Mike. There is a slight loss of contrast at extreme side angles, angles that you'd never encounter in routine use of the display. As for two people side by side, I think this display would work very well. Johnny. Because the display is curved, I never felt what you describe. It's just a glorious panorama and easy to take in all parts without a lot of head movement. JustCause. Perhaps you are just too close for the resolution you've chosen. Try sitting farther away and experiment with the resolution settings.
jscottk: I think of induction as in contact with a pad and wireless as something with a longer range, contactless. See: http://9to5mac.com/2016/01/28/wireless-charging-apple-iphone/ "The technology is said to allow iPhones and iPads to be powered from further away than current charging mat and inductive solutions allow."
I like this half-baked idea! And, I should add, half-baked ideas of people are better than ideas of half-baked people.
I just saw this. It might be helpful for some. http://mac360.com/2016/05/how-to-do-to-itunes-what-youve-always-hoped-you-could-do-say-goodbye/
iBuck. As Cybart explains it, unit sales growth is contrasted to profits. A product that is declining in unit sales can still show a profit, but eventually that's bad for the product's future. We're seeing that with the iPad: negative unit sales growth. The way I think of it is skipping on the water from wave top to wave top. If a company isn't selling products that have increasing unit sales growth, it isn't an investment opportunity. And it has the wrong product mix. That's why Apple ruthlessly leaves the past behind and catches the next wave, be it iPods…
CudaBoy: Clarification: That Alphabet/Fiat Chrysler deal is to build prototypes. There are no plans (yet) to build a commercial vehicle. Although one can surmise that's coming as well. http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/03/alphabet-fiat-chrysler-strike-deal-for-self-driving-minivan-prototypes.html If they sell 100,000 of those cars at $40,000 each, [someday] that's less than what Apple is estimated to have made in Apple Watch's first year. Plus, 75% of Apple Watch price is profit. For cars? About 10-15%. http://bgr.com/2015/04/30/apple-watch-bill-of-materials-cost/
ksec. I was just reading that "all 4K television sets launched last year have h.265 decoders." http://www.gravlab.com/2015/01/20/netflixs-transition-4k-hevc-challenging-far/ If you know something about patent issues affecting production, fill me in. As for iCloud Time Machine, we discussed your concern in a meeting early Friday. Such a system would have to be very smart about which files and when it backs them up in a low bandwidth environment. The local Time Machine drive could also serve as an intermediate cache. It could work.
geoduck: with watchOS 2.2, I'm averaging about 75-80% charge remaining each night when I put it on the charger.
I've always been fond of the smartphone concept in the SciFI series "Earth: Final Conflict". Recently, someone added a link to that gizmo in a comment to an article of mine. If anyone has it handy, I'll edit this article to include a mention.
geoduck. The estimate I saw for the Apple Watch, for Q2, from Maynard Um (Wells Fargo) was: "Watch sales/units/ASP of $0.8B/2.5MM/$320". Previously, for all of 2015, I saw estimates of 7 - 10 million. Even if the total to date is only 10 million, at an ASP of $320, that's a revenue of $3.2 billion. Nothing compared to the iPhone, but a nice chunk of change. Worth the effort put into it, I'd say.