dewme

All of this turmoil seems to be attributed to one man. But don’t forget that there are 535 + 9 other people who collectively have the power to reign in this guy. I can’t imagine there are even half that number of people who are willing to sell out their country, their constituents, their children and grandchildren, and their soul just to stay in the good graces of a psychopath. No job is worth the price that they and the future generations of Americans and the world are going to pay for their current selfishness. 

"Nonetheless, TD Cowen does believe that Apple has 18 months to make Apple Intelligence a compelling feature. "

Or what? 

coolfactor said:

Tim has done an exceptional job running Apple. I wish he was a bit more flexible in terms of creative designs like the early iMac days and iPod days. They really had fun with some of the designs, but it's become very conservative now.

I, for one, don't think Apple has bunged up the Apple Intelligence release. Many of the feature are released, and their operating systems are stable. AI tech evolution is moving so fast right now, it's smart of Apple to continue refining their integrations before releasing to the public.

What many critics forget is that many consumers of AI from *any* company are accessing it on a Mac or iPhone, so Apple has already reaped the benefits of a sale to that consumer.

I totally agree. In my opinion AI represents the next industrial revolution. Getting it right is far more important than getting something half-assed out there quickly for the sake of expedience or to placate the critics. The critics have no skin in the game but Apple has the future of one the most successful companies ever on the line. 

Mike Wuerthele said:

avon b7 said:

I'll wait to hear the full story from all sides but my first thought was 'Think Secret'. 

AppleInsider got sued a few years before ThinkSecret, and won too.

In this climate, though, it'll be interesting to see how this goes.

Yeah, it’s way too early to pass judgment. Let’s see the hard evidence plays out in a neutral setting, if that’s even possible these days. 

I'll definitely have to check this out and read all of the fine print. I currently have quite a few individual AppleCare+ subscriptions and this may save me a little bit of cash or simply reduce the number of monthly or yearly invoices I have to deal with. Simplification and convenience can be just as valuable to me as saving a few dollars every month. 

Apple’s secret sauce has always been the very close and complementary integration between their hardware, their software, and their services. Why would we believe that automobile manufacturers would not want exactly the same thing?

Apple may have had a window of opportunity to wrap their tentacles around unsuspecting automakers who didn’t recognize the value of everything we would expect modern cars to do beyond basic transportation. Now that the picture is getting a bit clearer for everyone, that window has closed. It’s not like Apple would go back to living with a dependency on Intel chips now that they’ve realized it’s a hell if a lot better for them to control their own chip destiny. 

When I first started reading ebooks on Apple devices I generally preferred the Kindle app over the Books app. The Kindle app syncs fine with my Kindle reader, which I prefer when reading in the evening when my eyes are tired from being in front of screens all day. 

capnbob said:

The impact on US consumers will be precisely what they voted for?

I'm not clear that you are asking a question or making a statement. The reality, imo, is that people vote for candidates for any number of reasons. Different voters have different sets of reasons that matter to them. It's an over generalization to claim that every one those who cast a vote for the candidate who won were supportive of every possible action or outcome that could occur once the candidate is in office. To claim that everyone who voted for the current president supports everything he does is absolute nonsense. Why would anyone in their right mind support the blatant and massive grifting that's been happening in plain site? It serves no purpose for the voters. Deep pocket donors who get a big government contract or a big tax break, maybe. 

What is not nonsense is that very many people from all political alliances are going to suffer under the policies of the current administration when the policies are misguided, tainted by the president's personal desire for self enrichment, or given a rubber stamp approval by the the "thruple" of concentrated power that now exists. Nowhere in the current alignment of power is there a concern for people and businesses who have to make hard choices about what they can or cannot afford to purchase or support. If Apple's costs increase for any reason, Apple's product prices will increase as well. Shareholders expect returns on their financial investments. Apple can't pull off the shady shrinkflation strategies that are so rampant in other parts of the consumer market. They can't reduce the number of cores in their processors or shrink the size of the MacBook Pro's screen and then try to convince you that it's the same product. No "fun size" iPhones for me. 

nubus said:

rob53 said:

The EU has no right to dictate to Apple how its products operate. 

Let us do a litmus test:
The US has no rights to dictate Ford how its products operate.
The US has no rights to dictate Boeing how its products operate.
The US had no rights to stop Johnson & Johnson from using asbestos in baby powder.

Could it be that EU has the right?

The EU has the right for as long as long as companies put up with it.

I fundamentally agree that the EU has every right to dictate what companies from anywhere in the world must do in order to sell products in the countries under their jurisdiction. The whole notion of "free trade" has been twisted and mangled into an unrecognizable shape by nationalistic tendencies over the past several decades anyway, and no more so than in the US. Free trade doesn't mean fair trade. 

It's not fair to call out one regulatory body like the EU when those who are calling them out are guilty of the same exact behaviors. We basically have about 150 countries in the world, some whose total population is comprised of penguins, all looking out for numero uno. Of course we all want access to goods from around the globe, but we also want to dictate the terms for how we obtain them to the extent possible so our best interests and how we manage our economy are taken into account.

The US is ruled by capitalism. Sometimes it benefits us but sometimes it places us in very precarious situations that play out over time. The US lost its ability to secure very strategic capabilities, like semiconductors, ship building, certain forms of manufacturing, public transportation, etc. This happened because the capitalism playbook at that point in time determined that retaining those capabilities was not as profitable as leaning on someone else to serve those needs while the US invested in higher profit margins or greater business opportunities in other areas, like massive military and defense systems. You know, profits over principles (PoP).

A lot of the things the EU does absolutely make a lot of sense for the EU. Same with the US. I believe despite the EUs actions they too are also falling into the same trap of losing organic capabilities they once had. But one thing the EU has learned is that no matter how egregious they treat foreign producers, like Apple or Microsoft, the capitalists will always succumb, perhaps reluctantly or by putting up a futile defense, to their demands. Why? Profits over principles. If Apple, Microsoft, Google, or any other non-EU company wanted to take a principled stand to defend its intellectual property, trade secrets, or relinquishing control over the ecosystems created at great expense, they absolutely could.

Apple, Microsoft, or any US owned company can tell the EU to go pound sand and quit selling products into those markets. Would it hurt Apple and its stakeholders? Absolutely. From a capitalist perspective it would be a catastrophe for Apple, at least in the short term. It would also be a very painful outcome for the EU as they have very little up & running capability to replace Apple. They could transition to Apple substitutes, but I think there would be a healthy black market for Apple products until that hole was filled, like in a decade.

But none of this will ever happen because Apple's business is run under the capitalist playbook. They have already pushed some of their core principles into the background, at least for the next four years. They will cave to the EU's demands like they've caved to China's demands and the current US administration's demands. When your strongest principles are based on economics and profits, as they are for any for-profit company, you'll do whatever it takes to keep the money train rolling. You can't fault Apple for it, but as a country dominated by similarly driven companies with the same motivations, it may not play out well in the long term. But then again, when did we start caring about the long term anyway? Those days are long over.

My iPhone 6+ started having serious Bluetooth problems with the first public beta of iOS 10 including frequent drop-outs even when the connected devices were only inches apart. No such problems with iPad Air with the same version of the beta iOS. With the latest public beta of iOS 10 my iPhone 6+ Bluetooth reliability has returned to normal. Go figure. I know it's beta and "use at your own risk" so I take it with a grain of salt and deal with it for now. But I do hope the RC version of iOS 10 is fully tested including the Bluetooth reliability with the iPhone 6+.