Originally Posted by Flaneur
That's what I was thinking of, but unless you've seen something i haven't, I think it's more or less the other way around. I remember Apple investing a billion or two in Sharp, thought to be for IGZO production development, then Samsung investing 100 million or so in Sharp, and Foxconn pitching in with some hundreds of millions also.
Yes, this bet on IGZO goes back to the Jobs era. It is just starting to bear some results (iPad Air), but it may be way behind (iPad mini retina—not, 4K Apple displays—not), not because of Cook or Apple's neglect, i would think, but because of technical difficulties.
It was in the financial sites. Apple gave Sharp something like $300 million to $500 million for prodution quarantees. I don't remember the exact number. Samsung did invest $5 billion in Sharp stock. This isn't in question. Foxconn was going to invest a few billion in Sharp, and actually came to an agreement, but as Sharp's stock continued to slide, due to their uncertain future viability, they demanded a re-negotiation of terms. Offhand, I don't remember the result of that. If I have time, I'll try to post a link or two, but I won't be able to do that right now, as my daughter is tugging me to work on here own project right now.
It took Sharp more time than was thought, to come out with reliable IGZO production. It was believed that the iPad 3, the first retina model, was to have the first IGZO display, but that Apple needed to redesign the device because Sharp failed to get production working properly.
Originally Posted by island hermit
I really believe that Apple is going to introduce an iDevice that will lend itself really well to the ubiquitous nature that will be required for Apple to get into more hands... and, at the same time, introduce a proprietary iOS mobile payment system.
... okay... hoping more than believing.
I think it IS pretty clear that they are getting into the mobile payment market. Ever since Passport, and their own Apple Store app that allows purchases, which I've used a number of times (though when I was in London last, and tried it in an Apple Store there it didn't work for purchases. A sales person in the store said that a lot of people from the USA complain about that, but that the app only works in the USA), it's seemed obvious that Apple was testing the waters on this.
It's interesting that Paypal is reported to be making overtures to Apple about being the back end to Apple's payment scheme. Apple would be a major competitor to them, and possibly to companies like square as well.
iBeacons already seems to be moving quickly int acceptance, if what we are reading is true. If that one way Apple will be working this, they are off to a great start, even before they have a payment system to offer. If enough stadiums, and stores continue deploying iBeacons, then they will have a large network in place at the beginning.
This is exciting because it follows the iPhone model. As we know, when the iPhone first came out, there was no third oRty app support at all, and no way to get any apps. The first iPhone was really much more of a very sophisticated featurephone than a real smartphone. When I said that on various sites, I was generally lambasted for it, particularly if it was an Apple-centric site, such as ours here.
But I said from the very beginning, from my interpTTion of SJ's remarks about it that Apple would indeed have third part app support. I do t know why they didn't from the beginning, but my supposition was that it took a while to get the pieces in place for it to happen. Building a unique, and very sophisticated App Store, and app delivery system is very hard. So it took some time.
But, another important reason which may have been there is that with no phones sold, an App Store and third party apps may not have been such a success at the very beginning. If Apple considered that to be true, then they may have decided to wait a year, until enough phones were sold, with people hungry for apps, to actually announce it. I mention this long saga for a reason.
If Apple considers getting enough customers BEFORE releasing a major new service to be of primary importance, the doing what they did with the original iPhone and App Store may be an experience they want to repeat. In other words, get many venues to deploy iBeacon, so thT when Apple announces their payment system, they will be hundreds, and even possibly some thousand, or more locations that can immediately take part. An instant customer base!
I've seen many great ideas fail because there was no customer base to take advantage of it, and the time it would take to build one up was just too long to support it. Essentially, major companies won't support some system that they do t have confidence will grow enough to at least offset their own costs. By using iBeaco s for this other stuff that is of interest to them, and the low cost of deploying them, gives them, and Apple a major advantage here.
This is why NFc never took off here, or most anywhere else. I know people say it's popular in Japan, and a few other places, but that doesn make me really care. We need to remember that it was being said by some wags that the iPhone would never sell in Japan because of the "sophisticated" phones they had their, with Tv, mobile vending machine payments, and a lot of other junk. But the iPhone took off right away, and now is close to 70% of smartphone sales there. I believe the same thing will happen to NFC in the places whe it is being used now. It will go away. It's really only good for vending machines and terminals in train and bus stations where you can easily swipe them on a physical reader. Very limiting for general use.
As for a less expensive devices, well, I can only hope they do.
Oops, I didn't mean to co-join these two posts. Sorry.