or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple investing record $10.5 billion in supply chain robots & machinery
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple investing record $10.5 billion in supply chain robots & machinery - Page 2

post #41 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewyboy View Post
 

I should have clarified. I was more so talking about just annual income from pay wages. Now if we're talking net worth, I'd say drblank that those numbers are probably pretty stink'n close. But the question arises, what's the spread against the population w/ those numbers? I'd say in the USA it's clearly lopsided to Upper Lower Class and Low Middle class. And that's across all ages in the US. I know many people how are nearing or are in "retirement" age and hardly have much, if anything saved. I know I'm negative, but hey, I'm only a few years out of college and hammering away at student loans. I know that when retirement comes (which I personally don't believe in), I'm not going to be caught w/ my pants down.

In terms of yearly salary, people in Silicon Valley, if your family income is $250K you are probably considered middle class.  But if you made that much money and lived in the mid-west, you would be lower upper class.   The cost of a DECENT 4 bedroom house in Silicon Valley costs $750K or more, but in other areas, that same house in a similar neighborhood might only be $250 to 350K and in some areas, that same house is only $175K.    It sucks, but them's the truth. Or close to it.

 

A person making about $70K to $90K a year is kind of lower middle class by themselves.  But it USED to be $50K a year.

 

To put things in perspective, back in the late 60's, a lot of people in upper management for a growing high tech company only made around $20K a year, but they were making more money from stock/ stock options.

 

Dig these numbers.

 

What's a top of the line fully loaded 4 door Mercedes Benz cost?  An S Class AMG is around $200K (I'm guessing, but I think that's about how much that costs).  Back in '69, Mercedes most expensive 4 door sedan 300SEL 6.3, it cost about $14K.  Similar sized engine 8 cylinder (only the 69 only put out 400HP instead of 600+HP), and everything about the car is far better than it was, but people back in '69 thought their feces were gift wrapped if they were able to buy a car for $14K. High end Ferraris were like $20K back in '69, but now, they are hundreds of thousands even over $1 Mil.  


Edited by drblank - 11/13/13 at 9:15am
post #42 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post
 

 

 

.... Capitalism manages  creates corruption ....

There, I fixed it for you.

Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #43 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post


An improved Capitalism is not Socialism. This kind of knee-jerk reaction to any thoughtful critique of the status quo serves no useful purpose.

This !

Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #44 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

To put things in perspective, back in the late 60's, a lot of people in upper management for a growing high tech company only made around $20K a year, but they were making more money from stock/ stock options.

 

That is exactly where most of the "wealthy" get wealthy. I forgot where I saw it, but there was an article that showed that most of the wealthy in america gain only something I think around 20-30% of their yearly income from salary. The rest is from the stock market and other investments. 

 

I ran across an interesting tool from WSJ that calculates your "percentage" based on your income. Now in regards to Silicon Valley, that is one of a few exceptions to average in where it is excessively high. But point still taken.

 

Overall thing I've learned by the age of 28 is that it's not about how much you make, although it does help, it's about what you do with what you make. Some like instant gratification where as others prefer delayed. It's those that delay that tend to show other characteristics to make wiser financial decisions.

post #45 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewyboy View Post
 

 

That is exactly where most of the "wealthy" get wealthy. I forgot where I saw it, but there was an article that showed that most of the wealthy in america gain only something I think around 20-30% of their yearly income from salary. The rest is from the stock market and other investments. 

 

I ran across an interesting tool from WSJ that calculates your "percentage" based on your income. Now in regards to Silicon Valley, that is one of a few exceptions to average in where it is excessively high. But point still taken.

 

Overall thing I've learned by the age of 28 is that it's not about how much you make, although it does help, it's about what you do with what you make. Some like instant gratification where as others prefer delayed. It's those that delay that tend to show other characteristics to make wiser financial decisions.

Yeah, I know. I made investments when I could when I was in my 20's, some turned out to be big money makers, but unfortunately, I didn't have more to invest and unfortunately I was forced to not work by some of the sleaziest scumbags in the s/w industry that don't understand the concept of making the product work so the account exec can sell more product and purposely having s/w installed improperly so it doesn't work and trying to cover it up preventing future business and then blaming the account exec. Freaking alcoholic CEO's and other members of upper management. It's too bad we can't get rid of these types of scum sucking losers..  That's why I won't work for alcohol drinkers.  They are two faced.  It's their nature, they can't be honest with their employees or themselves.

 

Anyway, enough of my rant. 

 

I think that Apple is at least doing what they can to bring jobs back to the US, and they have to start with the products that make the most sense until they can figure out how to do more of the other products that are more difficult.  But robotics aren't going away, that's a fact.

 

Maybe 50 years from now, many products will be made in our own homes with a device that is more advanced than a 3D printer, but 3D printers are more for prototyping right now.   In order to do metal based products, they aren't quite there to replace traditional production fabrication methods. But that will change over time.

post #46 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I don't know if you noticed, but in the MacPro mfg plant, each robotic system was "manned" by a human being.  And who makes these robotic systems? Other robots?  They still need people, it's just that robots lessen the number of people required to do menial jobs.  Apple's not the only one that's been using robots, nor will they be the last.  They STILL have human beings doing final assembly.  It's just that they want precision and consistency in the mfg of their products. Robots rarely make mistakes, plus they can better manage their flow of components because they know precisely how much product they go through on a daily basis.  It's actually quite interesting to see the entire process and have someone explain what/how they manage each step of the process from start to finish.

This basically tells people that if you want to work, the minimum wage assembly jobs are still there, but it's better if you got a college education to man a robot rather than whining about it. I don't know what the job requirements are for being a robot operator, but I'm sure it's not a minimum wage job.  I think you would have to have maybe a mechanical engineering degree or some sort of related degree so when something happens or needs to be done with the robot, you aren't totally clueless.

Actually, the internet alone changed the landscape of the job market probably more than companies like Apple mfg electronic components.

People don't go to local retail stores as much as they did prior to the internet, which is why a lot of retail stores shut down.
Nothing to be scared of go to school and learn to fix those robots or make them or program them or just maintain them. Where there is electronics there will always be a human controlling it (foreseeable future)
post #47 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixinmaster23 View Post


Nothing to be scared of go to school and learn to fix those robots or make them or program them or just maintain them. Where there is electronics there will always be a human controlling it (foreseeable future)

Yeah, 3D technology is the future for production, but it's still going to need people to monitor, fix, maintain the equipment, plus programming them/designing the actual product.  It's just going to make it faster and ultimately cheaper to bring things to market.  But it's going to be a while at the rate they are going. 3D printing is more for prototyping right now.

 

They still need to bring the raw materials (metal, plastics) from somewhere and process it to go into 3D printers since they use powered metal, plastics.

post #48 of 79

You can not easily copy hardware as you can software, which is why I love this and believes Apple's efforts to further itself from competition is the key to the future. 

 

Automation does equal lower cost per unit over time, but more so for Apple, this will enable them to do things others can't. Apple continually shows off their manufacturing process, and that is why Apple is considered one of the best in build quality. 

 

I would like to also see Apple spend money on battery and screen technology, as well as continued efforts on processors. 

 

Excited to see the fruits of Apple's labor! 

post #49 of 79

A lot of talk about political systems in this thread, so I'm going to make one comment and then go back to tech stuff.

 

In my opinion, there are certain axioms that we should remember, the most important one being:  Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.   When any one system has "all the money/power" .... then that system is on the way to self destruction. Can anyone take a good look at the present day US capitalistic society and claim it's the best one for it's citizens? The stock market is broken and corrupt, the banking system is broken and corrupt .... these two "power groups" only exist to line their own pockets off of the back of the general population. When a system encourages "personal greed" to replace "motivation" .... it's only a matter of time before it implodes. (hint: It's already started)

 

Personally, I think that until we, as a group, start to give equal weight to people, environment and profits ...( let's call it the PEP party)  with just token regard to the other two groups, we will always be stuck in the mess we are now in ... just going blindly from one financial calamity after another, aways willing to leave it up to others to "fix" the system . Guess what .... it's already "fixed" .. and not in a good way.

 

We can either learn to respect the ideas of others, using the best to strengthen our own beliefs .... or we can, mistakenly, try to build by tearing down all those who would dare to disagree.  Please choose wisely !

Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #50 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post
 

A lot of talk about political systems in this thread, so I'm going to make one comment and then go back to tech stuff.

 

In my opinion, there are certain axioms that we should remember, the most important one being:  Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.   When any one system has "all the money/power" .... then that system is on the way to self destruction. Can anyone take a good look at the present day US capitalistic society and claim it's the best one for it's citizens? The stock market is broken and corrupt, the banking system is broken and corrupt .... these two "power groups" only exist to line their own pockets off of the back of the general population. When a system encourages "personal greed" to replace "motivation" .... it's only a matter of time before it implodes. (hint: It's already started)

 

Personally, I think that until we, as a group, start to give equal weight to people, environment and profits ...( let's call it the PEP party)  with just token regard to the other two groups, we will always be stuck in the mess we are now in ... just going blindly from one financial calamity after another, aways willing to leave it up to others to "fix" the system . Guess what .... it's already "fixed" .. and not in a good way.

 

We can either learn to respect the ideas of others, using the best to strengthen our own beliefs .... or we can, mistakenly, try to build by tearing down all those who would dare to disagree.  Please choose wisely !

 

 

I agree with your outcome, but not the source, that being capitalism, but crony capitalism. 

 

Big business that are tied heavily into Big government is the problem. Wall Street being prompted up by the Fed is the problem. Capitalism without Socialism works great. We in the U.S. have our government too involved with business and processes. No, that is not to say deregulate, but government has great opportunities to have oversight, but they rather exercise the power of embedding itself into the process. 

 

Example: Banks went under due to sub-prime loans which our government forced them to do. Yes, they found a way to profit from it, but that is what businesses do, they make profit. Then our government bailed them out, why? If you dive into the facts, you will notice billions of dollars going every which way, many having nothing to do with home loans, which, wait for it.... are still in trouble. In a pure capitalist society, those loans would never have been made, and banks would never have been bailed out. 

 

So the power corrupts applies to the relationship government has with business and Wall Street. 

 

Example: Agriculture [see http://farmageddonmovie.com]. The government, in relationship with big agriculture forces regulations that keep small farms from competing. To the extent of government entering small farms, at gun point, for selling.... wait for it... raw milk! Raw milk is only legal to sell in 3 States I believe, California is one of them. Also the meat processing is so overblown, small companies can't compete. Read this tragic story about a family farm that closed after 380 years http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/11/05/after-380-plus-years-new-hampshire-family-sells-farm/ Then you have the pharmaceutical industry which is also corrupt. 

 

Crony capitalism does not work. Unfortunately the socialist in this country are tying to pass their crony capitalism off as pure capitalism and then suggest capitalism does not work so we need more government. So yes Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

post #51 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post

A lot of talk about political systems in this thread, so I'm going to make one comment and then go back to tech stuff.

In my opinion, there are certain axioms that we should remember, the most important one being:  Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.   When any one system has "all the money/power" .... then that system is on the way to self destruction. Can anyone take a good look at the present day US capitalistic society and claim it's the best one for it's citizens? The stock market is broken and corrupt, the banking system is broken and corrupt .... these two "power groups" only exist to line their own pockets off of the back of the general population. When a system encourages "personal greed" to replace "motivation" .... it's only a matter of time before it implodes. (hint: It's already started)

Personally, I think that until we, as a group, start to give equal weight to people, environment and profits ...( let's call it the PEP party)  with just token regard to the other two groups, we will always be stuck in the mess we are now in ... just going blindly from one financial calamity after another, aways willing to leave it up to others to "fix" the system . Guess what .... it's already "fixed" .. and not in a good way.

We can either learn to respect the ideas of others, using the best to strengthen our own beliefs .... or we can, mistakenly, try to build by tearing down all those who would dare to disagree.  Please choose wisely !

Our system today is not "real" capitalism. It is corporatist, aka "crony" capitalism. Therefore, arguments against laissez faire capitalism, or pro-socialism ignore the fact that THINGS DONT WORK TODAY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A FREE MARKET. We have an over regulated system that favors the politically connected. In a free market, competition lowers costs and squeezes out inefficiencies. Regulations and restrictions on competition (including the minimum wage, incidentally) create corruption, inefficiencies and monopolistic behavior.

Please learn the difference and get real.
Edited by SpamSandwich - 11/13/13 at 10:40am

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #52 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewyboy View Post
 

I think you may have hit the nail on the head as to what the legacy of Tim Cook is going to be.

 

That is an interesting point, where is that investment going to be made.  Will Apple invest billions in Foxconn or Pentagron? Or wil they try to remove labor and build antomated plants in the US?

post #53 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

They say Tim Cook is a genius at manufacture and logistics. And geniuses change things. Could he be The Man who brings Manufacturing back to the US?

 



iPhone
Designed by Apple in California
Assembled by Apple Robots in Texas
post #54 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post
 

 

 

I agree with your outcome, but not the source, that being capitalism, but crony capitalism. .... 

 

 So yes Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Money = power .... therefore capitalism begat "crony capitalism"  .... that is, unless you truly believe that the government actually "makes the rules."  In the beginning, perhaps capitalism in it's purest form, was a "good idea"...... and maybe Communism, in it's purest form,  (from each, according to his ability, to each, according to his need.) ...was a "good idea".  My point is that, greed, which has been, and always will be a part of human nature, (albeit by varying degrees)  cannot be ignored when considering a "system" .... and both of these systems have ignored that fact at their peril.  Communism may have died first, but there can be little doubt, that without massive change in our collective thinking, capitalism is on the same pathway, and that change has to include everyone, not just the "elite". They will not be ignored much longer. There are a lot more "have nots" than "haves" and someday, if we don't find a way to share, they'll find a way to take it, just like we have seen in other parts of the world where we have watched people fighting for freedom, sometimes by standing in front of a tank.

 

Not trying to rag on you, but the fact is that you seem to be blaming others (Capitalism without Socialism works great.) is a perfect example of what I'm saying.

 

An interesting fact is that Canada's "socialistic" government was responsible for not allowing the Canadian banks to follow the lead of the, mainly US banks,( in spite of the powerful lobbying effort on the banks behalf)  to relaxing the rules, making it easier for banks to lend more than they previously could .... and by curtailing that power we were spared the mess that the US banking system created.

 

One last thing, you say that the government "forced" the banks behaviour .... then why was it that not all banks acted in that destructive manner? I say that greed forced that behaviour and "Capitalism without Socialism" only serves the power group.  Can that truly be what we want for society at large?


Edited by newbee - 11/13/13 at 11:24am
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #55 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post
 

Money = power .... therefore capitalism begat "crony capitalism"  .... that is, unless you truly believe that the government actually "makes the rules."  In the beginning perhaps, capitalism, in it's purest form, was a "good idea"...... and maybe Communism, in it's purest form,  (from each, according to his ability, to each, according to his need.) ...was a "good idea".  My point is that, greed, which has been, and always will be a part of human nature, (albeit by varying degrees)  cannot be ignored when considering a "system" .... and both of these systems have ignored that fact at their peril.  Communism may have died first, but there can be little doubt, that without massive change in our collective thinking, capitalism is on the same pathway, and that change has to include everyone, not just the "elite". They will not be ignored much longer. There are a lot more "have nots" than "haves" and someday, if we don't find a way to share, they'll find a way to take it, just like we have seen in other parts of the world where we have watched people fighting for freedom, sometimes by standing in front of a tank.

 

Not trying to rag on you, but the fact is that you seem to be blaming others (Capitalism without Socialism works great.) is a perfect example of what I'm saying.

 

An interesting fact is that Canada's "socialistic" government was responsible for not allowing the Canadian banks to follow the lead of the, mainly US banks,( in spite of the powerful lobbying effort on the banks behalf)  to relaxing the rules, making it easier for banks to lend more than they previously could .... and by curtailing that power we were spared the mess that the US banking system created.

 

One last thing, you say that the government "forced" the banks behaviour .... then why was it that not all banks acted in that destructive manner? I say that greed forced that behaviour and "Capitalism without Socialism" only serves the power group.  Can that truly be what we want for society at large?

 

I don't think you understand capitalism, as it does not begat crony capitalism, but corrupt people do. Most companies in the U.S. are small business, but even the larger ones, say Apple, don't force regulations that keep competition out. Bad people + government = crony capitalism. 

 

Let's get some terms correct. 

 

Capitalism is business owned by private parties.

 

Crony capitalism is a term describing an economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials.

 

Socialism a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. (read government) 

 

Government is [should be] there for oversight to make sure the people don't get abused (with regards to business). Government is great at oversight. However, when that oversight leads to weighing outcomes based off relationships with big business (read lobbies) then you have Crony Capitalism. CC has greed, corruption, and not focus on the 'people'. Socialism exacerbates crony capitalism by its very nature.  

 

​In a town, you can also have small business in relationship with local government and thereby creating crony capitalism on the local level. Happens very often. 

 

Banks were not the ones who initiated the relaxed rules unless you think any business wants to do business with much riskier clients? Why would a bank want to loan people mortgages knowing they can't afford them? Some might have planned on selling these portfolios to banks without knowledge of the true value of the loan.

 

But then would it not be the government's 'oversight' that would make this known and protect the people? Why didn't it? Crony Capitalism allowed bankers and government to work deals. Deals not beneficial to the 'people' in which the government should serve. Not all banks acted the same way as not all are corrupt.  

 

Big Agriculture + Government = regulations that limit small agricultures while allowing big agricultures to thrive. Its lobbying to remove competition. Replace agriculture with pharmaceuticals or banks, or healthcare, or any number of big business that is a crony of the government. Check out the links I posted above, which are just 2 of many. 

 

Apple is a big business that does not lobby the government to eliminate competition. The do for social reasons and for protection from patent theft, but I don't know of any to remove or reduce competition. They probably find it easier to buy the competition, which is a capitalist way of doing business. 

 

Again, capitalism is not bad as it is only the ownership of companies by individuals. However, when you get big enough to have influence with government, that is where the corruptions flourishes. Big is relative to market so in a small town, big could be what you would consider very small. 

 

What we need in this country is the right regulations that opens up free markets to compete fairly, not regulations that limits competition.

 

Example. In the U.S. it is not legal for health insurance companies to sell policies across State lines, as it is with auto, life, etc. If a company in one State can offer health insurance in another State cheaper, it does not matter. Why? Big Healthcare lobbies government for protections so they can keep their rates high. That is not free market capitalism. That is crony capitalism and now socialism. 

 

Are there bad people that own businesses that steal from people that are not tied to government? Sure, and this is where government should be regulating, having oversight, so that these people are caught as quickly as possible. 

 

Big corporations and environment is another aspect of where government should have oversight, make regulations, but not based off reducing competition, but reducing environmental impact. I'm not a global warming alarmist, but I do believe we should be stewards of what God gave us. Government can help in this protection, but not allowing lobbyist to fund campaigns and create regulations that only benefit them. 

 

I hope you are seeing the difference. Yes, money does equal power, but that does not equal abusive power. Evil people will abuse, where good people won't no matter the money. 

post #56 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post
 

Money = power .... therefore capitalism begat "crony capitalism"  

 

I liken this to people's misreading of the Biblical quote 'the lust of money is the root of all evil'. It is not money, but the lust of it. The lust of anything, rather it be money or power, leads to evil. 

 

The government should be keeping this evil in check. Unfortunately, government lust for power, which quals evil only because they do evil to obtain the power. Not everyone in government is like this, but not everyone in Sodom was evil either. 

post #57 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post
 

 There are a lot more "have nots" than "haves" and someday, if we don't find a way to share, they'll find a way to take it, just like we have seen in other parts of the world where we have watched people fighting for freedom, sometimes by standing in front of a tank.

 

 

I agree there are more now in poverty than 10 years ago, I don't see the correlation to capitalism. I often argue that in my Dad's day, a single bread winner could support a family well, where today, it takes two, and that is even failing. But is that due to companies being owned by individuals? 

 

Also, although I donate money, what is your definition of sharing? A socialist would force the sharing, that is wealth distribution, which is not freedom. Don't confuse freedom with the concept that I have to do anything. If I wan't to share and exercise to do so, that is freedom. However, if the guy next to me wishes not to share, and you force him to do so, that is not freedom. 

 

I am yet to hear a good argument as to why my hard work should be distributed to those who don't. 

 

If society wanted real sharing, they would force the government to remove the cronies, lobbyist, the excessive spending, which would reduce the burden on individuals, thus more would share more abundantly. 

 

So please don't conjoin freedom and government control and redistribution of wealth. 

post #58 of 79
I think it was that jfanning dude just a couple weeks ago claiming Apple never invests in any of the production lines they outsource.
post #59 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewyboy View Post
 

Middle class america as we have known in this country for the last half decade is dead. The sooner people realize that the better. I know that and knew I had to make sure I got on the upswing to be in the new "middle class". They say the median income in america is 45-50k. I don't know a single person that makes that. I know plenty of people making 30k, I was one of them, and I know plenty of people making 70-85k. So there is the gap everyone talks about.

 

As far manufacturing, coding is the new manufacturing of the 21st century. Coding jobs are becoming a dime a dozen. You can be on the "assembly line" all the way to being the "foreman" for coding. It's what the world drives on (no pun intended). That's why you see this huge push to teach kids coding at a young age.. it's the mass job market of the future.. well actually now. Demand for business, finance, engineers, will be consistent but for comp. sci, it's blowing up in demand.

 

So to recap, middle class of ole is dead. Manufacturing is not what needs to be focused on, that battle is lost to robots. Focus on the new "manufacturing" which is coding. India & Europe are winning that one as far as I can see.

Now THIS is a person who is reading the tea leaves and not re-iterating clueless nonsense they heard from "experts" on TV News.

 

Yeah, I think we may have lost the next job battleground -- but not the war. The big future is in nano-tech, green tech and "personal care" -- of course, these are robots for elderly people. But really -- economies should not be our concern, I look at Europe where a lot of PEOPLE are doing fine, but their economies might be hurting. I'm not a "pure socialist" -- but Capitalists taught me we need a lot more of it.  The big truth, that we don't hear when people debate issues with carefully drawn left and right sides without any actual conclusive result -- is that we can JUST DECIDE what is fair.

 

All we as a society have to decide is; we won't let anyone drop off the map. Instead of exploiting third-world countries with the backing of our armed forces, we can surround a few offshore banks and repatriate funds for anyone not laying claim to them -- like all those banks who went bankrupt after years of incredible profits.

 

The FUTURE, will require that we have a national allowance to all people, and if you manage to do something productive -- hooray you get to make MORE than the allowance.

 

But really, unless people understand that THEY are likely the next "person not well trained enough and who is too lazy" to make a living -- they aren't going to understand the future at all.

post #60 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post
 

 I'm not a "pure socialist" -- but Capitalists taught me we need a lot more of it.  The big truth, that we don't hear when people debate issues with carefully drawn left and right sides without any actual conclusive result -- is that we can JUST DECIDE what is fair.

 

 

What exactly has capitalism taught you about the need for socialism? 

 

What is fair is to let people work for what they earn, keep what they earn, and spend what they earn on what they want to purchase. 

 

Quote:

 All we as a society have to decide is; we won't let anyone drop off the map. Instead of exploiting third-world countries with the backing of our armed forces, we can surround a few offshore banks and repatriate funds for anyone not laying claim to them -- like all those banks who went bankrupt after years of incredible profits.

 

The socialist idea of freedom = take from others. Nice! 

 

Quote:

 The FUTURE, will require that we have a national allowance to all people, and if you manage to do something productive -- hooray you get to make MORE than the allowance

 

Allowance, as in financial? You want to send EVERYONE a check? For what reason? Who pays for this? How is this freedom or fair? Don't we already have welfare? You want to pay more for people doing less? Where has that worked in the world? 

 

Where in the hell did personal responsibility go? 

post #61 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post
 

...Where in the hell did personal responsibility go? 

 

Thumbs up.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #62 of 79
Human Factors Engineering applied to Manufacturing [One of my most enjoyable classes in M.E. and labs].

All the spit and polish of finishes, injections, etc., are best done Robotically with obscenely expensive equipment [various modern CNC machines, lasers and small scale particle accelerators.] Very expensive software and infrastructure to house it.

You watch. More Manufacturing and Assembly will return to the US.

It was one of Steve's goals to have manufacturing return. Apple is doing it through reinvention, end-to-end, and patenting the processes.

Smart all around.
post #63 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Human Factors Engineering applied to Manufacturing [One of my most enjoyable classes in M.E. and labs].

All the spit and polish of finishes, injections, etc., are best done Robotically with obscenely expensive equipment [various modern CNC machines, lasers and small scale particle accelerators.] Very expensive software and infrastructure to house it.

You watch. More Manufacturing and Assembly will return to the US.

It was one of Steve's goals to have manufacturing return. Apple is doing it through reinvention, end-to-end, and patenting the processes.

Smart all around.

 

It's precisely those additional expenses that give Apple products the finishing touches that make replication difficult (one of the hallmarks of an industry leader).

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #64 of 79
Remember Tim Cook going to congress asking to reform tax. He wants manufacturing to come back to the US. And if it did workers would not screw in the same plug all day they would operate equipment (Robots) doing the mindless tasks.
post #65 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by msimpson View Post

Yes, and he might lead the effort to keep robots from being unfairly discriminated against in the workplace.

Apple have binders full of Robots I hear.
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #66 of 79

This is all well and good but until such time as they put the human back into consideration in design for disassembly and reassembly they are starting to lose me. I want to buy machines that can be repaired or even occasionally upgraded. The original Mac was designed to be hard to take apart and with RAM soldered in, but at least it wasn’t glued together. Old habits die hard.

 

My latest purchase, one of the last of the previous generation MacBook Pro 15", is tricky to take apart e.g. if the battery fails but it’s doable. I went for this rather than the latest model, and may have to look at other options if Apple doesn’t change its attitude on this.

 

Apple’s focus of design reminds me of Italian cars – great to look at and to drive, but a nightmare to maintain. Apple is not quite as bad at this as the worst Italian cars (reliability for example is nowhere near as bad – a neighbour’s Alfa once went away on a truck because the gear lever came away in her hand), but it’s part of the same general pattern. Something that looks good and is fun to use doesn’t have to be hideous to take apart and fix or upgrade (even if some of the competition feels the need to copy Apple on hard to fix, possibly in the mistaken theory that the good things would also follow).

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply
post #67 of 79

Socialism offers safety: free health care, free pension, a lifetime government job, or private sector job with labor laws so tight you can hardly get fired.

 

Capitalism offers instead the possibility of capital accumulation. The idea that you can build up savings and investments and one day stop working and live off your capital. And some people find the possibility of retiring at 45 and living off their capital more attractive than a safe life where they have to work until they're 65.

 

But the two are mutually exclusive, because social programs are expensive. No matter what politicians say, there are never enough millionaires to pay for them, it's always the masses who end up paying. And the more taxes they have to pay the less chance for individual capital accumulation.

post #68 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipm View Post
 

 I want to buy machines that can be repaired or even occasionally upgraded. ....

 

 Something that looks good and is fun to use doesn’t have to be hideous to take apart and fix or upgrade (even if some of the competition feels the need to copy Apple on hard to fix, possibly in the mistaken theory that the good things would also follow).

See, this is what I don't understand. Is the computer in your life the only thing you tinker with? Do you repair or upgrade your TV,  refrigerator, car, etc.. etc.? You may very well like to, and be capable of, maintaining your computer .... good on you, but I, and many, many more people would rather spend our time using, not fixing our computers .... even when we are able to do so.

 

People complain about Apple computers being difficult to maintain but I never see that same complaint about all the other devices in our lives .... must be because of the hobbyist beginning, maybe? Rest assured, we are well past the "hobbyist" stage now.

 

Oh well, different strokes for different folks, I guess.

Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
Apple is not Appl ...... Please learn the difference!    
Reply
post #69 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee View Post
 

See, this is what I don't understand. Is the computer in your life the only thing you tinker with? Do you repair or upgrade your TV,  refrigerator, car, etc.. etc.? You may very well like to, and be capable of, maintaining your computer .... good on you, but I, and many, many more people would rather spend our time using, not fixing our computers .... even when we are able to do so.

 

People complain about Apple computers being difficult to maintain but I never see that same complaint about all the other devices in our lives .... must be because of the hobbyist beginning, maybe? Rest assured, we are well past the "hobbyist" stage now.

 

Oh well, different strokes for different folks, I guess.

 

If you don’t want to change a flat tyre on your car without calling for help, I can see your POV. But I don’t agree computers are so far out of the hobbyist realm that no one should want to work on their own.

 

Cars used to be a whole lot easier to maintain than they are now, and I used to do a lot more work on cars than I do now, but they also needed a lot more work. My current car, doing low km per year, needs an annual service, and pretty much nothing else but refuelling and checking tyre pressure. Computers on the other hand have not progressed to the point where you can buy one and it just works for as long as it doesn’t get seriously old and unreliable. A good refrigerator can last you decades with only cleaning to maintain it. A computer is obsoleted by software bloat a lot faster than that, and pulling out parts and replacing them should not be that hard. I don’t agree that the fact that Macs are more professionally designed than a screwdriver shop PC means they should be really hard to repair or upgrade. I am not talking special tools: I mean things like glueing them together or soldering parts that will go obsolete to the logic board. I took apart a white iMac 17" to install a new HD and found some of the shielding damaged and a couple of screws missing from when it had a warrantee repair. So even certified repairers battle to take them apart and fix them.

 

An iPod or iPad is a relatively inexpensive purchase and I can limit the use of mine to things that it can still run as it gets older (though tossing it when the battery dies seems stupidly wasteful if it otherwise works). A computer I use for programming and research needs hardware updates every now and then to stay current.

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply
post #70 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipm View Post
 

This is all well and good but until such time as they put the human back into consideration in design for disassembly and reassembly they are starting to lose me. I want to buy machines that can be repaired or even occasionally upgraded. The original Mac was designed to be hard to take apart and with RAM soldered in, but at least it wasn’t glued together. Old habits die hard.

 

My latest purchase, one of the last of the previous generation MacBook Pro 15", is tricky to take apart e.g. if the battery fails but it’s doable. I went for this rather than the latest model, and may have to look at other options if Apple doesn’t change its attitude on this.

 

Apple’s focus of design reminds me of Italian cars – great to look at and to drive, but a nightmare to maintain. Apple is not quite as bad at this as the worst Italian cars (reliability for example is nowhere near as bad – a neighbour’s Alfa once went away on a truck because the gear lever came away in her hand), but it’s part of the same general pattern. Something that looks good and is fun to use doesn’t have to be hideous to take apart and fix or upgrade (even if some of the competition feels the need to copy Apple on hard to fix, possibly in the mistaken theory that the good things would also follow).

First off, RAM soldered onto the motherboard is actually more reliable than the socketed RAM.  Second, they aren't glued in, they have a strip of sticky tape, which can be pried off and replaced, as the sticky tape holds it down so it doesn't rattle loose when dropped or tossed around.  Glued insinuates that they apply glue, which isn't the case.   They also solder in the RAM so they can make the laptops thinner since people want thin laptops.  I personally don't mind them being soldered in.  Sure it would be nice if they could figure out how to have upgradeable RAM, etc. that was easily accessible, but it might be difficult to do that at this point while keeping the case as thin as possible.  These things shouldn't be user repairable anyway.  But users still try to crack open computers to try to fix them, I guess old habits die hard from the user's standpoint too.

 

Apple prefers it to have a trained technician do all of the work rather than the end user.  More problems happen when you have untrained people working on a computer.  There are some companies that put stickers, locktite in the screws to keep users from opening products made in other industries.

 

Apple is making their laptops and iMacs with less parts nowadays.  I cracked open a first generation iMac and that thing had more crap inside than the new ones. The new ones look MUCH simpler to put together.  I just think people shouldn't be trying to play AppleCare technician on computers unless it's a tower unit or it's purposely designed for user replaceable parts.

 

You can always complain www.apple.com/feedback if you feel that strongly about it.

post #71 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
I just think people shouldn't be trying to play AppleCare technician on computers unless it's a tower unit or it's purposely designed for user replaceable parts.

 

This is my point: they are increasingly designed to be hard to repair even if you are a trained technician. If you like that, fine. Just don't drop one or spill coffee on it.

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply
post #72 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipm View Post
 

 

This is my point: they are increasingly designed to be hard to repair even if you are a trained technician. If you like that, fine. Just don't drop one or spill coffee on it.

The other problem is when people buy a product and then they buy 3rd party drives, RAM, etc. and play AppleCare technician and the thing is still under warranty.  I'm sure it costs Apple a lot of money just in telling people that they don't warrant third party products and the user has to then remove the part and revert back to the original state before Apple can even look at it and since Apple doesn't know what someone did to a product, I'm sure there is quite a bit of trouble tickets issued because someone messed something up inside they didn't realized when they cracked open the unit and damaged it without knowing.  I'm sure that happens a lot, and the user probably doesn't want to admit the don't know what they are doing.  I used to be in the reseller industry for many years and I've seen people do over clocking (which is a HUGE no no), and other kinds of things to try to get a little faster performance and it usually ends up being less reliable because they don't realize that they might be putting something in that actually requires more cooling, or more power from the power supply that they didn't factor in, which lessens the reliability.  

 

I understand the insatiable desire for people to be inquisitive, or to want to tinker with stuff.  I'm sure plenty of us did that when we were little kids pulling apart household products just to see how they work. I've done that myself.  But the problem is that a certain degree of training is really required to lessen the likelihood of damaging the product. If the product is out of warranty and the owner knows not to call the mfg to bother them when they screw up the computer, then go right ahead and play around with it all you want, but if you just sold the product and paid the difference for a new unit, you would see a performance improvement, a new warranty.   So my point is buy more than you THINK you are going to need and then sell it within 3 years and upgrade it that way.  If you can't afford that, then maybe you need to either manage your money better like buying less of something else until you have enough disposable cash to buy what you should have had in the first place.

post #73 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipm View Post
 

 

This is my point: they are increasingly designed to be hard to repair even if you are a trained technician. If you like that, fine. Just don't drop one or spill coffee on it.

 

The "repairable" parts of a computer are likely to become less and less, regardless of your desire to tinker. Think of it this way; do you REPAIR a math coprocessor on the Motherboard or L1 RAM? No. That's because it's now a component that we consider the "CPU." But the what is on the motherboard or not is arbitrary. As complexities increase, more parts of the device we call a computer will have to be closely coupled. Sliding on a RAM slot when the IO is 10x faster and the data bandwidth has increased as well, is probably a common cause of defects.

 

In the case of Apple's iPhones and MacBook Air series, batteries and screens are not replaceable, because the entire structure has lost its casing and is built into the device, to reduce size and weight.

 

I like being able to upgrade RAM and hard drives as well. However, do you want 16 G RAM on a device 1/10th as fast? Or 128 G RAM on the next generation? I'm not convinced they are working towards planned obsolescence but on manufacturing complex devices in the most reliable manner. A 12nm process is more susceptible to damage by user than a 64nm process chip.

 

So in the future, you might "tinker" with computing devices you add to a group. I foresee the iWatch, iPhone and various computers functioning together to share data and computing tasks. Whatever the iWatch is, it will definitely act in more of a sensor and remote capacity. So how your "smart house" or "smart outfit" interacts with it's known group and components "it visits" will be the new realm of "home tinkerer."

 

It's funny that the discussion of Socialism and "non-user configurable parts" so well aligns as a paradigm here -- and is so poorly misunderstood as well for it's shortcomings and opportunities. If you WANT to have unregulated capitalism, then being on horseback without roads and being able to support yourself throwing a few beans in the ground and shooting game - well, that's doable. But as soon as you NEED STUFF to support a complex infrastructure, more parts are not "individually serviceable." No individual creates a CPU, nor does any individual make their own transit system. The notion of "what someone earns" is not decided by the market -- it's decided by people who have a built in incentive to reduce what you "earn" and give it to themselves if they can get away with it.

 

The mistrust of non-serviceable parts makes sense, and is human nature. Trust but verify. Just as all complex systems need people who understand them and poke them with a stick now and again to decide if there is a better way or if there is waste in that system. Everyone checking on every part of a complex system, however, is impossible. We have to trust others to specialize for us, so that we all benefit.

 

Walking with sandals and computing on an abacus are 100% user serviceable and don't require depending on anyone else.

post #74 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipm View Post
 

This is all well and good but until such time as they put the human back into consideration in design for disassembly and reassembly they are starting to lose me. I want to buy machines that can be repaired or even occasionally upgraded. The original Mac was designed to be hard to take apart and with RAM soldered in, but at least it wasn’t glued together. Old habits die hard.

 

My latest purchase, one of the last of the previous generation MacBook Pro 15", is tricky to take apart e.g. if the battery fails but it’s doable. I went for this rather than the latest model, and may have to look at other options if Apple doesn’t change its attitude on this.

 

Apple’s focus of design reminds me of Italian cars – great to look at and to drive, but a nightmare to maintain. Apple is not quite as bad at this as the worst Italian cars (reliability for example is nowhere near as bad – a neighbour’s Alfa once went away on a truck because the gear lever came away in her hand), but it’s part of the same general pattern. Something that looks good and is fun to use doesn’t have to be hideous to take apart and fix or upgrade (even if some of the competition feels the need to copy Apple on hard to fix, possibly in the mistaken theory that the good things would also follow).

 

I don't think most people want to tinker with their tech. 

post #75 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post
 

Socialism offers safety: free health care, free pension, a lifetime government job, or private sector job with labor laws so tight you can hardly get fired.

 

Capitalism offers instead the possibility of capital accumulation. The idea that you can build up savings and investments and one day stop working and live off your capital. And some people find the possibility of retiring at 45 and living off their capital more attractive than a safe life where they have to work until they're 65.

 

But the two are mutually exclusive, because social programs are expensive. No matter what politicians say, there are never enough millionaires to pay for them, it's always the masses who end up paying. And the more taxes they have to pay the less chance for individual capital accumulation.

 

 

I disagree only on the point that Socialism offer safety. It is sold as such, but it is a ponzi scheme. You continually need the influx of other people's money to stay solvent, and that never has lasted in history. Look at the state of the world, and who is doing well. 

 

The reason why capitalism works is because people are incentivised to work hard and do well. However, when you have this 'safety net', lazy people will take full advantage of that. In many States you make more on welfare than you do at a minimum wage job

 

Although this will never take place, due to the fact Socialism is a power grab of the government, I think a hybrid can be reached. Government can do a really good job of oversight. So you set up a system by which everyone has to have a Retirement Savings Account and a Health Savings Account. Some key fact, but not exhaustive as this is not the venue for this conversation. 

 

  • You can set these up as early as birth, or by your first job
  • Anyone can add to these accounts (donate) or by willing money from an estate
  • Accounts are managed by private companies with regulations and oversight by government

 

This will allow wealth to grow over time untaxed that you can pass to your family in a will, or donate. It is not managed by government which we know is wasteful and corrupt. Hollywood elites can donate their millions of dollars into the RSA or HSA of as many poor people they want. This directly helps them without making laws forcing everyone to help. 

 

If you are poor and have health issues, you can take the personal responsibility to find donations to your HSA. 

post #76 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipm View Post

This is all well and good but until such time as they put the human back into consideration in design for disassembly and reassembly they are starting to lose me. I want to buy machines that can be repaired or even occasionally upgraded. The original Mac was designed to be hard to take apart and with RAM soldered in, but at least it wasn’t glued together. Old habits die hard.

My latest purchase, one of the last of the previous generation MacBook Pro 15", is tricky to take apart e.g. if the battery fails but it’s doable. I went for this rather than the latest model, and may have to look at other options if Apple doesn’t change its attitude on this.

Apple’s focus of design reminds me of Italian cars – great to look at and to drive, but a nightmare to maintain. Apple is not quite as bad at this as the worst Italian cars (reliability for example is nowhere near as bad – a neighbour’s Alfa once went away on a truck because the gear lever came away in her hand), but it’s part of the same general pattern. Something that looks good and is fun to use doesn’t have to be hideous to take apart and fix or upgrade (even if some of the competition feels the need to copy Apple on hard to fix, possibly in the mistaken theory that the good things would also follow).

Quote:
Originally Posted by philipm View Post

If you don’t want to change a flat tyre on your car without calling for help, I can see your POV. But I don’t agree computers are so far out of the hobbyist realm that no one should want to work on their own.

Cars used to be a whole lot easier to maintain than they are now, and I used to do a lot more work on cars than I do now, but they also needed a lot more work. My current car, doing low km per year, needs an annual service, and pretty much nothing else but refuelling and checking tyre pressure. Computers on the other hand have not progressed to the point where you can buy one and it just works for as long as it doesn’t get seriously old and unreliable. A good refrigerator can last you decades with only cleaning to maintain it. A computer is obsoleted by software bloat a lot faster than that, and pulling out parts and replacing them should not be that hard. I don’t agree that the fact that Macs are more professionally designed than a screwdriver shop PC means they should be really hard to repair or upgrade. I am not talking special tools: I mean things like glueing them together or soldering parts that will go obsolete to the logic board. I took apart a white iMac 17" to install a new HD and found some of the shielding damaged and a couple of screws missing from when it had a warrantee repair. So even certified repairers battle to take them apart and fix them.

An iPod or iPad is a relatively inexpensive purchase and I can limit the use of mine to things that it can still run as it gets older (though tossing it when the battery dies seems stupidly wasteful if it otherwise works). A computer I use for programming and research needs hardware updates every now and then to stay current.

Quote:
Originally Posted by philipm View Post

This is my point: they are increasingly designed to be hard to repair even if you are a trained technician. If you like that, fine. Just don't drop one or spill coffee on it.

This needs repeating... well said drblank:

Apple prefers it to have a trained technician do all of the work rather than the end user. More problems happen when you have untrained people working on a computer. There are some companies that put stickers, locktite in the screws to keep users from opening products made in other industries.

To add to drblank's acute reply, one of the other main reasons for allowing only Apple technicians to service your device by locking it down: Apple has the tools to determine whether the device is even worth repairing. They are very well known for just handing you a new device and sending you on your merry way.

How do you think they determine that it is a better use of their time and reputation to replace rather than to repair? Detailed diagnostics and complete info on the parts in that particular serial-numbered device. They naturally do NOT make these statistics or information freely available to the public, but yes... they do have them and make daily use of them to streamline their efficiency and operations. If Apple can see that a certain batch of RAM, a video card, SSD was faulty at production time, they can and often do just replace the whole device.

By locking down i.e. glueing, soldering, special screws, etc., Apple puts the absolute burden on themselves to make sure that a device works according to warrantees and guarantees. The day the device is opened without authorization, is the day that "all bets are off" that it wasn't user error, mishandled, or jacked with.

One small side advantage is that the responsibility to dispose of the used parts (batteries) also falls on Apple's shoulders... rather than finding it's way to your trash bin and local landfill where it surely does not belong.

The above point is why IMO there should be a world-wide "Disposal Deposit" paid on all hand-held gadgets. that require them to be turned into either the manufacturer and or a recycling center for reimbursement or credit for a new device. No better way to clean up than to give people an incentive to do so, and in this specific case I'm thinking around $25 - $35,- per device.

* "If" a system like this ever came to be... Apple would be in a very good position towards making the transition very easy for themselves.

* probably never happen... but it might make some manufacturers think twice about putting "junk" on the market if they knew they would have to staff a major recycling center to dispose of it every 6 months.
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #77 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post
 

 

It's funny that the discussion of Socialism and "non-user configurable parts" so well aligns as a paradigm here -- and is so poorly misunderstood as well for it's shortcomings and opportunities. If you WANT to have unregulated capitalism, then being on horseback without roads and being able to support yourself throwing a few beans in the ground and shooting game - well, that's doable. But as soon as you NEED STUFF to support a complex infrastructure, more parts are not "individually serviceable." No individual creates a CPU, nor does any individual make their own transit system. The notion of "what someone earns" is not decided by the market -- it's decided by people who have a built in incentive to reduce what you "earn" and give it to themselves if they can get away with it.

 

The mistrust of non-serviceable parts makes sense, and is human nature. Trust but verify. Just as all complex systems need people who understand them and poke them with a stick now and again to decide if there is a better way or if there is waste in that system. Everyone checking on every part of a complex system, however, is impossible. We have to trust others to specialize for us, so that we all benefit.

 

Walking with sandals and computing on an abacus are 100% user serviceable and don't require depending on anyone else.

 

Great post until this point. Why do socialist always go to 'unregulated' capitalism? I don't know anyone that has ever said that, or wants that. Building road was not a government idea, but one of commerce and accessibility that the government took control of, and rightfully so. Same with the railway which was privately started. However, to suggest government came and saved us all from horse and buggy is complete nonsense. It is only when the people want something (sometimes having to demand it) that the government acts. 

 

Government has its role. I believe that role should be very limited. Infrastructure is an excellent example of what the government should be doing so as not to have a myriad of different ways of doing the same thing. Conversely, look at education where the U.S. is among the lowest worldwide. Hardly a shining example of government intervention. VA (hospital for our vets) is horribly backlogged. Medicare and Medicaid are billions of dollars in the hole. IRS has such huge waste, we just had a report about billions of tax refund dollars being sent out to people that were not owed this money, some in foreign countries. Our welfare is a joke where they can buy lobster while working people can only afford ground beef. 

 

Your EBT card might work, but that does not mean government 'works'. 

post #78 of 79
I would like to say thank you to many of the posters here on their very well written and objective views regarding the 'Capitalism vs. Socialism Debate". It's why I continue to be active almost exclusively on these forums.

Sticking to the robots topic though, I firmly believe that the continued investment by Apple in this area of manufacturing is really going to show in the next few years. When you need to make multi-millions of devices in an ever shorter period of time, plus make them to exacting tolerances that only a high-tech machine can guarantee... AND coupled with the "I-Want-It-Now" expectations of consumers these days after a device is demoed... it can only be beneficial for Apple to be an innovator and patent holder in this area of expertise.

As to robots in general: scary stuff when you think or dwell on it a minute. An above poster said that they can't repair themselves: wrong! Yes they will be able to and many can already. It's not a very hard scenario to visualize, in that constant diagnostic software/hardware is running along side the main robots, that pulls certain machines offline to service them. Naturally not all repairs, but I'm sure many, making engineering staff basically "babysitters" for the ensuing army of devices from a central control center. Add to that advanced 3D parts printers, and you "could" create the perfect "army" of tireless, self-healing workers. Also let's not forget that driverless vehicles already in use in some industries like agra and mining, as well as drones are a kind of "robot".

Sorry if I'm moving into "Smokey Dokey Territory", but there are certain old sci-fi flicks (Terminator) and books (Orwellian) that I'm a fan of... and while mostly over the top, they do shed a glimpse quite often into our future. How many people truly thought after the first demo of the iPhone 7 years ago, that we would be where we are now? What about the iPad as seen in the original 60's and 70's Star Trek. Did you really believe you would ever hold one, let alone after a measly 3+ years that it would have evolved into the iPad Air?

The pace of technology is mind-boggling right now and will become even more so without the weight... and wait... of the human element to complete their tasks. Robots... like the printing press, steam engine, industrialization and automobile before it... will become both an enabler and advancement for the human race, but will also have it's truly deplorable side effects and dire consequences. Pardon the cliché.

Food for thought: who's controlling the machines, for what purpose, and what are the wildest mishaps you can think of? They very well will become fact some day.

Personally, as much as I love tech, my mind wanders into The Scary Side far too often these days. The human condition is both served and exploited already by technology. Balancing that equation is not working very well today, and I can imagine that it won't get any better going forward. Specifically in regards to becoming educated in both realistic expectations and training, and not counting on manufacturing jobs AT ALL in the future. Even the service economy will continue to shrink, so burger-flipping, taxi driver, doorman, cashier, sales clerk... will not be an alternative job or career if you decide not to educate yourself.

It really is going to be an extremely huge burden on society to have anything called "uneducated jobs or labor" available to those individuals that don't have access to training due to their parents social position and/or place of birth... or just plain don't want to. How will a good portion of the human race live, eat and shelter itself? I do believe we need to start to confront that eventual reality now rather than later. IMHO... we as a society are already a decade or 2 behind due to our admirable belief as humans that "all hope is not lost, and yes we can fix it....some day". However... at this point in time... how fixable do our governments and the economic lever-pullers look to you? It already seems an unsurmountable task and I personally have no answers how to change that undeniable fact. Heck. We can't even control FUD and lying analysts and media slaves, let alone the government.

Some may reply that we do have the power and can rise up against the upper echelon and bend it democratically to our will as The People at any time. That time window is finite and critical when we decide to do so, and is closing more and more every day. I see "Rage Against The Machine" (i.e. the robots) literally speaking if we don't come together and decide to do something soon. We have witnessed as technology fans that, "Science fiction meets reality all too soon". The previous 100 years metaphorically called The Establishment, "The Machine, and to be complacent much longer in affecting change when we can could mean fighting against real machines in the future.

The debate we should be having is not over analog political experiments of the last 100 years i.e Capitalism vs. Socialism, but a digital one that truly affects us as a species: Innovative Tech for the Human Race vs. Political Tech Machinery to control us. The new "species" of machines can be used to be our saving grace on this planet of dwindling resources... or, it can be used by the powers that be, regardless of political persuasion, to control us. And in light of recent developments regarding privacy (NSA), it is certainly clear that "The Powers That Be" have a leg up on "us" already. Plug that database into an artificial intelligence computer and hook it all up to a Drone Control Center, and what you have is the real birth of Skynet rather than the Hollywood fictional one. Add a few more ground control, self-healing robots and vehicles from "friendly corporations", and it truly is "alive" and "us against them".

No, you do not want any of what I'm smoking
No, it does not create paranoia.
No... I'm not wearing a tin hat.

You only need to read the headlines of your favorite RSS reader or dead-tree newspaper... or this website and these forums.. to tie what I'm writing into a nice little Sci-Fi conspiracy script. Too bad that it could be a future documentary rather than a work of fiction and a wilder-than-normal imagination.

OK... enough... my Robot just ran out of juice and needs to be plugged in. How prophetic....1smoking.gif
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #79 of 79

Since this discussion is going all sorts of directions other than the original topic, I put my view on design for obsolescence here, in case anyone would like to take it further.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post




This needs repeating... well said drblank:

Apple prefers it to have a trained technician do all of the work rather than the end user. More problems happen when you have untrained people working on a computer. There are some companies that put stickers, locktite in the screws to keep users from opening products made in other industries.

To add to drblank's acute reply, one of the other main reasons for allowing only Apple technicians to service your device by locking it down: Apple has the tools to determine whether the device is even worth repairing. They are very well known for just handing you a new device and sending you on your merry way.

How do you think they determine that it is a better use of their time and reputation to replace rather than to repair? Detailed diagnostics and complete info on the parts in that particular serial-numbered device. They naturally do NOT make these statistics or information freely available to the public, but yes... they do have them and make daily use of them to streamline their efficiency and operations. If Apple can see that a certain batch of RAM, a video card, SSD was faulty at production time, they can and often do just replace the whole device.

By locking down i.e. glueing, soldering, special screws, etc., Apple puts the absolute burden on themselves to make sure that a device works according to warrantees and guarantees. The day the device is opened without authorization, is the day that "all bets are off" that it wasn't user error, mishandled, or jacked with.

One small side advantage is that the responsibility to dispose of the used parts (batteries) also falls on Apple's shoulders... rather than finding it's way to your trash bin and local landfill where it surely does not belong.

The above point is why IMO there should be a world-wide "Disposal Deposit" paid on all hand-held gadgets. that require them to be turned into either the manufacturer and or a recycling center for reimbursement or credit for a new device. No better way to clean up than to give people an incentive to do so, and in this specific case I'm thinking around $25 - $35,- per device.

* "If" a system like this ever came to be... Apple would be in a very good position towards making the transition very easy for themselves.

* probably never happen... but it might make some manufacturers think twice about putting "junk" on the market if they knew they would have to staff a major recycling center to dispose of it every 6 months.

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple investing record $10.5 billion in supply chain robots & machinery