  

The lowest end iPhone 4S I can buy would be like $200, with addition of several hundred dollars extra per year of data plan on top of that.  Talking to my house would require a substantial computer integrations into the electrical and heating systems - more money.  We're talking thousands of dollars, in a bad economy.

The game doesn't change on the leading edge.  The game changes in the mid-market, and that's a way off yet.


----------



## Umbran (Oct 23, 2011)

Morrus said:


> They're both in the lounge anyway. And it's a wireless network; no cables involved. All I actually have to do is flip the TV to AV2 on the remote.




Well, Morrus, consider how much technical knowledge was required to set up your current arrangement.  Now, consider that done with Apple's eye to technical ease, seamlessness, and intuitive UI.  It may not really be that much better than the setup you have, but it is Apple's version of that setup.


----------



## IronWolf (Oct 23, 2011)

Umbran said:


> But "has a use" is not equivalent to "complete game changer for everyone"




Like any technology, it starts out on the cutting edge and for those with some discretionary cash and then trickles down if it passes those hurdles as the market opens and the cost becomes more affordable. The Internet, private phone lines, VCRs, DVD players, flat screen TVs all sort of worked like this.

I agree with Morrus that this could very well be the first of the true voice capable devices.




			
				Umbran said:
			
		

> With respect... folks have been imagining that for decades.  Asimov wrote of such stuff early in his career.




Yep - and now it looks like we might actually have a contender technology to make this a reality.



			
				Umbran said:
			
		

> Talking to my house would require a substantial computer integrations into the electrical and heating systems - more money.  We're talking thousands of dollars, in a bad economy.




There would be some integration that need made of course, that is true of anything. I'm not sure if it would be *that* expensive once the technology trickles down a little bit. For heating/cooling you don't need a whole new heating system, just a thermostat capable of controlling your heating or cooling over it. An Apple TV (or PC connected to the TV w/ compatible app) connected to the TV can handle nearly anything you would want to bring up on the TV. It may be the brains that actually hears your temp increase request and passes it along to the thermostat for you.

There are a lot of pieces out there that Apple has at their disposal to bring some of this together. Is everyone's house going to start doing this today? Nope. Partially because we aren't *quite* there yet and there is a price component today. But prices drop, we see it all the time. 



			
				Umbran said:
			
		

> The game doesn't change on the leading edge.  The game changes in the mid-market, and that's a way off yet.




The game does change on the leading edge though. That's where we will see the technology first that will eventually trickle down to the mid-market.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 23, 2011)

Umbran said:


> I
> 
> With respect... folks have been imagining that for decades.  Asimov wrote of such stuff early in his career.




Oh, for sure.  Don't get me wrong - I'm not claiming to have had some kind of novel idea.  What I meant to put across is that we're pretty much there for that.  None of that is even slightly difficult for Apple to get Siri to do (and it already does some of it) - it's not a technological challenge.  It's just about partnerships now - which services Apple can strike a deal with to access their data.  

Payments via voice is probably the biggest hurdle there.  Apple already uses your iTunes credentials to purchase stuff from its own Apple store, from a small number of apps like Comixology, and of course for its own digitial products in iTunes, iBooks and the app store itself. 

The barrier is Apple making agreements with different outlets and organisations to be able to do that.  

That's what I meant to say - not that it's a new idea, but technologically it can be done very easily.  Just a question of getting partners to sign on to the concept.  We're there with the tech.


The 







> Talking to my house would require a substantial computer integrations into the electrical and heating systems - more money.  We're talking thousands of dollars, in a bad economy.




Yes, indeed.  That's certainly a barrier; as I was saying, I was just trying to say it's not a technological barrier.  The economics of it - I agree, some of that won't be any time soon for that precise reason.  



Umbran said:


> Well, Morrus, consider how much technical knowledge was required to set up your current arrangement.  Now, consider that done with Apple's eye to technical ease, seamlessness, and intuitive UI.  It may not really be that much better than the setup you have, but it is Apple's version of that setup.




Good point; I guess that's where Apple TV comes in.  My setup wasn't difficult, but it did require me to Google a little in advance.


----------



## Janx (Oct 23, 2011)

Morrus said:


> How does that differ from just throwing your PC display up on your TV via your wireless network (other than it being limited to just the stuff on your i-device rather than everything your PC can do)?




You also could have bought the cable to connect your iThing to your tv via hdmi or component video.

AirPlay just makes it wireless.

As to Umbran's setup concern.  Most people with Xboxes have it hooked up to the internet.  Except for iTunes integration, it does mostly the same things for streaming from your shared media and Netflix/hulu.  iTV sets up just as easy.


----------



## Janx (Oct 23, 2011)

Umbran said:


> I...snip...
> But "has a use" is not equivalent to "complete game changer for everyone"
> 
> 
> ...





You're right, and you're wrong.  Obviously, everybody has to have one, before the game has changed.  But this UI advance has changed how people use the device.

You can get an iPhone 3gs with plan for free now.  So everybody who skimps out for the free phone with the plan can have a smartphone. (obviously, it has the higher cost of required data plan).    In 2 years time, the 4s will occupy that free phone slot.

Since most of Siri is software, and every fw release adds new features, that free phone will be better than my wife's new 4s on the exact same hardware.

Now, let's look at this as a software dev.  I accept that the concepts of Siri are not new (as I indicated I had comparable ideas on the topic 20 years ago, they simply worked it all out).  Siri sets the bar for natural language usage and practical application.  Writing an email with Siri is no fancier than using Dragon Dictation.  Using Siri to book tickets, set reminders, compile grocery lists and remind you by location  are where the usefulness is.

From the application dev point of view, to make an app, I consider doing a installed client app, a mobile device app, or a web app.  Following the 3-tier application model or SOA practices, the UI tier can be detached from the architecture, so I can build for multiple platforms.  Siri is a new UI.  Assuming Android gets just as fancy, I will want to enable my app to hook into voice commands if applicable.

Obviously for regular games, voice control may not be useful.  But helpful apps are where Siri's power really is.

It would be trivial to add Siri to iTV3 or iPad3.  I would expect google to try to replicate the concept.  

Once its in our hands as a consumer, and we get it into it has a lot of potential to change how we use computers again.


----------



## Aeolius (Oct 23, 2011)

Umbran said:


> Talking to my house would require a substantial computer integrations into the electrical and heating systems - more money




Actually, talking to your house is free. It's getting it to listen that's the kicker.  

INSTEON-Compatible Thermostat - $160






INSTEON-Compatible Light Switch - $35





Indigo - $90 (Indigo Touch app for iOS = Free)

True, it's not cheap. But for less than $300, once you have an iOS device, you can control your HVAC and a light... assuming Apple let's Perceptive Automation have a crack at Siri.... until then it'll take the use of one finger. Until that point, there are always other options .


----------



## Kzach (Oct 23, 2011)

Morrus said:


> The barrier is Apple making agreements with different outlets and organisations to be able to do that.




This just made me realise something.

Apple + Amazon = World Domination.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 23, 2011)

Kzach said:


> This just made me realise something.
> 
> Apple + Amazon = World Domination.




See, what Apple could do (no idea if they will) is create a dedicated integration procedure.  Your online store, or concert tickets service, or train company, etc. could choose to allow purchases with Siri.  They apply to Apple and set up the required systems, and can then advertise themselves as working with Siri.

Apple would need to do quality control to ensure that from the user end it's all seamless and works perfectly.  So it'd probably have to be an application and acceptance process.   Each would have to tailor it to ensure that Siri could ask the right questions if it didn't have enough info from your initial request.

Like you say, Amazon would be a massive coup if Apple can get them on board with it.   It'd be a big boost to making the above appear attractive to businesses.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Oct 23, 2011)

Kzach said:


> This just made me realise something.
> 
> Apple + Amazon = World Domination.



It could also be a way for Apple to put a knife to the source of Google's income. Google gives Android away for free because they can afford to, they can afford to because Google makes King Midas amounts money from ads.

Siri ties in with Yelp and Wolfram Alpha right now, but imagine Apple creating even more partnerships with ever more companies. Soon people are asking Siri to find things and are served up ad-free results from those partners.

Yeah, when Siri can't figure out what you asked you get a pure web search, but that is stripped of the ads.


----------



## IronWolf (Oct 23, 2011)

Morrus said:


> See, what Apple could do (no idea if they will) is create a dedicated integration procedure.  Your online store, or concert tickets service, or train company, etc. could choose to allow purchases with Siri.  They apply to Apple and set up the required systems, and can then advertise themselves as working with Siri.
> 
> Apple would need to do quality control to ensure that from the user end it's all seamless and works perfectly.  So it'd probably have to be an application and acceptance process.   Each would have to tailor it to ensure that Siri could ask the right questions if it didn't have enough info from your initial request.




It isn't that big of a stretch for Apple to go this direction either. Just look at their app store. 

Integrating sales via Siri, Apple takes a cut off the top and off they go!


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Oct 23, 2011)

Medical device makers are making devices to tie into iOS. Not impossible to imagine home appliance/mechanical/security devices getting the same access. Put in bluetooth or wifi, write an app, away you go.

Apple has patents in home automation btw.


----------



## Kzach (Oct 23, 2011)

"Siri, pre-order the new Heroes of the Feywild for me and have it shipped to home," that would be so freaking cool.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 23, 2011)

Kzach said:


> "Siri, pre-order the new Heroes of the Feywild for me and have it shipped to home," that would be so freaking cool.




Oh, that's a no-brainer.  There's no chance in hell that that is not their intention.

Whether they manage to pull it off or not is another question; they have to strike the right agreements and partnerships.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Oct 23, 2011)

Morrus said:


> There's a lot of doubt that Apple will do that.  There'd be a lot of conflicting instructions and app developers trying to claim certain keywords for their app.  How many would want "tweet", for example?  (Bad example, because it'll be able to tweet natively soon with no need for a third-party app).   Does Apple have a "first-come-first-served" application process to grab keywords?  What about keyword squatters?




This is ultimately the reason why voice-activated commands by and large won't ever (and haven't yet) become mainstream.  There's too much fluidity in the semantics and intent of language to make it really practical.  That's not even getting into the actual mechanics of languages - notably different dialects having semantic collisions (British vs. US English is an excellent example).

There are other reasons why I don't think this is as revolutionary or awesome as other people do, but this is (IMO) the big one.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 23, 2011)

LightPhoenix said:


> This is ultimately the reason why voice-activated commands by and large won't ever (and haven't yet) become mainstream.  There's too much fluidity in the semantics and intent of language to make it really practical.  That's not even getting into the actual mechanics of languages - notably different dialects having semantic collisions (British vs. US English is an excellent example).




I speak British English (obviously) and have had not a single dialect or phraseology based issue with it.  Thus, so far they cover three English dialects and two foreign languages.   They do those few very well.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Oct 24, 2011)

Eric Anondson said:


> Medical device makers are making devices to tie into iOS. Not impossible to imagine home appliance/mechanical/security devices getting the same access. Put in bluetooth or wifi, write an app, away you go.




There are also some Apple only medical apps and websites, which are a primary reason we're getting a flotilla of iPad 2s for my Dad's practice.

Hadn't thought much about Siri, though...


----------



## Janx (Oct 24, 2011)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> There are also some Apple only medical apps and websites, which are a primary reason we're getting a flotilla of iPad 2s for my Dad's practice.
> 
> Hadn't thought much about Siri, though...




It's probably a good fit.  I hadn't realized it, but a friend of mine's wife had to get software for her blackberry because as a nursing student, when she was working the hospital, they were all expected to have it for looking stuff up and texting to communicate.

In my own company, we have doctors who use Dragon Dictation Medical edition for dictating their notes (cheaper than paying a service for transcription).  But they can't control their computers with voice.  Siri just might solve that for signalling when to record dictation and what patient to associate the notes for.

I also wouldn't assume it's just Apple and Siri. granted Apple bought Siri, but other companies are going to mimic this and probably be more open about it.  That'll help drive it to be a mainstream feature.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 24, 2011)

So all the tech blogs are currently predicting that Apple's next big thing is an HDTV with Siri integrated.  That does seem a logical step - Siri on your TV as well as your phone.

That'll be pretty Star Trek.  Asking Siri to place a FaceTime call on your TV; although video calls still haven't taken off (partly because there's no universal service like there is for voice, and partly because it requires Wi-Fi to function well).


----------



## Kzach (Oct 24, 2011)

Morrus said:


> Asking Siri to place a FaceTime call on your TV; although video calls still haven't taken off (partly because there's no universal service like there is for voice, and partly because it requires Wi-Fi to function well).




Nah, the reason video calls haven't taken off is a little less complex than that; how often would you really feel comfortable making or receiving a call at home where the other person can see you in your underclothes


----------



## Morrus (Oct 25, 2011)

Kzach said:


> Nah, the reason video calls haven't taken off is a little less complex than that; how often would you really feel comfortable making or receiving a call at home where the other person can see you in your underclothes




True enough!


----------



## Janx (Oct 25, 2011)

Kzach said:


> Nah, the reason video calls haven't taken off is a little less complex than that; how often would you really feel comfortable making or receiving a call at home where the other person can see you in your underclothes




part of that is that FaceTime (or even Skype) rather leaves you with being stuck in front of the camera.  You gotta hold it.  You can wash dishes, walk the dog, fix your car while on the phone. Not so much with a video chat.


----------



## Fast Learner (Oct 25, 2011)

You can also pay only minimal attention to certain voice calls when feasible -- e.g. someone droning on or your mom repeating the same story she's told you three times before -- but with video calls it's obvious if you're not paying attention.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Oct 25, 2011)

Uh-huh.  Uh-huh.  Uh-huh.

Yep.

Uhhwuwuzzat?


----------



## Aeolius (Oct 25, 2011)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Uh-huh.  Uh-huh.  Uh-huh. Yep. Uhhwuwuzzat?



   I have seen my kids act in just that fashion, when presented with a rotary phone.  

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTc3PsW5ghQ&feature=relmfu]Sesame Street: Martians Telephone - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Oct 25, 2011)

I love those guys- always have, always will!


----------



## Felon (Oct 25, 2011)

I'm not sure why anyone would claim that Siri is not really a voice recognition app, or "more" than a voice recognition app. It is a voice recognition app, but one with a very broad suite of application, possibly broader than we're seeing anywhere else. 

We're starting to see real progress in the area of vocal, facial, and motion recognition. Siri is one example, Microsoft's Kinect is another. We'll have all kind of gadgets to keep us amused and distracted while modern civilization collapses around us. 

Re: AppleTV, don't think of it as something that fills a unique niche. It's one of many devices vying for the content-streaming role in our entertainment centers. True, a networked media-center PC can trump it, but Apple products tend to appeal to crowds that largely eschew PC's.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 25, 2011)

Felon said:


> I'm not sure why anyone would claim that Siri is not really a voice recognition app, or "more" than a voice recognition app. It is a voice recognition app, but one with a very broad suite of application, possibly broader than we're seeing anywhere else.




You're misunderstanding the claims made in this thread.  Nobody has said that Siri is not voice recognition.  

They have said that it is not the same as the existing voice commands functions on mobile phones prior to it, including the voice commands on older iPhones and on current Android phones.  They are saying this in response to people who say "Pshaw!  My phone has been able to do that for years!"


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Oct 25, 2011)

Morrus said:


> Nobody has said that Siri is not voice recognition.



I might say it is more. Nuance powers siri's voice recognition. What I'd say makes it more is a level of natural language recognition in context.


----------



## Janx (Oct 26, 2011)

Eric Anondson said:


> I might say it is more. Nuance powers siri's voice recognition. What I'd say makes it more is a level of natural language recognition in context.




Yeah, whats not obvious to the civillians is that software is built in layers.

Voice recognition parses audio into text. the text is then passed to an interpreter which acts on the commands.

verb-target command structures have been easy to do since the first text adventures.

natural language interpreting is a bit trickier.

Thats where Siri has potential.  If it takes off in popularity, you're looking at the supplementary interface to using your PC, like the mouse was.


----------



## falcarrion (Oct 26, 2011)

what I have been reading is that the hackers are well on there way to porting siri to iphone4, ipad, and itouch. Though not totally working yet there almost there. Imagine what could be done with these devices if you didn't have to jailbreak them.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Oct 26, 2011)

I've done some looking and Siri isn't the only natural language recognition around, others have existed too.  Some of them are available on the various app markets.  And while a certain bar has been set, many are rushing in to any of the voids left.

But people needed to be reminded about voice recognition in general being elsewhere, because there's the recent tendency for people and the media to think that Apple came up with voice recognition software.  Now while it's good that they've put the spotlight on such technology, in such a way that no other company really can.  

What's working against any such thing, is that right now for the most part, all of such technology is generally frivolous for most users.  There's a "Wow this is really neat!" and then it's use falls off.  And there's a reason why most people step away from others when speaking on a phone, and that'll happen too with telling a phone to do something.

For the other points brought up here:

As for home appliances, most people won't care that you can't speak to it so it's already a very niche area, but there's also a thing from Google to get "Android Everywhere", and chances are they might beat Apple to that.

Similarly most companies that make HDTV stuff, all don't make iPhones but some do make other phones, it'll have to be some add-on device if such a thing is ever to happen with an iPhone.  Meanwhile Sony or someone else is going is more likely to get something without an add-on device that can respond to voice by itself or with a phone that they've made.

Apple and Amazon, that's never going to happen.  Apple has burned a lot of bridges with Amazon, including trying to sue Amazon over the use of "App Store" and Amazon is certainly looking for ways to bypass Apple, including it's web-based version of the reader.  So if there is a big partnership with a merchant it's going to have to be with someone else.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 26, 2011)

Kobold Avenger said:


> But people needed to be reminded about voice recognition in general being elsewhere, because there's the recent tendency for people and the media to think that Apple came up with voice recognition software.




I don't believe such a creature exists.  Nobody I've met or any media report I've seen have led me to believe that they think Apple invented voice recognition.  They just think Apple has integrated it _extremely_ well and cleverly marketed it as mainstream.


----------



## Janx (Oct 26, 2011)

Morrus said:


> I don't believe such a creature exists.  Nobody I've met or any media report I've seen have led me to believe that they think Apple invented voice recognition.  They just think Apple has integrated it _extremely_ well and cleverly marketed it as mainstream.




True.  Sure, there are probably civillians who think Apple invented everything (I met one who thought the Macintosh was the first computer).  But then again most Americans don't know where other states are on the map.

So facts aside, Apple does a very good of setting the bar for a feature and for taking ownership of an idea in the minds of people.

Apple OWNS the mp3 player
Apple OWNed the graphical user interface
Apple OWNS the smartphone (until iPhone, Blackberry and PDAs were for business pros)
Apple OWNS the tablet
Apple now OWNS the natural speech UI

everybody else will catch up, but for awhile, Apple is going to dominate.

The importance or Siri is that it will be a turning point for adoption of the technology.  My Kinect does voice recognition too, but I don't use it.

Having it hooked into your TV as a command center for getting info, setting reminders, buying stuff like tickets, etc is like having your own personal assistant (the original point of a PDA).


----------



## Morrus (Oct 26, 2011)

Janx said:


> True.  Sure, there are probably civillians who think Apple invented everything.




"Civilians"?


----------



## Janx (Oct 26, 2011)

Morrus said:


> "Civilians"?




"Muggles"?

Anybody not fully versed in the topic at hand.
People in the computer industry tend to know the history of technology, just as people in the aeronautic industry know the history of flight beyond the wright brothers first flight (which I would have to google to check if it was 1908 or 1912 but I know it was around then).

Anybody else not directly working with a given industry usually knows very few if any facts of the history of that topic.

Thus, when Apple trots out a technology and it takes off, most people assume that Apple invented it, because that's the first major occurance of it they are aware of.

If you'd never seen a Mac, and worked with MS Windows your whole career, you might assume Microsoft invented the graphical user interface and that Apple must have copied them.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 26, 2011)

Janx said:


> "Muggles"?
> 
> Anybody not fully versed in the topic at hand.
> 
> Thus, when Apple trots out a technology and it takes off, most people assume that Apple invented it, because that's the first major occurance of it they are aware of.




Your view of the general public is very cynical - and, I believe, you underestimate people.  As I said, I do not believe there is such a person as the who believes Apple invented voice recognition.

And I don't know anybody in that industry - including myself!  _Everyone_ knows voice recognition has been around for years.


----------



## Janx (Oct 27, 2011)

Morrus said:


> Your view of the general public is very cynical - and, I believe, you underestimate people.  As I said, I do not believe there is such a person as the who believes Apple invented voice recognition.
> 
> And I don't know anybody in that industry - including myself!  _Everyone_ knows voice recognition has been around for years.




Americans are notorious for being ignorant.  The classic example being able to point to a given state on the map.

I'm not claiming that anybody has said they think "Apple invented voice recognition"

But already in this thread, some folks don't know the difference between simple voice command parsing and natural speech recognition.

And I personally spoke to somebody who thought the Macintosh was the first computer ever and did not know who Steve Jobs was, despite the fact that she had an iPhone4 in her hand and has never owned a Mac.

Additionally Apple fans are often derided because their zealotry implies they think Apple invented everything.

to sum up, there ARE some people who are woefully ignorant as to the history of the innovation of the products they favor.

And there is plenty of precendent for people being generally ignorant of the history of any given topic outside of their fields of interest.  Especially Americans who tend to hyper specialize on topics.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Oct 27, 2011)

1) Paul McCartney once said the first time he felt old was when he encountered an enthusiastic young fan who had "all his stuff."

"Even The Beatles?" he asked.

Wide eyed, she responded, "You were in a band before Wings?"

2) At one point in history, Chinese nobles were awestruck by inventions brought by merchants from the West...that the Chinese had actually invented hundreds of years before.

3) None of my relatives from New Orleans- except those who have lived away for most of their lives (like me and my parents)- can distinguish the 4 cardinal points.  If you give them directions involving N S E W, they will br utterly flummoxed.

IOW, no matter how common or widespread the knowledge, there will be those who do not know it.

So, while I'm not one of them, I can believe there are fellow Applephiles who see the company as the innovator in every aspect of home computing.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 27, 2011)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> 1) Paul McCartney once said the first time he felt old was when he encountered an enthusiastic young fan who had "all his stuff."
> 
> "Even The Beatles?" he asked.
> 
> ...




With all due respect, and I'm certainly not trying to impugn your honesty here, I find these very hard to believe.  Other than the last one (and I guess only you would know) are you sure these aren't just urban myths?

That said, the cardinal directions one would flummox most British people.  We don't have roads which go N, S, E, or W, so cardinal directions are useless for giving directions.  Instead we have to use "left at the pub" and so forth.  I couldn't tell you which way was which unless I was in my own home (since I happen to know that).  Certainly not via the stars or anything, though if I thought about it I could probably make a guess based on the sun.

Of course, we all know "Liverpool is up north from here" and such in a larger-scale geographical way but not locally - we couldn't direct you to our house by saying "Go north along X road then west along Y road".


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Oct 27, 2011)

The first came from an interview with Paul I heard on the radio, told by Sir McCartney himself.

The latter I've seen in more than one history text.  As I recall, one of the devices was a water clock, the other was a musical automaton.


----------



## Janx (Oct 27, 2011)

Morrus said:


> Of course, we all know "Liverpool is up north from here" and such in a larger-scale geographical way but not locally - we couldn't direct you to our house by saying "Go north along X road then west along Y road".




By any chance, does england have relatively straight streets or roads?  Do the people tend to stay in their one town?

Everywhere I've been, I've always known where North is, and track everything by that.

It's like the driving directions difference for men and women.  Women like naming landmarks, men like road names.  I argue that men use landmarks, too, namely, the little signs at intersections telling you what road you can turn onto... 

Anyway, the side point is, people are remarkably ignorant about things.  More so than we who have filled our brains with trivia about diverse topics.

My clueless friend (who didn't know who Steve Jobs was or why the news was making such a big deal about him) went to BuzzFest last weekend.  Bush came out on stage and said "Hello Cleveland!"  Nobody got the joke and crickets ensued.  Neither did she.  She wondered why they got the name of the city wrong, so I showed her the Spinal Tap snippet.

Now she's incredibly behind the pop-culture references, but the gaps in knowledge of the general population is wider than we think.


----------



## Aeolius (Oct 27, 2011)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> The latter I've seen in more than one history text.  As I recall, one of the devices was a water clock, the other was a musical automaton.




Not to mention globes. The Chinese had globes hundreds of years before Columbus made his journey.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 27, 2011)

Janx said:


> By any chance, does england have relatively straight streets or roads?




No.  None.  That's why cardinal directions are useless for navigation.



> Do the people tend to stay in their one town?




No more or less than anyone else does, I imagine.


----------



## falcarrion (Oct 28, 2011)

As long as you can guide me to the pubs, that all I need to know.


----------



## Banshee16 (Oct 31, 2011)

Morrus said:


> I don't believe such a creature exists.  Nobody I've met or any media report I've seen have led me to believe that they think Apple invented voice recognition.  They just think Apple has integrated it _extremely_ well and cleverly marketed it as mainstream.




I believe he/she's referring to members of the general public.....the "average joe" who buys the iPhone due to marketing, and his/her friends having one, and that it seems cool, rather than because they read up on the technology.

Apple's definitely not putting effort into ensuring that their marketing says "hey, we've added a cool, already existing technology into our phones, and we think you'll like it because it's really neat" 

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Oct 31, 2011)

Morrus said:


> Your view of the general public is very cynical - and, I believe, you underestimate people.  As I said, I do not believe there is such a person as the who believes Apple invented voice recognition.
> 
> And I don't know anybody in that industry - including myself!  _Everyone_ knows voice recognition has been around for years.




Everyone's a lot of people?  Are you sure you can't find one? 

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Oct 31, 2011)

Kobold Avenger said:


> I've done some looking and Siri isn't the only natural language recognition around, others have existed too.  Some of them are available on the various app markets.  And while a certain bar has been set, many are rushing in to any of the voids left.




Those in the U.S. have access to Dragon Go! which supposedly duplicates much of the functionality of Siri.  I can't attest to how well it works as I'm in Canada, where the app's not currently available.

Banshee


----------



## Morrus (Oct 31, 2011)

Banshee16 said:


> I believe he/she's referring to members of the general public.....the "average joe" who buys the iPhone due to marketing, and his/her friends having one, and that it seems cool, rather than because they read up on the technology.




That is what I interpreted him to mean; and I stand by my point that I do not believe anybody is under the impression that Apple invented voice recognition software.  Not even my grandmother, who is as likely to have ever read up on the subject as I am to have studied the history of knitting.


----------



## Banshee16 (Oct 31, 2011)

Morrus said:


> That is what I interpreted him to mean; and I stand by my point that I do not believe anybody is under the impression that Apple invented voice recognition software.  Not even my grandmother, who is as likely to have ever read up on the subject as I am to have studied the history of knitting.




Guess your grandfather is better informed than some people I know 

Banshee


----------



## Janx (Nov 1, 2011)

Morrus said:


> That is what I interpreted him to mean; and I stand by my point that I do not believe anybody is under the impression that Apple invented voice recognition software.  Not even my grandmother, who is as likely to have ever read up on the subject as I am to have studied the history of knitting.




Are we still stumbling over my stupid term?

I have not met any AppleFans who claim Apple invented Voice Recognition.

I have seen Anti-AppleFans who claim AppleFans think Apple invented Voice Recognition.

So there are misperceptions out there.  And the world is chock full of ignorant people who don't know the history or full function of the things they use.

Heck, my own wife had no clue the switch near the volume buttons on her iPhone was a full Mute control.  She'd go into movies and toggle the sound down on everything from the UI.  She'd had her iPhone for at least a year when I asked her what she was doing and she explained leading to a FacePalm moment.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Nov 2, 2011)

Janx said:


> Heck, my own wife had no clue the switch near the volume buttons on her iPhone was a full Mute control.



Anecdote sharing time. I have explained to many iPhone users that the button on the top is not an off bottom, but a sleep button. That the way to turn it off means holding the top button down at least 3 seconds to give you the on screen off slider. Revelation moment for all. Shutting off now and then is a "Good Thing"©.

And the number of people that think leaving their rechargeable device connected to its charger when it is already filled to the full mark is not a problem for the battery is uncountable.


----------



## Banshee16 (Nov 2, 2011)

Eric Anondson said:


> And the number of people that think leaving their rechargeable device connected to its charger when it is already filled to the full mark is not a problem for the battery is uncountable.




Even Apple doesn't say it's bad to keep your device plugged in.  You have a limited number of charge cycles before battery life is reduced.  The important thing is at least once a month to go through a complete discharge.

A charge cycle is a 0-100% charge-decharge.  So, going from 100 to 80% 5x is a single charge cycle.  Charging to full once a month and then discharging to 0% is sufficient to keep the electrons moving, from everything I've read.

Apple - Batteries

Apple - Batteries - iPhone

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/1066536?start=0&tstart=0

For most people, they're going to get varying amounts of use off charge.....some days I use 5% other days I use 40%.  

There's been no noticeable difference in battery life on my phone since I purchased it a year ago.  The *only* difference I've noticed is since installing iOS 5, it's a little shorter..but then I have more things checking for notifications than I used to.

Banshee


----------

