- Last Active
Maybe, just maybe, if all journalists provided the historical context of their ramblings, they may eventually be as insightful and as informative as Dan.
Once again, LOVE your work, Dilger!
Perhaps, one day, the goons at MS, GoogAlpha and even Ubuntu will happen across Dan's style and understand the advantage of critical analysis - tinged with sarcasm - and actually begin providing Apple with some competition... ooorrrr they could try putting the customer first and expending their own efforts in creative ways to invent solutions.
Hope springs eternal.
hagar said:Thanks for pointing me to Joanna Stern's article on iPhone and AI in WSJ. I think she's spot on. The position of Apple on privacy is not a desirable one. If I look at my Android friends that are amazed by the AI delivered to their phone by Google & friends that analyse their data, I can't help but wonder how Apple will ever deliver something similar?
Nobody seems to care that Apple protects their privacy (it's a multinational too!) and Google not. They just want useful information delivered to them when they need it.
I DO NOT WANT GOOGLE TO INVADE MY PRIVACY FOR ADVERTISING.
I hope this statement makes it clear that your general and anecdotally-supported statement is not, in fact, universal. I do my best to be goog-free.
Once again, Dilger hits the nail on the head. Apple has long been 'recommended' to move into the lower markets, long before it even began selling iPhone. Apple only works on profitability, and it seems to me that refurbs are Apple's way of moving mid-teir. Selling last year's model for a small discount was the best way to move downward, but to also keep the customer base growing. But Apple's most significant business solution to a saturated market, I reckon, is the huge investments Apple's made in Services. Whereever or whenever what ever model iPhone is bought, the App Store, iTunes etc etc all provide a revenue stream back into Apple. Apple has done fantastically well to not only plan all this out, but to execute the plan extremely well. I can not see any competitor arising for Apple within the next ten years.
As I discovered with G+ after doing MySpace and Facebook- it isn't the platform, it's the connection I can have with family and friends. MySpace was ugly and difficult to use; G+ is for random people to promote their own business interests, and thusly, both failed for me. Facebook allows me to stay in touch with people I actually care about, and to differentiate between this close circle, and wider circles of people that I may need to contact from time to time: FB functions as a personal telephone directly and contact list, and is not platform-specific. Any networking service by Apple will need to aim at this core function to take any power away from FB, and I hope Apple does! I despise the tracking and advertising on FB, and use it reluctantly and with adblockers and FBPurity to tidy up the interface. I'm sure not everyone has similar usage scenarios, but just as with MS Office and GSearch: it is not the brand names that are important, it is the functionality that each of them provide. Apple has a huge fan and consumer base which would love to not have to bother with FB et. al., but the functionality of being able to contact friends and family on any platform is more important - and this is why I still have to use FB.
msantti said:cali said:Good thing he's smart. Here's one guy in the tech industry who's thinking. Imagine Tim turning his back on Apple fans?
I'm happy Apple products protect their users globally.
Trust Apple to be the ones to make a stand against Microsoft, Google, the US legal system, and now the worst aspects of US culture. Trust Apple to make a difference, to look to the future, and to bring a better future today. I vote Tim Cook for CEO of Apple, where he can continue making a difference!
Hahahaha! Maybe Goog can remove all the viruses, backdoors, malware and adware while they're re-writing their shite. All that advertising profit will be really handy now - maybe start on a completely new architecture. Maybe based on UNIX and BSD and Mach. And maybe use some open source standards. And how about standardised encryption? Hmmm.... I wonder...In other news, a major upheaval in modern computing just exploded across the tech industry today, yet some people 'familiar with the topic' are hesitant to jump to conclusions, especially considering how Samsung managed to pay nothing after billions in profits after stealing Apple's ideas, and Microsoft only paied $150m for same. "Too early to say" said one 'analysit', "but we believe the court will ultimately conclude, in about 2027, that there really was no harm done, especially if we can get Koh to manage the case!" Alphagoo's stock tanked on the news, yet rebounded before close of trading. More news at 11!
I still don’t see the similarity, umless it’s in the ‘anti-trust’ word. These cases are completely different. Goog’s is much more like Microsoft’s multiple anti-trust cases: preventing any competition in a market. iBooks never prevented market competition. Apple was forced to use a different model, and then had some asshole use his position to try gettingt scoops out of staff ie abusing his position. You’re saying Apple can give a heads up to Goog staff on that? Another trashy article from AI. How about some rationality? Please contact Dilger when writing more than a paragraph.
Good-bye Samsung I'm very impressed with how quickly TSMC went from unheard-of to top-of-the-line. It is a testament to their resourcefulness. It's also a clear illustration of SS's shortsightedness! If only LG could get their act together with displays, but I think Japan Display would be the better alternative. If they survive the year.