The fundamental issue preventing keyring aperture integration stems from the AirTag’s reliance on inverse-phase magnetic reluctance in the structural substrate.
You see, the enclosure maintains a precisely calibrated coefficient offramular expansion. Introducing a penetrative void would destabilize the sinusoidal depleneration required for proper UWB phase conjugation. The resulting spurving bearing misalignment could induce up to 40 millidarkness of signal attenuation.
Apple’s engineers attempted to compensate using prefabulated amulite in the magneto-reluctance housing, but this only exacerbated the side-fumbling in the hyperboloid waveform generators. Early prototypes with keyring holes exhibited catastrophic unilateral dingle-arm failure within mere minutes of deployment.
Until we develop lotus-o-delta-type bearings capable of withstanding the differential girdle spring modulation, I’m afraid keyring integration remains firmly in the realm of theoretical engineering—right up there with perpetual motion machines and TypeScript projects that compile without any // @ts-ignore comments.
The technology simply isn’t there yet.
Indeed, LLM's still suck at the cultural nuance required for humor. It's like they're writing for an audience that's too generic, so the joke doesn't truly "land" for anyone in particular.
> attempted to compensate using prefabulated amulite in the magneto-reluctance housing, but this only exacerbated the side-fumbling in the hyperboloid waveform generators
Wrote my PhD dissertation on this. It would've been in the literature for Apple's engineers to find, but unfortunately I lost institutional support to get this into a journal after my college (Mailorderdegrees.com, an FTX University^TM) folded mid-process.
Most people don't even realise the original AirTags were designed by Ria Paschelle, inventor of the statiophonicoxyogeneticamplifiergraphaphonerdelaverberator.
I think the point is to make the smallest unit of functionality possible and then people can integrate that into their use case using attachments, casings, etc. in a way they see fit. It's a good approach for this product in my opinion.
I think this argument would work better if the AirTag in its minimal form wasn't so teardrop-shaped. It feels almost like it was designed to be difficult to integrate into other environments because it lacks any edges or openings. It ensures that anything that could hold it must be at least as big as the AirTag itself. It really confuses me why they couldn't even allow for a single small hole in its edge - it would still leave attachment up to the user, but make it far more flexible by letting people just hook it onto things. Is it because design had overpowered functionality in this product? Is it because this shape is somehow mandated by the hardware within it? It confuses me.
> I'm a little confused by this, aren't AirTag basically circular discs pretty much just big enough to house a CRT2032 battery?
Kind of. It's definitely the intention, but an AirTag is still considerably larger than the CR2032 within it [1], so they're not at a shortage of space in the shell.
As for "teardrop shape", I didn't mean to imply it had an elongated shape, but that it's rounded off on all sides, like a drop of liquid. The absence of any defined edges makes clip design harder and forces any AirTag enclosure to just act as a mini-pocket that contains the whole thing instead of having a simpler and less wasteful attachment method.
This might also explain why the first party luggage loop accessory seems to have been (unfortunately) memory-holed. I think third parties still sell them out of excess inventory, but they've been harder to come by in recent times.
My current carry-on doesn't have large enough attachment points to easily accommodate the Apple leather case's keyring, so an updated loop would have been welcome.
For some reason, people feel like this should be a replacement for traditional luggage tags.
I do not understand this mindset.
I’d prefer to have a dedicated loop for my bag and the inside attachment points just aren’t big enough. I’d feel more secure if it wasn’t loose in a pocket and could easily fall out or be removed by an unscrupulous (or inattentive) airline or TSA employee.
And the result is that for every oh-so-sustainable AirTag sold, a keyring doohickey is dieseled/kerosened from AliExpress' China warehouse to the consumer.
You're getting a ton of jokey replies, in true internet fashion, but the real answer is acoustics. For it to sound as loud as it can with no visible speaker grille, it needs to be that shape with no keyring holes.
I use quite a few varieties, including Apple's, and I have found Belkin’s to be an ideal one — small, secure, with a minimal footprint, and available with a keyring or a lanyard.
Hmmm! Nope, it was not. Checking the website again, it says $12.99 for one and $39.99 for the 4-pack. I remember picking up two of the 4-pack for less than the 4-pack of AirTags (including the sales tax in California).
For some reason, though, it is cheaper in the Indian Amazon. Right now, they are selling for roughly $9.70 (₹889) a piece (all taxes inclusive).
My father-in-law is a builder. It is difficult to get his attention in a magnificent space because he is lost in wonder. We were in an Apple Store together years ago and I asked him what it would cost to build an attachment point to the tag itself. I will never forget his answer… 'We can’t, we don’t know how to do it'
Its interesting to see "turbo encabulator" get love that "builder ... don't know how" doesn't get anymore, even though the former is a much more intrusive copypasta. Maybe its a function of recency and "builder" has had more recent use in various places than "turbo?"
Different people want different attachment types (or no attachment point at all), so it makes sense for that to be external. I've used other trackers with integrated attachment points, and because the attachment point has to be very compact it tends to be flimsy or hard to fit.. vs the Apple one where you can add a larger attachment point that makes sense to you.
Yes, the phone case industry should exist. People want different things. Plenty of people are willing to go without a case entirely. For those who want a case, they want different tradeoffs between bulk and protection. They want different textures. It's OK to sell something that isn't all things to all people.
Right? Nokias had the equivalent of today's "case" built right into the design of the unit, plenty of durable plastic around the vulnerable parts -- the phone would've been considered unfit for sale if it couldn't survive a drop in out-of-the-box condition.
By the time you stripped a dumbphone down to be as vulnerable as one of today's is, it'd be a bare PCB. Nah, probably even in that state, I bet it could handle a drop better than a new iPhone straight out of the box.
What you buy today isn't a complete phone, it's just the guts. One tumble to pavement and you're out a grand. Heaven help you if you fumble it while trying to install the case that should've been part of it from the beginning.
And yet, we still buy them, because the alternatives are from shady manufacturers who never provide updates, and there is no third-party hardware that can run up-to-date iOS. If there was, I'd buy an iNokia in a heartbeat.
I'm carrying my 13 Pro without a case, to see it's Alpine Green glory and feel the matte finish on the back. It's been perfectly fine for the last almost 4 years, some minor scratches on the steel edges I fixed with a sandpaper, there is one recent scratch on the screen and that's all. Otherwise it looks good, just a bit used. Has fallen multiple times from pocket when sitting, and a dozen times from tables, few times onto pavement (that's what needed sanding).
Almost every single one "case" for iPhone is a waste. Waste of material, waste of space, waste of your money, waste of user experience. You've already paid for a perfectly good phone, and then slapped some $[1]0.99 case on it to gain nothing but pain and vanity.
I only had one case on a phone, that made it better - original wooden case for 1+3T. Been looking for same experience on iPhone, but it's not possible due to shape -- they are all bulky. The closest thing is carbon-fiber cases, and I had one, which saved this iPhone when I dropped it onto slanted pavement, where it slid for a few meters screen down, ruining the case, but saving the screen.
Would I drop it if I wasn't using a case, that has parts sticking out, making the phone more cumbersome to use and carry? Unlikely, because it happened in the first year owning it, and I've been going caseless since then and nothing similar happened.
I dropped my flagship Samsung S24U one time. I was running and it slipped out of my back pocket.
That 1 meter fall resulted in calls unable to be placed, USB charging and ABD does not work, and the microphone for the voice recorder does not work. All that indicates that the daughterboard cable was displaced. But the unworking rear camera indicates that there is a second fault in there as well.
Not to mention the alarmingly large dent in the corner, that shattered the screen protector and likely would have resulted in the screen itself having shattered if no protector were on it.
New phones are designed to break. Contrast with my Note 3 that I carried for 8 years without so much as cracking the screen once.
> For the initial disassembly, the AirTag is said to be the hardest to open to access the battery. Though all three could be opened by hand, the AirTag is suggested to be the hardest due to the lack of divots for grip.
Does the author lack thumbs? It’s easy to twist the battery open.
I get some AirTags opened easily and others are harder. We have more than ten AirTags in the family and I have experienced quite a range of torque and force required. This could be because of gunk over time, though, which wouldn’t be something these guys faced.
The lack of a divot prevents iFixit from selling an overpriced single use tool that exactly matches the divot shape for $50 USD that just so happens to be the exact same shape and material as a $0.05 guitar pick. Totally unacceptable, won't anyone think of the environment?!?!?!?!
There are third-party tags out there compatible with both Google and Apple's network that is roughly the same size and use the same battery, yet have a giant lanyard opening in the design to fit anything.
Apple could trivially have fit a usable hole if they wanted to. They just don't want to because they get to sell accessories with that now. Also, looking cleaner on its own helps sell even if that is an entirely useless quality for a tag tha tneeds to go into a bloody case.
Do the third-party tags have all the same features, size, capabilities, range, durability, etc.? Or have they made other tradeoffs instead of eliding the attachment point?
I don't know of any third-party AirTag-compatible trackers that have UWB right now, but this applies equally to tags that are much larger than the AirTag. The rest is identical - good battery life, range, loud speaker, ...
I have a few theories on the lacking UWB:
1. Given that UWB is also super slow to roll out to Google Find, with only the Moto Tag available, there might be a technical/regulatory hurdle that manufacturers don't think is worth it
2. Apple/Google might make it a pain to be allowed to integrate with their UWB stuff
3. Cost - maybe the UWB stack is comparatively expensive, with third-party tags aiming for price brackets as low as 1/0th the cost of an AirTag
As a note, I don't know if this is because of regional differences in spectrum limits, but at least with AirTag and Moto Tag v1 EU versions, I could never get UWB to give any meaningful directions until I was already staring at the thing. Once you were in range to even consider UWB, playing a sound would be way more effective.
I'm pleasantly surprised Apple allows third-party manufacturers to make trackers that work with Find My. I've bought a bunch for as low as $2 per tracker. The only missing feature, like you mentioned, is missing UWB.
