twolf2919

retrogusto said:

If I can no longer press the volume buttons through fabric when the phone is in my pocket, that would be an added inconvenience, and if I can no longer glance at the ringer switch to see if the ringer is on, that too would be a step in the wrong direction. It’s hard to imagine any advantages to the user that would more than make up for these drawbacks. It’s not like the current waterproofing is insufficient for my needs.

Agree with the first point - and add potential impact on case design as many cases cover up those buttons and rely on mechanical movement through their material - but the second point is not really relevant as Kuo has made no mention of replacing the ringer switch.

gatorguy said:

"...According to new research by VPN provider SurfShark, the US government makes the most requests for user data from Big Tech companies than any other jurisdiction in the world. The company analyzed data requests to Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft by “government agencies of 177 countries between 2013 and 2021.”

The US came in first with 2,451,077 account requests, more than four times the number of Germany, the number two country on the list. In fact, the US made more requests than all of Europe, including the UK, which collectively came in under 2 million."

"The report also sheds light on which companies comply the most versus which ones push back against requests. For all of its privacy-oriented marketing — “what happens on your iPhone stays on your iPhone” — Apple complies with data requests more than any other company, handing it over 82% of the time.

In contrast, Meta complies 72% of the time, and Google does 71% of the time. Microsoft, on the other hand, pushes back the most among Big Tech companies, only handing data over 68% of the time."

These statistics are meaningless without context.  Apple keeps a lot less personal information - that it has in decrypted form - than any of the other companies mentioned.  So, arguably, it has less reasons not to comply than these other companies.   I.e., it is because "what happens on your iPhone stays on your iPhone", Apple can comply with requests for data it does have - i.e. unencrypted iCloud data (which, as of iOS 16, the user has the option to also encrypt).

Maybe I'm missing something but didn't Apple stop selling in Russia?  So why would it pay a fine to a country it no longer does business in?  I know, I know: it may want to pay to make sure it'll be able to resume business once the Ukraine war is over - but that would put Apple into a pickle from a moral perspective.  It ostensibly stopped doing business in Russia because it thinks Russia's invasion of Ukraine is immoral/unjust and does not want to contribute to it.  Well, paying $17m would do just that.

As always, the media (and stock markets) overreacting - the world isn't black and white or zero sum.  Yes, Apple is definitely turning to India to diversify its supply chain.  As Covid-19 lockdowns have shown, Apple needs alternatives from the single-country solution that is China.  But that doesn't necessarily mean Chinese manufacturers are in trouble.  Even though Apple is huge, it is still growing in the 10% range, so even a diversification away from China could still leave Chinese manufacturers with plenty to do.  And, I think, this is a very slow process.  Even as some manufacturing and assembly is moving to India, India doesn't yet have many of the parts needed in assembly, so they'll still be coming from China for a long time.

Why is it so hard for authors to get AR vs VR correct?  All the rumors about an imminent new Apple device have been for a VR or MR/VR product, not an AR device.  Heck, even the stock photo used for this article shows goggles with opaque front - something you could not have with AR glasses/goggles.

JP234 said:

twolf2919 said:

JP234 said:

twolf2919 said:

I agree with most of what Morgan Stanley is saying - but they obviously don't know their AR from their VR.  There is 0% probability Apple will be coming out with an AR product this year.  Most likely, it'll announce a VR headset this year, but given the niche market that is VR and the rumored price point of > $1.5k, the release of such a VR headset will not result in any meaningful revenue for AAPL in 2023.

You think that tech industry analysts at Morgan Stanley, with resources you can't even imagine, don't know these things and you do?
That's hubris.

No hubris - just a lot of experience, including a stint at Morgan Stanley in the '90s..  Analysts guessing what a company like Apple will bring to market has very little to do with the financial resources at their disposal - I doubt a Morgan Stanley analyst has any more access to Apple product secrets than anybody else.  If they did, Apple as a publicly traded company could actually get into trouble.  They read news, rumors, and attend Apple quarterly earnings calls - just like you and me could (and I do).  All the rumors so far, including from fairly accurate rumor sources such as Mark Gurman and Kuo Ming Chi, have suggested that a MR/VR headset in the $2k range is forthcoming, possibly as early as Apple's developers conference in June.

"I doubt a Morgan Stanley analyst has any more access to Apple product secrets than anybody else."
If you had worked at the trading desk of M-S, you would know different. My guess is that even if you did work for the company, your role was not in that division.

You can doubt all you want.  It is true that I was not a trader - my role at the time was to get Morgan Stanley started with its first web-based tools and products - i.e. I was a software developer.  But in that role I actually wrote some of the tools the traders subsequently used.   Traders have a heck of a lot more financial tools/information at their disposal than normal folks, but they don't magically have access to more company/tech news than you and I.

But this discussion is going nowhere.   Thanks for your insightful contribution to this thread.

DAalseth said:

Reminds me of the story on AI a year or more ago. Some analyst was saying that Apple wouldn’t be able to move any meaningful part of its manufacturing out of China for at least a decade or more. 

Apple may never be able to completely withdraw from China, but according to Yoshinaga, suppliers are preparing to move out much faster than expected. 

Now we just need to move chip fab away from Taiwan. 

Not sure what you're suggesting - that the analyst was wrong?  This article doesn't contradict the analyst - it's simply saying that a minor Apple supplier is expanding its manufacturing in Vietnam.  Sort of related, does Apple publish a list of its supply chain partners?  I'd venture to guess that the vast majority of parts going into Apple's bread-and-butter product, the iPhone, are still made in China.  Even once TSMC's fab in Arizona comes online in a couple years, it'll only fulfill part of Apple's needs - and that Arizona fab will still be using parts made in China.