I don't really believe these articles, not because they never cite a sources and are built from rumours, nor because they are historically wrong, but simply because their own story timeline doesn't make sense and they seemingly have no idea how mass production works.
From the article:
"As of early fall, it was clearer than ever that production problems meant Apple Inc. wouldn’t have enough iPhone Xs in time for the holidays."
So according to the article Apple knew months ago that there were production issues, but did nothing about that and then only chose to dial back the spec of a bottleneck component at the 11th hour? That's bullshit.
Apple might have been furiously working on whatever issues were affecting yield, but making insufficient progress. While the effect of making changes to the manufacture of a thing could take some time, particularly if the changes are far upstream, relaxing requirements can improve yield immediately. At some point, if relaxing requirements is an option, you consider it.
I find nothing about this rumor to be more or less fishy than others.
Funny counting you have over there. Today is October 25, early fall is 2 months ago now (i.e 8 weeks ago) even so, the statement also infers that Apple knew for longer than this period (and they would have to since the production ramping would have made this apparent.)
.. but numbers aside, the problem is the same - the article is implying that this change in the sensor was incurred less than a month ago, because production capacity was still being removed from the iPhone X assembly line. That's simply not feasible.
Funny counting indeed. The earliest (first) day of fall was Friday, September 22. That's less than five weeks ago, a little over a month.
Ah I see what you’re doing, all seasons have two start dates meteorological and astronomical. Sept 1 and 22 respectively. However this is still beside the point. It’s not as if apple started production in September
Sounds, like dump cycle news from the analysts, cause Apple knows that this sensor failing would be worse than then shipment being delayed. Thus the standard set is sufficient to meet this ideal. That is all that counts.
Well since they did so earlier I'll betcha you're right... Altho Apple doesn't actually refute the Bloomberg article AFAICT. What Apple does say is that they have made no change that affects the accuracy of the system, but doesn't address whether Bloomberg is correct or incorrect about relaxed quality tolerances for better yields.
They just did. I'd wager the SEC should be looking into this crap too, this is serious sitting on "info" to manipulate the market (even if it turns out to be false).
I like Touch ID. You don't even need to unlock your phone to use Apple Pay. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Just for a tiny bit of screen space...whatever? It is still a small screen. My iPhone is for texting, reading/writing short emails, Apple Pay, taking photos and phone calls. Anything else can wait until I return to the office or home where I have actual computers.
I think this is the 3rd negative report on the X from Bloomberg. Somebody wants the X to fail.
Ex rumor monger Mark Gurman heads Bloomberg’s coverage, and it’s always been apparent he had an axe to grind with apple for some reason, possible for having some stories that failed to pan out. Gruber seems to know more and snipes back at him on a regular basis.
...or at least Gruber would like to THINK he knows more.
Whatever happened with that new Apple Watch form-factor he said was going to be revealed a couple months ago? Or that the iPhone X was going to begin at $1200?
Gruber was very clear when he said the $1200 was his personal guess, and considering the $1000 and $1150 actuals he was not far off; much closer than the prices of prior iPhone tiers, so he was right. He also qualified that the "little birdie" who told him about the possible AW design was an unproven one. Do you actually read/listen to his content? Not understanding your examples.
Anyway, when I said "seems to know more" I was referring to Gruber seeming to know more about why Gurman is out to shit on Apple, and going out of his way to ding the dinger.
I don't really believe these articles, not because they never cite a sources and are built from rumours, nor because they are historically wrong, but simply because their own story timeline doesn't make sense and they seemingly have no idea how mass production works.
From the article:
"As of early fall, it was clearer than ever that production problems meant Apple Inc. wouldn’t have enough iPhone Xs in time for the holidays."
So according to the article Apple knew months ago that there were production issues, but did nothing about that and then only chose to dial back the spec of a bottleneck component at the 11th hour? That's bullshit.
Apple might have been furiously working on whatever issues were affecting yield, but making insufficient progress. While the effect of making changes to the manufacture of a thing could take some time, particularly if the changes are far upstream, relaxing requirements can improve yield immediately. At some point, if relaxing requirements is an option, you consider it.
I find nothing about this rumor to be more or less fishy than others.
You should have. Apple is not going to be making last minute adjustments to how these components work so late in the game.
I like Touch ID. You don't even need to unlock your phone to use Apple Pay. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Just for a tiny bit of screen space...whatever? It is still a small screen. My iPhone is for texting, reading/writing short emails, Apple Pay, taking photos and phone calls. Anything else can wait until I return to the office or home where I have actual computers.
You don't need to unlock an X to use AP. Just like with the 8, you have to bio-authenticate. With the 8 its your fingerprint, with the X it's your face. With the 8 you must touch it at the appropriate time, w/ the X you must look at it at the appropriate time. I realize this is hard for people to conceptualize but it's not much different.
iPhones are actual computers. They are pocket computers, which is why they cost much more than phones.
You don't need to unlock an X to use AP. Just like with the 8, you have to bio-authenticate. With the 8 its your fingerprint, with the X it's your face. With the 8 you must touch it at the appropriate time, w/ the X you must look at it at the appropriate time. I realize this is hard for people to conceptualize but it's not much different
iPhones are actual computers. They are pocket computers, which is why they cost much more than phones.
Sure iPhones are computers but my car has a computer in dash as well. Neither are particularly user friendly.
I completely understand how facial recognition works, but doesn't mean I have to like it. I don't mind the feature being on the phone. I just don't like the idea of taking away the home button and Touch ID.
You don't need to unlock an X to use AP. Just like with the 8, you have to bio-authenticate. With the 8 its your fingerprint, with the X it's your face. With the 8 you must touch it at the appropriate time, w/ the X you must look at it at the appropriate time. I realize this is hard for people to conceptualize but it's not much different
iPhones are actual computers. They are pocket computers, which is why they cost much more than phones.
Sure iPhones are computers but my car has a computer in dash as well. Neither are particularly user friendly.
I completely understand how facial recognition works, but doesn't mean I have to like it. I don't mind the feature being on the phone. I just don't like the idea of taking away the home button and Touch ID.
Don’t worry, nobody takes away the home button and Touch ID. Here they are with the 8 series and next year there will be 8s and so on... Face ID too has a place just like Touch ID, it is at least non-invasive. That non-invasiveness puts it conceptually ahead of Touch ID. Isn’t it good to have a pocket computer that recognizes you?
Comments
I find nothing about this rumor to be more or less fishy than others.
Altho Apple doesn't actually refute the Bloomberg article AFAICT. What Apple does say is that they have made no change that affects the accuracy of the system, but doesn't address whether Bloomberg is correct or incorrect about relaxed quality tolerances for better yields.
I'd wager the SEC should be looking into this crap too, this is serious sitting on "info" to manipulate the market (even if it turns out to be false).
Anyway, when I said "seems to know more" I was referring to Gruber seeming to know more about why Gurman is out to shit on Apple, and going out of his way to ding the dinger.
You don't need to unlock an X to use AP. Just like with the 8, you have to bio-authenticate. With the 8 its your fingerprint, with the X it's your face. With the 8 you must touch it at the appropriate time, w/ the X you must look at it at the appropriate time. I realize this is hard for people to conceptualize but it's not much different.
iPhones are actual computers. They are pocket computers, which is why they cost much more than phones.
I completely understand how facial recognition works, but doesn't mean I have to like it. I don't mind the feature being on the phone. I just don't like the idea of taking away the home button and Touch ID.
"rag"?
And yet you read it, have an account and comment on it. Why should the editor change anything?