nubus

mpantone said:

They are called reciprocal because when one country applies a tariff to another, in almost all cases, that other country will apply the same tariff.

They are not. It is a calculation based on deficit of physical goods excluding services. Disney, McDonald's, Microsoft, Salesforce,... a big ZERO to Trump. So... EU is hit by a 20-25% tariff for a 3% trade deficit and tariffs being 10% or mostly 0%.

Lesotho is hit by 50% - a country doing 98.9% less per capita than the US is tariffed to death due to Levi's and their $3/day salaries. For the US to be a country so hungry for $3/day jobs that Africans must die for it?!

I miss the country of "The Hill We Climb".

thrang said:

Umm, so we really want the EU or other governments to start directing product development? 

At times we do. The car industry didn't remove lead from gas. The tobacco industry invented nicotine products with watermelon flavor for kids. We got baby powder with asbestos as it was cheaper to produce. Food with carcinogenic ingredients. Building materials that burst into flames. Would you say Boeing did improve quality after government let Boeing control Boeing? That banks could do better without regulation?

This time it is about Apple producing e-waste and letting taxpayers pay. Apple agreed 15 years ago to fix it but did nothing. What would you have done?

9secondkox2 said:

It’s a great deal for the usa. 

And it sets the tone for a more even snd fair deal to come. 

Both sides reduced by 115%-points. China didn't give some extra discount US didn't already have. US already caved in with reduced tariffs on electronics. Inbound tariffs are still higher than before.

1. Moving production seems to be between other countries. Apple isn't moving manufacturing to the US.
2. Moving from China does require billions in investments that wouldn't have been needed - so taking profits from Apple.
3. Apple was capable of running an efficient production without federal intervention. The tariffs push Apple to less efficient solutions. Either due to 14 days more shipping, other logistics, salaries, skills, flexibility,... it simply won't be as efficient as when Apple was in control.

To conclude: There are no US jobs created by Apple in manufacturing, there are short-term expenses, and products will become more expensive to manufacture. There is no upside to Apple or users on any of these tariffs.

blitz1 said:

Liquid Glass is quite different from Aqua.

Aqua was about being translucent. 

With Liquid Glass, the context defines the available functions.

Quite novel to me.

Agree. Aqua was candy with buttons looking like pills, big sheets, Genie effect, and more. This UI is absolutely next generation designed for iOS. It can disappear to reduce the UI chrome and focus on content. But it is vibrant, uses colors when needed, is coherent across platforms, and it seems they spent a lot of time on doing it right. Probably also designed for accessibility as any modern UI must be. Looking forward to it.

Xed said:

I get why a lazy grifter will keep on grifting if he can get away with it, but what is impossible for me to wrap my head around is why so many people see his pathetic coward and fool that cares nothing about them as some sort of strongman and protector.

It is indeed interesting. Went on two road trips to the Deep South. A lot of Confederate flags, Trump 2020 signs, counterfactual history museums, and a Code Orange when passing a local school as they had their second shooting in a week.  These people are scared of vaccines but like fracking and smartphones. They stand for the national anthem but see the attack on Capitol as required "to protect the values".

Can it be fixed? I hope so.

ericthehalfbee said:

Seen a few comments on ASML.

If the EU regulated ASML and their monopoly like they do Apple then ASML would be forced to give competitors and startups access to their proprietary technology so ASML doesn’t have an unfair advantage.

Having a monopoly/dominant position/being a gatekeeper isn't illegal in the EU. It comes with certain responsibilities. If ASML decided to sell only to some customers or told their vendors not to deliver to competitors or their customers that they had to be 100% ASML to get support then ASML would be hit as well. 

The article is right that this is likely a study by Apple (or CCIA for Apple).

Professor Viswanath Pingali wrote something similar last year "India is not Europe" in a paper published for ICLE with 4 people from ICLE including the founder and a researcher that is close to Amazon. Viswanath Pingali was the only one being external. Together the five concluded that EU policies weren't in the best interest of India. He is also quoted by Google on how India should regulate Google less.

ICLE is funded by Amazon, Meta, and CCIA - the lobby organization for the computer industry where Apple is a prominent member. He is simply on repeat adding his name and title to publications funded by the computer industry.

pichael said:

I can’t see it in the uk store still? Anyone else unable to see it in other countries?

Why would it be available in the UK? The court orders are for EU and US.

darelrex said:

Is there anything the EU could possibly demand of Apple that you would not call "leveling the playing field"? Should Apple's chip team be required to provide chips to Apple's competitors? Should Apple be required to license iOS to its competitors? Should it be required to allow installation of alternate OSes on iPhone and iPad? Do you have any sane legal theory of which features of its products a company should be allowed to control, and which it should be forced to turn into third-party flea markets — or do you say "leveling the playing field" when you really mean leveling Apple with any frightfully damaging fairness fantasy that comes down the regulatory pike, simply so that Apple won't be so successful any more, and the playing field therefore will be more "level"?

In theory there is no limit. US/China/EU could make the demand that devices can't show a smiling face (or now logo) on startup. Or that Apple must sell through stores it doesn't own (the way US states decided to regulate car sales). Or that there can't be encryption (UK, UAE,...). Legislation can result in pretty much anything. Obviously Apple can decide not to sell but from reduced encryption in UK to gov apps in Russia it seems Apple has low standards.

What have US and EU demanded so far?

• USB-C and removal of the charger from the package to reduce e-waste - something Apple promised to do on their own.
• The option for alternative stores but EU respects the value of the SDK. Apple can reject apps and do get paid for SDK use per install.
• Allowed apps to give people an option to pay directly but only for extras (US).
• Allowed apps to use NFC (EU) - the apps are still checked by Apple.

None of the above give technology away. The current request from Google, Meta, Spotify, and Garmin isn't giving tech away either. Those greedy companies want to profile us better towards advertisers. We don't know how EU will respond.

If EU decides to give away our privacy then we do have a problem. That is however not the current situation.

anonymouse said:

Clearly, the best and only really viable option is for Apple to sell dumbed down iPhones in the EU, devices that don't receive the latest technology and even have some features removed.

Mediocre by design
How US car manufacturers and Apple won the EU through subpar products

Could I get a signed copy?