13 ms·

AirPods as a Platform

128 points by sc90 6y ago

dweekly 6y ago
Author's site appears to be slow/unresponsive; cached copy is at http://web.archive.org/web/20210216181726/https://julian.digital/2020/04/19/airpods-as-a-platform/ http://web.archive.org/web/20210216181726/https://julian.dig...
rado 6y ago
It makes sense considering Apple is all about diminishing physical technology (iMac: the screen is the computer). AirPods, Watch or something else as tiny or completely invisible will be the next platform, once they solve the performance and UI problem, which they will.
- nickelcitymario 6y ago
  > Apple is all about diminishing physical technology That's an interesting perspective. Theoretically, the best way to get rid of hardware is to move as much as possible to "the cloud"[1], yet Apple isn't very good at cloud. (At least, not as good as Google and Amazon.) So let's say we're headed to a future where the only physical electronics anyone owns are wearables: watch, glasses, ear buds. No phones, tablets, laptops, or desktops. Just wearables. In that scenario, who wins? Apple is best suited for making that hardware (by a long mile), but Google and/or Amazon are better suited for handling the software in the cloud. I'd place my bets on Apple catching up on cloud faster than Google or Amazon catching up on hardware. However, if we took it a step further and went full Mana[2], tapping right into the nervous system, my bet would be on Google winning that one. They have the cloud capabilities and expertise, but Alphabet also has some experience in health and biology (if I'm not mistaken). -- [1] I know, I know. "Cloud" is just someone else's computer. It's also more than that. [2] https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 https://marshallbrain.com/manna1
  - reaperducer 6y ago
    > Apple is all about diminishing physical technology That's an interesting perspective It's Steve Jobs' perspective. He talked repeatedly about technology disappearing into the background, and one day we would have technology so good that we wouldn't even see it. It would disappear into the walls. To me, it's the ultimate expression of making computers work for us, not the other way around, which is mostly what we have now.
    - nickelcitymario 6y ago
      I hadn't heard that, so I may be late to the party on this perspective.
  - dghlsakjg 6y ago
    I think apple is very good at cloud. They don't sell cloud services so comparisons to GCP or AWS is unfair, but their cloud integrations are pretty top notch from my perspective. My phone backs up automatically. My photos are available on all devices with the swipe of a single slider. iCloud is so tightly integrated with their products that a lot of people don't even know they are using it. I think that's a pretty good implementation of cloud.
    - nickelcitymario 6y ago
      I'm not saying Apple is bad at cloud, per say. (Although I think there's an argument to be made there.) Rather, I'm saying they're nowhere near as good at it as Amazon or Google, and I anticipate that this gap is only going to grow.
      - Nbox9 6y ago
        I would argue that Apple has fewer cloud products, but most of their cloud products are very good. Amazon and Google have many cloud products of varying degrees of quality.
        nickelcitymario 6y ago
        That's a fair and accurate assessment, I think.
  - bigiain 6y ago
    > Theoretically, the best way to get rid of hardware is to move as much as possible to "the cloud"[1] An alternative view is that Apple’s biggest product puts enough compute in your pocket to make “cloud” unnecessary in a lot of cases. My phone is somewhere between a t3.medium and a t3.2xlarge (based on ram and cpu cores respectively). That can provide a lot of local compute for my wearables. And those wearables are gonna need network anyway, so either that all end up with 5G cellular radios (and 4/3G fallback) and enough battery to run that, or one device provides the network hub and the tiny things in your ears and the glasses sitting on your nose can have lower power radios and smaller batteries. I reckon watches/glasses/earbuds(/cars/tvs/etc) all relying on a phone is a reasonably sensible model, rather than each of those devices having completely stand alone capabilities. (And, the idea of Google tapping into my nervous system??? No thanks... I’ll proudly be a data center smashing neo-Luddite before that happens to me...)
    - Nbox9 6y ago
      I really enjoy the data addons for IPad and Apple Watch because they allow me to be connected without having a phone in my pocket. What I desire is connectivity (be able to see messages, make calls, etc), but iPhone often encourages disconnection via mindless scrolling. I enjoy the times I can get away from my iPhone, and I am not excited about this hub future you describe.
  - solarkraft 6y ago
    > Apple isn't very good at cloud Apple isn't very fond of cloud, which a lot of people appreciate.
- Closi 6y ago
  I actually think Apple is about integrating different hardware to create unique interface experiences which are cross-device. I suspect it's not going to be 'one technology' any time soon, it's going to be lots of devices working together seamlessly. For example, if I am playing music on my Airpods from my iPhone and my phone is in my pocket, turning the crown on my apple watch is a really neat and intuitive way to change the volume. The first time I did it and it worked it felt like magic. Similarly walking down a street and getting audio directions on AirPods almost works - but if that's combined with a small map on my watch it works much better - better than a phone. But at the same time, neither a watch or Airpods are going to be the right way to send a private text message on a quiet bus, and because a giant new unifying technology isn't with us yet, I suspect a hybrid approach is going to be with us for a while.
nickelcitymario 6y ago
The article overlooks one of the major reasons for wanting a non-voice interface to an audio experience: Being quiet. Most of the time, if I'm wearing headphones, it's so as to not disturb others around me. Otherwise I'd play it out loud. This benefit goes away when everyone around me suddenly hears me bark out loud to adjust the volume, or send a text, or what-have-you. I'm a big believer in audio-as-a-platform (particularly the AR possibilities), but I hate audibly trying to speak to a computer. It's by far the worst input interface. (On the other hand, much like cameras, the best interface is the one you have with you. I yell at my Google speakers all the damn time, because my hands are busy around the house. But those are also speakers, not headphones, and therefor a different use case.)
- cma 6y ago
  > Most of the time, if I'm wearing headphones, it's so as to not disturb others around me. Otherwise I'd play it out loud. Maybe that's the key to its network effect as a platform. If you don't want to hear everyone talking to themselves in the library, you'll need noise canceling headphones too.
  - ch4s3 6y ago
    Noise canceling headphones don't seem to do much for people talking in the background, or really any sudden loud noise.
- bogwog 6y ago
  So far the only thing I find myself using voice commands for is to set alarms on my iPhone. Saying "Hey Siri, set an alarm for 15 minutes" is so much easier than doing it manually through the clock app. Other than that though, I haven't found any practical use for them. Maybe once AI improves a lot, and it feels like you're talking to an actual person, it might be more useful.
  - kemayo 6y ago
    Shopping list while I'm cooking. "Hey Siri, add tomatoes to my shopping list". (And then said list is shared with my family.)
elicash 6y ago
The thing he wants a hardware button for is probably only used by .01% of users. Edit: Removed the points that he already addressed after seeing comments below.
- macintux 6y ago
  His footnotes begin with: > The input mechanism I describe doesn’t have to be a physical button. In fact, gesture-based inputs might be even more convenient. If AirPods had built-in accelerometers, users could interact with audio content by nodding or shaking their heads. Radar-based sensors like Google’s Motion Sense could also create an interesting new interaction language for audio content.
  - macintux 6y ago
    ...and the 2nd one: > You could also think about the Apple Watch as the main input device. In contrast to the AirPods, Apple opened the Watch for developers from the start, but it hasn’t really seen much success as a platform. Perhaps a combination of Watch and AirPods has a better chance of creating an ecosystem with its own unique applications?
  - TheRealSteel 6y ago
    All AirPods actually do contain an accelerometer, and the Pro contain a gyroscope as well, however I'm not aware of them being opened to developers, so they're still not of use to anything unless Apple decides to open them up or implement the feature themselves.
    - PurpleFoxy 6y ago
      Apple has them in the pencil too and they kind of suck. For the AirPods it’s not too bad for the double tap action but on the pencil it’s horrible. It’s such a difficult action to make when using it and I trigger it randomly all the time. Would much prefer a Wacom style button bar.
idolaspecus 6y ago
I agree with the author about the potential of audio interfaces + some simple additional inputs + integration with certain apps. For me personally there is a suite of tools involving audio books and note taking that would change my life: A remote with a few physical buttons to rewind, switch to record-mode, skip sections. Speech to text with full text search. Voice recordings tied to what I’m listening to. Basically, I want to be able to work through a difficult audiobook while walking around.
avipars 6y ago
hug of death, can't load the site
seltzered_ 6y ago
"The most obvious choice here is Siri, which is already integrated into every pair of AirPods." - Not entirely true. It's the pairing of the device with an iOS or capable watchOS device. "Why has no one thought about additional buttons or click mechanisms that allow users to interact with the actual content?" - It's called a smartwatch (The pebble was really nice at this). or generically bluetooth radio controls. I wish these design analyses talked about the material input costs needed to produce the thing we might perceive as a 'platform'. I just see more batteries, wear, expense, etc.
- tinus_hn 6y ago
  The newer ones support ‘hey Siri’ which happens in the AirPods, otherwise they’d have to continually run audio to your phone.
jonbaer 6y ago
Has anyone actually TRIED using the AirPods in some form programmatically? It's impossible, you lock down your phone TouchID/FaceID and attempt to do a simple list by voice and "you need to unlock your Phone first" ... there is no trust in the pairing of hardware. I wanted to do a delivery platform based ONLY on the AirPods for all parties (pickup/dropoff/billing) but it's just not possible. I hope it changes in the future to reflect some of what is in this post.
- PurpleFoxy 6y ago
  The Apple Watch is a lot better at this. It is considered trusted because it locks as soon as you take it off your arm
- kgin 6y ago
  Given that airpods already know when they get removed form your ears, I wouldn't be surprised for the next iteration to have a form of "unlocking" once you unlock your phone or watch while connected to the airpods. There's no reason for you to not be able to do tasks as long as you don't remove the airpods.
  - jonbaer 6y ago
    The Apple H2 chip - featuring EarID ;-)
  - Tepix 6y ago
    Voice fingerprinting (ideally done locally) would also pretty much solve the issue.
corobo 6y ago
I'd be happy with being able to program in triple tap actions as well as the double tap. Two commands (and that's if you've even got both in) is not enough!
- lambda_dn 6y ago
  Could it it detect different kinds of ear pressures, you could control it that way using your air passages. Two big sniffs to skip a song. Copyrighting this right here btw. I'll take 10% of all future sales please.
  - corobo 6y ago
    If you're taking the piss I don't know where I've tripped up from your comment. Is there something infeasible about triple taps? If you jailbreak you can do it..
    - lambda_dn 6y ago
      No I'm serious, wasn't reflecting on your comment. Im not a doctor so not sure if air pressure in the ear canal could be detected and how much a human can control it. But it would be easier than voice or touch from the users point of view.
      - corobo 6y ago
        Apologies. Wound too tight today.
- redisman 6y ago
  Eh I think that interface stinks. It's just physically very uncomfortable to tap on the headphones in your ear because of the loud noise and the headphone pressing deeper into your ear. I have a knockoff bluetooth "Pods" and I absolutely hate the triple tap.
  - PurpleFoxy 6y ago
meagher 6y ago
Pro tip: You can shorten voice commands for Siri, Alexa, et al. "Hey Siri, what's the weather today?" ==> "Hey Siri, weather" "Hey Siri, set a timer for 10 minutes" ==> "Hey Siri, 10 minute timer"
function_seven 6y ago
This is what I want: When golfing, I want to keep track of how far I hit the ball, the club I used, and where I landed. There are apps for this, of course, but I can't use them. By the time I've arrived at my ball, I'm not going to stop, take out my phone, and start fidling with UI controls to select a club or confirm a location. I would love to have an app that let me keep one AirPod in my ear, and allow me to track my golf game. The UX would be something like this: 1. Arrive at course, and use phone to select the tees and confirm the course I'm playing. Start the round. 2. Tap my AirPod and say, "Teeing off on hole 1 using driver" 3. Hit the ball 4. When I arrive at my ball, tap again and say, "hitting seven iron" 5. When I sink a putt, tap and say, "next hole". From just those interactions, the app could keep track of every shot, and also keep my score and number of putts. I could choose to not announce each and every shot if I wanted to, and instead say, "add three strokes" once I'm done with the hole. I could also ask, "How far to the middle of the green?" and get a distance in my ear. "What did I hit last time on this hole, for this shot?" (Answer: "You used a nine iron, and hit it 107 yards") All that would be killer for me. Nicer than staring at my phone screen in the sunlight, and looking like I'm farting around to the players waiting for me to clear the fairway. Anything like this exist today?
- jareklupinski 6y ago
  that sounds like a fun product to work on! it seems there are some apple watch golf apps already https://www.golfpass.com/travel-advisor/articles/apple-watch-review-apps-for-golfers https://www.golfpass.com/travel-advisor/articles/apple-watch... and some apps specifically mention leaving your phone in your cart and using bluetooth audio queues https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.freecaddie.audio&hl=en_US&gl=US https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.freecaddie... but none that specifically use bluetooth audio / cues as the main input method?
- llbeansandrice 6y ago
  I don't think there is any Siri integration yet but disc golf has an app with some of that functionality in the uDisc app. You can "map" a round and it can track all of your throws. I think you can input disc (club) selection as well? No AirPods integration like that but it does have Apple watch integration I think. [Blog post announcing the feature](https://udisc.com/blog/post/picture-this-udisc-unveils-map-scoring-mode https://udisc.com/blog/post/picture-this-udisc-unveils-map-s...)
haroldkurac 6y ago
Not that patents are predictive of what will actually make it into the product, but Apple does have at least a few covering hand gesture and other inputs to AirPods: https://patents.google.com/patent/US10757491 https://patents.google.com/patent/US10757491 https://patents.google.com/patent/US10873798 https://patents.google.com/patent/US10873798
joejohnson 6y ago
That was a lot of words to say “what if the AirPods had a programmable button so apps could favorite songs or add a bookmark?”
germinalphrase 6y ago
Airpods (or any modern earphones) are absolutely the first really useful AR product available to consumers. Transparency mode is a critical success even if it’s so boring as to be unremarked upon by most people. An AR device is most useful if it’s ubiquitously available. Transparency mode makes that possible (even if it could use improvement). The device also needs to avoid a negative social stigma. Airpods have largely achieved that as well (at least along younger people). That is partially marketing/brand image - but it is also based on utility. Older folks would generally find it rude to leave headphones in while having a conversation because they assume the listener isn’t listening, but I work with a lot of teens, and it seems like they couldn’t care less. It’s understood that the speaker can still be heard. A quick tap/squeeze is the social signal. The author is right that there is huge untapped potential in auditory augmentations, but the focus on verbal input control is misplaced. It’s simply too obtrusive for public environments. If I were betting, I’d say Apple won’t open up this kind of functionally until the (cross device) input control is generally codified, and that scheme will be intrinsically linked to a forward facing camera/sensor package to provide contextual awareness and implied user attention & intentions (i.e. glasses or similar). Working on AR UX would be incredibly exciting.
- jskrn 6y ago
  Quality comment and helped me think about Airpods in a different way - thank you.
  - germinalphrase 6y ago
    It’s fun stuff to notice and consider though. Anyone have a good AR slack/discord/... to pass along?
- Tepix 6y ago
  > A quick tap/squeeze is the social signal. It does leave room for improvement. Perhaps some visual signal that shows that you can hear your surroundings clearly would be better.
lukev 6y ago
This starts to touch on one of the reason every "personal assistant" is crap: they're basically just a verbal command line. Their only real value proposition is basic interactions when the user's hands and/or eyes are busy with something else. Until they can get smart or fluent enough that they can rival the effectiveness and accuracy of hands-on-screen interaction, the use cases will remain fairly niche. More programmable, multi-modal interaction is a step in the right direction, but it'll require a lot more.
genuine_smiles 6y ago
> Why has no one thought about additional buttons or click mechanisms that allow users to interact with the actual content? Microsoft added PowerPoint forward/back control to their earbuds. https://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-surface-earbuds-price-release-date-office-integration-2019-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-surface-earbuds-pr...
choward 6y ago
I don't get what this has to do with AirPods exactly compared to other Bluetooth headphones. Besides the author using a lot of Apple words it seems like they're proposing a new product that has nothing to do with Apple.
Nbox9 6y ago
As far as I am aware, no one has been able to make a successful Voice First product. Some products, like Spotify or Audible, are greatly enchanted with Voice, but voice is just another access point.
- Tepix 6y ago
  There's a successful Windows app called VoiceAttack that will let you use voice instead of controls ingames. They also offer voice packs spoken by famous actors that are popular. Having Kirk's voice update you on the status of your space ship is enticing.
Tepix 6y ago
It would be cool if you could shake your head briefly when a new song comes up on Spotify, signalling that you don't like it.
Tepix 6y ago
It could end up being quite hilarious if Apple ends up using various "signals" like biting your teeth, making grimmaces and weird noises to control invoke commands. You'd no longer be sure if someone is having a seizure or trying to stop the podcast she is listening to.
- germinalphrase 6y ago
  You joke but clicking your tongue or tapping your teeth would be innocuous (if even noticeable) to others.

128 points by sc90 6y ago

Author's site appears to be slow/unresponsive; cached copy is at http://web.archive.org/web/20210216181726/https://julian.digital/2020/04/19/airpods-as-a-platform/ http://web.archive.org/web/20210216181726/https://julian.dig...

rado 6y ago

It makes sense considering Apple is all about diminishing physical technology (iMac: the screen is the computer). AirPods, Watch or something else as tiny or completely invisible will be the next platform, once they solve the performance and UI problem, which they will.

nickelcitymario 6y ago
> Apple is all about diminishing physical technology That's an interesting perspective. Theoretically, the best way to get rid of hardware is to move as much as possible to "the cloud"[1], yet Apple isn't very good at cloud. (At least, not as good as Google and Amazon.) So let's say we're headed to a future where the only physical electronics anyone owns are wearables: watch, glasses, ear buds. No phones, tablets, laptops, or desktops. Just wearables. In that scenario, who wins? Apple is best suited for making that hardware (by a long mile), but Google and/or Amazon are better suited for handling the software in the cloud. I'd place my bets on Apple catching up on cloud faster than Google or Amazon catching up on hardware. However, if we took it a step further and went full Mana[2], tapping right into the nervous system, my bet would be on Google winning that one. They have the cloud capabilities and expertise, but Alphabet also has some experience in health and biology (if I'm not mistaken). -- [1] I know, I know. "Cloud" is just someone else's computer. It's also more than that. [2] https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 https://marshallbrain.com/manna1
- reaperducer 6y ago
  > Apple is all about diminishing physical technology That's an interesting perspective It's Steve Jobs' perspective. He talked repeatedly about technology disappearing into the background, and one day we would have technology so good that we wouldn't even see it. It would disappear into the walls. To me, it's the ultimate expression of making computers work for us, not the other way around, which is mostly what we have now.
  - nickelcitymario 6y ago
    I hadn't heard that, so I may be late to the party on this perspective.
- dghlsakjg 6y ago
  I think apple is very good at cloud. They don't sell cloud services so comparisons to GCP or AWS is unfair, but their cloud integrations are pretty top notch from my perspective. My phone backs up automatically. My photos are available on all devices with the swipe of a single slider. iCloud is so tightly integrated with their products that a lot of people don't even know they are using it. I think that's a pretty good implementation of cloud.
  - nickelcitymario 6y ago
    I'm not saying Apple is bad at cloud, per say. (Although I think there's an argument to be made there.) Rather, I'm saying they're nowhere near as good at it as Amazon or Google, and I anticipate that this gap is only going to grow.
    - Nbox9 6y ago
      I would argue that Apple has fewer cloud products, but most of their cloud products are very good. Amazon and Google have many cloud products of varying degrees of quality.
      - nickelcitymario 6y ago
        That's a fair and accurate assessment, I think.
- bigiain 6y ago
  > Theoretically, the best way to get rid of hardware is to move as much as possible to "the cloud"[1] An alternative view is that Apple’s biggest product puts enough compute in your pocket to make “cloud” unnecessary in a lot of cases. My phone is somewhere between a t3.medium and a t3.2xlarge (based on ram and cpu cores respectively). That can provide a lot of local compute for my wearables. And those wearables are gonna need network anyway, so either that all end up with 5G cellular radios (and 4/3G fallback) and enough battery to run that, or one device provides the network hub and the tiny things in your ears and the glasses sitting on your nose can have lower power radios and smaller batteries. I reckon watches/glasses/earbuds(/cars/tvs/etc) all relying on a phone is a reasonably sensible model, rather than each of those devices having completely stand alone capabilities. (And, the idea of Google tapping into my nervous system??? No thanks... I’ll proudly be a data center smashing neo-Luddite before that happens to me...)
  - Nbox9 6y ago
    I really enjoy the data addons for IPad and Apple Watch because they allow me to be connected without having a phone in my pocket. What I desire is connectivity (be able to see messages, make calls, etc), but iPhone often encourages disconnection via mindless scrolling. I enjoy the times I can get away from my iPhone, and I am not excited about this hub future you describe.
- solarkraft 6y ago
  > Apple isn't very good at cloud Apple isn't very fond of cloud, which a lot of people appreciate.
Closi 6y ago
I actually think Apple is about integrating different hardware to create unique interface experiences which are cross-device. I suspect it's not going to be 'one technology' any time soon, it's going to be lots of devices working together seamlessly. For example, if I am playing music on my Airpods from my iPhone and my phone is in my pocket, turning the crown on my apple watch is a really neat and intuitive way to change the volume. The first time I did it and it worked it felt like magic. Similarly walking down a street and getting audio directions on AirPods almost works - but if that's combined with a small map on my watch it works much better - better than a phone. But at the same time, neither a watch or Airpods are going to be the right way to send a private text message on a quiet bus, and because a giant new unifying technology isn't with us yet, I suspect a hybrid approach is going to be with us for a while.

nickelcitymario 6y ago

The article overlooks one of the major reasons for wanting a non-voice interface to an audio experience: Being quiet. Most of the time, if I'm wearing headphones, it's so as to not disturb others around me. Otherwise I'd play it out loud. This benefit goes away when everyone around me suddenly hears me bark out loud to adjust the volume, or send a text, or what-have-you. I'm a big believer in audio-as-a-platform (particularly the AR possibilities), but I hate audibly trying to speak to a computer. It's by far the worst input interface. (On the other hand, much like cameras, the best interface is the one you have with you. I yell at my Google speakers all the damn time, because my hands are busy around the house. But those are also speakers, not headphones, and therefor a different use case.)

cma 6y ago
> Most of the time, if I'm wearing headphones, it's so as to not disturb others around me. Otherwise I'd play it out loud. Maybe that's the key to its network effect as a platform. If you don't want to hear everyone talking to themselves in the library, you'll need noise canceling headphones too.
- ch4s3 6y ago
  Noise canceling headphones don't seem to do much for people talking in the background, or really any sudden loud noise.
bogwog 6y ago
So far the only thing I find myself using voice commands for is to set alarms on my iPhone. Saying "Hey Siri, set an alarm for 15 minutes" is so much easier than doing it manually through the clock app. Other than that though, I haven't found any practical use for them. Maybe once AI improves a lot, and it feels like you're talking to an actual person, it might be more useful.
- kemayo 6y ago
  Shopping list while I'm cooking. "Hey Siri, add tomatoes to my shopping list". (And then said list is shared with my family.)

elicash 6y ago

The thing he wants a hardware button for is probably only used by .01% of users. Edit: Removed the points that he already addressed after seeing comments below.

macintux 6y ago
His footnotes begin with: > The input mechanism I describe doesn’t have to be a physical button. In fact, gesture-based inputs might be even more convenient. If AirPods had built-in accelerometers, users could interact with audio content by nodding or shaking their heads. Radar-based sensors like Google’s Motion Sense could also create an interesting new interaction language for audio content.
- macintux 6y ago
  ...and the 2nd one: > You could also think about the Apple Watch as the main input device. In contrast to the AirPods, Apple opened the Watch for developers from the start, but it hasn’t really seen much success as a platform. Perhaps a combination of Watch and AirPods has a better chance of creating an ecosystem with its own unique applications?
- TheRealSteel 6y ago
  All AirPods actually do contain an accelerometer, and the Pro contain a gyroscope as well, however I'm not aware of them being opened to developers, so they're still not of use to anything unless Apple decides to open them up or implement the feature themselves.
  - PurpleFoxy 6y ago
    Apple has them in the pencil too and they kind of suck. For the AirPods it’s not too bad for the double tap action but on the pencil it’s horrible. It’s such a difficult action to make when using it and I trigger it randomly all the time. Would much prefer a Wacom style button bar.

idolaspecus 6y ago

I agree with the author about the potential of audio interfaces + some simple additional inputs + integration with certain apps. For me personally there is a suite of tools involving audio books and note taking that would change my life: A remote with a few physical buttons to rewind, switch to record-mode, skip sections. Speech to text with full text search. Voice recordings tied to what I’m listening to. Basically, I want to be able to work through a difficult audiobook while walking around.

avipars 6y ago

hug of death, can't load the site

seltzered_ 6y ago

"The most obvious choice here is Siri, which is already integrated into every pair of AirPods." - Not entirely true. It's the pairing of the device with an iOS or capable watchOS device. "Why has no one thought about additional buttons or click mechanisms that allow users to interact with the actual content?" - It's called a smartwatch (The pebble was really nice at this). or generically bluetooth radio controls. I wish these design analyses talked about the material input costs needed to produce the thing we might perceive as a 'platform'. I just see more batteries, wear, expense, etc.

tinus_hn 6y ago
The newer ones support ‘hey Siri’ which happens in the AirPods, otherwise they’d have to continually run audio to your phone.

jonbaer 6y ago

Has anyone actually TRIED using the AirPods in some form programmatically? It's impossible, you lock down your phone TouchID/FaceID and attempt to do a simple list by voice and "you need to unlock your Phone first" ... there is no trust in the pairing of hardware. I wanted to do a delivery platform based ONLY on the AirPods for all parties (pickup/dropoff/billing) but it's just not possible. I hope it changes in the future to reflect some of what is in this post.

PurpleFoxy 6y ago
The Apple Watch is a lot better at this. It is considered trusted because it locks as soon as you take it off your arm
kgin 6y ago
Given that airpods already know when they get removed form your ears, I wouldn't be surprised for the next iteration to have a form of "unlocking" once you unlock your phone or watch while connected to the airpods. There's no reason for you to not be able to do tasks as long as you don't remove the airpods.
- jonbaer 6y ago
  The Apple H2 chip - featuring EarID ;-)
- Tepix 6y ago
  Voice fingerprinting (ideally done locally) would also pretty much solve the issue.

corobo 6y ago

I'd be happy with being able to program in triple tap actions as well as the double tap. Two commands (and that's if you've even got both in) is not enough!

lambda_dn 6y ago
Could it it detect different kinds of ear pressures, you could control it that way using your air passages. Two big sniffs to skip a song. Copyrighting this right here btw. I'll take 10% of all future sales please.
- corobo 6y ago
  If you're taking the piss I don't know where I've tripped up from your comment. Is there something infeasible about triple taps? If you jailbreak you can do it..
  - lambda_dn 6y ago
    No I'm serious, wasn't reflecting on your comment. Im not a doctor so not sure if air pressure in the ear canal could be detected and how much a human can control it. But it would be easier than voice or touch from the users point of view.
    - corobo 6y ago
      Apologies. Wound too tight today.
redisman 6y ago
Eh I think that interface stinks. It's just physically very uncomfortable to tap on the headphones in your ear because of the loud noise and the headphone pressing deeper into your ear. I have a knockoff bluetooth "Pods" and I absolutely hate the triple tap.
- PurpleFoxy 6y ago

meagher 6y ago

Pro tip: You can shorten voice commands for Siri, Alexa, et al. "Hey Siri, what's the weather today?" ==> "Hey Siri, weather" "Hey Siri, set a timer for 10 minutes" ==> "Hey Siri, 10 minute timer"

function_seven 6y ago

This is what I want: When golfing, I want to keep track of how far I hit the ball, the club I used, and where I landed. There are apps for this, of course, but I can't use them. By the time I've arrived at my ball, I'm not going to stop, take out my phone, and start fidling with UI controls to select a club or confirm a location. I would love to have an app that let me keep one AirPod in my ear, and allow me to track my golf game. The UX would be something like this: 1. Arrive at course, and use phone to select the tees and confirm the course I'm playing. Start the round. 2. Tap my AirPod and say, "Teeing off on hole 1 using driver" 3. Hit the ball 4. When I arrive at my ball, tap again and say, "hitting seven iron" 5. When I sink a putt, tap and say, "next hole". From just those interactions, the app could keep track of every shot, and also keep my score and number of putts. I could choose to not announce each and every shot if I wanted to, and instead say, "add three strokes" once I'm done with the hole. I could also ask, "How far to the middle of the green?" and get a distance in my ear. "What did I hit last time on this hole, for this shot?" (Answer: "You used a nine iron, and hit it 107 yards") All that would be killer for me. Nicer than staring at my phone screen in the sunlight, and looking like I'm farting around to the players waiting for me to clear the fairway. Anything like this exist today?

jareklupinski 6y ago
that sounds like a fun product to work on! it seems there are some apple watch golf apps already https://www.golfpass.com/travel-advisor/articles/apple-watch-review-apps-for-golfers https://www.golfpass.com/travel-advisor/articles/apple-watch... and some apps specifically mention leaving your phone in your cart and using bluetooth audio queues https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.freecaddie.audio&hl=en_US&gl=US https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.freecaddie... but none that specifically use bluetooth audio / cues as the main input method?
llbeansandrice 6y ago
I don't think there is any Siri integration yet but disc golf has an app with some of that functionality in the uDisc app. You can "map" a round and it can track all of your throws. I think you can input disc (club) selection as well? No AirPods integration like that but it does have Apple watch integration I think. [Blog post announcing the feature](https://udisc.com/blog/post/picture-this-udisc-unveils-map-scoring-mode https://udisc.com/blog/post/picture-this-udisc-unveils-map-s...)

haroldkurac 6y ago

Not that patents are predictive of what will actually make it into the product, but Apple does have at least a few covering hand gesture and other inputs to AirPods: https://patents.google.com/patent/US10757491 https://patents.google.com/patent/US10757491 https://patents.google.com/patent/US10873798 https://patents.google.com/patent/US10873798

joejohnson 6y ago

That was a lot of words to say “what if the AirPods had a programmable button so apps could favorite songs or add a bookmark?”

germinalphrase 6y ago

Airpods (or any modern earphones) are absolutely the first really useful AR product available to consumers. Transparency mode is a critical success even if it’s so boring as to be unremarked upon by most people. An AR device is most useful if it’s ubiquitously available. Transparency mode makes that possible (even if it could use improvement). The device also needs to avoid a negative social stigma. Airpods have largely achieved that as well (at least along younger people). That is partially marketing/brand image - but it is also based on utility. Older folks would generally find it rude to leave headphones in while having a conversation because they assume the listener isn’t listening, but I work with a lot of teens, and it seems like they couldn’t care less. It’s understood that the speaker can still be heard. A quick tap/squeeze is the social signal. The author is right that there is huge untapped potential in auditory augmentations, but the focus on verbal input control is misplaced. It’s simply too obtrusive for public environments. If I were betting, I’d say Apple won’t open up this kind of functionally until the (cross device) input control is generally codified, and that scheme will be intrinsically linked to a forward facing camera/sensor package to provide contextual awareness and implied user attention & intentions (i.e. glasses or similar). Working on AR UX would be incredibly exciting.

jskrn 6y ago
Quality comment and helped me think about Airpods in a different way - thank you.
- germinalphrase 6y ago
  It’s fun stuff to notice and consider though. Anyone have a good AR slack/discord/... to pass along?
Tepix 6y ago
> A quick tap/squeeze is the social signal. It does leave room for improvement. Perhaps some visual signal that shows that you can hear your surroundings clearly would be better.

lukev 6y ago

This starts to touch on one of the reason every "personal assistant" is crap: they're basically just a verbal command line. Their only real value proposition is basic interactions when the user's hands and/or eyes are busy with something else. Until they can get smart or fluent enough that they can rival the effectiveness and accuracy of hands-on-screen interaction, the use cases will remain fairly niche. More programmable, multi-modal interaction is a step in the right direction, but it'll require a lot more.

genuine_smiles 6y ago

> Why has no one thought about additional buttons or click mechanisms that allow users to interact with the actual content? Microsoft added PowerPoint forward/back control to their earbuds. https://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-surface-earbuds-price-release-date-office-integration-2019-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-surface-earbuds-pr...

choward 6y ago

I don't get what this has to do with AirPods exactly compared to other Bluetooth headphones. Besides the author using a lot of Apple words it seems like they're proposing a new product that has nothing to do with Apple.

Nbox9 6y ago

As far as I am aware, no one has been able to make a successful Voice First product. Some products, like Spotify or Audible, are greatly enchanted with Voice, but voice is just another access point.

Tepix 6y ago
There's a successful Windows app called VoiceAttack that will let you use voice instead of controls ingames. They also offer voice packs spoken by famous actors that are popular. Having Kirk's voice update you on the status of your space ship is enticing.

Tepix 6y ago

It would be cool if you could shake your head briefly when a new song comes up on Spotify, signalling that you don't like it.

Tepix 6y ago

It could end up being quite hilarious if Apple ends up using various "signals" like biting your teeth, making grimmaces and weird noises to control invoke commands. You'd no longer be sure if someone is having a seizure or trying to stop the podcast she is listening to.

germinalphrase 6y ago
You joke but clicking your tongue or tapping your teeth would be innocuous (if even noticeable) to others.