or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Mazda 3s

That's exactly what my post from above was getting at. An entire car makes no sense from Apple's perspective. But to have a piece of Apple tech in EVERY car (or nearly every car) vastly expands its reach.
An actual Apple Car, a vehicle made by Apple, is bullshit. This post over at VW Vortex sums it up nicely:http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?p=87189708#post87189708
This sounds like a bunch of BS to me. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. If anything, these vans seem like Apple's answer to Google Street View and little else. Besides, the minivan market is one of the worst segments to enter. It has been shrinking for years as people gravitate towards compact and midsize crossover vehicles.
I would be all over this -- it's almost perfect, but is hampered by one fatal flaw: you can only access the service with one device at a time. So if I wanted to watch a game on ESPN downstairs, my wife couldn't be watching something on AMC upstairs in the bedroom.    Hell, I would even put up with sticking bunny ears on our HDTVs for local channels, but the one device restriction makes this a non-starter in my household.
It's pretty simple actually...
Very good article, DED, but the trolling the title is going overboard (although I guess it's good for Google News search algorithms...)
Hah, that very well could be true!  Just seems odd to ridicule and try to discredit IDC when it suits your agenda...Then use their data and analysis when its suits your agenda. If they are s**t and shouldn't be trusted, then their numbers shouldn't be used for analysis as a credible source. But if you do use their numbers, it lends credibility to a source that you have tried in the past to discredit.
Aren't IDC and Gartners numbers and analysis routinely panned here by AI's editorial staff, yet here this report is being taking a face value because it makes a great headline to pick on Amazon. Can't have it both ways...
 That makes sense. What I don't understand though (and I guess what frustrates me with DED's articles putting down the competition) is that the market is big enough for a number of players. Apple makes great high-end chips, as does Qualcomm. Qualcomm also makes mid- to low-end chips to cater to lower price points that Apple doesn't want to mess with. And that's fine, not everyone needs to drive around in a Porsche for Porsche money when a VW will do. I prefer my iPhone 6,...
OK, maybe I'm missing something, but I don't understand the slant of this article.http://www.cnet.com/news/android-stays-unbeatable-in-smartphone-market-for-now/If Android phones make up 84% of the smartphone market, and Qualcomm chips seem to be in the vast majority of those devices, they're still selling a s**tload more chips than Apple, right?
New Posts  All Forums: