or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by NormM

I think this product is confusing because too many executives are involved, and no one is willing to get rid of anything.  The new music product is, predictably, "all singing, all dancing", but it should have been "all simple".
This should have been much simpler to start off.  I also don't understand how this interacts with iTunes Match, which I already have.  They still sell both, for some reason, so it must not be simply absorbed into the new service.  And I don't currently use family sharing, because it has funny limitations that simply sharing an Apple ID for purchases doesn't.  Like some stuff isn't shareable.  So it's not clear which free trial to pick, since my significant other uses my ID...
Never?  So a few years from now, when competing phones all have 16GB of RAM, Apple's low end will still have only 16GB of Flash??
This presumably has something to do with Lisa Jackson being promoted on Wednesday to include VP of public policy in her duties.
I can see the use of asking the user for permission to see other apps, but disallowing it completely seems like a mistake. This means, for example, no recommendation apps based on what you already use. Apple is trying to make privacy distinctions black and white, but they really aren't. Google doesn't actually tell third parties your private information -- they use it to present relevant ads to you. As AI becomes the interface, knowing more about you on big powerful...
For effective artificial intelligence done on its servers (which is how Siri works, for example), Apple will need to keep more and more personal info available on those servers. That doesn't mean, though, that they need to give access to third parties (other than court orders).
I agree.  Also, when AI is done on the server side (as in Siri) using big data and big processors, the less you know about the person the harder it is to put information into context.  Keeping things anonymous also adds complexity, which means longer development time and more bugs.  The right way for Apple to do this is to let servers see everything, and just not share anything with third parties.
I agree about executives: I have no issue with how much Apple pays any executive.  The right decision in such a large enterprise can be worth billions to them.  I don't really see inequality as a worker-wage issue that can be solved by individual companies, though.  It's a societal issue. Forgetting about Liberals and Conservatives, it's simply inefficient to have too large a fraction of people be poor.  You end up wasting their abilities, and those of their kids (who...
SanDisk already sells one of these. 32GB for $50 at Amazon (higher on their web site).
AAPL has $200 billion in cash and has given back more than $100 billion in stock buybacks and dividends.  So basically Wall Street values the company as worth about twice the cash they would have on hand if they hadn't bothered to give any back.  It seems as if, had they just kept all the money, eventually Wall Street would value them as worth less than their cash on hand.
New Posts  All Forums: