gareth2210

The cost of the chip might reduce but the cost of developing the next one and keeping ahead of Intel will not. It's not just a matter of reusing iPhone chips - Mac chips will need their own special sauce. Apple should use any spare to invest in research to increase the distance between Macintosh and the rest.

The companies actually digging the cobalt out of the ground include Glencore (UK-based mining conglomerate) and a Chinese company. The cobalt is then sold to a Brussels-based company and then sold on to manufacturers. Apple and Google etc. are actually third in line...
Now abusive practices are abusive practices but Apple is probably not responsible here any more than BAE Systems or the many 'defence' industries in the US can be sued for the killing done with the products they manufacture. Although the case would probably be stronger there - lithium batteries do have a 'peaceful' application whereas a Cruise missile or a military jet have little use outside the military whose core business is fighting and, inevitably, killing.
Bizarrely, Glencore's website talks a lot about 'transparency' and 'responsible sourcing'. Its almost as if you couldn't trust them ...

How much has 'brilliant' Trump's strategy cost the US and its citizens so far? How much money will the government invest to fight this Trade War? Just intrigued because on this side of the pond we have some Trump fans who are busy pushing a crash-out Brexit so that we can do trade deals with him.

Agree with everything in the article and don't use Facebook but ... I have friends who do. I know! The Shame! : ) I try to steer them to the path of virtue but am not familiar with social media alternatives. Could AppleInsider do a review of the alternatives?

Everything Darkpaw said. It will be another example of the UK government doing the wrong thing at the right time and then eventually doing the right thing when its too late - the wrong time.

And the UK government history of failure with large scale IT projects is so extensive you could fill a book of case studies.

It's almost as if Johnson and co. just wanted to give money to their questionable mates?

Hey, let me share a little love for Wall Street and the analysts. Their constant and reliable misreading of apple share values has allowed me to build up a nice little stock of them during the crazy sell offs!😀

avon b7 said:

The obvious follow up question for Tim was:

Do you think the financial orchestration that resulted in Apple allegedly paying 0.005% for one year was 'fair', given that, in response to the demands of the EU for Apple to return billions of euros to Ireland, you defended Apple's position by stating that Apple had 'values'? How do Apple's values fit into the claim of it paying 0.005% as a result of financial orchestration?

As for changing the system, he is fully aware that the whole thing is being debated at institutional levels anyway, and has been for some time.

Surely Apple has to play by the rules that everyone plays by? Yes, the tax paid is 'unfair' to governments and tax-paying citizens but for Apple to opt for a different payment to be 'fair' to them (the taxpayers) the company would be 'unfair' to Apple shareholders who bought into the company with the understanding that Apple would make as much legal profit as possible.
Yes, change the tax system, make every company play by 'fairer' rules that recognises the money earned in a particular country and Apple will do the same. If Apple was campaigning against 'fair taxes' or 'data privacy protection' then that would certainly be wrong but obeying the (imperfect) rules seems 'fair' ... if distasteful. As an Apple shareholder, and tax payer, I would be happy to see Apple pay more tax .... but not if Facebook, Google, Amazon, Starbucks etc. don't.