[HN Gopher] AirTag Teardown Part One: Yeah, This Tracks
___________________________________________________________________
AirTag Teardown Part One: Yeah, This Tracks
Author : tosh
Score : 188 points
Date : 2021-05-02 14:06 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ifixit.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ifixit.com)
| johne20 wrote:
| Of course the 3D printing community is already designing
| accessories. https://www.thingiverse.com/search?q=Airtag
| judge2020 wrote:
| Unfortunate to see this use the history api incorrectly to the
| point that it prevents you from hitting the back button and
| going to the page you came from.
| caturopath wrote:
| The lack of loophole was disorienting, but then I went and looked
| up how they want you to attach it, and the hangtag accessories
| look so pretty https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/04/apple-
| introduces-airt... -- things like the appearance and the sound
| quality really show a commitment to making polished products
| rather than practical ones. I've been fairly negative on Apple
| for a few years and they still need to pull bigger rabbits out of
| their hat until I completely reverse that, but it's really
| impressive that they've turned a Tile into a status symbol.
|
| It's hilarious to a certain extent that they built the thing
| smaller than all the competition and bulk it up with a wad of
| leather anyhow.
| tootie wrote:
| People debate if Apple is about primarily hardware or software
| but I posit their forte is marketing. They make good products
| but also consistently beat out superior competition by
| engineering desirability.
| smichel17 wrote:
| They're a fashion company, which happens to produce hardware
| and software. A bit like Riot Games is an art company which
| happens to produce League of Legends (like Valve / TF2 and
| hats/collectibles before them).
| ryandrake wrote:
| A little off-topic, but can an artistic person or graphic
| designer help me to understand why every airtag in Apple's
| literature with the Apple logo has that two-color (light gray,
| dark gray) scheme with a not-exactly-straight line dividing the
| colors [1]? It seems like an odd design choice.
|
| EDIT: Ha! Thanks for the push. I would have never seen it. My
| eyes are broken I guess. It truly looks to me like they are
| two-toned gray, even after the explanation.
|
| 1:
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/images/product/accessories/st...
| panda88888 wrote:
| I think it's a single color but shaded due to its dome shape.
| Guest19023892 wrote:
| The tags with the icons are white.
|
| https://i.imgur.com/ZlvXsaR.jpg
|
| The tags with the Apple logo are a mirror finish.
|
| https://i.imgur.com/QaVobYc.jpg
|
| The sharp line isn't part of the design, it's just a
| minimalist way of showing a highly reflective material. The
| sharper the line, the sharper the reflections in the surface.
| The line is curved because the surface of the tag is curved
| (e.g. you can see how the straight window is curved in the
| above image). If the tag was a flat surface, then it would be
| a straight line.
| spoonjim wrote:
| The Tile is much more compact than the kitted out AirTag. Shame
| that Apple had to pander to the twin gods of accessories margin
| and fashion.
| caturopath wrote:
| > Shame that Apple had to pander to the twin gods of
| accessories margin and fashion
|
| I feel like that's...what Apple is?
|
| If you don't like it, that's fine, and they have lots of
| more-utilitarian competitors in every space they operate. I
| personally don't currently use any Apple products; I'm not
| really the target market either.
| spoonjim wrote:
| Well the Apple product is technologically superior since
| they browbeat their iPhone installed base into surveilling
| AirTags. This is what is so infuriating about Apple -- they
| have excellent engineering and are often the best product
| in the market, but you then have to buy into their whole
| ethos as well.
| [deleted]
| fastball wrote:
| Are you criticizing the fact that Apple brought a
| tracking device to market utilizing the best tracking
| network? Wat.
| kemayo wrote:
| It... isn't, though? There's a side-by-side comparison photo
| of the naked devices in the linked article, and I'm fairly
| sure from eyeballing it that the AirTag + the smallest of the
| accessories (the Belkin one [1]) is still smaller than the
| Tile.
|
| [1]: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/HNPR2ZM/A/belkin-
| secure-h...
| jayd16 wrote:
| The latest tile is thinner and more flat. You could
| probably fit it in a wallet but the round shape of the
| airtag makes it a bit more awkward. Still, I'm sure people
| will make it work.
| dagmx wrote:
| You're talking about a very specific tile product. It's
| also not got a user replaceable battery and has other
| concessions to meet that size constraint
| solarkraft wrote:
| It doesn't matter though. The AirTags' tracking (on a map)
| actually works, while Tiles' doesn't.
| fastball wrote:
| Or, said another way: isn't it great that Apple gives you the
| choice of smaller with no loophole if you don't need it?
| Exmoor wrote:
| > It's hilarious to a certain extent that they built the thing
| smaller than all the competition and bulk it up with a wad of
| leather anyhow.
|
| That's essentially how I feel when I see the "Our thinnest
| iPhone ever" slide knowing that 95% of iPhone owners put it in
| a bulky case. That said, that's not unique to Apple and the
| phone is at least usable without a case.
| wincy wrote:
| Wow I didn't believe this stat, but sure enough 87% of people
| use cases on their iPhones. I didn't know people were so
| paranoid, I love my iPhone 12 Pro Max because it feels
| perfect in my hand despite being so large. I feel like a case
| would ruin that.
|
| I wonder if it's paranoia or actual clumsiness or maybe just
| salespeople that get people to buy cases. I've owned an
| iPhone since the 3G and have dropped my naked phone exactly
| once, my 6 Plus, which was still usable for years after that.
| [deleted]
| ngoldbaum wrote:
| Glass is much more slippery than a plastic or leather case.
| I've cracked a caseless phone's screen after it slipped off
| a slightly off-level table. I always use leather cases now
| and no longer have the problem of my phone randomly
| slipping off of surfaces or even falling out of my greasy
| hands.
| qqqwerty wrote:
| It boggles my mind that phone makers don't use a grippy
| surface on the phones. The sleek surfaces look great in
| marketing photos but make for horrible usability.
|
| I use Android and once a phone is nearing the 3/4 mark of
| it's useful life, I pull the cases off because at that
| point the smaller/sleeker form factor helps offset the
| annoying performance degradation. With my Nexus 5, which
| had a grippy back, the screen is still intact to this
| day. My Nexus 6p, which has a metallic back, slipped out
| of my hand the very first day I took the case off and the
| screen shattered.
|
| My new strategy is to just buy a mid-low range android at
| the end of the sales cycle for a steep discount. I got
| last years Moto G Power model for about 40 bucks. Once I
| get about half way through it's useful life (~2 years), I
| am going to take the case off and I am going to scuff it
| up with sand paper and then spray on some truck liner or
| other grippy surfacing agent.
| powersnail wrote:
| > That's essentially how I feel when I see the "Our thinnest
| iPhone ever" slide knowing that 95% of iPhone owners put it
| in a bulky case
|
| I was in the same boat until and I dropped my phone and break
| the back, which is ridiculously expensive to fix.
|
| I use a case now, which only takes 10 bucks to replace if
| broken. It's not as pretty as a naked phone, but it's
| practical.
| cube2222 wrote:
| I've had this attitude before, but I must say, the recent
| iPhones at least (iPhone 11 in my case) are ridiculously
| resistant to damage.
|
| Mine is not in a case and regularly has scary-looking
| falls, but there's almost no-scratch. Only on the edges of
| the aluminum body you can see the paint scratched off in
| some places.
|
| I've found that the added bulk of a case makes me drop my
| phone much more frequently.
| agumonkey wrote:
| yesterday i was holding my phone with protective glass,
| rubber case, all wired to an external battery and laughed at
| larger than a nokia 3310 monstrosity. Modern times.
| caturopath wrote:
| It's not like the choice is "thick and doesn't need a case or
| thin and needs a case". Even if the phone was thicker, people
| would be using cases if they bought it, right?
| falcolas wrote:
| Me? No. I get a case because of the fscking camera bump
| (though with the latest model, it's more tumor than bump).
| I just want my phone to lay flat.
| asdff wrote:
| It's like a wobbly table until you bend the knee and
| shell out a few bucks for a case. Same thing with
| removing the ports: can't charge your phone and listen to
| music at the same time if you are a wired charger user
| and wired headphone listener. That privilege previously
| enjoyed by default on every single cell phone ever made
| is now reserved to customers who purchase wireless
| charging or wireless headphone accessories. Shell out a
| few more bucks on junk you didn't need a generation ago,
| or deal with a sub par experience out of the box, as
| always with Apple these days.
| adrr wrote:
| If the back wasn't slick glass you'll get more people
| without cases.
| selykg wrote:
| Probably not everyone. But for me, after spending $1400 I'm
| putting it in a case. My Xs Max is nearly two and a half
| years old now and I took it out of the case for it's
| scheduled cleaning and after wiping it down and getting the
| built up pocket crud out of the crevices where the case and
| phone meet, its like brand new.
|
| I'm hoping I can get at least another year out of this
| thing. Battery is excellent. iOS doesn't seem slow at all.
| mnouquet wrote:
| > after spending $1400
|
| Damn, I feel silly, I have bought 9 phones over the past
| 3 years and still haven't spent that kind of money...
| perryizgr8 wrote:
| The reason for putting it in a case is not the price tag.
| People buy 100k cars and don't cover the outer surfaces
| with protective plastic.
|
| The problem is Apple builds the phone in a fragile
| manner, prone to breaking and scratching. It's true of
| other phones too.
| davidmurdoch wrote:
| > People buy 100k cars and don't cover the outer surfaces
| with protective plastic
|
| Yes, they do. Look up Paint Protection Film. Ceramic
| coating is also very commonly used to protect the car's
| paint, plastics, and glass.
| perryizgr8 wrote:
| Is it as common as putting a case on your phone? I doubt
| it. My point is that Apple and others can easily make far
| more durable phones for the price they ask, and not need
| literally everyone to use a case.
| davidmurdoch wrote:
| I'm not sure how common it is in general, but for people
| who care about their car's paint it is common, and I
| imagine people who buy $100k+ cars are probably the type
| that have their cars detailed regularly by a
| professional.
|
| Doesn't matter though. It's not in phone manufacturers'
| best interests to make durable phones. They need to make
| trendy phones, as that's what the majority have voted for
| (with their wallets). And Apple users have it the worst,
| as the lock-in leaves them with no alternative phone
| manufacturers).
|
| Even with protective cases many flagship phones won't be
| very useable after 2 years anyway, as the battery life
| decreases, the OS and apps do more and more things, and
| flash storage starts to fail/slow.
| dijit wrote:
| I distinctly remember people at Nokia laughing at how the
| first iPhone didn't stand up to any of their robustness
| tests. Obviously they were wrong and people bought them
| (due to the fit and finish of the software, not
| robustness or battery life) and the first iPhone feels
| like it was much more durable than the latest generations
| with their protruding cameras, glass on two sides and
| edge to edge screen.
| perryizgr8 wrote:
| Yeah the new phones are laughably non-robust. Use an
| iPhone without a case or protective film for a year and I
| guarantee you there will be micro scratches on the back
| glass.
|
| They don't design the phone to be used without a case.
| People use cases because of that, not because of the
| price tag.
| dijit wrote:
| Speaking personally; I bought a iPhone 12 mini near
| launch, got a nice leather case for it because I dislike
| the camera bump but still managed to get a scratch (which
| I can feel) on the screen a mere week in.
|
| I'm pretty careful with my phone too, has its own pocket
| doesn't mix with anything. I'm actually quite displeased;
| especially as scratch resistance was a touted feature.
|
| EDIT: never mind. It was drop resistance. Not scratch
| resistance.
| gumby wrote:
| Who cares about micro (or even macro) scratches on the
| _back_? It's the front you look at.
| jjeaff wrote:
| You don't hold a car in your hand and stare at it all
| day. But also, cars are mostly painted with a clear coat
| that can be buffed or sanded and buffed to remove
| imperfections.
| hombre_fatal wrote:
| I want the shock absorber of my $1000 device to be
| changeable, not built into the phone so that when I go to
| sell it, it looks like a banged up Nokia brick with
| shredded rubber bumpers with a faded scratched screen I
| can barely read anymore.
| gumby wrote:
| > I'm hoping I can get at least another year out of this
| thing.
|
| A year should be no problem. I just replaced my iPhone 6s
| and Apple Watch 0 in February. If I hadn't decided I
| wanted the NFC functionality I would have simply replaced
| the battery.
|
| I don't bother with a case because it's often simply my
| pocket, which is a case I guess.
| NathanielK wrote:
| I disagree. With modern materials, the thinness is the root
| of durability compromises. I've used my Xperia XZ1 compact
| for several years without a case. I've dropped it on
| concrete floors, sat on it, and used it in the mud.
| There're some chips in the paint, but the fiberglass body
| underneath is fine. Any scratches on the Gorilla Glass 5
| are barely visible.
|
| My old phones with cheap poly-carbonate backs(cracks
| easily) and thin GG3(cracks,scratches are apparent) were
| fragile in comparison. The material science has improved
| with modern phones, but manufacturers choose to make
| fragile phones.
|
| You don't need thick overmoulding and port covers to make a
| phome durable without a case. The materials are strong
| enough on the high end phones. The problem is that when you
| make the glass thinner and exposed at the corners, it will
| crack with much less impact. The overall thinness means
| less flexural rigidity (rigidity is proportional to
| thickness cubed), you can snap a modern phone with your
| hands. Cheap new phones get it even worse. They use
| flimsier materials to cram a better SoC in, and still are
| rarely waterproof.
| myself248 wrote:
| Back when phones were built to survive the outside world
| without a case, I never put cases on my phones.
|
| The whole Nextel and Nokia and Blackberry era, not a one.
| They looked a bit worn from a few years each in my pocket
| with my keys, but they all worked fine, and they'd all
| survive a drop to the floor.
|
| Today the only phone I'd trust to survive a naked drop
| would be a Unihertz Titan, but until there's an AOSP ROM
| for it, I'm not trusting it with my data. So, cases on
| everything.
| thatguy0900 wrote:
| There's also a line of phones made by CAT, the
| construction company, that looks pretty durable. I've
| been thinking about getting one just to have fun with the
| thermal camera.
| WrtCdEvrydy wrote:
| I like those phones and never had one (either CAT or
| third party) fail... the issue is that the processor /
| RAM setup is always a little on the weak side and OS
| updates are a problem.
|
| I'd probably buy my first ever iPhone if Apple came out
| with a ruggedized version of the current iPhone SE.
| NathanielK wrote:
| Sony[1] has a ruggedized version of their flagship with
| all the same fancy specs. You might not like the price
| however.
|
| https://electronics.sony.com/mobile/smartphone/profession
| al-...
| thatguy0900 wrote:
| Yeah, the os updates is why I've been holding off.
| Basically just have to accept you won't get any
| WrtCdEvrydy wrote:
| I mean, to be honest, I didn't pay a lot of my original
| one (non-CAT) but it's on Android 8.0.1 forever... which
| isn't exactly a bad version.
|
| I wish Android would decouple the device drivers from the
| kernel space kinda like a desktop OS so your manufacturer
| could just supply their drivers and you could upgrade the
| OS at will... a man can dream.
| tonyarkles wrote:
| Sonim too. Got to play with one for a client. It wasn't
| pretty, I seem to recall it ran a pretty crusty version
| of Android, but damn was that thing tough. And the
| speaker! Oh boy... the app I was helping with had to do
| with personal safety, and if the volume was turned all
| the way up that thing was LOUD!
| adamlett wrote:
| _Back when phones were built to survive the outside world
| without a case_
|
| You mean: Back when phones had screens made of plastic
| instead of glass. And yes, sure, that does make them more
| likely to survive a drop, but also means the screen
| becomes a scratch magnet. That of course is the right
| compromise when the screen is tiny and the pixels are
| enormous, but not so much when it's the other way around.
| ASalazarMX wrote:
| One of the worst ideas was putting glass _on the back_ ,
| doubling the chance of cracking it.
| SahAssar wrote:
| I think the nokia lumia line handled this pretty well:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf1fRu9YgfE
|
| My lumia 800 went through hell (including being dropped
| from a third floor balcony onto asphalt) but still looked
| good.
| pcl wrote:
| I put my phone in a case so that when I drop it, the corner
| of the case takes the brunt of the force instead of the
| phone itself. Unless the phone had a floating edge around
| it (essentially, a case), I would still need one.
|
| (Yes, it's still possible to drop my phone face down on a
| rock or something, but most of the times I've broken a
| phone screen, it's been a crack in the glass emanating from
| a corner. Which makes sense, given the physics of the
| things.)
| yumraj wrote:
| > Even if the phone was thicker, people would be using
| cases if they bought it, right?
|
| People started using cases for most part after the iPhone
| came out. Older phones were almost never used with a case,
| except perhaps for use case requiring a ruggedized
| enclosure.
| grishka wrote:
| I remember some people, especially elderly, putting their
| (dumb) phones into those protective plastic cases. The
| kind where you'd push the buttons through the plastic.
| That was looong before the iPhone came out and when
| something was considered a smartphone if it ran Symbian.
| snotrockets wrote:
| Some comments below suggests cases are for protection. I'd
| argue most cases are bought first & foremost a fashion
| accessory, then a safety device. Think wallets or watches.
| asdff wrote:
| It's the thinnest iphone ever that hasn't sat flat on a table
| for years. Touch the screen and it wobbles like a bar table
| needing some coasters under a leg. Apple purposely designs
| their cases to be flush with the camera bump, knowing that
| for most users, the phone will just live in a case.
|
| It's kind of ridiculous to build that baked in expectation
| for more accessory buying directly into your device, but I
| guess that's modern design principles. Extract more dollar,
| and leave you with the equivalent of a wobbly table if you
| don't buy in.
| pentae wrote:
| I have an 11 pro without a case on it and just tried
| replicating what you're describing and I can't do it.
|
| It pivots at most 1-2mm laterally to the left when i'm
| tapping hard on the left side of the screen which is barely
| noticeable. When I tap normally (a bit softer) or swipe it
| doesn't even move.
|
| I'm no fanboy but i'm amazed that out of all the things you
| could critique about Apple it would be this one.
| noelherrick wrote:
| I can't believe you're serious. Since the iPhone X, a
| screen replacement has been such a significant percentage
| of the cost it's not worth it. And if you damage the back
| glass, Apple will just replace the phone. Before the X, I
| was a bare phone user. After that, there is no way I
| would leave my phone exposed. The only way I could
| justify that danger would be if I could swallow a $1500
| expense every other week. Why? Fully glass phones slide
| off of everything. I'm sure there are HNers who can do
| that but I can't.
| FDSGSG wrote:
| Why don't you just get applecare plus? Getting a case has
| never even crossed my mind, I can just go replace my
| phone for free whenever I want.
| jjeaff wrote:
| What are you talking about? It's not free, there is a
| deductible. And it's not anytime you want. It's a maximum
| of 2 incidences per year. So you pay $200 a year plus $30
| for cracking your screen. Or $150 for loss or theft.
|
| I'm guessing you could get a third party screen repair
| for less than $230.
| FDSGSG wrote:
| Oh, Apple stores will waive the deductible if you ask.
| They don't even try to charge it if your device was
| originally sold in the EU.
|
| I've replaced two iphones in the past month, didn't pay a
| deductible for either.
|
| If you break your phone more than twice a year, a regular
| phone case probably isn't going to cut it.
|
| >I'm guessing you could get a third party screen repair
| for less than $230.
|
| Yes, but not 4 third party screen repairs and definitely
| not even one replacement phone. I've had two total losses
| in my 2 year applecare period, once the phone was damaged
| on both sides by a police baton and once by a falling
| dumbbell. A normal phone case wouldn't have been enough
| in either of these situations.
| theonemind wrote:
| The entire paradigm is broken by design if you have to
| buy it and slap it into a case. With first party
| engineering, they could make a phone that doesn't need a
| case..it would be bulkier, maybe less pretty, but _better
| than any third party case could ever be_ , and a better
| result than buying the pretty phone and slapping a big
| ugly case on it, because they put their resources into
| designing the product properly for its intended end use
| instead of leaving the end user to crappy hacks to cover
| up inadequate design.
|
| Personally, I just won't go there. If it's too expensive
| not to put a case on, it's too expensive for me to own.
| vizzah wrote:
| My iPhone 12 mini laying on the back side wobbles as hell
| when touching the screen even with a minor force. Not
| usable to type that way. Has anyone produced some kind of
| a sticker for the backside to make it even?
| dpkonofa wrote:
| I know it means nothing but I'm in the 5%. I've never had a
| case on my iPhone and I've owned every other generation since
| the original (I always skip generations for my devices since
| they started doing the incremental S versions). I prefer
| things without cases and the AirTags are going to be no
| exception. I'm going to throw them into a pocket or put them
| into an already existing spot so I like that it's thin.
| solarkraft wrote:
| > and the hangtag accessories look so pretty
|
| I'm going to buy AirTags and 100% disagree. I will likely print
| a complete enclosure because the accessories they sell are
| expensive, look stupid and will still scratch the tags up like
| mad (will I resell them? probably not, but still).
| brailsafe wrote:
| Sheesh, those are costly. $35 usd is more than two weeks worth
| of groceries, two months of a world of Warcraft subscription,
| and about the same price as any of Affinity's products. For the
| AirTag, I'd admit that it seems sophisticated enough to warrant
| it. But the loop to affix it!?
| zxcvgm wrote:
| Disappointed that this teardown was more of a teaser without any
| PCB photos. Here are some YouTube videos that feature a better
| look at the PCB of the AirTag:
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63dJ5ytz37w
|
| [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1-iKyVyLfU
|
| [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeytpQcUHSw
|
| Only video [1] went all the way and removed the PCB from the
| plastic case, revealing what seems to be an NFC antenna facing
| the plastic dome. Unfortunately, they struggled with removing the
| plastic carrier and broke the board in two.
| Kye wrote:
| Do you think they modeled the design after the round Apple
| campus?
| rokobobo wrote:
| I don't think you need to be inspired by a particular circle-
| shaped object to decide to design another circle-shaped object.
| Kye wrote:
| I was thinking in terms of circuit layout. Trying to fit it
| into the floor plan of the building would be a very Apple
| thing to do.
| zrail wrote:
| Probably some old Apple product that nobody remembers.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_USB_Mouse
| ftio wrote:
| My transverse carpal ligament remembers.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Currently, most Apple design shade gets thrown at the
| butterfly keyboard. This one must be remembered too in all of
| its horrendous glory.. We will never forget!
| fblp wrote:
| I wonder what the internal discussion at Apple was about whether
| or not to include a loophole in the product.
|
| The fact that fixit has gone out and shown how you can add a
| loophole rather than wasting $13 on an accessory is a bit of a
| facepalm moment.
| fastball wrote:
| It's really not though. I just bought a four pack, and I only
| want a loophole on one of them (so I bought the Belkin holder).
| crazygringo wrote:
| Because it's not going to be $13, you'll surely be able to buy
| 5 for $6 off Amazon soon for whatever kind of holder-with-
| loophole you want.
|
| People love customizing their things. Some people will need
| large holes, other tiny ones, depending on what they're
| attaching it to. Some will want to make their AirTag bigger and
| bulkier, others not.
|
| In this case I think Apple made the absolutely right decision.
| dzhiurgis wrote:
| Put one in your ear as a tunnel. Remember tunnels?
| hprotagonist wrote:
| >add a loophole
|
| Now, throw it in a glass of water for an hour.
|
| I'd be amazed if it didn't trash the IPx7 rating, which is an
| AirTags differentiator over Tile.
| justusthane wrote:
| That's a silly argument. There's absolutely no reason that a
| built-in loophole would have to let water in (unlike iFixit's
| drilled hole, which might).
| hprotagonist wrote:
| i meant that iFixit's argument that you could be cheeky and
| drill a hole for a key ring is true, but also would in all
| likelihood ruin the waterproofing.
| [deleted]
| culturestate wrote:
| I'll go out on a limb here and guess that their guiding
| principle with this was as it is with every other portable
| device they have now - make it as small as practically possible
| and let people extend it if and how they want[1] to.
|
| Saves a little bit of material, makes manufacturing a little
| less complicated, and makes the accessory ecosystem a whole lot
| more appealing.
|
| 1. I don't carry a keychain, for example, but I'll slip one in
| each of my bags.
| elliekelly wrote:
| > I'll go out on a limb here and guess that their guiding
| principle with this was as it is with every other portable
| device they have now - make it as small as possible and let
| people extend it if they want
|
| Here I am, desperately clutching my nearly-obsolete iPhone in
| my small hands, waiting for Apple to return to this principle
| and make an iPhone that I can comfortably use one-handed
| again.
| fastball wrote:
| Which iPhone do you have that is much smaller than the 12
| Mini?
| elliekelly wrote:
| I have the 8 (I think? whichever one was the last to have
| the home button) and it's only _slighty_ bigger than the
| 12 Mini in size but it's actually the screen on the newer
| phones that are too big. There isn't a way to comfortably
| hold it _and_ reach all of the real estate one-handed.
|
| I know I can do the stupid scoot the screen down thing
| but if you've ever tried to use that on a regular basis
| you'd see how worthless and frustrating it is. It's a
| waste of time and sometimes it hides part of the screen
| that I need to see!
|
| Honestly, if Apple would just let me set a top bar as
| like a clock or something across the whole iOS and shrink
| the functional display to the size of the iPhone 4 I'd be
| a happy camper. It would be ugly as anything but I don't
| even care because it would, ironically, be far more
| functional to me if I could just set the top quarter inch
| of the screen to be completely non-functional.
| shp0ngle wrote:
| iPhone mini exists. It has lackluster sales though so I
| think Apple will kill it in the next iteration.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| _> Here I am, desperately clutching my nearly-obsolete
| iPhone in my small hands, waiting for Apple to return to
| this principle and make an iPhone that I can comfortably
| use one-handed again._
|
| I've been using the iPhone12 Mini for months. It works
| great, one-handed.
|
| I have heard that it has not sold well, and may be
| discontinued. That would make me sad.
| dijit wrote:
| I upgraded from an iPhone SE (5 body) to an iPhone 12
| mini.
|
| Here's the thing: the 12 mini has the same dimensions as
| the iPhone 6 that I deemed too big originally. I picked
| up my old phone the other day and holy shit did it feel
| nice in comparison.
|
| If you were holding out for an iPhone 5 sized phone then
| this wasn't it; no wonder it didn't sell so good in that
| demographic. I only bought it because I wanted to support
| smaller phones- but realistically it's not small enough.
|
| EDIT: I think I'm wrong but it's closer to the 6 than the
| 5:
|
| 5: H 123.8mm (4.87 inches) W 58.6mm (2.31 inches) D 7.6mm
| (0.3 inches)
|
| 6: H 138.1 mm (5.44 in) W 67.0 mm (2.64 in) D 6.9 mm
| (0.27 in) (inc. lens, 7.5 mm, 0.30 in)
|
| 12 Mini: H 131.5 (5.18 in) W 64.2 (2.53 in) D 7.4 mm
| (0.29 in)
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| No, you're right. The screen makes it a LOT bigger than
| the iPhone SE (what I had used, previously).
|
| But it's just at the upper limit at what I can do one-
| handed.
|
| I traded in an XS Max for it. I don't miss that big
| honker, one bit. I use it as a test device, nowadays.
| teekert wrote:
| To easily do everything with one hand, swipe down from
| the bottom (as if unlocking but down), then you pull the
| upper part of the screen down. Works everywhere. (I also
| have the 12 mini btw, really like it)
| [deleted]
| jrobn wrote:
| The iPhone 12 Mini is great. I will never go back to a
| bigger phone again. The lack of all day battery life is a
| feature in my opinion. I use it more like a fancy tool.
| teekert wrote:
| "Lack of all day battery" depends on how you use it. I
| have 2 day battery (about 2-3 hr screen time/day). Since
| I got a second sim it decreased somewhat though, negated
| again to a agree by setting WLAN call.
| fencepost wrote:
| Is the 2020 SE still too large? Because I'm pretty sure
| they're not going smaller than that unless it's for
| radically cheaper devices targeted at the third world and I
| don't see that happening.
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| This was my thought as well. I'd probably never put these in
| a loop - I'll place one in my bag, on my measuring tape (ha),
| and my wife will probably use one too... Most likely without
| attaching it to anything, just sticking it in a pocket or
| whatever. It's fine for all of our use cases.
| mirthflat83 wrote:
| IP67, size, and design. Your comment is more of a facepalm
| moment.
| [deleted]
| NationalPark wrote:
| I think it has as many non-loophole uses as loophole uses, so I
| can see why they chose to cut down on bulk there. I put one in
| my wallet and one in a small internal pocket in my bag, neither
| are actually attached.
|
| I can't remember the last time I actually lost my bag or my
| wallet, but these are definitely pretty fun.
| texec wrote:
| Beside the size it's probably a tradeoff on mechanical
| integrity: a keyring can introduce immense mechanical stress.
| On my last tag the small loophole just broke away after a year
| on a key that was not used daily or in harsh environments. With
| the AirTag you can just replace a $2 third party accessory.
| Apple didn't have to engineer a very durable (maybe milled?)
| loophole, which would have increased cost.
| fblp wrote:
| Great response. Thank you!
| jayd16 wrote:
| This is what I would guess. They didn't want to see a bunch
| of broken look airtags floating around in a year's time and
| they also didn't want to spring for the metal reinforcement.
| ffggvv wrote:
| prettty sure the entire point was so they can make money off
| accessories
| dan1234 wrote:
| While ifixit did drill a hole, we have no way of knowing how
| durable that hole will be. The drill point looked pretty close
| to the edge, simple fatigue may snap the hole quite quickly.
| Jpoliachik wrote:
| > But why bother putting a real driver in here at all? Magnets
| not only add weight, they take up a lot of space. Looks like one
| corner Apple refused to cut on this tiny disk is sound quality.
|
| I find it fascinating what tradeoffs are decided upon. Apple is
| arguably the best luxury brand in the world - and this is why.
| rand_r wrote:
| Apple's unique ethos is technology as a means for creative
| expression. That's why they've excelled in font rendering,
| colour accuracy, sound fidelity, and input-lag.
|
| I think this value came from Steve Jobs, and I hope they never
| lose it because it imbues Apple with real human spirit. They're
| more than just another profit-seeking company.
| fnord123 wrote:
| > That's why they've excelled in font rendering, colour
| accuracy, sound fidelity, and input-lag.
|
| That'll be why mac laptops connect to bluetooth speakers
| using the worst default settings for sound fidelity so it
| sounds like a dying frog.
|
| And the input lag is quite terrible when the machine is under
| any load.
| dijit wrote:
| Input lag on an iPhone or an iPad is best in class. The Mac
| leaves much to be desired.
|
| I have never had an issue with Bluetooth on the Mac. Maybe
| there's issues if you're doing audio recording on the
| headset, but that's a limitation of bluetooth 4 and would
| be similar on Linux or Windows.
|
| My Linux laptop likes to negotiate HSP (low quality but
| with audio recording) over HSDP (high quality) with my Bose
| QC35s, but the Mac is quite happy to dynamically switch as
| needed.
| fnord123 wrote:
| Default bitpools on mac are very low for audio ime. To
| fix it, you can run the following:
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/5rfdj6/pro_tip_si
| gni...
| ryneandal wrote:
| I've tried to use the mic on my airpods with my windows
| desktop once -- Bluetooth 4 mic output _definitely_
| sounds like what he's describing. It's godawful and
| certainly an effective way to mete out punishment to
| those vendors you dislike via conference call. It's an
| immediate headache.
| fastball wrote:
| I'm sure that will be fixed once Apple inevitably starts
| building their own Bluetooth chipsets.
| gumby wrote:
| > you'll have to wait until 2015:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple-
| designed_processors#W_se...
| fastball wrote:
| * for computers.
|
| From what I've heard, their chipsets don't have the same
| problems as the ones they use in macs.
| baoqdau wrote:
| This is your brain on consumerism.
| ben-schaaf wrote:
| > That's why they've excelled in font rendering
|
| Not sure about the past, but without subpixel antialiasing
| they pretty much have the worst font rendering now.
| matwood wrote:
| Doesn't this only cause issues on non-HiDPI screens.
| owlboy wrote:
| Can you elaborate?
| spicybright wrote:
| Right? All it's missing is a Posted from my iPhone footer
| rand_r wrote:
| Basically, they assume you're using a retina quality (aka
| HiDPI) display where each virtual or abstract pixel maps
| to four physical pixels in the display.
|
| For example, you have a 27" 4K display, but set the
| resolution to 1920x1080 in System Preferences.
|
| Mapping each virtual pixel to four physical pixels lets
| you render curves really crisply. However, on non-HiDPI
| where you don't have pixel doubling, you have to use sub-
| pixel rendering to approximate curves.
|
| One technique is playing with slightly shading adjacent
| pixels so that at a distance curves appear to be smoothed
| out. But for some technical reasons, Apple dropped
| support for sub-pixel rendering. It was too hard to do
| and the future is HiDPI anyway.
| gumby wrote:
| > They're more than just another profit-seeking company.
|
| I do like Apple but be real: this is _how_ they garner their
| profits.
| tzs wrote:
| Is the magnet strong enough to stick the tag to ferromagnetic
| metals?
| gmrple wrote:
| Weakly, yes. Enough to hold its own mass at rest, but I don't
| think it would work with any type of acceleration. It will
| stick nicely to a neodymium magnet.
| gumby wrote:
| ... Which I assume also mutes it?
| tzs wrote:
| I'd expect sticking the tag to some ferromagnetic
| surface, such as a fridge door, by the magnet to have
| about the same effect as gluing the tag to that same
| surface would which I would guess would be none.
|
| Generally in a permanent magnetic speaker the permanent
| magnet is solidly affixed to the speaker housing.
|
| The part that actually moves to make sound (the
| diaphragm) has a coil attached to it. The signal is sent
| through that coil, which produces a variable magnetic
| field that interacts with the fixed magnetic field of the
| permanent magnet.
|
| This interaction produces a force that moves the coil,
| and thus also moves the diaphragm producing sound.
|
| You could probably design a speaker where the coil is
| fixed and the magnet is attached to the diaphragm, but
| that is generally not done. You want the moving parts to
| be as light as possible so that it doesn't take a lot of
| energy to rapidly change their motion.
|
| Consider a speaker playing an N Hz sine wave--it has to
| change direction 2N times per second, and between each
| direction change you want it to move far enough to move
| enough air to for the sound to be easily audible.
|
| If the moving part is too heavy you would need a lot more
| force to accelerate it enough to move far enough to move
| enough air in the short time you have in order to reach a
| specified loudness, and then it would take a lot of
| energy to quickly change direction and do the opposite
| movement. Hence, the heavy magnet is fixed and the light
| coil moves the diaphragm).
|
| Microphones are similar. There are moving coil
| microphones, but I don't recall seeing moving magnet
| microphones.
|
| You might think it would also be the same with phonograph
| cartridges, but there you _do_ find both moving magment
| and moving coil designs [1].
|
| [1] https://www.audio-technica.com/en-us/support/audio-
| solutions...
| gumby wrote:
| Thanks for that great message!
|
| The case I was thinking about was specific to the airtag.
| In this case a fixed voice coil moves a small permanent
| magnet attached to the diaphragm rather than the other
| way around (according to iFixit, quote below). So maybe a
| rare earth magnet oriented the right way could prevent
| the magnet from moving. There's an air gap so it will
| have to wait until I can do an experiment.
|
| Note from iFixit:
|
| > Did you notice the "button" on the underside of the
| cover? That's not a clickable button, like the Mate and
| SmartTag have, but rather the magnet we saw earlier in
| the X-ray. It sits right inside the donut-shaped logic
| board, nested into a coil of copper to form a speaker.
| You read that right--the AirTag's body is essentially a
| speaker driver. Power is sent to the voice coil, which
| drives the magnet mounted to the diaphragm--in this case,
| the plastic cover where the battery lives--which makes
| the sounds that lead you to your lost luggage.
| lloydatkinson wrote:
| More like "a discussion about how to drill a hole in it"
| lbebber wrote:
| Hahah the coin x-ray thing was great
| knolan wrote:
| The ifixit folks are really good at getting people invested in
| understanding what's going on inside our gadgets. A little bit
| of humour like this is especially fun.
| DoingIsLearning wrote:
| What exactly is 'UWB functionality'?
|
| Are they using UWB for RF localization?
|
| I assume you would need multiple beacons for that? Are they using
| the phone as a single beacon? Wouldn't this just give you a
| radius rather than a location?
| polishdude20 wrote:
| Yeah maybe. But from what I've heard the product can do, it'll
| guide you with a heading pointing towards where the product is.
|
| It may be that the iPhone has some sort of dual antenna
| functionality where the difference in time between signals
| being recieved can be used to find the direction.
| threepio wrote:
| What are the practical ramifications of Apple harnessing every
| existing iPhone as an AirTag discovery device in the Find My
| network? (I think it's awful from a privacy and device-ownership
| standpoint, but let's leave that aside.)
|
| For instance, because physics is real, it must take some amount
| of battery power & data transfer to collect information about
| nearby AirTags. Suppose I walk into Disneyland on a summer
| weekend with an iPhone. The place is going to be full of AirTags.
| Assumedly my iPhone will be very busy reporting on their
| location. Hour by hour, how does that workload compare to the
| stuff I ask my phone to do for me (e.g., receive text messages,
| download mail)? Will it run down the battery / chew up bandwidth
| caps in any significant way?
| knolan wrote:
| I would say those AirTags will be with the iPhones of their
| respective owners. Mine report as "With you" so perhaps they
| don't advertise themselves in this state. The phone will be
| frequently updating its own location to Find My anyway so no
| extra power draw.
|
| However if you're walking by a set of left luggage lockers or
| through some similar environment where lots of AirTags not with
| their owner then there would indeed be some overhead. If you
| work in baggage handling in an airport would probably be
| telling. This all depends on the frequency which the AirTag
| reports itself and the frequency where your iPhone listens out.
| I suspect the impact would be negligible considering the power
| draw of the U1 in the AirTag is of order the power draw that
| the phone must commit.
| threepio wrote:
| > Mine report as "With you" so perhaps they don't advertise
| themselves in this state.
|
| So you know for certain that AirTags have multiple broadcast
| states (e.g., "with me" vs. not)? Apple's description makes
| it sound like they only have one state:
|
| "Your AirTag sends out a secure Bluetooth signal that can be
| detected by nearby devices in the Find My network." [1]
|
| [1] https://www.apple.com/airtag/
| reasonabl_human wrote:
| The air tag just broadcasts location, the 'with you' state
| is generated within Find My iPhone, recognizing that the
| airbag is in the same location as your phone. That, and
| signal strength for locating the device.
| ylk wrote:
| > Communication with the Find My network is end-to-end
| encrypted so that only the owner of a device has access to its
| location data, and no one, including Apple, knows the identity
| or location of any device that helped find it.
|
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/04/apple-introduces-airt...
|
| In case you care about details: https://support.apple.com/en-
| nz/guide/security/sec60fd770ba/...
| https://support.apple.com/en-nz/guide/security/secd4ab33e5c/...
|
| I'm not sure how the e2ee works out when using Find My in the
| browser, but that's a different topic, I guess.
|
| edit:
|
| > This entire interaction is end-to-end encrypted, anonymous,
| and designed to be battery and data efficient, so there is
| minimal impact on battery life mobile data plan usage and user
| privacy is protected.
|
| https://support.apple.com/en-nz/guide/security/sec6cbc80fd0/...
| mirths wrote:
| The AirTag transmits every 2 seconds. The iPhone should scan
| every 2 minutes for 2 seconds in order to capture the AirTag.
| BLE scanning costs about ~20mW. So the average power
| consumption is 20mW * (2sec / 120sec) = 0.3mW.
|
| Over an entire day, it's 7mWh. The iPhone 12 battery is
| 10000mWh.
|
| Conclusion: it's neglibile.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Reporting this data home also costs power.
|
| It's rather pathetic how Apple restricts user's right to use
| full capabilities of their devices (like restricting running
| apps in the background) to 'increase their battery life'
| while simultaneously be perfectly fine to use that power for
| their own benefit.
|
| I wonder can a user disable this airtag reporting feature if
| he doesn't own a single airtag and doesn't want to
| participate in this surveillance network?
| knolan wrote:
| You can disable it from the Find My settings for iCloud in
| your phone.
| GeorgeTirebiter wrote:
| It's the principle: other people's tags get to commandeer
| resources from 'my phone' without me giving permission.
| Unless somewhere in the iPhone fine print it say something
| like "by using an iPhone, you are implicitly agreeing to
| become part of Apple's Global BLE Network" --- well, if not
| that, I'm not sure how Apple gets away with this.
| ylk wrote:
| > Any iOS, iPadOS or macOS device with "offline finding"
| enabled in Find My settings can act as a "finder device".
|
| https://support.apple.com/en-
| nz/guide/security/sec6cbc80fd0/...
|
| Open the Settings app and search for "Find My". You'll find
| the setting. Or follow this: Settings->Apple ID->Find
| My->Find My iPhone->Find My network
|
| There's some explanation as to what it does and you'll be
| able to opt out if you don't like it. (Though you won't
| even see the "Find My network" setting if you had "Find My"
| disabled anyway)
| mirths wrote:
| There _is_ a permission in iPhone settings: participate in
| "find my" network. You can turn it off.
| AlphaSite wrote:
| It also helps find your phone if you loose it. So everyone
| wins.
| beiller wrote:
| Would it be more if we consider the radio boot time to send a
| tx, and the amount of bytes sent to apples server? Also what
| happens if I'm at the air port with 100 air tags in range? I
| know they try to piggy back the data transmissions but now we
| are counting on apple's software having no bugs.
| cprecioso wrote:
| At first glance, I'd say the resource consumption is actually
| going to be basically negligible. The Bluetooth and GPS radios
| would probably be on anyway, and the packets flow through the
| air anyway, so just making a note of the IDs you see, batching
| them, and sending that every hour or so, is not going to be
| very heavy.
| audunw wrote:
| I'm assuming AirTags just send out Bluetooth advertising
| packets. Your phone is continuously listening for those anyway
| to detect devices you own, like your watch and headphone. So
| that part is "free".
|
| The power required to process the packet is negligible.
|
| Sending the data back to Apple could be more significant. But I
| guess that's only of the AirTag is "lost", and probably as part
| of a bundle of data sent regularly anyway, probably when asking
| Apple servers about new notifications. What takes power is
| waking up from sleep to send data. If the CPU is already awake,
| taking a few extra microseconds to transmit a few more bytes of
| data is nothing.
|
| So really, I don't think the energy and data it's using is
| anything to be concerned about. It's a drop in the bucket.
| Someone wrote:
| > Sending the data back to Apple could be more significant.
| But I guess that's only of the AirTag is "lost"
|
| To do that, your phone has to know which AirTags are lost.
|
| A solution might be that Apple periodically sends a list of
| lost AirTags to phones (possibly as a bloom filter or other
| inexact, but compact, structure), but I'm not convinced it
| does. Maybe, it bets on AirTags being rare enough (who's
| going to buy tens of them? I wouldn't, as the idea of having
| to replace those batteries would put me of buying many) for
| this not to be a problem.
| BoorishBears wrote:
| > I think it's awful from a privacy and device-ownership
| standpoint, but let's leave that aside.
|
| Why is that so?
| vlovich123 wrote:
| Are the iPhones always tracking and reporting? Or are they just
| watching passively for the devices reported lost and only
| reporting the location to Apple of your own AirTags. The latter
| seems far more sensible. The battery cost of this is fairly
| trivial. Your phone is already capturing its location and
| reporting for FindMy. The incremental cost of attaching the
| AirTag's location is minimal. To monitor BLE for a bunch of
| addresses is also minimal cost that's typically predominantly
| done within the BT chip to avoid waking the SoC. At first
| glance there are some details that are unclear here in terms of
| how they scale this. For example, at Apple scale, the total
| size of lost AirTags is quite large, larger than what you can
| typically offload to a BLE chip. Similarly, the privacy
| protection features mean that BLE addresses rotate so just
| passively scanning wouldn't be sufficient. My bet though is
| that that's the work that was done - offloading all of this to
| the BLE chip in ways that are friendly to the HW capabilities.
| It's also entirely possible they worked with their BT supplier
| to add the necessary low-level hooks to make that perform well
| and preserve privacy.
| jvanderbot wrote:
| Reminder: repair.org fights for right to repair legislation,
| provides actionable advice, and takes tax-deductible donations.
|
| Repair.org and ifixit are two sides of my favorite coin right
| now.
| fastball wrote:
| More like two sides of the same AirTag.
| GeorgeTirebiter wrote:
| Do people actually need to use these things? Maybe I'm weird, but
| when young, I had drilled into me Benjamin Franklin's "A place
| for Everything, and Everything in its Place". If I can't remember
| where I put something, then I suspect Bigger (medical) Problems
| are on the horizon... (!)
| twobitshifter wrote:
| There have been over 30 million tiles sold worldwide, so
| there's a sizable market. Many people are distracted and
| absentmindedly will leave valuables behind or in odd places,
| sunglasses, keys, wallets, umbrellas, hats, remote controls.
| Most of this is stuff on your person. Even if you have a proper
| place, sometimes stuff just drops out of pockets or bags.
| theonemind wrote:
| No one needs them. I have no idea why Apple made them.
| atorodius wrote:
| I bought one for my key, and am very happy.
| theonemind wrote:
| Honestly, they look very useful to me. I'm just being
| sarcastic to the grandparent humblebrag. I don't lose my
| keys, but I'm so bad at keeping track of them I keep them
| on a lanyard and hang them around my neck (which is why I
| don't lose them.)
| atorodius wrote:
| Sorry, didnt catch the sarcasm through text :)
| audunw wrote:
| I've never lost my car keys, but I plan to get airtags for them
| because replacing key fobs can be insanely expensive now a
| days.
|
| I wish AirPods acted as airtags. Those are the only other
| things I'm kind of worried about losing. Mostly because we have
| small kids.
|
| Maybe I'll hide one in our bikes as a low effort way to track
| them in case of theft.
| dzhiurgis wrote:
| I'd love to track my wallet, but tags are too thick for that.
| Causality1 wrote:
| I'm really hoping AirTags put some downward pressure on the
| tracker industry. There's an outrageous markup on most other
| trackers like Tile. Maybe if people can get AirTags for $30 Tile
| will stop pretending their $3 plastic squares are worth $25.
| mirthflat83 wrote:
| The x-ray image looks like Apple's spaceship campus
| DanBC wrote:
| > All three trackers open up with finger power--no other tools
| required! That said, the AirTag is by far the most difficult,
|
| I'm a little bit uncomfortable about this, because it gives
| access to a coin cell battery.
|
| People under-estimate how dangerous batteries can be.
|
| https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6134a1.htm
|
| > From 1997 to 2010, an estimated 40,400 children aged <13 years
| were treated in hospital emergency departments (EDs) for battery-
| related injuries, including confirmed or possible battery
| ingestions. Nearly three quarters of the injuries involved
| children aged <=4 years; 10% required hospitalization. Battery
| type was reported for 69% of cases, and of those, button
| batteries were implicated in 58%. Fourteen fatal injuries were
| identified in children ranging in age from 7 months to 3 years
| during 1995-2010. Battery type was reported in 12 of these cases;
| all involved button batteries.
| szhu wrote:
| Btw, would swallowing the AirTag whole be just as dangerous?
| They're water resistant, but I'm assuming that they won't stay
| sealed in stomach conditions.
| jmull wrote:
| I assume drilling a hole in an air tag would pretty much
| completely compromise its water resistance?
|
| That would be a pretty big drawback to using it on a key ring. I
| don't have to pull my keys out much any more, but I think they
| still end up exposed to water once in a while.
| smiley1437 wrote:
| I wonder if an Airtag can still track if it's been swallowed? Or
| does a human body block too much RF?
|
| I can practically guarantee these things will be swallowed if the
| ridiculous people who eat Tide Pods are anything to go on...
| glfharris wrote:
| Please don't swallow anything with a battery, for the sake of
| your local emergency department.
| Someone wrote:
| For those who don't know, read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
| Button_cell#Accidental_ingesti....
|
| Basically, shorting a battery using wet body tissues can lead
| to a hydrolysis reaction that produces sodium hydroxide
| (caustic soda), and that can burn through your oesophagus,
| blood vessels, etc.
| ericlewis wrote:
| that would be very very painful
| dylan604 wrote:
| "The ultimate white whale: a tool-free user-replaceable battery
| in an Apple product!"
|
| How sad in how true it is
| fencepost wrote:
| I wouldn't want to use their hack for drilling a hole - not
| because of the risk or loss of water resistance but because the
| edge of the hole isn't going to have great structural strength
| and will likely crack and let the keyring out. You'd also
| probably want to get some small split rings to use with that
| hole, then connect one of those to anything else.
| jandrese wrote:
| It was only a 1/8" hole, you can't line it with much and still
| fit a keyring through.
|
| Unfortunately the most obvious use case of attaching it
| directly to your keychain so you don't lose your keys probably
| won't work because in your pocket the keyring itself will act
| like a lever against the hole and tear the case to shreds. You
| really do need the overpriced accessory for that use case.
| laurent92 wrote:
| To attach an AirTag (or my micro Yubikey) to a keyring, you
| generally just use a string. It's flexible, strong, very thin
| and it's a good link to any keyring. With Yubikey the lanyard
| is $1.
|
| Anyway, I was wondering whether another fun idea would have
| been to drill the hole in the absolute center of the Airtag,
| and create a new market for batteries with a hole in the
| middle.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-05-02 23:02 UTC)