mike_galloway

mark fearing said:

I don't think the UK can kill this deal. It's just an opinion (I mean one countries opinion). Since so many other territories have already said it's OK. Not sure what happens next but the EU has not weighed in yet and in the U.S. it's not clear it will be pushed against. 

The law of unintended consequences -  not putting a charger in every product is likely to increase the number of cheap and maybe poor quality products. Although other companies substandard products are not really Apples problem.

randominternetperson said:

sirdir said:

mike1 said:

rundhvid said:

Apple says this supports up to 96kHz, and means users "can enjoy high-fidelity, full-resolution audio."

—except ’s own Hi-Res Lossless in 192 kHz 👀🤭

Soooo???? You're saying they therefore shouldn't have improved it all then?

Probably that you can't call something 'full resolution' if you yourself deliver a much higher resolution. 

The average human can detect sound in the 20Hz to 20 kHZ.  96kHz is way outside the range of human hearing.

Not sure why Apple makes any products or Appleinsider bothers to write any articles as everyone on these forums appears to be way more knowledgeable than anyone that actually does something.

libertyandfree said:

 Like I have repeatedly stated on this site and others, . Apple would not be harmed by these tariffs.  It’s amazing how people still do not understand how Trump operates and what his intentions are even after him being president for 4+ years.   Many view him as incompetent or corrupt and greedy but he is just following his America First policies and truly is trying to put America in a better position.  Those suffering from TDS will never see this. 

whump

ecarlseen said:

Wow. I spent a lot of time in International logistics and about 12 years in supply chain management for companies that were moving production from Asia to North America (mostly Mexico, but some US), and you did a very good job covering the labor portion of it.

There's more to it: any consumer electronics contain tons of tiny parts (resistors and capacitors, wiring, etc.) that cost virtually nothing, as in a hundredth of a penny or so. Costs don't get added up the supply chain, they get multiplied, so having the price of these parts move significantly from virtually nothing can have a very significant impact. Producing them domestically or even in Mexico adds a lot of cost.

US customs is a complete joke. Parts can fly right through or be arbitrarily held for months. I think people can figure out the details, but this adds a lot of cost.

US regulation swings between inattentive / useless, and capricious / arbitrary. We all know about companies abusing this, but you don't hear as much about regulators deciding suddenly one day they're going to interpret a rule differently and make an example out of somebody: usually a smaller business that can't fight back. And a company somebody spent years or decades building is just gone because a bureaucrat had a whim.

I could go on and on, but it's a tough problem. Thinking they could move the supply chain back to the US in three years is hilarious. 15 years would be reasonable.

The article is spot on.

As an electronics designer I have been in manufacturing since the 1980s - but only small companies where at least you do get to see the entire operation.

Working with the Taiwanese and Chinese is a revelation to that of people in our own country (UK)

The exceptionally poor work ethic here (and maybe the USA) is why manufacturing will never come back without a major change in education and expectation. 

It will take more than a generation to achieve.

If demand in your home country is weaker than expected, then this would be a good reason not to roll out to other countries.

Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.

First bit complete

iadlib said:

Dan Ives told CNN that it would take about $30 billion and three years for Apple to move its global supply chain back to American soil.
But with what money is it expected to do this — the money from Services? That seems highly unlikely.

UMM Apple has 162 billion in cash and cash equivalent assets. Had they not spent so much money on stock buy backs they’d have more. They can financially make this move happen. Whether it’s lucrative. That’s a different story. 

What really destroys wealth is a carrot top that finds ways of reducing the profits of global American companies.