Actually Mac OS Classic had a very good memory management within the limits of its capabilities. It was just not a true operating system.
Is that like the
"No True Scotsman" fallacy?
It was software that initialized the hardware, handled input from the keyboard, output to a display, read and wrote to storage media, and ran software on top of that software. In every definition, it was a true operating system. It was modern for the time, even if we've since moved past it.
If you want to go pedantic, all the forum is yours. Of course everyone here knows what CP/M is.
We're talking about something booting from a 400K diskette, just a System file and a Finder file along with the ImageWriter driver and a few other files. Yes that was an achievement but an achievement that shaped all the future evolution. When OS/2, Windows NT and others opened the path to modern PC operating systems it would have no chance of survival. Even Amiga's Tramiel OS was ahead of Mac OS with its true multitasking.
Ah, that old paid shill chestnut. How I… didn’t miss it.
...as the profit margin on the phone is absolutely ridiculous…
So what is the margin?
So apples problem is how do they keep those ridiculous iPhone profits coming in, and the answer is they won't be able to for much longer, that is just simple economics.
Yeah, call us when Apple stops taking in 90% of the industry’s profit, then.
Ah, that old paid shill chestnut. How I… didn’t miss it.
...as the profit margin on the phone is absolutely ridiculous…
So what is the margin?
So apples problem is how do they keep those ridiculous iPhone profits coming in, and the answer is they won't be able to for much longer, that is just simple economics.
Yeah, call us when Apple stops taking in 90% of the industry’s profit, then.
So while Windows RT on an ARM tablet was a dead end at the time, the Surface line was not.
It's also worth pointing out that Surface revenue was up 32% yoy this past quarter and that Microsoft has more devices in the works for later this year.
Apple’s 1990s mistakes (product supply problems, Mac clones, OS stagnation, the Microsoft marketshare expansion juggernaut) are not happening today.
** In the 2000s three things took place which have helped Apple and Apple has taken advantage of it. 1. Gadget expertise; The iPod showed that Apple’s closed ecosystem did a great job with gadgets. The software and OS were stable and easy to use. Support was excellent. * Smartphones are gadgets. The iPhone success is an extension of Apple’s expertise with making and supporting gadgets. * Users who prefer ease of use and convenience for mobile devices are the target customer for what Apple offers. 2. Internet malware; Because Apple is a niche player, most malware goes to the majority OSs, desktop = Windows, mobile = Android. Because Apple has relatively closed systems and has better privacy protections, the user can more easily protect themselves from malware. * Again Apple products are attractive for users who prefer ease of use and convenience. 3. Apple is a well run company. Cook has done a masterful job with suppliers and production getting new products to users. Cook keeps consistency and support for the main Apple products. - As the article mentioned; Microsoft in 2000 was in a completely dominant position for all of personal tech. But MS made a string of terrible mistakes and now their phone/wearable product line is almost dead. - Google is the dominant OS player due to mobile devices having a large percent of all personal computing. But with Android’s poor record of OS updates, poor support from many companies, inferior high end Pixel phone offerings, lack of privacy protections, poor record in dealing with malware, Google cannot threaten the iPhone market.
** Anti-Apple journalism; every year many tech journalists write articles saying that Apple is doomed. Why is this nonsense repeatedly written? Because the articles have a huge audience that get clicks. And advertising is a key funding stream for news reporting. - Why the huge anti-Apple audience? Most phones have Android. (Some of this is because of poor countries where cost is essential.) - Lots of the Apple hate is silly school boy stuff where the other “team” is the enemy. - Other Apple haters on the web have other factors; 1. They prefer open software that can be modified and don’t care much for walled gardens and ease of use. So, they want Apple to die. 2. Many Apple haters have contempt for customers who want ease of use. These haters only want what they like to be offered and so they want Apple to die.
... Samsung does well enough in the US and they must be the number one 'knock off' brand in your way of thinking.
Samsung is not “..the number one ‘knock off’ brand in your way of thinking”?
Thanks for the laugh.
I never said it was and yes, the term 'knock off' is laughable by today's standards but some people just can't seem to get over issues long past, so, in effect, for those same people, Samsung (who Apple actually took to court - and rightly so - for knocking the iPhone off - 'stealing' its design) are part of the 'knock off' brigade.
Ridiculous by all accounts today, as is claiming anything Huawei does is also a knock off.
But does it change anything? The point was Samsung is successful in the US and there is no valid reason to think Huawei wouldn't be. Not even the pronunciation. The entire northern hemisphere (save USA) has had zero problems with the name. I doubt it would be an issue.
Name one major smartphone innovation from Huawei.
“Does it change anything?” Consumers such as yourself — who don’t seem to think that IP knockoffs matter, even though tens, if not hundreds, of billions of value is blatantly stolen — are part of the reason why it takes longer to change anything than it should.
I think that China and Chinese companies are on notice on the IP front. It appears to me that the US government has finally found the cajones to call a spade a spade. They’re not going to be able to knock off IP so easily anymore, despite the casually dismissive attitudes of folks like you. I think that Huawei will be sued out of existence if they tried to sell their phones in this country (their networking equipment is now de facto banned). A couple of US carriers have already backed off from selling their handsets in the US. And the company is under a criminal probe in the US. And they’ve pulled a EUR500 euro bond offering just yesterday, thanks to all these pressures from the US. (You can look up these facts).
Profitable companies never go out of business. Google and Microsoft may have lost some potential market share and profits to Apple, but they are not endangered like Apple was. Last I checked, they still make plenty of money.
Ah, that old paid shill chestnut. How I… didn’t miss it.
...as the profit margin on the phone is absolutely ridiculous…
So what is the margin?
So apples problem is how do they keep those ridiculous iPhone profits coming in, and the answer is they won't be able to for much longer, that is just simple economics.
Yeah, call us when Apple stops taking in 90% of the industry’s profit, then.
So while Windows RT on an ARM tablet was a dead end at the time, the Surface line was not.
It's also worth pointing out that Surface revenue was up 32% yoy this past quarter and that Microsoft has more devices in the works for later this year.
No Windows RT on ARM did not evolve. Those are all conventional PCs. The article specifically described RT's efforts to make a new class of Windows devices. That failed entirely, at great cost. And no, Surface isn't up. It's been sideways with no real growth since launch. It has shifted slightly between slightly better and slightly worse quarters, but it has never grown significantly above ~1M tablets/PCs per quarter. Compare that to 7-10M iPads or ~5 million Macs per quarter.
Ah, that old paid shill chestnut. How I… didn’t miss it.
...as the profit margin on the phone is absolutely ridiculous…
So what is the margin?
So apples problem is how do they keep those ridiculous iPhone profits coming in, and the answer is they won't be able to for much longer, that is just simple economics.
Yeah, call us when Apple stops taking in 90% of the industry’s profit, then.
With next week's earnings call, we will see new adjustments to the figure banded around by analysts.
Who’s “Counterpoint Research”? Never heard of them. Can you tell us more? Why should I believe this numbers?
I sometimes link to Counterpoint because it is often used used as the base of AI articles.
Do a search if AI. You will find articles that pick up on their research.
Believing the numbers is just like with any research company. The point is it is out there and I'm not just making things up. We are all free to believe or disbelieve.
... Samsung does well enough in the US and they must be the number one 'knock off' brand in your way of thinking.
Samsung is not “..the number one ‘knock off’ brand in your way of thinking”?
Thanks for the laugh.
I never said it was and yes, the term 'knock off' is laughable by today's standards but some people just can't seem to get over issues long past, so, in effect, for those same people, Samsung (who Apple actually took to court - and rightly so - for knocking the iPhone off - 'stealing' its design) are part of the 'knock off' brigade.
Ridiculous by all accounts today, as is claiming anything Huawei does is also a knock off.
But does it change anything? The point was Samsung is successful in the US and there is no valid reason to think Huawei wouldn't be. Not even the pronunciation. The entire northern hemisphere (save USA) has had zero problems with the name. I doubt it would be an issue.
Name one major smartphone innovation from Huawei.
AIIS
"Possibly the best aspect of the new P20 Pro camera is the AI assisted stabilisation, which allowed me to take long exposures (four to six seconds a go) with the phone merely held in my hand. No tripod, no resting on street furniture and no holding my breath to minimise movement; just taking the phone from my pocket, pointing in the right direction and shooting.
I cannot think of any other phone that can come anywhere close to taking such good photos in near darkness as the P20 Pro. The Google Pixel phones come close, but not close enough in my opinion, but the Pixel phones lack the ability to take crisp monochrome photos, or the close-ups that are possible thanks to the separate telephoto lens.
Once again, please look at these photos and make up your own mind."
Take your iPhone out at night, set a 4-6 hand held exposure and check your results.
If it were easy, all phones would be able to handle it. Huawei has an entire imaging division (including some ex Nokia scientists responsible for some of the Nokia camera goodies). Top of the line phones are co-engineered with Leica.
The US carriers didn't back away from deals because of doubts. AT&T wouldn't have spent the best part of a year tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks if it had any doubts. It is generally accepted that those carriers were pressured into backing away.
BTW, the Kirin 970 holds a Cat 18 modem with dual simultaneous VoLTE capacity. Another world first in a smartphone. As is the 3X zoom of the P20 Pro.
So while Windows RT on an ARM tablet was a dead end at the time, the Surface line was not.
It's also worth pointing out that Surface revenue was up 32% yoy this past quarter and that Microsoft has more devices in the works for later this year.
I had/have a Surface 3. It was grossly underpowered. My gen 2 iPad was faster. I now have the new Surface Pro. Its very as a light laptop (up until you you have to include the weight of docking station) but nothing feels right or intuitive as a tablet in the UI sense. I don't believe that Microsoft has it in their DNA anymore to make a computer that works as both tablet and PC (i.e. the perfect hybrid). I think Apple will be able to do it in either time. Probably not as fast as I would like but I guess that's just the way it is. Remember Microsoft's last great ideas was that people wanted to run Excel on their phones. I think MS is racing straight for the Cloud because they know their hold on the desktop is becoming less and less important. That's why they are porting their software to other platforms.
So while Windows RT on an ARM tablet was a dead end at the time, the Surface line was not.
It's also worth pointing out that Surface revenue was up 32% yoy this past quarter and that Microsoft has more devices in the works for later this year.
No Windows RT on ARM did not evolve. Those are all conventional PCs. The article specifically described RT's efforts to make a new class of Windows devices. That failed entirely, at great cost. And no, Surface isn't up. It's been sideways with no real growth since launch. It has shifted slightly between slightly better and slightly worse quarters, but it has never grown significantly above ~1M tablets/PCs per quarter. Compare that to 7-10M iPads or ~5 million Macs per quarter.
I should say my local Microsoft store has expanded greatly. It has gone from one employee standing in a kiosk to a bigger store with 3 or 4 employees playing X-Box when I stop by. I don't think Apple has to worry about Surface (and I like my Surface Pro).
Lots of talk in that editorial, yet none of it related to the unsustainable business practices in pathological capitalism that are the problem now, as it was for Apple in the past: obsession with perpetual growth of profit margins and Wall Street pandering.
There's also the lack of deeper vision, the loss of expertise (some or much of it being driven out of the company by infighting), and the unrestrained extreme preferences that used to be balanced by complementary preferences...
Corporations are effectively immortal. However, their "personalities" change over time as their makeup changes. Today's Apple isn't the Apple that shook up the computer industry between 2007-2010 (my preferred golden era). Similarly, that Apple wasn't the same one that existed during the previous "golden era".
The sad thing is, both eras were driven by a very strong, mostly unified vision that is not coming back a third time because the man who provided it, as well as the questionable management style that kept the various personalities in balance, is now dead.
Without that unified force, Apple has been degenerating into the riding of its own coattails; there's the insulated arrogance of executives (growing more out of touch every year, possibly bored millionaires), product and customer abuse to drive new sales in shorter and shorter cycles (because shareholders and profit margins rule most of the decision making), resting on the laurels of historic brand respect (being burned away with the death of attention to detail and quality that earned it)... basically, MBA-style management.
Part of that comes from apps running in the Dalvik or ART (Android RunTime) virtual machines, and the other part comes from app developers who don't do a good job of managing the memory their applications claim or release. What you could say if you wanted to place blame is that Java and the ART VM that Android apps run within doesn't do a good job of pushing app developers to use good practices.
<s>Google should really sue Oracle for letting them lift such bad system</s>
I also listen to theVerge, one of the theme's that they have talked about lately is how Google doesn't stand up for its users against the carriers. That's why they can't come up with a good messaging app amongst other issues. Maybe Google is hamstrung in being able to really improve and/or replace Android if it's seen as a threat to the Carriers. The OEM manufacturers in no way trust Google-just look at their relation with Samsung - for selling their own phones.
Apple's biggest problem seems to be the need for more developers, designers, and engineers to be able to meet their deadlines and keep improving (that's why we have late issues with HomePod and AirPower). But I think iOS for iPad and watchOS are doing great (I still like iOS10 on my phone). Hopefully John Giannandrea will catch Siri up to Alexa and Google Assistant. HomePod just needs continuous improvement for the next few years to hopefully include family support and a better Siri.
There is no comparison between now and then because Apple is now operating in a market the likes of which has never been seen in the past. The Earth has truly become a global village and Apple has been largely responsible for it's exponential growth and will forever remain, even if their domination diminished, a huge player.
There is no comparison between now and then because Apple is now operating in a market the likes of which has never been seen in the past. The Earth has truly become a global village and Apple has been largely responsible for it's exponential growth and will forever remain, even if their domination diminished, a huge player.
Comments
Yeah, call us when Apple stops taking in 90% of the industry’s profit, then.
https://www.counterpointresearch.com/chinese-brands-mobile-handset-profit-crossed-us1-5-billion-first-time-single-quarter/
Then rose again (iPhone 2017 refresh).
With next week's earnings call, we will see new adjustments to the figure banded around by analysts.
So while Windows RT on an ARM tablet was a dead end at the time, the Surface line was not.
It's also worth pointing out that Surface revenue was up 32% yoy this past quarter and that Microsoft has more devices in the works for later this year.
** In the 2000s three things took place which have helped Apple and Apple has taken advantage of it.
1. Gadget expertise;
The iPod showed that Apple’s closed ecosystem did a great job with gadgets. The software and OS were stable and easy to use.
Support was excellent.
* Smartphones are gadgets. The iPhone success is an extension of Apple’s expertise with making and supporting gadgets.
* Users who prefer ease of use and convenience for mobile devices are the target customer for what Apple offers.
2. Internet malware;
Because Apple is a niche player, most malware goes to the majority OSs, desktop = Windows, mobile = Android.
Because Apple has relatively closed systems and has better privacy protections, the user can more easily protect themselves from malware.
* Again Apple products are attractive for users who prefer ease of use and convenience.
3. Apple is a well run company.
Cook has done a masterful job with suppliers and production getting new products to users.
Cook keeps consistency and support for the main Apple products.
- As the article mentioned; Microsoft in 2000 was in a completely dominant position for all of personal tech. But MS made a string of terrible mistakes and now their phone/wearable product line is almost dead.
- Google is the dominant OS player due to mobile devices having a large percent of all personal computing. But with Android’s poor record of OS updates, poor support from many companies, inferior high end Pixel phone offerings, lack of privacy protections, poor record in dealing with malware, Google cannot threaten the iPhone market.
** Anti-Apple journalism; every year many tech journalists write articles saying that Apple is doomed.
Why is this nonsense repeatedly written?
Because the articles have a huge audience that get clicks. And advertising is a key funding stream for news reporting.
- Why the huge anti-Apple audience?
Most phones have Android. (Some of this is because of poor countries where cost is essential.)
- Lots of the Apple hate is silly school boy stuff where the other “team” is the enemy.
- Other Apple haters on the web have other factors; 1. They prefer open software that can be modified and don’t care much for walled gardens and ease of use. So, they want Apple to die. 2. Many Apple haters have contempt for customers who want ease of use. These haters only want what they like to be offered and so they want Apple to die.
• Peerless
• Prognostication
of• Projected
• Pundit
• Performance
• Poo-Poo-Pee-Doo
“Does it change anything?” Consumers such as yourself — who don’t seem to think that IP knockoffs matter, even though tens, if not hundreds, of billions of value is blatantly stolen — are part of the reason why it takes longer to change anything than it should.
I think that China and Chinese companies are on notice on the IP front. It appears to me that the US government has finally found the cajones to call a spade a spade. They’re not going to be able to knock off IP so easily anymore, despite the casually dismissive attitudes of folks like you. I think that Huawei will be sued out of existence if they tried to sell their phones in this country (their networking equipment is now de facto banned). A couple of US carriers have already backed off from selling their handsets in the US. And the company is under a criminal probe in the US. And they’ve pulled a EUR500 euro bond offering just yesterday, thanks to all these pressures from the US. (You can look up these facts).
Do a search if AI. You will find articles that pick up on their research.
Believing the numbers is just like with any research company. The point is it is out there and I'm not just making things up. We are all free to believe or disbelieve.
"Possibly the best aspect of the new P20 Pro camera is the AI assisted stabilisation, which allowed me to take long exposures (four to six seconds a go) with the phone merely held in my hand. No tripod, no resting on street furniture and no holding my breath to minimise movement; just taking the phone from my pocket, pointing in the right direction and shooting.
I cannot think of any other phone that can come anywhere close to taking such good photos in near darkness as the P20 Pro. The Google Pixel phones come close, but not close enough in my opinion, but the Pixel phones lack the ability to take crisp monochrome photos, or the close-ups that are possible thanks to the separate telephoto lens.
Once again, please look at these photos and make up your own mind."
https://jmcomms.com/2018/04/03/huawei-p20-pro-photo-gallery-part-two-two-cities-day-and-night/
It is quite a feat but make up your own mind.
Take your iPhone out at night, set a 4-6 hand held exposure and check your results.
If it were easy, all phones would be able to handle it. Huawei has an entire imaging division (including some ex Nokia scientists responsible for some of the Nokia camera goodies). Top of the line phones are co-engineered with Leica.
https://petapixel.com/2018/04/20/huawei-p20-pro-vs-canon-5ds-r-im-stunned/
The US carriers didn't back away from deals because of doubts. AT&T wouldn't have spent the best part of a year tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks if it had any doubts. It is generally accepted that those carriers were pressured into backing away.
BTW, the Kirin 970 holds a Cat 18 modem with dual simultaneous VoLTE capacity. Another world first in a smartphone. As is the 3X zoom of the P20 Pro.
Does that count for innovation?
There's also the lack of deeper vision, the loss of expertise (some or much of it being driven out of the company by infighting), and the unrestrained extreme preferences that used to be balanced by complementary preferences...
Corporations are effectively immortal. However, their "personalities" change over time as their makeup changes. Today's Apple isn't the Apple that shook up the computer industry between 2007-2010 (my preferred golden era). Similarly, that Apple wasn't the same one that existed during the previous "golden era".
The sad thing is, both eras were driven by a very strong, mostly unified vision that is not coming back a third time because the man who provided it, as well as the questionable management style that kept the various personalities in balance, is now dead.
Without that unified force, Apple has been degenerating into the riding of its own coattails; there's the insulated arrogance of executives (growing more out of touch every year, possibly bored millionaires), product and customer abuse to drive new sales in shorter and shorter cycles (because shareholders and profit margins rule most of the decision making), resting on the laurels of historic brand respect (being burned away with the death of attention to detail and quality that earned it)... basically, MBA-style management.
I also listen to theVerge, one of the theme's that they have talked about lately is how Google doesn't stand up for its users against the carriers.
That's why they can't come up with a good messaging app amongst other issues. Maybe Google is hamstrung in being able to really improve and/or replace Android if it's seen as a threat to the Carriers. The OEM manufacturers in no way trust Google-just look at their relation with Samsung - for selling their own phones.
Apple's biggest problem seems to be the need for more developers, designers, and engineers to be able to meet their deadlines and keep improving (that's why we have late issues with HomePod and AirPower). But I think iOS for iPad and watchOS are doing great (I still like iOS10 on my phone). Hopefully John Giannandrea will catch Siri up to Alexa and Google Assistant. HomePod just needs continuous improvement for the next few years to hopefully include family support and a better Siri.
Apple is still incredibly strong.