Thursday, 23 April 2020

Apple and CMU researchers demo a low friction learn-by-listening system for smarter home devices

A team of researchers from Apple and Carnegie Mellon University’s Human-Computer Interaction Institute have presented a system for embedded AIs to learn by listening to noises in their environment without the need for up-front training data or without placing a huge burden on the user to supervise the learning process. The overarching goal is for smart devices to more easily build up contextual/situational awareness to increase their utility.

The system, which they’ve called Listen Learner, relies on acoustic activity recognition to enable a smart device, such as a microphone-equipped speaker, to interpret events taking place in its environment via a process of self-supervised learning with manual labelling done by one-shot user interactions — such as by the speaker asking a person ‘what was that sound?’, after it’s heard the noise enough time to classify in into a cluster.

A general pre-trained model can also be looped in to enable the system to make an initial guess on what an acoustic cluster might signify. So the user interaction could be less open-ended, with the system able to pose a question such as ‘was that a faucet?’ — requiring only a yes/no response from the human in the room.

Refinement questions could also be deployed to help the system figure out what the researchers dub “edge cases”, i.e. where sounds have been closely clustered yet might still signify a distinct event — say a door being closed vs a cupboard being closed. Over time, the system might be able to make an educated either/or guess and then present that to the user to confirm.

They’ve put together the below video demoing the concept in a kitchen environment.

In their paper presenting the research they point out that while smart devices are becoming more prevalent in homes and offices they tend to lack “contextual sensing capabilities” — with only “minimal understanding of what is happening around them”, which in turn limits “their potential to enable truly assistive computational experiences”.

And while acoustic activity recognition is not itself new, the researchers wanted to see if they could improve on existing deployments which either require a lot of manual user training to yield high accuracy; or use pre-trained general classifiers to work ‘out of the box’ but — since they lack data for a user’s specific environment — are prone to low accuracy.

Listen Learner is thus intended as a middle ground to increase utility (accuracy) without placing a high burden on the human to structure the data. The end-to-end system automatically generates acoustic event classifiers over time, with the team building a proof-of-concept prototype device to act like a smart speaker and pipe up to ask for human input. 

“The algorithm learns an ensemble model by iteratively clustering unknown samples, and then training classifiers on the resulting cluster assignments,” they explain in the paper. “This allows for a ‘one-shot’ interaction with the user to label portions of the ensemble model when they are activated.”

Audio events are segmented using an adaptive threshold that triggers when the microphone input level is 1.5 standard deviations higher than the mean of the past minute.

“We employ hysteresis techniques (i.e., for debouncing) to further smooth our thresholding scheme,” they add, further noting that: “While many environments have persistent and characteristic background sounds (e.g., HVAC), we ignore them (along with silence) for computational efficiency. Note that incoming samples were discarded if they were too similar to ambient noise, but silence within a segmented window is not removed.”

The CNN (convolutional neural network) audio model they’re using was initially trained on the YouTube-8M dataset  — augmented with a library of professional sound effects, per the paper.

“The choice of using deep neural network embeddings, which can be seen as learned low-dimensional representations of input data, is consistent with the manifold assumption (i.e., that high-dimensional data roughly lie on a low-dimensional manifold). By performing clustering and classification on this low-dimensional learned representation, our system is able to more easily discover and recognize novel sound classes,” they add.

The team used unsupervised clustering methods to infer the location of class boundaries from the low-dimensional learned representations — using a hierarchical agglomerative clustering (HAC) algorithm known as Ward’s method.

Their system evaluates “all possible groupings of data to find the best representation of classes”, given candidate clusters may overlap with one another.

“While our clustering algorithm separates data into clusters by minimizing the total within-cluster variance, we also seek to evaluate clusters based on their classifiability. Following the clustering stage, we use a unsupervised one-class support vector machine (SVM) algorithm that learns decision boundaries for novelty detection. For each candidate cluster, a one-class SVM is trained on a cluster’s data points, and its F1 score is computed with all samples in the data pool,” they add.

“Traditional clustering algorithms seek to describe input data by providing a cluster assignment, but this alone cannot be used to discriminate unseen samples. Thus, to facilitate our system’s inference capability, we construct an ensemble model using the one-class SVMs generated from the previous step. We adopt an iterative procedure for building our ensemble model by selecting the first classifier with an F1 score exceeding the threshold, 𝜃&'( and adding it to the ensemble. When a classifier is added, we run it on the data pool and mark samples that are recognized. We then restart the cluster-classify loop until either 1) all samples in the pool are marked or 2) a loop does not produce any more classifiers.”

Privacy preservation?

The paper touches on privacy concerns that arise from such a listening system — given how often the microphone would be switched on and processing environmental data, and because they note it may not always be possible to carry out all processing locally on the device.

“While our acoustic approach to activity recognition affords benefits such as improved classification accuracy and incremental learning capabilities, the capture and transmission of audio data, especially spoken content, should raise privacy concerns,” they write. “In an ideal implementation, all data would be retained on the sensing device (though significant compute would be required for local training). Alternatively, compute could occur in the cloud with user-anonymized labels of model classes stored locally.”

You can read the full paper here.



from Apple – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/34XehEE

Apple said to sell Macs powered by in-house ARM-based chips as early as 2021

Apple’s long-rumored Mac ARM chip transition could happen as early as next year, according to a new report from Bloomberg. The report says that Apple is currently working on three Mac processors based on the design of the A14 system-on-a-chip that will power the next-generation iPhone. The first of the Mac versions will greatly exceed the speed of the iPhone and iPad processors, according to the report’s sources.

Already, Apple’s A-series line of ARM-based chips for iPhones and iPads have been steadily improving, to the point where their performance in benchmark tests regularly exceeds that of Intel processors used currently in Apple’s Mac line. As a result, and because Intel’s chip development has encountered a few setbacks and slowdowns in recent generations, rumors that Apple would move to using its own ARM-based designs have multiplied over the past few years.

Bloomberg says that “at least one Mac” powered by Apple’s own chip is being prepared for release in 2021, to be built by chip fabricator and longtime Apple partner Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC). The first of these chips to power Macs will have at least 12 cores, including eight designed for high-performance applications, and four designed for lower-intensity activities with battery-preserving energy efficiency characteristics. Current Intel designs that Apple employs in devices such as the MacBook Air have four or even two cores, by comparison.

Initially, the report claims Apple will focus on using the chips to power a new Mac design, leaving Intel processors in its higher-end pro level Macs, because the ARM-based designs, while more performant on some scores, can’t yet match the top-end performance of Intel-based chip technology. ARM chips generally provide more power efficiency at the expense of raw computing power, which is why they’re so frequently used in mobile devices.

The first ARM-based Macs will still run macOS, per Bloomberg’s sources, and Apple will seek to make them compatible with software that works on current Intel-based Macs as well. That would be a similar endeavor to when Apple switched from using PowerPC-based processors to Intel chips for its Mac lineup in 2006, so the company has some experience in this regard. During that transition, Apple announced initially that the switch would take place between 2006 and 2007, but accelerated its plans so that all new Macs shipping by the end of 2006 were powered by Intel processors.



from Apple – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2KtrDiQ

Wednesday, 22 April 2020

What happens if Magic Leap shuts down?

Since first uploading a YouTube teaser video of its tech five years ago, Magic Leap’s presence in the augmented reality industry has been controversial.

Some have lauded the team’s ambitions, while others I’ve talked to say the company’s posturing has dissuaded investors from taking chances on other AR hardware startups, which has hampered the industry’s advance.

Regardless of its impact, Magic Leap carries outsized weight, leading one to question what would happen to other AR companies if the company’s situation worsened.

The company announced layoffs today, with reports indicating that it is dismissing around 1,000 employees — about half of the company. Magic Leap’s added news of a major pivot to enterprise makes it seem like that wasn’t its primary strategy over the past year. From my perspective, the company looks like it is on a path to a fire sale and will be dependent on executing a dramatic turnaround, which grows tougher under current economic conditions.

Magic Leap has few users, so a theoretical shutdown would likely have a lesser impact than other unicorn flare-outs; still, losing a company on the forefront of a technology lauded by many as the next ubiquitous platform will certainly impact others that are striving to bring this tech to market.

The impact for startups moving forward would be nuanced. Without a substantial software suite of its own, Magic Leap relied heavily on developer partnerships, though in recent months many of those seemed to promote enterprise use cases. AR/VR startups are already in a rough position, and one less developer platform could force more companies to de-prioritize headset-based platforms and shift their focus to mobile.



from Apple – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/3eBLKsK

A new iPhone email security bug may let hackers steal private data

Apple will patch a newly discovered iPhone vulnerability that security researchers say hackers have already used to steal data from their victims’ devices.

News of the vulnerability dropped Wednesday by security firm ZecOps. Zuk Avraham, the company’s chief executive, said the firm found the bug last year during a routine investigation. At least six organizations were targeted by attackers as far back as 2018, he said.

Avraham said the bug is in the iPhone’s default Mail app. By sending a specially crafted email to the victim’s device, an attacker can overrun the device’s memory, allowing the attacker to remotely run malicious code to steal data from the device, he said.

Worse, the bug doesn’t require any user interaction on the latest version of iOS 13, said Avraham.

The bug dates back to iOS 6, which was first released in 2012. Avraham later confirmed in a tweet that macOS, which also comes with an in-built Mail app, is not vulnerable.

iPhone vulnerabilities are some of the most valuable bugs for hackers because they are so difficult to find. Some buyers will snap up these highly sought-after bug for as much as $1 million. But because these more sophisticated bugs are so valuable, they are typically only ever obtained by well-resourced threat actors, such as governments. These exploits are often used against their targets, such as criminals or terrorists, in highly precise operations. But some governments are also known to target certain ethnic groups, activists and journalists.

To wit, Avraham said in his blog post that the targets of this attack included staff at a U.S.-based Fortune 500 company and a journalist in Europe. Avraham also did not name the apparent hackers but said that at least one of the attackers was likely a nation state.

When reached, an Apple spokesperson did not immediately comment. Motherboard, which first reported the story, said the bug has been fixed in a beta version of the software, and a fix will be rolled out in an upcoming update.

Until then, high-risk users should disable the Mail app for now.



from iPhone – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2XXH76o

A new iPhone email security bug may let hackers steal private data

Apple will patch a newly discovered iPhone vulnerability that security researchers say hackers have already used to steal data from their victims’ devices.

News of the vulnerability dropped Wednesday by security firm ZecOps. Zuk Avraham, the company’s chief executive, said the firm found the bug last year during a routine investigation. At least six organizations were targeted by attackers as far back as 2018, he said.

Avraham said the bug is in the iPhone’s default Mail app. By sending a specially crafted email to the victim’s device, an attacker can overrun the device’s memory, allowing the attacker to remotely run malicious code to steal data from the device, he said.

Worse, the bug doesn’t require any user interaction on the latest version of iOS 13, said Avraham.

The bug dates back to iOS 6, which was first released in 2012. Avraham later confirmed in a tweet that macOS, which also comes with an in-built Mail app, is not vulnerable.

iPhone vulnerabilities are some of the most valuable bugs for hackers because they are so difficult to find. Some buyers will snap up these highly sought-after bug for as much as $1 million. But because these more sophisticated bugs are so valuable, they are typically only ever obtained by well-resourced threat actors, such as governments. These exploits are often used against their targets, such as criminals or terrorists, in highly precise operations. But some governments are also known to target certain ethnic groups, activists and journalists.

To wit, Avraham said in his blog post that the targets of this attack included staff at a U.S.-based Fortune 500 company and a journalist in Europe. Avraham also did not name the apparent hackers but said that at least one of the attackers was likely a nation state.

When reached, an Apple spokesperson did not immediately comment. Motherboard, which first reported the story, said the bug has been fixed in a beta version of the software, and a fix will be rolled out in an upcoming update.

Until then, high-risk users should disable the Mail app for now.



from Apple – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2XXH76o

EU privacy body urges anonymization of location data for COVID-19 tracking

The European Data Protection Board (EDPB) has published guidance for the use of location data and contacts tracing tools intended to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Europe’s data protection framework wraps around all such digital interventions, meaning there are legal requirements for EU countries and authorities developing tracing tools or soliciting data for a coronavirus related purpose.

“These guidelines clarify the conditions and principles for the proportionate use of location data and contact tracing tools, for two specific purposes: using location data to support the response to the pandemic by modelling the spread of the virus so as to assess the overall effectiveness of confinement measures; [and] contact tracing, which aims to notify individuals of the fact that they have been in close proximity of someone who is eventually confirmed to be a carrier of the virus, in order to break the contamination chains as early as possible,” the EDPB writes in the document.

The European Commission and the EU parliament have already weighed in with their own recommendations in this area, including a toolbox to help guide contacts tracing app developers. The Commission has also urged Member States to take a common approach to building such apps. And has been leaning on local telcos to provide ‘anonymized and aggregated’ metadata for modelling the spread of the virus across the EU.

The guideline document from the EDPB — a body made up of representatives from the EU’s national data protection agencies which helps coordinate the application of pan-EU data protection law — brings additional expert steerage for those developing digital interventions as part of a public health response to the coronavirus pandemic.

“The EDPB generally considers that data and technology used to help fight COVID-19 should be used to empower, rather than to control, stigmatise, or repress individuals,” it writes. “Furthermore, while data and technology can be important tools, they have intrinsic limitations and can merely leverage the effectiveness of other public health measures. The general principles of effectiveness, necessity, and proportionality must guide any measure adopted by Member States or EU institutions that involve processing of personal data to fight COVID-19.”

Among the body’s specific recommendations are that where location data is being considered for modelling the spread of the coronavirus or assessing the effectiveness of national lockdown measures then anonymizing the data is preferable — with the EDPB emphasizing that proper anonymization is not easy.

Given the inherent complexity it also recommends transparency around the anonymization methodology used. (tl;dr: there’s no security in obscurity, nor indeed accountability.)

“Many options for effective anonymisation exist, but with a caveat. Data cannot be anonymised on their own, meaning that only datasets as a whole may or may not be made anonymous,” it notes.

“A single data pattern tracing the location of an individual over a significant period of time cannot be fully anonymised. This assessment may still hold true if the precision of the recorded geographical coordinates is not sufficiently lowered, or if details of the track are removed and even if only the location of places where the data subject stays for substantial amounts of time are retained. This also holds for location data that is poorly aggregated.

“To achieve anonymisation, location data must be carefully processed in order to meet the reasonability test. In this sense, such a processing includes considering location datasets as a whole, as well as processing data from a reasonably large set of individuals using available robust anonymisation techniques, provided that they are adequately and effectively implemented.”

On contact tracing apps — aka digital tools that are designed to map proximity between individuals, as a proxy for infection risk — the EDPB urges that use of such apps be voluntary.

“The systematic and large scale monitoring of location and/or contacts between natural persons is a grave intrusion into their privacy,” it warns. “It can only be legitimised by relying on a voluntary adoption by the users for each of the respective purposes. This would imply, in particular, that individuals who decide not to or cannot use such applications should not suffer from any disadvantage at all.”

The importance of accountability is also front and center, with the EDPB saying the controller of such apps must be clearly defined.

“The EDPB considers that the national health authorities could be the controllers for such application; other controllers may also be envisaged. In any cases, if the deployment of contact tracing apps involves different actors their roles and responsibilities must be clearly established from the outset and be explained to the users.”

Purpose limitation is another highlighted component. Apps need to have purposes that are “specific enough to exclude further processing for purposes unrelated to the management of the COVID- 19 health crisis (e.g., commercial or law enforcement purposes)”, it says.

So, in other words, no function creep — and no EU citizen mass surveillance via a pandemic backdoor.

The EDPB also writes that “careful consideration should be given to the principle of data minimisation and data protection by design and by default” — noting specifically that contact tracing apps “do not require tracking the location of individual users”.

Instead “proximity data should be used” for the contacts tracing purpose.

“Contact tracing applications can function without direct identification of individuals,” it further emphasizes, adding that “appropriate measures should be put in place to prevent re-identification”.

The guidance aligns with the coronavirus contacts tracing model devised jointly by Apple and Google — which have said they will be offering a cross-platform API for COVID-19 contacts tracing based on ephemeral proximity IDs shared via Bluetooth.

At one point the EDPB guidance appears to be leaning towards favoring such decentralized approaches to contacts tracing apps, with the body writing that “the collected information should reside on the terminal equipment of the user and only the relevant information should be collected when absolutely necessary”.

Although later on the in guidance it discussed centralized models that involve proximity data being uploaded to a server in the cloud, writing that: “Implementations for contact tracing can follow a centralized or a decentralized approach. Both should be considered viable options, provided that adequate security measures are in place, each being accompanied by a set of advantages and disadvantages.”

In Europe there is currently a big fight between different camps over whether contacts tracing apps should use a centralized or decentralized model for storing and processing proximity data — with a contacts tracing app standardization effort known as PEPP-PT that’s backed by Germany’s Fraunhofer Institute for Telecommunications and some EU governments wanting to support centralized protocols for COVID-19 contacts tracking, while a separate coalition of European academics wants only decentralized approaches on privacy grounds, and has developed a protocol called DP-3T.

“The current health crisis should not be used as an opportunity to establish disproportionate data retention mandates,” the EDPB warns. “Storage limitation should consider the true needs and the medical relevance (this may include epidemiology-motivated considerations like the incubation period, etc.) and personal data should be kept only for the duration of the COVID-19 crisis. Afterwards, as a general rule, all personal data should be erased or anonymised.”

The body also recommends algorithms used in contacts tracing apps be audited and regularly reviewed by outside experts.

Again, a key criticism of the PEPP-PT initiative has been around lack of transparency — including its failure to publish code for external review. (Though it has said it will be publishing code.)

“In order to ensure their fairness, accountability and, more broadly, their compliance with the law, algorithms must be auditable and should be regularly reviewed by independent experts. The application’s source code should be made publicly available for the widest possible scrutiny,” the EDPB writes.

Another notable piece of the guidance is for a data protection impact assessment not only to be carried out but that it be published — which marks a further push for accountability via transparency in such an unprecedented moment.

“The EDPB considers that a data protection impact assessment (DPIA) must be carried out before implementing such tool as the processing is considered likely high risk (health data anticipated large-scale adoption, systematic monitoring, use of new technological solution). The EDPB strongly recommends the publication of DPIAs,” it writes.

Typically DPAs leave it up to data controllers to decide whether to publish a DPIA or not — in this case the strong push from the central authority is that these documents are made public where COVID-19 contacts tracing apps are concerned.

Having highlighted the pros and cons of centralized vs decentralized approaches to contacts tracing, the EDPB goes on to recommend that the conceptual phase of app development “should always include thorough consideration of both concepts carefully weighing up the respective effects on data protection/privacy and the possible impacts on individuals rights”.

“Any server involved in the contact tracing system must only collect the contact history or the pseudonymous identifiers of a user diagnosed as infected as the result of a proper assessment made by health authorities and of a voluntary action of the user. Alternately, the server must keep a list of pseudonymous identifiers of infected users or their contact history only for the time to inform potentially infected users of their exposure, and should not try to identify potentially infected users.”

“Putting in place a global contact tracing methodology including both applications and manual tracing may require additional information to be processed in some cases. In this context, this additional information should remain on the user terminal and only be processed when strictly necessary and with his prior and specific consent,” it adds.

You can read the full document here.



from Apple – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/3cIcdTB

Review: Apple’s cheap and cheerful iPhone SE

It’s admittedly difficult to have a comparative conversation about the iPhone SE. This device isn’t really in the same neighborhood as the iPhone 11, even though it’s furnished with the same plush carpeting and fluffy armchairs.

The iPhone SE is a value offering. Even though I will use comparatives throughout this piece to help put it in the context of Apple’s lineup, that probably doesn’t matter to the vast majority of potential customers for this device.

Simply, it’s a super value for the price, just smashing really. And a damn good phone. Alas, I am too used to no home button for it to be really appealing to me, but this is going to be a great phone for millions of people. And talk about timing on the value side of things — $399 for an iPhone with Apple’s latest power plant on board is huge.

The quick response to the iPhone SE was that it was ‘an iPhone 8 with iPhone 11 internals’. That’s…well, that’s true. There was some general sentiment of shruggery about Apple producing a phone out of their ‘spare’ parts. But, dear reader, your level of excitement about that is very likely going to be tied closely to how much you can afford to spend on a phone, how much you care about camera quality and how much of a priority the size of your phone is to you.

Let’s begin at the end.

Size and feel

It’s smaller, but not too small. If you’re keening for a 4” phone you won’t find the solace you desire here, but it’s refreshingly thin and light and very easy in the reach department. If those things are vital for you, it’s the only game in town with fresh internals.

I actually bought an old iPhone SE a while back as a pocket device, but I found that I could no longer reliably type on a 4” phone.

The new iPhone SE is just fine in that regard, and 4.7” is what I consider to be my lower limit for typing reliably. That, of course, does not apply if your hands are smaller or your fingers are shorter than mine. If that’s the case, you may still find the iPhone SE to be too large for your tastes. But alongside current iPhones it is practically petite.

Touch ID makes an appearance on the iPhone SE — fortuitously as we enter a world where many of us will be mask wearers for some time and Face ID is naturally limited in its effectiveness.

Pushing the home button is so awkward. The insane durability and utility of the swipe-able interface presented in the iPhone X jumps out hard here. Those swipe gestures are so natural and organic now that breaking them is no easy feat. If you are coming from a current Touch ID device you’ll be ok, but it will be a big adjustment from, say, an iPhone X.

There’s not much more to say because we’ve seen this design in the iPhone 8. It still feels good and modern.

I didn’t have enough time to do a serious battery life test but it seemed…fine? It’s so hard to tell the first couple of days anyway with indexing and other background stuff happening. Apple also says that the new iPhone SE is IP67 rated for up to 1 meter for 30 minutes so it’s still dunk proof, one of the biggest reducers of accidental damage to come to iPhone in the years since the first SE.

Camera

The iPhone SE’s camera system is a rare monocular addition to the lineup. It’s a single, wide-angle camera with an effective 28mm focal length. This is slightly narrower than we’re used to seeing in iPhones these days, most of which hit around 26mm. This means a slightly closer crop on photos. There is no telephoto lens, just like the iPhone XR.

The iPhone SE gets a boost from the totally new image pipeline of the iPhone 11 and 11 Pro. The ISP and the Neural Engine of the A13 processor give it more help in a variety of ways, especially given that so much of what makes up photography is in now really computer math.

Even with the painful lack of a telephoto lens, this is still one of the better smartphone cameras on the market because it has the full imaging pipeline of the iPhone 11 behind it. If it didn’t, I think that it would feel much ‘older’ in terms of imaging quality, but it speaks to how much of photography is driven by the CPU or GPU rather than the lens and sensor these days.

This proves out, as in my tests, the iPhone SE camera was much improved over the iPhone 8, and offered more portrait modes than the iPhone XR. The additional modes focus on cutting subjects out of the background. Their inclusion is tied directly to the ability of the Neural Engine (a portion of the A13’s chip dedicated to high frequency low-lift machine learning tasks) to execute segmentation masking and semantic rendering.

It also records expanded dynamic range 4k 30fps video and 4k 60fps video with cinematic stabilization.

The biggest practical benefit of the pipeline, though, is the improved Smart HDR feature which I covered in my iPhone 11 review. This really improves detail across massive tonal ranges from bright highlights to shadow detail. While it does not magically make the iPhone SE the same class of image making device that the iPhone 11 is, it goes a long way to making your average snapshot look the best it can.

It does, and should, blow away the ‘old’ iPhone SE when it comes to sharpness, color rendition and dynamic range. It’s clearly better than its predecessor and clearly better than the iPhone 8, which it will most directly replace in Apple’s lineup.

For those considering stepping downward in their choice of device, it’s worth noting here explicitly that nearly across the board the image quality was just pounded by the iPhone 11 Pro. Which is, on one level, expected. The iPhone 11 Pro is a much more expensive device.

The iPhone SE does not have Night Mode. It performs notably worse than the iPhone 11 in dark areas because of this. It does have optical stabilization on the rear camera, which helps, but don’t expect the same performance in those tough conditions as the more expensive phones.

Given that the camera performs well across most other vectors, this is probably one of the biggest things in this category to recommend the iPhone 11 over the iPhone SE. That is assuming that we’re even having that conversation. Given that so many people use the iPhone as their primary camera, however, I think it’s one worth having. If you are pretty comfortable with ‘whatever’ pictures the iPhone takes, the SE is going to deliver with flying colors. You get a bunch of technical improvements and performance leaps behind the scenes and a solid, if not amazing, optical front end. Basically, It is what it is.

Screen

I prefer the iPhone SE’s color rendition to the iPhone XR. Though, on paper, the Liquid Retina Display and the Retina HD Display should be pretty much the same performance wise, there’s always been something a bit off-putting to me about the XR’s color tone — with True Tone off and at the same brightness, the iPhone SE tends to be more neutral warm with the iPhone XR ending up on the cooler end of the spectrum.

These observations are, by definition, anecdotal. And the panels that Apple is using in the iPhone SE are not really anything special — they are run of the mill ‘fantastic’, as is usual for the iPhone. The iPhone 11 Pro’s OLED screen, of course, trumps easily on black levels, color and tone.

The main differences between the iPhone XR and the iPhone SE screen come down to the ‘edge-to-edge’ design of the XR’s wraparound display and the SE’s more standard rectangle. Well, that and tap-to-wake.

The 32% difference in total pixels between the two devices is a complete non-factor in my testing, by the way. Once again, not a huge surprise given the same 326ppi.

As with the gesture situation, I really, really miss tap-to-wake, which seems. Not being able to wake your phone to peek at the screen with a touch is a step backward in usability for anyone who has previously owned an iPhone with that feature and I highly encourage people considering a move “down” to the SE to factor in losing that utility.

If you’re coming from another iPhone without it you’ll be fine, but if you had it, you’re gonna miss it.

Greasing the chute

The iPhone SE adds lubrication to what has historically been the most frictional section of Apple’s entry chute to its ecosystem. Where Apple previously relied on the the churn of used devices being put into the market or handed down to family members as a ’spackle’ for the low-end onramp, it now has a first party offering. One that is actually an amazing value for the price.

That lower price point can be looked at through a purely pragmatic prism: it’s cheaper and it fills in gaps in Apple’s device pricing umbrella. The last time people thought Apple was making a play for affordability was back in 2013 during the subsidization era, with the iPhone 5C. That didn’t actually help with the onramp issue because Apple did not commit to a ‘cheap phone’ strategy on any real level. Instead of the low end phone everyone expected, it released a relatively high-end phone as a branching upgrade path for iPhone 5 users.

This time around, we get to see exactly how a ‘cheap’ iPhone will perform.

I know Apple executives hate that word, but there’s a great UK idiom that I’ve always loved: cheap and cheerful. That’s exactly what the iPhone SE is. Attractive, inexpensive and pleasant to use. Not a bad tagline for a device.

But what does the company get out of it, really? Is undercutting the price of the iPhone XR or other devices worth it in the long run?

To fully understand the iPhone SE’s appeal for Apple, here’s a few bullet points to consider:

  • People in Apple’s universe spend money with Apple.
  • Once people enter Apple’s world, they are often very satisfied and do not leave.
  • People are rewarded for entry with an extremely affordable device that will be supported for 5 years or more — an easy industry peak.
  • Revenue generated per U.S. iPhone hit $80 in 2018.
  • Subscription revenue for U.S. mobile apps jumped 21% in 2019.
  • Worldwide app stores saw record consumer spend of $120B in 2019.

Back in 2018, analyst Horace Dediu noted that Apple appeared to be emphasizing a ‘lasts longer’ strategy for iPhones. The strategy, he noted, prioritized usage and users over units sold, which became reinforced when Apple stopped reporting unit shipments data and boosted the metrics it doled out about its Services category.

Basically, the longer that Apple keeps iPhones in circulation, the less they will sell on an individual basis — but the longer they would keep people in the ecosystem.

All of this adds up to the fact that Apple stands to gain far more from making the front door wider than it does from making the threshold higher. The iPhone SE opens up new audiences for Apple. It’s an ideal phone for first time iPhone users, young buyers getting their first device and people currently on a budget.

Besides being the first attempt by Apple at this market in the modern smartphone era, it’s also the first iPhone since the company pivoted heavily into the services business. Apple saw that every iPhone needed to give the breath of life to more business for its other divisions as the market for devices entered its oxygen-saturation phase.

The iPhone SE will bring, or graduate, people into the Apple ecosystem and push money into the services category of its business for years to come. Even if they keep the device for years and never upgrade.

In a time of severe market disruption, where big consumer purchases may take a back seat, Apple has timed the iPhone SE perfectly to serve a real need. The barrier to entry is lower and customers know that they will be served by this purchase for 2-5 years with full backing of Apple’s software support and far better security and privacy track record than the rest of the field. Right now, as we’re all isolated, these pocket machines make us more connected to one another and provide us a lifeline of information about the best way to stay healthy and safe.

As smartphones became ubiquitous and then commonplace, they have taken on the role of pariah and scapegoat for a number of societal ills. The focus on superficiality, obsession with small things or even plain old sloth. Now, all of those equations have been scribbled out. Just as parents have re-thought the idea of screen time while we’re all locked up and social media has become a vital tool for maintaining our sanity rather than bragging — we’ve also come to realize that maybe the smartphone stands between us and real isolation.

The iPhone SE has come along right as Apple has an opportunity to make those benefits available to the widest audience.

This iteration of the iPhone is one of those rare moments where the business gets served, the users get served and everyone comes out of it with a good deal.



from Apple – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2VMn6xa