or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by TheOtherGeoff

I will be surprised if the iWatch/Time runs iOS.  My guess it will be iPod's OS or a variant that allows for secure pairing to iOS devices and downloading of firmware upgrades that way. I doubt it was misdirection, I really think it's CYA in that the decision/path hadn't been locked down at patent submission time.
 instrap circuitry is key.   1) it provided detection that the device is being worn (auto on/off)2) antennas3) it provides all the bio-telemetry.4) componentry can be spread out to provide greater accuracy ( multiple accelerometers to better detect rotation). As for separate replacement... same was said of batteries in phones.  If made correctly (flexible, non-breakable, non-degrading material, no hinges)  the only thing that needs field replacement will be the clasping...
doubtful.  at least not soon.  I don't think sharing that sort of IP was mentioned anywhere.   
And Carney isn't working for them anymore.  To me that says he's looking to get away from trying to find a sweet smelling message to describe the manure of 'how government works.' You've lumped a lot of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bush the 1st, 50's Defense Appropriations, into a role that neither the clearance or the pay grade to even gain access to 'our data.  Yet you haven't pointed out one thing that Carney has done or the power to do.   Bravo.   Great straw man argument.
 a PR chief for a corporation is NOT supposed to help Apple win over customers.   that's MARKETING.  If anything, the PR chief is supposed to make sure they don't LOSE customers based on how corporate actions are perceived. a PR chief's main (not supposed) job is to maximize the positive spin on the corporation's message to the press and stockholders. Before she resigned, did you even know who Katie Cotton was and what she did for Apple.  Other than 'Fake Steve Jobs,'...
The hardest  thing to do is say 'no' - Steve Jobs. Really.  I read this thread, and it basically boils down to Tablets have been a niche.   They are too big to be really mobile, mobile phones do 100% of what tablets do, just smaller, and there is just too much 'windows' in the world for work to be done on them. The iPad Mini was Apple's feint to the gap between the 10" iPad, and the 4" iPhone, a gap that Android was making millions of sales into.  the Mini closed that gap...
 I wouldn't say that.    I would say... They were 3 years late in purchasing Nokia. If they had purchased Nokia and build the Surface Tablets in 2010,  They had a chance to be a 3rd player vs Android and iOS.  Now... they are not a factor at all... too little too late... too short of runway to make surface a player.
Or it's the most painful way to realize a change in direction.  This is no different than when Apple said 'NO' to the 10 or so products when Steve came back.   Focus, refocus, and focus again.   Microsoft has a couple really hard decisions.  Does it want to be the OS at the endpoint, or the SW people use, because the former means it has to own the Hardware (Nokia, Surface).   I'm reading that they want to be the SW people use, which is now App and Cloud based, not WINDOWS...
but what if samsung was the single source and they failed.   that's a FAIL.   having a supplier who is already building to spec... that's redundancy.  It may be costly, but your recovery plan is in place and tested.
To build a fab is a major CapEx undertaking, frought  with schedule and technology risk.  Better to have a samsung or a TMSC build the facility, as they do that every other year, and they have a huge number of clients to distribute the risk, and to utilize the facility once it's not the 'cutting edge' of technology supplying 'state of the shelf' chips to the masses.   Apple doesn't want to do any of that.
New Posts  All Forums: