Apple has long-term plan, is working on products 'way out in the 2020s'

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 73
    That's not a standard definition of socialism.  Here's the definition from the source of all truth: 

    Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political theories and movements associated with them. Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective or cooperative ownership, or to citizen ownership of equity. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them, though social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.

    That may be the definition, but every socialist country in Europe is capitalist+safeguards. 

    There are no socialist countries in Europe.
  • Reply 62 of 73
    cgWerks said:

    macxpress said:
    I'd just be happy to see a new MacPro, MacMini and Macbook Pro that can take 32GB of RAM in the not too distant future.  
    Don't count on it...Most of the above is up to Intel, not Apple. 
    I'll settle for updated MacPro (TB3), MacMini (TB3), and MacBook Pro (reliable keyboard) in the not too distant future. Intel has nothing to do with preventing that.
    Coming this year; maybe this year; already here.
  • Reply 63 of 73
    avon b7 said:
    sflocal said:
    It's news when Apple stops investing in R&D.  This is a fluff-piece.

    No doubt some could call the original article a fluff-piece. Nevertheless, it is newsworthy, because it offers some insight into the company and its leadership. If it was me, I'd grill Tim a bit more, about some troubles over the past few months, but that wasn't the tone of the interview. Real fluff-pieces are those articles, about some products, that are "good"—not great—and fail to address the elephant in the room, for the sake of personal/editorial agendas. Most Android enthusiasts would call us, Apple users and AI readers, fanboys being spoon fed fluff-pieces about Apple. But even though the tone in AI is more positive towards Apple than most publications, in more than 10 years reading it daily, I fail to remember even seeing a single fluff-piece.
    Yes, I'd run him over coals on a few things and make him sweat a bit.

    100% fluff in the interview.

    In fact, 'interview' is stretching things. It came over as an excuse for Tim to spin his spin.


    Dude it's the cover story for the CEO of the "most innovative company of the year."  This isn't a 60-minutes hit piece.  What did you expect?
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 64 of 73
    zoetmb said:
    Don't try to turn everything into politics.   Socialism is where the Government owns everything.  Do you think Apple (or so-called "socialists") wants the Government to own it? Just because many people believe that capitalism doesn't work well for receiving medical care doesn't mean they want socialism for everything.    Even socialist countries have lots of capitalism.   
    I agree with your rebuttal, but even so want to dot some i's..

    Government owns everything = communism..
    Socialism  = capitalism + safeguards

    That's safeguards for the weak, obviously, because we all know who's gonna win in a battle between a rich guy and a poor if money is the only yardstick... But apparently that makes socialism something dirty.. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

    That's not a standard definition of socialism.  Here's the definition from the source of all truth: 

    Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political theories and movements associated with them. Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective or cooperative ownership, or to citizen ownership of equity. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them, though social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.


    Socialism, like all forms of collectivism, is a fantasy that doesn’t work in reality because it’s a philosophy based on a hugely flawed theory that people are not self-interested. All people naturally are self-interested, so when the system says “everyone is in charge”, then no one is in charge. Unchecked corruption, inevitable centralization of power, destruction of market responsiveness and misallocations of resources are common results.
    edited February 2018 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 65 of 73
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,056member
    avon b7 said:
    sflocal said:
    It's news when Apple stops investing in R&D.  This is a fluff-piece.

    No doubt some could call the original article a fluff-piece. Nevertheless, it is newsworthy, because it offers some insight into the company and its leadership. If it was me, I'd grill Tim a bit more, about some troubles over the past few months, but that wasn't the tone of the interview. Real fluff-pieces are those articles, about some products, that are "good"—not great—and fail to address the elephant in the room, for the sake of personal/editorial agendas. Most Android enthusiasts would call us, Apple users and AI readers, fanboys being spoon fed fluff-pieces about Apple. But even though the tone in AI is more positive towards Apple than most publications, in more than 10 years reading it daily, I fail to remember even seeing a single fluff-piece.
    Yes, I'd run him over coals on a few things and make him sweat a bit.

    100% fluff in the interview.

    In fact, 'interview' is stretching things. It came over as an excuse for Tim to spin his spin.


    Dude it's the cover story for the CEO of the "most innovative company of the year."  This isn't a 60-minutes hit piece.  What did you expect?
    It's not about what I expect but what I would have done.

    It's not every day you get the option of a 'wide ranging' interview with Tim Cook. The magazine owes him or Apple nothing. As soon as the fluff started I would have countered with the prickly questions. I doubt readers want to read bland, 'stating the obvious' responses and from people basically patting themselves on the back and goubg through the motions. It's not as if there aren't many subjects to choose from like:

    Taxes
    Right to repair
    Thinness
    Keyboards
    Batteries
    Software QA
    Privacy
    China, India, Asia, South America
    Business model changes
    The Mac
    Peak iPhone
    AI

    Etc.

    Take it where you want (design, markets, future, etc) but when the fluff alerts go off, take out the prod and start prodding.

    If you ever saw early (Tim Sebastian) episodes of the HardTalk series you will know what I'm referring to in terms of style.



  • Reply 66 of 73
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,273member
    cgWerks said:
    I'll settle for updated MacPro (TB3), MacMini (TB3), and MacBook Pro (reliable keyboard) in the not too distant future. Intel has nothing to do with preventing that.
    Coming this year; maybe this year; already here.
    We'll see, we'll see, how so?

    avon b7 said:
    As soon as the fluff started I would have countered with the prickly questions. I doubt readers want to read bland, 'stating the obvious' responses and from people basically patting themselves on the back and goubg through the motions. It's not as if there aren't many subjects to choose from...
    Unfortunately, that would be the last interview you'd have with anyone from Apple, and your news outlet would get snubbed to future access to them.
  • Reply 67 of 73
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,832member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    sflocal said:
    It's news when Apple stops investing in R&D.  This is a fluff-piece.

    No doubt some could call the original article a fluff-piece. Nevertheless, it is newsworthy, because it offers some insight into the company and its leadership. If it was me, I'd grill Tim a bit more, about some troubles over the past few months, but that wasn't the tone of the interview. Real fluff-pieces are those articles, about some products, that are "good"—not great—and fail to address the elephant in the room, for the sake of personal/editorial agendas. Most Android enthusiasts would call us, Apple users and AI readers, fanboys being spoon fed fluff-pieces about Apple. But even though the tone in AI is more positive towards Apple than most publications, in more than 10 years reading it daily, I fail to remember even seeing a single fluff-piece.
    Yes, I'd run him over coals on a few things and make him sweat a bit.

    100% fluff in the interview.

    In fact, 'interview' is stretching things. It came over as an excuse for Tim to spin his spin.


    Dude it's the cover story for the CEO of the "most innovative company of the year."  This isn't a 60-minutes hit piece.  What did you expect?
    It's not about what I expect but what I would have done.

    It's not every day you get the option of a 'wide ranging' interview with Tim Cook. The magazine owes him or Apple nothing. As soon as the fluff started I would have countered with the prickly questions. I doubt readers want to read bland, 'stating the obvious' responses and from people basically patting themselves on the back and goubg through the motions. It's not as if there aren't many subjects to choose from like:

    Taxes
    Right to repair
    Thinness
    Keyboards
    Batteries
    Software QA
    Privacy
    China, India, Asia, South America
    Business model changes
    The Mac
    Peak iPhone
    AI

    Etc.

    Take it where you want (design, markets, future, etc) but when the fluff alerts go off, take out the prod and start prodding.

    If you ever saw early (Tim Sebastian) episodes of the HardTalk series you will know what I'm referring to in terms of style.



    Buy AAPL stock.

    Go to yearly Shareholder meeting.

    Fantasizing your "meeting" as a post on AI serves no purpose, other than preening I suppose.


  • Reply 68 of 73
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,056member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    sflocal said:
    It's news when Apple stops investing in R&D.  This is a fluff-piece.

    No doubt some could call the original article a fluff-piece. Nevertheless, it is newsworthy, because it offers some insight into the company and its leadership. If it was me, I'd grill Tim a bit more, about some troubles over the past few months, but that wasn't the tone of the interview. Real fluff-pieces are those articles, about some products, that are "good"—not great—and fail to address the elephant in the room, for the sake of personal/editorial agendas. Most Android enthusiasts would call us, Apple users and AI readers, fanboys being spoon fed fluff-pieces about Apple. But even though the tone in AI is more positive towards Apple than most publications, in more than 10 years reading it daily, I fail to remember even seeing a single fluff-piece.
    Yes, I'd run him over coals on a few things and make him sweat a bit.

    100% fluff in the interview.

    In fact, 'interview' is stretching things. It came over as an excuse for Tim to spin his spin.


    Dude it's the cover story for the CEO of the "most innovative company of the year."  This isn't a 60-minutes hit piece.  What did you expect?
    It's not about what I expect but what I would have done.

    It's not every day you get the option of a 'wide ranging' interview with Tim Cook. The magazine owes him or Apple nothing. As soon as the fluff started I would have countered with the prickly questions. I doubt readers want to read bland, 'stating the obvious' responses and from people basically patting themselves on the back and goubg through the motions. It's not as if there aren't many subjects to choose from like:

    Taxes
    Right to repair
    Thinness
    Keyboards
    Batteries
    Software QA
    Privacy
    China, India, Asia, South America
    Business model changes
    The Mac
    Peak iPhone
    AI

    Etc.

    Take it where you want (design, markets, future, etc) but when the fluff alerts go off, take out the prod and start prodding.

    If you ever saw early (Tim Sebastian) episodes of the HardTalk series you will know what I'm referring to in terms of style.



    Buy AAPL stock.

    Go to yearly Shareholder meeting.

    Fantasizing your "meeting" as a post on AI serves no purpose, other than preening I suppose.


    Ever seen a HardTalk episode? Wonder why they are so highly valued?

    Fluff serves little purpose. It's almost an insult.

    I see you have never been to a shareholder's meeting either. It's not an interview.


    cgWerks
  • Reply 69 of 73
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,056member
    cgWerks said:
    cgWerks said:
    I'll settle for updated MacPro (TB3), MacMini (TB3), and MacBook Pro (reliable keyboard) in the not too distant future. Intel has nothing to do with preventing that.
    Coming this year; maybe this year; already here.
    We'll see, we'll see, how so?

    avon b7 said:
    As soon as the fluff started I would have countered with the prickly questions. I doubt readers want to read bland, 'stating the obvious' responses and from people basically patting themselves on the back and goubg through the motions. It's not as if there aren't many subjects to choose from...
    Unfortunately, that would be the last interview you'd have with anyone from Apple, and your news outlet would get snubbed to future access to them.
    That depends and, don't get me wrong, I see your logic, but shows like HardTalk should have vanished from TV and radio years ago in that case.

    Some people are held to ransom for interviews (I had a spell as a journalist years ago) and some want to have their cake and eat it. They want to see all the questions beforehand, veto certain subjects and in some cases want to approve/edit the final piece. I have no issue with that as long as the details are laid out to the reader.

    Also, if I were interviewing TC in an Apple context, I would not be bringing gay or gun rights into play for example.

    But there's no way I would let certain fluff parts stick without digging into them deeper. 

    If the interviewer or publisher puts it into the public domain, they can take the page hits but also accept the flak.


  • Reply 70 of 73
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,832member
    avon b7 said:
    cgWerks said:
    cgWerks said:
    I'll settle for updated MacPro (TB3), MacMini (TB3), and MacBook Pro (reliable keyboard) in the not too distant future. Intel has nothing to do with preventing that.
    Coming this year; maybe this year; already here.
    We'll see, we'll see, how so?

    avon b7 said:
    As soon as the fluff started I would have countered with the prickly questions. I doubt readers want to read bland, 'stating the obvious' responses and from people basically patting themselves on the back and goubg through the motions. It's not as if there aren't many subjects to choose from...
    Unfortunately, that would be the last interview you'd have with anyone from Apple, and your news outlet would get snubbed to future access to them.
    That depends and, don't get me wrong, I see your logic, but shows like HardTalk should have vanished from TV and radio years ago in that case.

    Some people are held to ransom for interviews (I had a spell as a journalist years ago) and some want to have their cake and eat it. They want to see all the questions beforehand, veto certain subjects and in some cases want to approve/edit the final piece. I have no issue with that as long as the details are laid out to the reader.

    Also, if I were interviewing TC in an Apple context, I would not be bringing gay or gun rights into play for example.

    But there's no way I would let certain fluff parts stick without digging into them deeper. 

    If the interviewer or publisher puts it into the public domain, they can take the page hits but also accept the flak.


    I could find no indication that "Hard Talk" had ever interviewed any CEO, of any major corporation, other than Orange, nor specifically any sitting technology CEO of any major technology company, so you pining for this is absurd. This is based on a list of interviews available on iPlayer.

    "Hard Talk" is, obviously, not the venue for CEO's.

  • Reply 71 of 73
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,273member
    avon b7 said:
    That depends and, don't get me wrong, I see your logic, but shows like HardTalk should have vanished from TV and radio years ago in that case.
    I don't have personal experience, but from what I've heard from several people who do cover Apple stuff for a living, you have to kind of tip-toe or you don't get invited back. That said, there are people who cover Apple who speak their mind.... they just don't get invites. (A good example is Rob Walsh of Today in iOS, or maybe Marco Arment... but then again, neither of these guys makes their living from Apple media coverage.)
  • Reply 72 of 73
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,056member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    cgWerks said:
    cgWerks said:
    I'll settle for updated MacPro (TB3), MacMini (TB3), and MacBook Pro (reliable keyboard) in the not too distant future. Intel has nothing to do with preventing that.
    Coming this year; maybe this year; already here.
    We'll see, we'll see, how so?

    avon b7 said:
    As soon as the fluff started I would have countered with the prickly questions. I doubt readers want to read bland, 'stating the obvious' responses and from people basically patting themselves on the back and goubg through the motions. It's not as if there aren't many subjects to choose from...
    Unfortunately, that would be the last interview you'd have with anyone from Apple, and your news outlet would get snubbed to future access to them.
    That depends and, don't get me wrong, I see your logic, but shows like HardTalk should have vanished from TV and radio years ago in that case.

    Some people are held to ransom for interviews (I had a spell as a journalist years ago) and some want to have their cake and eat it. They want to see all the questions beforehand, veto certain subjects and in some cases want to approve/edit the final piece. I have no issue with that as long as the details are laid out to the reader.

    Also, if I were interviewing TC in an Apple context, I would not be bringing gay or gun rights into play for example.

    But there's no way I would let certain fluff parts stick without digging into them deeper. 

    If the interviewer or publisher puts it into the public domain, they can take the page hits but also accept the flak.


    I could find no indication that "Hard Talk" had ever interviewed any CEO, of any major corporation, other than Orange, nor specifically any sitting technology CEO of any major technology company, so you pining for this is absurd. This is based on a list of interviews available on iPlayer.

    "Hard Talk" is, obviously, not the venue for CEO's.

    I never even mentioned putting TC on HardTalk.

    I said:

    "If you ever saw early (Tim Sebastian) episodes of the HardTalk series you will know what I'm referring to in terms of style.
  • Reply 73 of 73
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,056member
    cgWerks said:
    avon b7 said:
    That depends and, don't get me wrong, I see your logic, but shows like HardTalk should have vanished from TV and radio years ago in that case.
    I don't have personal experience, but from what I've heard from several people who do cover Apple stuff for a living, you have to kind of tip-toe or you don't get invited back. That said, there are people who cover Apple who speak their mind.... they just don't get invites. (A good example is Rob Walsh of Today in iOS, or maybe Marco Arment... but then again, neither of these guys makes their living from Apple media coverage.)
    That's how I perceive things too. I've been quite disappointed with some of the Apple centric sites that have interviewed Apple management.
    cgWerks
Sign In or Register to comment.