We’re about five months away from a typical new iPhone’s launch period, yet the digital periodicals are churning out fake news in earnest. Isn’t it funny that only Apple’s future is full of fake news stories?
You don’t hear much about the future of Microsoft Windows Phone these days, right? What about those overdue Surface PC replacement models? No, most of the technology industry’s oversupply of fake news is aimed at Apple. Here’s another headline and it might be one of the worst ever. For Apple. Also for reading.
What iPhone 8?
Stock market rumor monger The Motley Fool is a good place for a few chuckles at Apple’s expense, so here goes.
First, the headline:
This Might Be the Worst News Yet for Apple Inc.’s iPhone 8
Uh oh. More bad news for a product that hasn’t even been announced yet. Or even named yet. 2017, using the tick-tock method, should have an iPhone 7s and iPhone 7s Plus. But 2017 is special as it’s been a decade since the original iPhone launched, so, it’s iPhone 8. Or, iPhone 7 Pro. Or, maybe iPhone X. I like that one.
Here’s the subhead:
Apple’s bold plan to integrate Touch ID into the display might fail this year.
Apple’s plan? That supposes the article’s writer has knowledge of such plans, which is highly unlikely. Apple has announced nothing. The so-called plan is a guesstimate. But whatever the plan is, it might fail this year. Or next year. Or, it might be successful. Failure generates more readers.
Since Apple’s new iPhone model is expected to have a full-screen face, embedding the Touch ID sensor into a home button that sits in the “chin” of the new iPhone isn’t possible.
Wait. We’ve gone from plans to expectations. That’s quite a leap. So is the leap of the iPhone’s Touch ID fingerprint sensor from the front and below the screen to the back of the case. No problemo. Android smartphone makers have done just that for a few years and they haven’t gone out of business.
What do analysts think of Apple’s conundrum?
Two main alternatives to Touch ID embedded in the display have been proposed by analysts. The first is that Apple could put the Touch ID sensor on the back of the device — something commonly done by Android smartphone manufacturers. Another proposal is that Apple could just ditch Touch ID altogether, instead opting to use alternative forms of biometric identification.
Uh huh. And analysts said last year’s iPhone 7 would be a dud but since then, Apple sold more iPhones than ever. Go figure. Is it at all possible that Apple will deliver something different than what armchair quarterback analysts think?
Not only does this suggest that the user experience that Apple may deliver with its upcoming iPhone 8 will be greatly diminished because of the rear-mounted fingerprint sensor, but this would also reflect poorly on Apple’s engineering/research and development organization.
Because $10-billion in R&D should get you something cool, not something that emulates a poor user experience; like a backside fingerprint sensor you see on so many Android smartphones. Who complains about those?
I believe that in the interim between the iPhone 8 and the 2018 iPhone, there’s a solid chance that some of Apple’s competitors will release devices with the fingerprint scanner built into the display. Indeed, Samsung reportedly wanted to ship such a technology with the Galaxy S8, but the technology wasn’t ready.
Market analysis is all about belief systems and casino odd. And guesses. Plenty of guesstimates.
If Apple isn’t first then the company is sure to go out of business because embarrassment. Wait. That can’t be right. Apple wasn’t the first with portable media players, but the iPod did OK. Apple wasn’t first with the smartphone but the iPhone did OK. Apple wasn’t first with a tablet PC, but the iPad did OK. Apple wasn’t first with a smartwatch, but the Watch owns the market. See the pattern?
If Apple isn’t first (or among the first) to deliver this technology, then it will look like a copy-cat rather than a leader, which, given Apple’s unfortunate recent history of being late to big paradigm shifts in smartphones (large screens, full-screen display, etc.), wouldn’t be a good look at all.
Yeah, poor Apple, the California company that wilts under pressure from competitors. ‘Unfortunate history of being too late to big paradigm shifts‘ should have some impact upon the company, right? Where’s the math to support that stupid thought?