Apple said to unveil 'iPhone 8,' 'iPhone 7s' and more at Sept. 12 event

12467

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 125
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    So who's more clueless?

    Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?

    Give me a break.  Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro.  You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
    You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
    I beg to differ.

    I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis.  Since 2013.  When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right.  And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG.  If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013.  And again in 2016 when the stock was $90.  I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY.  Now its up more than 70% since then.  Again I was right.

    There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.

    I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
    I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?

    And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).

    The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
    Nah.

    I've been extremely bullish on Apple since 2012.  All through 2013,  2014, 2015, 2016, 2017.

    I did sell some of my Apple shares earlier this year because I was too overweight on  Apple.  Its not a good idea (usually) to hold to high of a percentage of one stock. 

    Another reason I sold is because I saw a great opportunity in buying Shopify stock for $69 (SHOP). 

    Yes, I was critical of Tim Cook at times.  But much of it was warranted.  Such as putting too much emphasis on China (which Cook has corrected), too much focus on social issues instead of products ( Cook has corrected) and allowing Wall Street to control the narrative.
    Bull Fucking Shit!
    anantksundaram
  • Reply 62 of 125
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,327member
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    So who's more clueless?

    Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?

    Give me a break.  Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro.  You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
    You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
    I beg to differ.

    I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis.  Since 2013.  When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right.  And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG.  If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013.  And again in 2016 when the stock was $90.  I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY.  Now its up more than 70% since then.  Again I was right.

    There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.

    I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
    I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?

    And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).

    The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
    Nah.

    I've been extremely bullish on Apple since 2012.  All through 2013,  2014, 2015, 2016, 2017.

    I did sell some of my Apple shares earlier this year because I was too overweight on  Apple.  Its not a good idea (usually) to hold to high of a percentage of one stock. 

    Another reason I sold is because I saw a great opportunity in buying Shopify stock for $69 (SHOP) in March. Shopify is up 50% since then.  

    I wanted to diversify my portfolio.  Shopify is  more a risky stock that could possibly go up 1000% in the next 10 years.  Apple is more of a safe, cash cow stock. But no way is it going to go up 1000% in the next decade.

    Yes, I was critical of Tim Cook at times.  But much of it was warranted.  Such as putting too much emphasis on China (which Cook has corrected), too much focus on social issues instead of products ( Cook has corrected) and allowing Wall Street to control the narrative.
    Don'f make me go back through my posts to prove otherwise sog35, and make a complete liar out of you.

    I do recall, and noted at the time, that you were having a mental breakdown on the forum when the stock collapsed. 
    anantksundaram
  • Reply 63 of 125
    sog35 said:
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    So who's more clueless?

    Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?

    Give me a break.  Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro.  You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
    You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
    I beg to differ.

    I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis.  Since 2013.  When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right.  And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG.  If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013.  And again in 2016 when the stock was $90.  I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY.  Now its up more than 70% since then.  Again I was right.

    There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.

    I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
    I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?

    And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).

    The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
    You are absolutely correct, and he has been called on that several times before and by various AppleInsider members. IMHO there's a lot of inconsistency in some of the posts he makes.
    No.

    He is absolutely wrong.  I have hundreds of posts that say to buy Apple.  

    Find me a single one that says Apple is a bad stock to own.

    Criticizing Tim Cook does not equal Apple is a bad stock to own.
    One, you were not merely "criticizing" Cook. You were asking for his head on a plate. Two, someone would have to be a pretty dumb investor if they are consistently bullish on a stock led by someone they think is a shitty CEO whose board had/has no plans to sack him.

    I recall, as @gatorguy does, that you claimed you sold all or most of your stock at some point. There was a lot of flying fur over your bipolar behavior re. AAPL.
    edited August 2017
  • Reply 64 of 125
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,063member
    jbdragon said:
    I just spend a bunch on a iPad Pro 12.9". Do I really need to upgrade my iPhone 6? Upgrade or go for a 4th year? I have the original Apple Watch. Do I upgrade or hold on? LTE I could really care less. The times I have only my watch on my and not my phone and they're not both connected onto the same Wifi Network is pretty slim. I'm not going to pay a monthly charge on a watch. Not worth it.

    There's also no way Apple is going to release new phones that are a iPhone 7S, 7S Plus and iPhone 8. That's not happening. Apple would have just outdated their new iPhone 7S and 7S Plus phones right from launch. Already OLD as the iPhone 8 is there also. That's beyond dumb. Apple will do what they have done with the iPad. Get rid of numbers all together. Then it's just the iPhone, iPhone Plus and iPhone Pro. Possibly a updated iPhone SE. Apple doesn't even number the iPhone SE as it is. These will just be the 2017 models.

    Will I upgrade? I'll wait for real facts from Apple, so I'll make up my mind after Apple's press conference on what I'll do.
    Your final sentence is very wise and I join that opinion.

    I am not willing to predict what phones Apple might release. I do think they will have very good reasons to do what they eventually do. 

    I'm really looking forward to the announcements. Decisions to be made thereafter. Likely not going to upgrade my iPhone 7, but my wife needs an upgrade from her 5s. Jury is still out on the ATV, as I just got a new "smart" 4k TV that has far more content on it than I will ever need. I too like my original AW, and don't see a need for an upgrade.

    Choices are good.


  • Reply 65 of 125
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,209member
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    So who's more clueless?

    Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?

    Give me a break.  Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro.  You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
    You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
    I beg to differ.

    I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis.  Since 2013.  When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right.  And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG.  If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013.  And again in 2016 when the stock was $90.  I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY.  Now its up more than 70% since then.  Again I was right.

    There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.

    I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
    I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?

    And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).

    The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
    You are absolutely correct, and he has been called on that several times before and by various AppleInsider members. IMHO there's a lot of inconsistency in some of the posts he makes.
    No.

    He is absolutely wrong.  I have hundreds of posts that say to buy Apple.  

    Find me a single one that says Apple is a bad stock to own.

    Criticizing Tim Cook does not equal Apple is a bad stock to own.
    One, you were not merely "criticizing" Cook. You were asking for his head on a plate. Two, someone would have to be a pretty dumb investor if they are consistently bullish on a stock led by someone they think is a shitty CEO whose board had/has no plans to sack him.

    I recall, as @gatorguy does, that you claimed you sold all or most of your stock at some point. There was a lot of flying fur over your bipolar behavior re. AAPL.
    I said Cook should be fired IF he did not improve. He improved.

    Again. Saying to fire a CEO does not equal saying a stock is TRASH.

    Lets see some proof that I said Apple stock is horrible and you should sell all of it. Lets see it.

    I can pull up hundreds of posts that I said to buy AAPL.

    Stop SLANDERING my name. Show me proof.
    One of your quotes from just a few months ago this year:
    "I will probably get back into Apple when it gets severely undervalued in the next 18 months. But right now? No. This may hit $150-$160 but then Wall Street will hit it hard and drop it to $110 in the next 2 years. That's when I'll buy again.

    Till then I'm buying shares in stocks Wall STreet LOVES. Why fight the tide?  I loaded up on Shopify stock. A really amazing company that is revolutionizing retail." 

    Full disclosure too. I used to get a check directly from Shopify every month, "on the payroll" so to speak, so I'm familiar with them too. 
    EDIT: Damn old age. Shopzilla and not Shopify. My bad... :/
    edited August 2017 Solianantksundaram
  • Reply 66 of 125
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    So who's more clueless?

    Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?

    Give me a break.  Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro.  You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
    You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
    I beg to differ.

    I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis.  Since 2013.  When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right.  And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG.  If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013.  And again in 2016 when the stock was $90.  I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY.  Now its up more than 70% since then.  Again I was right.

    There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.

    I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
    I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?

    And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).

    The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
    You are absolutely correct, and he has been called on that several times before and by various AppleInsider members. IMHO there's a lot of inconsistency in some of the posts he makes.
    No.

    He is absolutely wrong.  I have hundreds of posts that say to buy Apple.  

    Find me a single one that says Apple is a bad stock to own.

    Criticizing Tim Cook does not equal Apple is a bad stock to own.
    One, you were not merely "criticizing" Cook. You were asking for his head on a plate. Two, someone would have to be a pretty dumb investor if they are consistently bullish on a stock led by someone they think is a shitty CEO whose board had/has no plans to sack him.

    I recall, as @gatorguy does, that you claimed you sold all or most of your stock at some point. There was a lot of flying fur over your bipolar behavior re. AAPL.
    I said Cook should be fired IF he did not improve. He improved.

    Again. Saying to fire a CEO does not equal saying a stock is TRASH.

    Lets see some proof that I said Apple stock is horrible and you should sell all of it. Lets see it.

    I can pull up hundreds of posts that I said to buy AAPL.

    Stop SLANDERING my name. Show me proof.
    I told you I don't have the time or the inclination. AI doesn't make it easy to search by date (For someone who'd like to, the following might be some relevant time periods to look at: Apr-Jul 2013, Jan-Mar 2016, and May-Sep 2016).
    edited August 2017
  • Reply 67 of 125
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    So who's more clueless?

    Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?

    Give me a break.  Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro.  You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
    You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
    I beg to differ.

    I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis.  Since 2013.  When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right.  And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG.  If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013.  And again in 2016 when the stock was $90.  I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY.  Now its up more than 70% since then.  Again I was right.

    There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.

    I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
    I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?

    And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).

    The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
    You are absolutely correct, and he has been called on that several times before and by various AppleInsider members. IMHO there's a lot of inconsistency in some of the posts he makes.
    No.

    He is absolutely wrong.  I have hundreds of posts that say to buy Apple.  

    Find me a single one that says Apple is a bad stock to own.

    Criticizing Tim Cook does not equal Apple is a bad stock to own.
    One, you were not merely "criticizing" Cook. You were asking for his head on a plate. Two, someone would have to be a pretty dumb investor if they are consistently bullish on a stock led by someone they think is a shitty CEO whose board had/has no plans to sack him.

    I recall, as @gatorguy does, that you claimed you sold all or most of your stock at some point. There was a lot of flying fur over your bipolar behavior re. AAPL.
    I said Cook should be fired IF he did not improve. He improved.

    Again. Saying to fire a CEO does not equal saying a stock is TRASH.

    Lets see some proof that I said Apple stock is horrible and you should sell all of it. Lets see it.

    I can pull up hundreds of posts that I said to buy AAPL.

    Stop SLANDERING my name. Show me proof.
    You’ve written that he should be removed immediately for tanking the company. You’ve even listed all the ways in which Apple sucks. In none of your comments did you ever say, “I know the stock is dropping, but Apple is a great company that can survive this [economic downturn | CEO | whatever], so you should invest in this company even more because Apple’s future is bright.”
    edited August 2017 StrangeDays
  • Reply 68 of 125
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,327member
    sog35 said:
    tmay said:
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    So who's more clueless?

    Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?

    Give me a break.  Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro.  You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
    You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
    I beg to differ.

    I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis.  Since 2013.  When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right.  And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG.  If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013.  And again in 2016 when the stock was $90.  I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY.  Now its up more than 70% since then.  Again I was right.

    There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.

    I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
    I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?

    And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).

    The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
    Nah.

    I've been extremely bullish on Apple since 2012.  All through 2013,  2014, 2015, 2016, 2017.

    I did sell some of my Apple shares earlier this year because I was too overweight on  Apple.  Its not a good idea (usually) to hold to high of a percentage of one stock. 

    Another reason I sold is because I saw a great opportunity in buying Shopify stock for $69 (SHOP) in March. Shopify is up 50% since then.  

    I wanted to diversify my portfolio.  Shopify is  more a risky stock that could possibly go up 1000% in the next 10 years.  Apple is more of a safe, cash cow stock. But no way is it going to go up 1000% in the next decade.

    Yes, I was critical of Tim Cook at times.  But much of it was warranted.  Such as putting too much emphasis on China (which Cook has corrected), too much focus on social issues instead of products ( Cook has corrected) and allowing Wall Street to control the narrative.
    Don'f make me go back through my posts to prove otherwise sog35, and make a complete liar out of you.

    I do recall, and noted at the time, that you were having a mental breakdown on the forum when the stock collapsed. 
    Do it.  If you are going to call me out at least provide the proof before you SLANDER me.

    Lets see the proof where I say Apple is a horrible stock to own and you should sell all of it.
    Funny thing is, I've tracked your "breakdown" back to around January 2016. I just have to figure out how to get into the archives for that timeframe; AI "hangs" when I get to that point. 

    Still, I did find the relevant posts wrt Wells Fargo downgrading Apple, which, I'm guessing, killed your magic $150 stock price "gamble", and that in fact was the point at which you promised to leave the forum. 

    I'll keep looking.
    Solianantksundaramfastasleep
  • Reply 69 of 125
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    sog35 said:
    That isn't the question.

    The question is did I ever say Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.

    You could have a horrible CEO, and still have a very nice stock to own.

    Again show me proof that I said Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.
    That is the question and every single one of those comments where you bitched about the stock performance is you saying the stock isn’t worth owning, even to the point of pimping Shopify. Can you show us where you once said that it was a great buying opportunity when the stock tanked?

    Fuck, you've jacked threads that had nothing to do with Cook or the stock value just to complain about how shitty the stock was doing and how Tim Cook was killing the company.
    edited August 2017 anantksundaramfastasleepStrangeDays
  • Reply 70 of 125
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    So who's more clueless?

    Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?

    Give me a break.  Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro.  You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
    You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
    I beg to differ.

    I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis.  Since 2013.  When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right.  And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG.  If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013.  And again in 2016 when the stock was $90.  I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY.  Now its up more than 70% since then.  Again I was right.

    There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.

    I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
    I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?

    And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).

    The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
    You are absolutely correct, and he has been called on that several times before and by various AppleInsider members. IMHO there's a lot of inconsistency in some of the posts he makes.
    No.

    He is absolutely wrong.  I have hundreds of posts that say to buy Apple.  

    Find me a single one that says Apple is a bad stock to own.

    Criticizing Tim Cook does not equal Apple is a bad stock to own.
    One, you were not merely "criticizing" Cook. You were asking for his head on a plate. Two, someone would have to be a pretty dumb investor if they are consistently bullish on a stock led by someone they think is a shitty CEO whose board had/has no plans to sack him.

    I recall, as @gatorguy does, that you claimed you sold all or most of your stock at some point. There was a lot of flying fur over your bipolar behavior re. AAPL.
    I said Cook should be fired IF he did not improve. He improved.

    Again. Saying to fire a CEO does not equal saying a stock is TRASH.

    Lets see some proof that I said Apple stock is horrible and you should sell all of it. Lets see it.

    I can pull up hundreds of posts that I said to buy AAPL.

    Stop SLANDERING my name. Show me proof.
    I told you I don't have the time or the inclination. AI doesn't make it easy to search by date (For someone who'd like to, the following might be some relevant time periods to look at: Apr-Jul 2013, Jan-Mar 2016, and May-Sep 2016).
    Nice excuse bro.

    But next time instead of SLANDERING someone based on your memory, go get proof first.
    LOL. You're funny.

    Here's a philosophical question for you to ponder, bro: how can one SLANDER [sic] someone whose name or identity they don't even know?! You could be a bot for all I know (or care).

    ADD: Can we ignore this bot, and get back to the topic at hand? I don't think we should reward its nonsense by derailing the thread. Not worth t.
    edited August 2017
  • Reply 71 of 125
    welshdog said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    Prediction:  Apple will widen the gap between the top end and the mid tier.  Just like they did for iPad

    iPhone 7s - $549 - 32 GB, $649 128GB

    iPhone 7s+ $679 - 32 GB, $779 128 GB

    Apple won't be selling 7 and 7+.  The low tier will be the SE.

    iPhone X $949 - 128GB, $1049 256 GB, $1149 512 GB
    Strong statements.
    I can even see Apple making a bigger leap by selling the iPhone 7s for $499.  That would capture an even bigger market.

    The strategy of widening the gap between top and mid tier worked really well for the iPad this year.

    The question is will enough people buy the iPhoneX to make up the price drop with the 7s?

    And will enough new buys who would have not purchased the 7s for $649 buy the 7s for $499?
    You really don't understand Apple then, if you think that is even remotely feasible, or even smart in theory.

    Do you not understand that Apple does NOT need to sell a single unit more than what they will sell at the current prices? They have no reason to lower prices and maybe sell a couple more. That is a huge risk. All they need to do is maintain, and add a great product every year.
    I don't believe Apple cares that much about market share when they already have the lion's share of the industry profits. Plus if they changed strategy to expand market share where are they going to get millions more components? Suppliers already struggle to meet Apple's quantity and time demands. How would they do that if Apple suddenly increased order sizes by 30%?
    Apple does NOT care that much about market share - Is it a REAL fact? Or is it a made up one without any basis? Would Apple be satisfied with selling 150 million iPhones in 2018-19 assuming they are able to achieve the same margins by selling only high end iPhone Pros? Or be satisfied with selling 200 million iPhones with a mix of 3 phones, still maintaining the same level of profit? Are you sure???
    I think it's fair say that Apple will absolutely not compromise on margins. (The only product they've likely compromised margins for is AppleTV, and even there because Apple conspicuously treated it as a "hobby" for the longest time, and it's seen as more of a secondary product in Apple's product line).
  • Reply 72 of 125
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    That isn't the question.

    The question is did I ever say Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.

    You could have a horrible CEO, and still have a very nice stock to own.

    Again show me proof that I said Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.
    That is the question and every single one of those comments where you bitched about the stock performance is you saying the stock isn’t worth owning, even to the point of pimping Shopify. Can you show us where you once said that it was a great buying opportunity when the stock tanked?

    Fuck, you'd jack threads that had nothing to do with Cook or the stock value just to complain about how shitty the stock was doing and how Tim Cook was killing the company.
    It doesn't work that way buddy.

    You are the one SLANDERING ME and making the accusations. You are the one who needs to provide proof.
    Here's my comment in full:

    "You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven."

    Now, where did I slander you?

    Additionally, you wrote, "I've been extremely bullish on Apple since 2012.  All through 2013,  2014, 2015, 2016, 2017," despite even this year writing, "I will probably get back into Apple when it gets severely undervalued in the next 18 months. But right now? No. This may hit $150-$160 but then Wall Street will hit it hard and drop it to $110 in the next 2 years. That's when I'll buy again. Till then I'm buying shares in stocks Wall STreet LOVES."

    Oh, that's how you define "extremely bullish"? And that was AFTER you mostly changed course at the beginning of this year, but that quote shows how you're feelings change with daily market trends.
  • Reply 73 of 125
    welshdog said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    Prediction:  Apple will widen the gap between the top end and the mid tier.  Just like they did for iPad

    iPhone 7s - $549 - 32 GB, $649 128GB

    iPhone 7s+ $679 - 32 GB, $779 128 GB

    Apple won't be selling 7 and 7+.  The low tier will be the SE.

    iPhone X $949 - 128GB, $1049 256 GB, $1149 512 GB
    Strong statements.
    I can even see Apple making a bigger leap by selling the iPhone 7s for $499.  That would capture an even bigger market.

    The strategy of widening the gap between top and mid tier worked really well for the iPad this year.

    The question is will enough people buy the iPhoneX to make up the price drop with the 7s?

    And will enough new buys who would have not purchased the 7s for $649 buy the 7s for $499?
    You really don't understand Apple then, if you think that is even remotely feasible, or even smart in theory.

    Do you not understand that Apple does NOT need to sell a single unit more than what they will sell at the current prices? They have no reason to lower prices and maybe sell a couple more. That is a huge risk. All they need to do is maintain, and add a great product every year.
    I don't believe Apple cares that much about market share when they already have the lion's share of the industry profits. Plus if they changed strategy to expand market share where are they going to get millions more components? Suppliers already struggle to meet Apple's quantity and time demands. How would they do that if Apple suddenly increased order sizes by 30%?
    Apple does NOT care that much about market share - Is it a REAL fact? Or is it a made up one without any basis? Would Apple be satisfied with selling 150 million iPhones in 2018-19 assuming they are able to achieve the same margins by selling only high end iPhone Pros? Or be satisfied with selling 200 million iPhones with a mix of 3 phones, still maintaining the same level of profit? Are you sure???
    I think it's fair say that Apple will absolutely not compromise on margins. (The only product they've likely compromised margins for is AppleTV, and even there because Apple conspicuously treated it as a "hobby" for the longest time, and it's seen as more of a secondary product in Apple's product line).
    iPad 2017 readily comes to my mind. Another point - you have not answered my other 2 questions, with specific hypothetical figures for iPhone sales in future. I asked them for a reason. The scenario with 200 million iPhone sales is a realistic one, if there is no change to the pricing structure of the 3 iPhones (with the assumption that 2 existing models retain their price and the new model priced even higher). 
    edited August 2017
  • Reply 74 of 125
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    That isn't the question.

    The question is did I ever say Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.

    You could have a horrible CEO, and still have a very nice stock to own.

    Again show me proof that I said Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.
    That is the question and every single one of those comments where you bitched about the stock performance is you saying the stock isn’t worth owning, even to the point of pimping Shopify. Can you show us where you once said that it was a great buying opportunity when the stock tanked?

    Fuck, you'd jack threads that had nothing to do with Cook or the stock value just to complain about how shitty the stock was doing and how Tim Cook was killing the company.
    It doesn't work that way buddy.

    You are the one SLANDERING ME and making the accusations. You are the one who needs to provide proof.
    Here's my comment in full:

    "You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven."

    Now, where did I slander you?

    Additionally, you wrote, "I've been extremely bullish on Apple since 2012.  All through 2013,  2014, 2015, 2016, 2017," despite even this year writing, "I will probably get back into Apple when it gets severely undervalued in the next 18 months. But right now? No. This may hit $150-$160 but then Wall Street will hit it hard and drop it to $110 in the next 2 years. That's when I'll buy again. Till then I'm buying shares in stocks Wall STreet LOVES."

    Oh, that's how you define "extremely bullish"? And that was AFTER you mostly changed course at the beginning of this year, but that quote shows how you're feelings change with daily market trends.
    there is a huge difference between buying ADDITIONAL shares of Apple and holding on to the shares you already own.

    I never said to sell all your Apple shares. Because I never did.
    You wrote "get back into" which means you've gotten out of holding Apple. You also said that it will be severely undervalued within an 18 month timeframe and that will drop hard to $110 per share within a 24 month timeframe all within the same paragraph of a single post.

    So much for being extremely bullish on Apple.


    PS: What the fuck did you think was going to happen when you made virtually permanent comments on an Internet forum about an unknown future where you let your simplistic desires control your comments? I've personally tried to warn you about making absolute comments that, at best, would only be a lucky guess, if you happen to be correct and yet you still kept making foolish statements that continually contradict each other. Here's one such example from last week.

    August 24, 2017
    10:57AM - "iPhone X - Starts at $979 for 64GB"
    11:43AM - "iPhoneX  32GB  $979,  128GB $1099, 256 GB $1199"
    You couldn't even go an hour on the same thread where you keep your prognastication consistent. But why would you when if the capacity starts at 32 GB or 64GB you can point to one comment where you did say it while ignoring all the conflicting data where you said something entirely different? Ergo, eat a bag of dicks.

    edited August 2017 macky the macky
  • Reply 75 of 125
    AppleZuluAppleZulu Posts: 2,003member
    Looking forward to it. I'm going to go out on a limb and bet a dollar to a donut that the announcement will finally put to bed the the ridiculous rumors about the iPhone 8's screen that result in the mess in the mock-up image at the top of this thread. There will be no little tabs, nor will the screen have rounded corners. The bezel might be smaller, but the screen will retain the retacngular 16:9 (or 9:16, depending which way it's turned...) aspect ratio. While everyone out here in rumorland seems to be so wowed by the idea of edge-to-edge screen coverage that they're willing to sacrifice every other factor that goes into good design, I just don't see Jony Ive signing off on all that. Other than the edge-to-edge claim, the notched tab offers no benefits and plenty of sub-optimal work-arounds (literally!) to get there. The rounded corners undo what video screen designers and engineers spent decades trying to get away from: cropping off the corners and edges of images created for rectangular screens. Just look at the cityscape image in the mock ups at the top of this thread. To achieve the form factor in the 8 mockup, the screen image loses cropped-out bits that are seen on the screens of the '7s' on either side of it. That is not a design improvement, and I don't see it happening. 
  • Reply 76 of 125
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,327member
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    So who's more clueless?

    Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?

    Give me a break.  Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro.  You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
    You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
    I beg to differ.

    I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis.  Since 2013.  When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right.  And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG.  If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013.  And again in 2016 when the stock was $90.  I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY.  Now its up more than 70% since then.  Again I was right.

    There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.

    I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
    I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?

    And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).

    The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
    You are absolutely correct, and he has been called on that several times before and by various AppleInsider members. IMHO there's a lot of inconsistency in some of the posts he makes.
    No.

    He is absolutely wrong.  I have hundreds of posts that say to buy Apple.  

    Find me a single one that says Apple is a bad stock to own.

    Criticizing Tim Cook does not equal Apple is a bad stock to own.
    One, you were not merely "criticizing" Cook. You were asking for his head on a plate. Two, someone would have to be a pretty dumb investor if they are consistently bullish on a stock led by someone they think is a shitty CEO whose board had/has no plans to sack him.

    I recall, as @gatorguy does, that you claimed you sold all or most of your stock at some point. There was a lot of flying fur over your bipolar behavior re. AAPL.
    I said Cook should be fired IF he did not improve. He improved.

    Again. Saying to fire a CEO does not equal saying a stock is TRASH.

    Lets see some proof that I said Apple stock is horrible and you should sell all of it. Lets see it.

    I can pull up hundreds of posts that I said to buy AAPL.

    Stop SLANDERING my name. Show me proof.
    EYou’ve written that he should be removed immediately for tanking the company. You’ve even listed all the ways in which Apple sucks. In none of your comments did you ever say, “I know the stock is dropping, but Apple is a great company that can survive this [economic downturn | CEO | whatever], so you should invest in this company even more because Apple’s future is bright.”
    That isn't the question.

    The question is did I ever say Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.

    You could have a horrible CEO, and still have a very nice stock to own.

    Again show me proof that I said Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.
    tmay said:
    Your comments bely your pimping $150 for Apple stock last year; maybe you prefer to call it cheerleading, but either way, a self-serving 180 degree turn on the stock.
    "My view of Apple stock changed 180 degrees because the financials changed 180 degrees. Last year Apple was growing revenues by 30%. Tim Cook just guided revenue to be negative 10% in March. That is a huge change. Its just the new reality. If you dont allow new facts to change your opionion on a stock then you ate cheerleading,"

    Your words, your comment, to my post (above) of 2 February 2016.

    You should stop digging that hole; you weren't bullish in February 2016.



    edited August 2017 Soli
  • Reply 77 of 125
    welshdog said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    Prediction:  Apple will widen the gap between the top end and the mid tier.  Just like they did for iPad

    iPhone 7s - $549 - 32 GB, $649 128GB

    iPhone 7s+ $679 - 32 GB, $779 128 GB

    Apple won't be selling 7 and 7+.  The low tier will be the SE.

    iPhone X $949 - 128GB, $1049 256 GB, $1149 512 GB
    Strong statements.
    I can even see Apple making a bigger leap by selling the iPhone 7s for $499.  That would capture an even bigger market.

    The strategy of widening the gap between top and mid tier worked really well for the iPad this year.

    The question is will enough people buy the iPhoneX to make up the price drop with the 7s?

    And will enough new buys who would have not purchased the 7s for $649 buy the 7s for $499?
    You really don't understand Apple then, if you think that is even remotely feasible, or even smart in theory.

    Do you not understand that Apple does NOT need to sell a single unit more than what they will sell at the current prices? They have no reason to lower prices and maybe sell a couple more. That is a huge risk. All they need to do is maintain, and add a great product every year.
    I don't believe Apple cares that much about market share when they already have the lion's share of the industry profits. Plus if they changed strategy to expand market share where are they going to get millions more components? Suppliers already struggle to meet Apple's quantity and time demands. How would they do that if Apple suddenly increased order sizes by 30%?
    Apple does NOT care that much about market share - Is it a REAL fact? Or is it a made up one without any basis? Would Apple be satisfied with selling 150 million iPhones in 2018-19 assuming they are able to achieve the same margins by selling only high end iPhone Pros? Or be satisfied with selling 200 million iPhones with a mix of 3 phones, still maintaining the same level of profit? Are you sure???
    I think it's fair say that Apple will absolutely not compromise on margins. (The only product they've likely compromised margins for is AppleTV, and even there because Apple conspicuously treated it as a "hobby" for the longest time, and it's seen as more of a secondary product in Apple's product line).
    iPad 2017 readily comes to my mind. Another point - you have not answered my other 2 questions, with specific hypothetical figures for iPhone sales in future. I asked them for a reason. The scenario with 200 million iPhone sales is a realistic one, if there is no change to the pricing structure of the 3 iPhones (with the assumption that 2 existing models retain their price and the new model priced even higher). 
    I have no reason to or intention to answer your other two questions. One, they are not germane to my point that, based on past observed behavior, Apple cares more about profit than market share. Two, your stuff about 200M phones etc is all about making assumptions about which I have no clue one way or another. 
  • Reply 78 of 125
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,912member
    I would go happy crazy if Apple makes iPhone Plus with end-to-end screen(like anticipated OLED iPhone 8) with pencil support ? You may call it iPhone 8 Plus or iPhone-Pad 8 or iPad-Phone 8. This may be one reason Apple investing in LG's OLED manufacturing.

    edited August 2017
  • Reply 79 of 125

    tmay said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    So who's more clueless?

    Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?

    Give me a break.  Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro.  You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
    You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
    I beg to differ.

    I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis.  Since 2013.  When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right.  And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG.  If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013.  And again in 2016 when the stock was $90.  I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY.  Now its up more than 70% since then.  Again I was right.

    There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.

    I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
    I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?

    And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).

    The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
    You are absolutely correct, and he has been called on that several times before and by various AppleInsider members. IMHO there's a lot of inconsistency in some of the posts he makes.
    No.

    He is absolutely wrong.  I have hundreds of posts that say to buy Apple.  

    Find me a single one that says Apple is a bad stock to own.

    Criticizing Tim Cook does not equal Apple is a bad stock to own.
    One, you were not merely "criticizing" Cook. You were asking for his head on a plate. Two, someone would have to be a pretty dumb investor if they are consistently bullish on a stock led by someone they think is a shitty CEO whose board had/has no plans to sack him.

    I recall, as @gatorguy does, that you claimed you sold all or most of your stock at some point. There was a lot of flying fur over your bipolar behavior re. AAPL.
    I said Cook should be fired IF he did not improve. He improved.

    Again. Saying to fire a CEO does not equal saying a stock is TRASH.

    Lets see some proof that I said Apple stock is horrible and you should sell all of it. Lets see it.

    I can pull up hundreds of posts that I said to buy AAPL.

    Stop SLANDERING my name. Show me proof.
    EYou’ve written that he should be removed immediately for tanking the company. You’ve even listed all the ways in which Apple sucks. In none of your comments did you ever say, “I know the stock is dropping, but Apple is a great company that can survive this [economic downturn | CEO | whatever], so you should invest in this company even more because Apple’s future is bright.”
    That isn't the question.

    The question is did I ever say Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.

    You could have a horrible CEO, and still have a very nice stock to own.

    Again show me proof that I said Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.
    tmay said:
    Your comments bely your pimping $150 for Apple stock last year; maybe you prefer to call it cheerleading, but either way, a self-serving 180 degree turn on the stock.
    "My view of Apple stock changed 180 degrees because the financials changed 180 degrees. Last year Apple was growing revenues by 30%. Tim Cook just guided revenue to be negative 10% in March. That is a huge change. Its just the new reality. If you dont allow new facts to change your opionion on a stock then you ate cheerleading,"

    Your words, your comment, to my post (above) of 2 February 2016.

    You should stop digging that hole; you weren't bullish in February 2016.



    tmay said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    sog35 said:
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    Soli said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    So who's more clueless?

    Me or a dude who thinks he knows how to build iPhones better than Apple?

    Give me a break.  Apple would fire you the first day on the job trying to do Apple power management. Sorry bro.  You are not elite level. Apple is. You are not. Now just sit back and let the masters show you how its done.
    You’re comments are more clueless. It’s not even up for debate. You repeatedly make absolute statements about future brand names, prices, stock value, and everything else in between based on your desires without any notion of why you believe such future events will come about or anything that resembles a balanced hypothesis . You’re no three-eyed raven.
    I beg to differ.

    I was here telling people to buy Apple stock on a constant basis.  Since 2013.  When it was $60. Looks like I am a 3-eyed Raven. I was right.  And 90% of Wall Street was WRONG.  If not then Apple would have never been $60 in 2013.  And again in 2016 when the stock was $90.  I said to BUY BUY BUY BUY.  Now its up more than 70% since then.  Again I was right.

    There is a big difference between guessing prices and brand names vs saying Apple are idiots for making the charger too slow.

    I've proven my worth regarding investing in Apple. Mr Melgross has proving nothing in being able to engineer an iPhone better than Apple.
    I beg to differ, @sog35. As I recall, there were significant stretches of time since 2013 -- I do not have the time or the inclination to go ferret out those posts -- when you were quite bearish on Apple, and had, in fact, had claimed you got rid of all (or most) of your holdings, except for some options. I recall your sentiment on Apple yo-yoing quite a bit. Perhaps someone can back me up on this?

    And, let's not even get started on your silly, hissy-fit crusade over a fairly long stretch to burn Cook at the stake (another point on which you've yo-yoed like crazy).

    The forecasts you make are not worth the paper they're written on. And considering they're not even written on paper, well...
    You are absolutely correct, and he has been called on that several times before and by various AppleInsider members. IMHO there's a lot of inconsistency in some of the posts he makes.
    No.

    He is absolutely wrong.  I have hundreds of posts that say to buy Apple.  

    Find me a single one that says Apple is a bad stock to own.

    Criticizing Tim Cook does not equal Apple is a bad stock to own.
    One, you were not merely "criticizing" Cook. You were asking for his head on a plate. Two, someone would have to be a pretty dumb investor if they are consistently bullish on a stock led by someone they think is a shitty CEO whose board had/has no plans to sack him.

    I recall, as @gatorguy does, that you claimed you sold all or most of your stock at some point. There was a lot of flying fur over your bipolar behavior re. AAPL.
    I said Cook should be fired IF he did not improve. He improved.

    Again. Saying to fire a CEO does not equal saying a stock is TRASH.

    Lets see some proof that I said Apple stock is horrible and you should sell all of it. Lets see it.

    I can pull up hundreds of posts that I said to buy AAPL.

    Stop SLANDERING my name. Show me proof.
    EYou’ve written that he should be removed immediately for tanking the company. You’ve even listed all the ways in which Apple sucks. In none of your comments did you ever say, “I know the stock is dropping, but Apple is a great company that can survive this [economic downturn | CEO | whatever], so you should invest in this company even more because Apple’s future is bright.”
    That isn't the question.

    The question is did I ever say Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.

    You could have a horrible CEO, and still have a very nice stock to own.

    Again show me proof that I said Apple is a horrible stock and you should sell all of it.
    tmay said:
    Your comments bely your pimping $150 for Apple stock last year; maybe you prefer to call it cheerleading, but either way, a self-serving 180 degree turn on the stock.
    "My view of Apple stock changed 180 degrees because the financials changed 180 degrees. Last year Apple was growing revenues by 30%. Tim Cook just guided revenue to be negative 10% in March. That is a huge change. Its just the new reality. If you dont allow new facts to change your opionion on a stock then you ate cheerleading,"

    Your words, your comment, to my post (above) of 2 February 2016.

    You should stop digging that hole; you weren't bullish in February 2016.



    Moreover, given his supposed longer term 'bullishness' on AAPL, his argument is tantamount to saying that he'd rather not buy when the stock is low! In other words, his money is not where is mouth is. 

    Oh boy, as I said, time to move on...
    Soli
  • Reply 80 of 125
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Soli said:
    melgross said:
    sog35 said:
    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:

    melgross said:
    If true, I wonder why Apple isn’t going to use level 2 wireless charging, at 15 watts, rather than level 1 charging, at 7.5 watts. I can say for certain that my 7+ charges a lot faster using a 12 watt iPad charger than the measly 5 watt charger that comes with it. It even charges a bit faster using the 29 watt Macbook charger that I bought as the primary charger for my iPad Pro 12.9”, which charges a lot faster with that than the 12 watt charger.

    i hope Apple is giving up on those old chargers this year. The iPhone really needs at least an 8 watt charger, and the iPad Pro 12.9”, a 16 watt model.
    Well unless you are a power engineer I don't think we know why Apple chose the lower standard (if they did, it's just a rumor for now). Of course this will be touted by the haters, if true, as some failure on Apple's part. But apparently Apple doesn't care one bit about what there haters say, or what some users say when they don't know why something is happening.
    That’s just making excuses. And I designed a fair amount of electronics professionally. I understand power as well as most anyone.

    the point is that the standard Apple is using has two levels. Obviously, Apple made a decision here, it wasn’t random. I’m questioning why they made that decision. Some flagship Android phones are using level 2. Since the iPhone can easily charge with chargers higher than 15 watts without any problems, it’s a valid question as to why Apple went with the lower number, assuming that it’s correct, as I said in my other post. I would be happy if it was incorrect.

    but Apple’s devices are known for slow charging times with the supplied chargers. That’s nothing new. Just look at the review comparisons at the sites that do that.
    another clueless person who thinks they can engineer iPhones better than Apple......
    Oh please, your post shows that you are far more clueless than I am. You think, like a fanboy, where everything Apple does is always the best, and that every decision is always the right one, no matter what.

    i’m questioning why they did it, because the phones can obviously charge at much higher rates. It’s a very fair question to,ask.

    what’s not fair is people who know nothing, attacking me for asking it.
    It’s a fair question, but it’s mostly academic unless we make a case that Apple doesn’t know what they’re doing with battery chemistry.

    As you note in another post, the rate at which these batteries are charged varies at different stages of charging. Maybe Apple is being overly cautious, but could considering Apple’s position in the market I can’t fault them for that. So what changed this year if we assume the rumors are truse?
    This has nothing to do with battery chemistry. Their batteries can accept more than 15 watt charging now, and have for two years. It’s something they decided for other reasons. We don’t know what that is, and I’m wondering about. But getting attacked for wondering why they MAY be doing this is just not right.
Sign In or Register to comment.