avon b7


avon b7
Last Active
  • Huawei sues U.S. government, says purchasing ban unconstitutional

    tmay said:
    It’s funny how many fandroids get very upset at the fact that they cannot buy Huawei devices here and scream that there is no proof about any allegations of espionage. 

    The simple fact that the CIA and the NSA issued the warning isn’t good enough for them. I get not trusting some parts of our govt, but when the part that spies on other countries warns the American people that there is a real risk, I think we should listen. 
    Especially when it’s all the heads of six intelligence agencies, operating in unison.


    The same agencies that said Russia meddled in the election and are no friends to the administration. Their findings were valid then, but now they aren’t — for the Chinese Cheer Squad, anyway. 

    Cognitive dissonance, much?

    It almost like a disease. People would risk having their info monitored by another country just to have a shiny new toy. 
    I don’t like the thought of my country tracking me, but the thought of another country tracking me creeps me out. 

    Has anyone seen how many cameras China has in public to watch them? Do they get that you can get arrested by looking at a website they label as subversive?

    They still want the device because it will do 5G. Great trade off!!
    I'll play;


    "Under Xi’s leadership, the party now has eyes everywhere—literally. As many as 200 million surveillance cameras have already been installed in an effort to reduce crime and control social unrest. The surveillance technology will also play an essential role in the 2020 national rollout of the country’s social credit system, which will evaluate people’s political and economic trustworthiness and reward and punish them accordingly. The CCP has now established party committees within nearly 70 percentof all private enterprises and joint ventures, in order to ensure that the businesses advance the interests of the state. Beijing has also succeeded in constraining outside influences: thanks to a law passed two years ago, for example, the number of foreign nongovernmental organizations operating in China has fallen from more than 7,000to just over 400. And “Made in China 2025”—China’s plan to protect its domestic firms from foreign competition in ten areas of critical cutting-edge technology—is well under way. The Sichuan provincial government, for example, has stipulated that for 15 types of medical devices, hospitals will be reimbursed only for procedures that use Chinese-manufactured devices."
    Huawei is has been very successful in the emerging nations selling their telecom systems at low prices, with subsidies, and even with financing, all with the blessings and support of the CCP. Western nations have not been as welcoming, citing issues of National Security.

    Coincidentally, those countries that have bans or attempted bans of Huawei telecom, are seeing unusual retaliation in the form of export contract cancellations, and export "friction", a sure sign the the Chinese Government has an interest in Huawei's success in the West. Likely as well, the two unlucky Canadian's picked up for "spying", are hostages in the extradition drama of Meng Wanzhou, Huawei CFO.

    yet more;

    Huawei has been very successful with western nations too, not only emerging nations.

    China sees Huawei as a national champion and I have no doubt that it takes some decisions based on how Huawei is treated by some countries. That is not a problem. The US has literally been threatening its allies for weeks over Huawei. There is a big difference between the two situations though.

    Does China want to see more success for Huawei in the west? Why wouldn't it?

    The US is currently negotiating with the UK on possible post Brexit agreements as it wants US companies to have more success in the UK. This is normal.

    Country to country, where politics underlies a large part of what goes on, is not the same as country to company. If you start singling out one particular company and take your case and attempt to impose it on other countries you are very likely to get into hot water both politically and legally. Especially if you have very little to back up your case in the first place.

    Remember, this is about protectionism, not security. At the MWC press conference that the US delegation held (yes, unbelievable but true) they were asked point blank to give a statement on that pesky detail of evidence. They didn't. This fact was echoed in the sunseqsubs articles in the press.
  • Editorial: Apple just told you that they aren't going to make an 'iPhone SE 2' any time so...

    moxom said:
    Viewing this on my iPhone 5. 

    I was hoping for a new small iPhone like a lot if people but I have now accepted that it's not going to happen. 

    Unfortunately, I have to change my phone now as many apps I use (including banking apps) no longer run which is a real shame as my phone is working great. 

    I may now consider getting a second hand iPhone SE or just go for an iPhone 8 which is at an attractive price now. 

    First World problems indeed...

    Due to an EU directive (PSD2), a smartphone app will be required by my bank for access via the 'internet'. Of course, the bank itself will determine which version of the app is the minimum required to access their services. This will no doubt have an impact on phone upgrades.

    5G Network slicing will also be involved at some point for enhancing security. 
  • Huawei-Google smart speaker project shut down by US restrictions


    Wow, what could go wrong?

    Scary sh**.
    Nothing scary about it. Especially as it was a standard partnership project. Huawei uses Google Assistant, Alexa and YoYo in various products. This would have been (and probably still will be) a future product.

    In less than two weeks Honor will fully unveil a far more ambitious project. A 'TV/Smartscreen' with a camera onboard (pop-up for those who don't want one) that will include a brand new AI chipset and possibly not run Android. It will also have all the directional mics and much of the technology of the Smartspeaker, too. We might also see two new SoCs at the end of August from Huawei.

    The risk of Huawei pulling away from U.S suppliers has seemingly become reality with many U.S suppliers likely to see revenue drops to the tune of billions. 

    Of course, if you feel scared it's likely based on heresay. I think the Snowden leaks should have made you feel far more scared, independently of the companies you buy from.

  • Editorial: Free advertising for Apple Card isn't coming from unit sales or market share

    "Why is it so important that Apple is not selling more devices than the rest of the world combined? Actually, it's quite clearly not important"

    AFAIK, Apple has never sold more 'devices' than the rest of the world combined and you yourself have written articles on Apple being the top seller in some shape or fashion of some models. Handset sales remain a key metric in Apple's business. That is undeniable in spite of your sarcasm.

    The wobble Apple took at the start of the year was largely caused by lower than expected iPhone sales.

    Actually sales are clearly very important and have been the key driver for Apple for years. That's why they actually do matter and are important. Even today.

    While revenue from iPhones, for the first time in a long while, made up less than 50% of the total recently (and might even become a trend), that percentage is likely to jump back over 50% after Apple's blowout Christmas quarter and that will happen largely through increasing handset sales.

    After a profit warning and three years of flat unit sales, you are now picking up something new to downplay problematic handset unit sales. Sales that would have been seen in even poorer light if it weren't for DT trying to crush Huawei.

    Less than a year ago, sales (or analysts hitting on them) were important enough for you to pen this piece:


    You even wrote a piece claiming Apple in China was doing fine in the very same 24 hours that Apple issued a profit warning. Speculation swings both ways and can be wrong. No news there. 

    Why wasn't this piece written back then if unit sales aren't actually important? Why waste so much energy focussing on pure speculation by different analysts/journalists? Analysts and journalists will speculate but they also report the official numbers too. Just like they report on Apple Card.

    In fact, the current situation is partly because Apple has lagged behind competitors for a few years now in a broad range of handset technologies. Price is clearly another factor. If people talk about Huawei and Samsung it is because of what they have delivered. If people largely stopped talking about the latest iPhone series shortly after release it is because the release was not worthy of more attention. Apple really didn't deliver with the 2018 iPhone refresh. The Apple Watch was far more newsworthy.

    If Huawei and Samsung have delivered and left Apple to catch-up in key areas it is because they are competing and as a result of that competition, Apple is apparently trying to move things up a gear. At last! But all indicators (read rumours) point to another relatively 'light' iPhone refresh. We'll see what actually gets presented but, unlike sales forecasts, rumours on upcoming iPhones have historically not been that bad.

    'Competency' seems to be your way of writing Samsung and Huawei off in some way. I have no idea why you want to tread there.

    Nothing could be further from the truth. The Fold was a PR disaster but the rest of the handset division has been on a roll. Far better than the S9 Series.

    Huawei hasn't put a foot wrong so far in spite of U.S attempts to literally kill the company.

    In fact, Huawei moved into the handset business and broke the Apple/Samsung duolpoly. No mean feat. It has key technology literally at every step of the way from the top right down into wearables and everything in between.

    If you want to talk about competency, where was Apple while all this was happening? Why wasn't Apple developing 5G in 2009 like Huawei? If Huawei managed to outdo Apple on handset hardware in just a few short years, why hasn't Apple done the same in the other direction? Was it really so hard not to see 5G in terms of another industrial revolution and make a strategic move?

    No Apple hoarded it's cash and is still focussing on consumer facing earnings. Only now is it trying to pick up the pieces of not seeing the strategic moves its competitors saw long ago and make its own 5G modem (buying in IP and know how).

    Now, AI is another prospective big money earner for the next six years both at enterprise and consumer levels. 

    On Friday, Huawei released Ascend which will be included in earbuds and rise up through watches, handsets, IoT, TVs, cars, servers and entire data centers. Alongside that, it released MindSpore. That is competency and Mindspore will go open source like HiAI has been for three years now.

    Where is the Apple equivalent silicon and supporting software frameworks? I've read rumours of Apple being interested in 6G development but missing 5G almost entirely isn't 'competency' in my book. 

    Apple 'miscalculated' in Tim Cook's own words. As a result it looks like it had to reimburse Samsung for not achieving planned shipments of oled displays and issue a profit warning. 

    If Huawei has reached the point where it has the U.S senate running scared and trying to chop it down by any means possible you can be sure that competency was the underlying reason.

    Apple Card was announced in March 2019 and went live on the 20th of August so it is a little premature to count any eggs on that one.

    "telling us as loudly as possible that Apple's market share of units sold is dangerously flat or even shrinking. Often, it's "waning" or "collapsing," or some other dramatic term suggesting immediate demise for a company..."

    You are mixing things up here. Firstly, Apple's unit sales have been flat. That is reality. However, where did you get 'dangerously' from? Secondly, unit sales did shrink. That is reality. However, where did you get "suggesting the immediate demise" from?

    iPhone sales are still key to the company's coffers but they have enough non-iPhone business and cash to avoid its demise. You are throwing these things in for dramatic effect but they are false. You might find some unbalanced fool out there making those claims but it simply isn't representative of what is being said.

    "The physical Apple Card wears out, but not the digital experience that's driving consumer attention"

    I feel confident in pointing out that if this had been a Samsung/Google/Huawei card 'wearing out' it would have got far more than half a sentence dedicated to it.

    The 'digital experience that is driving consumer attention' is so low that I, nor anyone I know, even has an interest in it. Many iPhone users included. Being limited to Apple Pay obviously reduces consumer attention to less than 15% of the world's smartphone base. This is supposing that I have my facts right because it hasn't really drawn my attention at all.

    Now, if it wasn't less than 15%, consumer attention would probably be higher but that conflicts with the idea of marketshare not being relevant in the first place. Marketshare is important. Tim Cook even hinted during the last earnings call that less services would be tethered to the iPhone and they would see how that worked out. That was interesting for a few reasons and time will tell if it has an impact on the 'ecosystem'.

    "the reality remains that Apple is selling the most premium devices to the valuable end of the market. "

    The most, but less than before. That is also reality. Huawei and Samsung have better flagships in the 'valuable end' of the market and, whichever way you look at it, the pie that makes up the 'valuable end' has more non-Apple takers than before.

    "This minority of the market is driving the development of the majority of the tech that is having a real impact. That, in turn, is driving commercial interest in Apple as a brand".

    Can you name some of those technologies? Because for the last three years most of them have come from Huawei and Samsung (NOT Apple) and yes, they are driving commercial interest but NOT in Apple. That's why everyone has been raving about NON-Apple phones (and I'll include One Plus and others in that group). It's why the latest iPhone hasn't drawn much interest at all since launch and any buzz died down very early on.

    "Interest  in Apple is why the vast volumes of phones from Huawei and Samsung are desperately trying to look like an iPhone. Yet those companies have not attracted significant proprietary app development despite their efforts to do this. Neither has successfully launched new companion wearables like Apple Watch or AirPods, and neither has competently introduced new Services fueling the extraordinary growth Apple has seen from its App Store, iCloud, and other new Services offerings-- including the new Apple Card attracting an unusual level of attention, given that it is merely a credit card with some clever new app features."

    No. Huawei and Samsung are not trying to look like the iPhone. Much less 'desperately'. 

    'Not attracted significant propietary app development'? They run Android. Perhaps I am missing something here.

    No successful companion wearables? They have released successful companion wearables. Lots of them! And growing!


    I mentioned Ascend further up. What do you think Ascend Nano was designed for? DaVinci cores are already present in the Kirin 810. The Kirin 990 will have an NPU based around Ascend Tiny (or perhaps Ascend Lite). You can expect its already successful wearables business to grow along with IoT.

    Both have 'Services' and both will also grow. Even for Apple, Services is a relatively new leg to the earnings table but you are no doubt looking at 'Services' from short sighted CE perspective. Both Samsung and Huawei offer services outside the CE realm too. Huawei offers cloud services to industry as well as end users. Does Apple? Does Apple have an equivalent to the Ascend 910 Cluster?


    That will have services attached to it.

    "Large volumes of low and middle-tier phones are establishing their brands as basic and cheap".

    Utter nonsense! Think about a Samsung or Huawei handset and the first, and only, thing that springs to mind is anything but 'basic and cheap'. It is completely the opposite! You think premium flagship with a price to match. Stop anyone in the street and ask them to name a Huawei phone. I guarantee you it won't be a Y Series phone. That is the power of the brand and is why Huawei is (or was, until Trump threw a tantrum) selling more and more premium phones. The same applies to Honor. Not only that but tech savvy users will even put the phones ahead of Apple in many areas.

    "While both brands currently hold a lead in certain areas over Apple, ranging from 5G modems to screen size variants, the reality is that the largest Android licensees have always held various inconsequential leads over Apple at various times over the last decade, including 4G and 3G before it."

    Certain areas? "Really, George?" Come on. 

    "Yet this has never mattered before."

    It has but you just haven't seen it and it still matters and you still don't see it. Three years of flat sales, a profit warning and YoY contraction make those leads consequential (Competition, in a word) but let's not forget Apple's role in this. If people aren't seeing value (and I'd argue that many aren't) for the asking price, then Apple should be doing more. By the time Apple releases a tri-camera phone, it will be 18 months late to market in competitive terms. So late in fact that tri-cameras aren't even newsworthy in the wider industry anymore and only the top of the line iPhone is rumoured to carry that setup. I hope prices come down if these phones turn out to be another marginal improvement over the last generation. Low light improvements? Another 18 months late. More than x2 optical zoom. Another 18 months. Fast charging? Ten years late!

    No. Those leads haven't been inconsequential in the slightest.

    I only got the XR after a big increase in the trade-in discounting. Without that it was a no sale because IMO the value wasn't there.

    "The two ultra premium-class products making the most original feature leap in smartphones this year were the foldable phone-tablets introduced by Samsung and Huawei. Yet they were both delayed for months, squandering their potential to captivate any real interest among consumers during the sleepy period between iPhone launches. Both represented a lot of work for nothing in 2019."

    'Most original' is subjective. Folding phones may be original (or not) but the first generation models were never brought to market with anything other than a tiny niche in mind. None of their 'potential' has been squandered at all. Until they arrive there is no market and the potential is exactly the same as it was when they were announced. The quiet period for these phones (in unit sales terms) doesn't exist and there is no sleepy period between iPhones. P30 Series, S10 Series, Note 10 series, Magic II, Honor 20 Series, One Plus 7 series... . No sleep til Hammersmith!

    On the other hand, when they do reach the market, they will definitely absorb attention from the iPhone. People will be rushing to publish reviews and see how quickly they break! LOL! Seriously, iPhone is going to have a harder time getting airtime this year (as if the Mate 30 Series wasn't already enough). To make matters worse, the Mate X has been seriously upgraded and might even have a 5G modem on the Kirin 990 SoC.

    The most original feature IMO was the x10 periscope lens on the P30 Pro.

    I won't continue as time doesn't permit.

  • Demand for iPhone 11 outpacing supply chain expectations

    lkrupp said:
    Once again Apple confounds the pundits and trolls. Will they ever learn? Not likely. After all, negativity is the norm on the Internet. 
    So three years of flat sales and a profit warning leave nothing for Apple or you to learn?

    Apple hasn't confounded anyone. For the last three years it has been the same, right down to the kind of statement you just made. And as usual you are running with an analyst statement! The same analysts you always criticise!

    Have you forgotten about 'the iPhone X is the most popular iPhone'?  That, in the end, didn't change anything. Things still came out flat.

    If anything, the opposite to what you are saying is true. Apple has learnt (the hard way) and as a result we have a much stronger lineup at far cheaper prices - right down to the iPhone 8.

    Thank the competition for that, too.
  • iPhone 11 versus Pixel 4 -- Benchmark and hands on comparison

    Soli said:
    If there were no such thing as the iPhone I would get a Pixel.
    LOL AppleExposed is right to point out that the Pixel you're looking at wouldn't exist. Android only exists because Apple carved out a path for them to fill the void for markets Apple didn't want to serve.

    What pisses me off is that Android just piggybacked Apples work and did it so quickly that the consumer thought iPhone/iKnockoffs were an organic way forward for phones. It wasn't. So fast forward to today Android users don't know they're using iPhone knockoffs. iPhone alternatives were supposed to be Windows Mobile, Blackberry and Symbian but greedy Google fu**ed that up too.
    That is a very distorted way to see things. Put bluntly, modern Android phones are far more than stock Android. There is almost an entirely new layer sitting on top of it. That alone is enough to make a striking difference on almost every level (even at the level of the file system and deeply integrated hardware like NPUs). If you add onto those differences the functionality of Google Services, the difference is far greater still, and Google Services have pretty much always been better than Apple's equivalents (where they exist). Search, Maps, email, voice assistants.

    A modern Android phone is not, as you claim, an 'iKnockoff'.

    The recent Anandtech review of the iPhone 11 Pro went as far as to say this:

    "Finally, we have Apple's new cameras. Over the last year and a half we’ve seen tremendous innovation from the competition, and Apple’s sole task here this generation was to catch up and to keep up. The new triple camera setup is one feature that Apple really needed a checkmark on if it wanted to compete with the versatility presented by the competition".

    It is widely accepted that on modern smartphones, the camera set-up is a critical element and much of the focus over the last few years has been in that area. Make no mistake, one of the key areas of comparison between the iPhone 11 Pro and the Pixel 4 will be precisely the camera.

    That area is not 'Android' so focussing your bitterness on the OS is wholly misplaced.

    Apple has played catch-up in practically every major area on the iPhone 11 series (better, more versatile camera hardware, better connectivity, better battery life etc) but now Apple has to keep up.

  • Editorial: Why the Apple A13 Bionic blows past Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 Plus

    melgross said:
    lkrupp said:
    Years ago I had this piece of SW installed on a desktop that would download a chunk of data, process it, and upload the answer.  I think it was for S.E.T.I or something.  Distributed (donated) computing.

    Thinking of the A13, and Apple's advances into medical with Apple Watch:  Perhaps pretty soon we'll be able to donate some of the IMMENSE computational computing to protein-modelling or some other amazing medical-research (Billions of $ worth of computing power......free), and cure cancer or other such wonder....

    Really really cool.

    Quantum computing will eliminate the need for distributed processing. Just saying.
    Nope. It’s for very different kinds of problem solving.
    And problem making, depending on your point of view ;-)

  • Editorial: Does Apple have the mettle to fight for Mac success in the Pro market?

    Why is everyone lamenting the loss of the Mac middle when it is here we just all fail to see it. I like many of you want something between a iMac or iMac Pro and a tower but what do I really want? I want to add in cards and RAIDS and whatnot. Well the eGPU and thunderbolt enclosures are here to stay. Yes we can lament the extra boxes and the lack of ability to have it all in one big box but thats about all we can lament. We CAN actually do everything we want, we just may not like it cuz it isn't "pretty" or "clean". I run pro setups all the time with iMac's connected to eGPU's and other boxes running other PCI cards and in the end it does in fact look clean and professional....it's not just not in one box. Think of it this way. The entire power of having a tower is gives you the "option" to add cards if need be. Well we still have this option with thunderbolt 3...yes we have to cough up some extra dough for a eGPU box but thats about it right?  What am I missing here??? I would rather argue about the hatred of having to spend $300 on an eGPU box to add a card rather than arguing over a whole missing product or cheap tower. But hey, thats just me. 
    That's thinking outside the box! ;-)

    I would like one especially to have the screen not soldered to the machine.

    Currently I have a 27" iMac with a failed GPU. The screen is fine but unusable. The opposite would be true is the screen had failed.

    I want an internally upgradeable machine with a screen of my choice.

    I think many people feel exactly the same way.
  • Editorial: Does Apple have the mettle to fight for Mac success in the Pro market?

    sflocal said:
    KidGloves said:
    Blah, Blah, Blah Daniel... For all the money Apple generates from Mac sales you would think they could offer an option in the middle ground between the Mini and the Pro. Dell, HP and the rest can sell LOADS of different product lines and still make a profit. A Mac user has only one place to go to buy a Mac and Apple offers severely limited choices. Imagine if BMW offered only the 1 Series, 2 Series, and the 7 Series. That's the state of desktop Mac options. 

    I'm sick reading you banging on about how smart and profitable Apple is. As you say, the Mac division on its own would be a Fortune 500 company. When did they last truly innovate? Have you seen some of the recent PC hardware? It might not all be perfect but they try. Apple design for me has been getting lazy for years. The whole trash can Mac Pro was possibly the worst bit of design in Apple's history. All the users wanted was a powerful box they could stick under their desks, maybe fit some cards into for specialist pro tasks, and not really think about at all. Instead, they got something that's beautiful to look (well at least until it has wires spewing out all over the place) but not much more useful than a Mac Mini for professional tasks. It's then left for years without a single update. Absolutely crazy for a Fortune 500 sized outfit.

    The new Pro looks amazing but it's targeted at a very small niche audience. I and a lot of people like me need something bigger than a Mini and smaller than a Pro. A Mac Middle if you will...
    Most folks - and this is a proven fact - will never open up a computer once the initial purchase is made.  Fact.  Been beaten to death multiple times.

    When that time does come to upgrade, from a cost perspective - whether you like it or not - it's better to buy a new machine with newer technology, then to mix-and-match old tech, with new tech in an expandable system and not get the entire benefit.  Fact.

    So give it a rest.  We all would love an "affordable" Mac Pro, but the reality is for most of Apple's customers, an iMac, or Mini works just fine.  Folks like you represent such a small blip on Apple's P&L that it's more a rounding-error than anything else.  

    Apple products have such a long lifespan - and better resale value than the competition.   They last 5+ years for most folks.  WHY on earth would someone want to upgrade certain components when the rest of the tech is technically obsolete?

    Just let it go.
    Curious. I'd say a very high percentage of buyers of such a machine would do the exact opposite of what you are saying and that upgrading the machine down the line would be a key factor in their purchase decision. That, and not having a screen bolted on.

    They would able to get around the 'buy the RAM and storage you need from us at purchase time' (because it's soldered on) and upgrade as needed at a better price/GB.

  • Editorial: Does Apple have the mettle to fight for Mac success in the Pro market?


    Based on past history of just abandoning anything that takes a modicum of effort 
    it would be unwise for those who are not of the Apple Sheep cloth to put much faith 
    in Apple being consistent with any product at this level.    You only need look at 

    1.  The demise of the Xserve server and RAID 
    2.  Apple acquiring and doing nothing with PowerSchool. 
    3.  The neglect of iBook Author despite the small but fanatical fan base  
    4.  Aperture’s slow decaying death 
    5.  OS X Server turning into a toy 

    Apple’s spent their money on AI companies and other ancillary technologies but they haven’t spent much effort 
    into growing their Pro apps beyond routine small features and maintenance updates. 

    I’d trust Apple if I had a few workstations to purchase but I’d be wary with committing to anything more than that. 
    This has been my view for years, too.

    Apple lacks commitment to projects that are long term bets. Their pro history is littered with hardware/software that wasn't really developed as far or as well as it could have been.

    And it isn't even limited to the pro segment either. A lot of propietary hardware became a headache for users at some point.

    Recent 'gaps' in product lines only serve to increase the sensation of having to be wary at all times (Mac Pro, Mac Mini, iPad Mini etc).

    IMO, Apple should be bending over backwards to convince prospective buyers that the new Pro hardware will here for the long term. A five year warranty would be a great starting place.