kellie

About

Username
kellie
Joined
Visits
18
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
193
Badges
0
Posts
74

Reactions

87Like54Dislike32Informative

  • M3 Ultra Mac Studio rumored to debut in mid-2024 -- without a Mac Pro

    kelliekellie
    Apple shows no signs of wanting to offer products that compete with the ultra high end systems used for the most advanced animation and video editing functions.  They don’t want to offer systems that are open and extensible. They certainly don’t want to provide a means for Nvidia or AMD to inject their gpus into the Apple ecosystem.  Apple wants absolute control of their platform to optimize revenue and profits. The only upgrade path Apple wants to offer is chucking old systems and buying new systems.  You can’t even add memory or storage to any Apple product these days. For a company that hypes their environmental friendliness, their product strategy does not overall result in friendly environmental impacts.  They tout use of recycling. The best recycling is getting maximum life out of each product they sell through design and upgrade options vs recycling a three year old Mac book pro because the ssd failed and there’s no way to repair it. 
    9secondkox2williamlondonmuthuk_vanalingam

  • Apple's iPhone 15 & Apple Watch event -- what we loved, and didn't

    kelliekellie
    AppleZulu said:
    I still don't get the fuss over the Mother Nature skit. I thought it was an amusing gag, and it emphasized the message about their multiple approaches to better corporate environmental stewardship.

    This is certainly something to use for marketing. More people will consider this positively when making choices about purchasing electronics gear than will get cranky about Apple being "woke." 

    I think it's also something they should emphasize to cause other companies to follow in their footsteps. Apple is actually planning the entire life cycle of their products, reducing unneeded waste in production and distribution, creating a market for recycled materials from their own products, and planning not just how to put their products together, but how to efficiently take them back apart in order to recover those materials for re-use. This is the opposite of what most other corporations have been doing for decades.

    Even as environmental regulations have forced companies to stop dumping many manufacturing and production chemicals directly into the environment, corporations have continually found other ways to externalize their costs by handing their waste over to consumers, leaving it to them to dump into the environment. Overuse of plastics, single-use items, unnecessary packaging and more are all examples of corporations reducing their own costs, while shifting them to consumers to deal with the waste. They stamp some of it with a recycle symbol and then let consumers and taxpayers assume the cost of collecting, processing and attempting to re-sell recycled materials. 

    For example, once upon a time, Coke, Pepsi and others bottled their drinks in glass, and consumers could return those to the store for credit, the bottlers took them back, washed them and reused them again. Then they switched to plastic, initially without even pretending to care about recycling or reuse. Recycling came later, but it's up to municipalities to pay for collection and recycling (or consumers outside city limits to pay for this directly), and Coke and Pepsi are extremely limited in how much recycled plastic they buy and turn back into bottles. So in essence they dump huge quantities of plastic on consumers and leave it to us to figure out what to do with it all. It's obscene, when you spend two minutes thinking about it.

    So why again should anyone be irritated about a five minute sketch about Apple actually taking responsibility for what they put out into the world?
    1. The skit was too much. The message could have been delivered in half the time with half the brow beating. 

    2.  One line in the skit was, not an exact quote, “we won’t be happy until all carbon is removed from the atmosphere.”  Better not do that or all the plants will perish. 

    3. At least in NY, soda bottles have deposits, which results in the majority of soda bottles being returned and recycled.  The government isn’t paying to collect them.  Even if Coke was paying to collect bottles they would increase the price of the product to cover the expense.  There’s no free lunch.  Corporations don’t pay taxes. People do.  So any costs are ultimately borne by the consumer or taxpayer.  

    4. The bottles in my recent Coke purchase were made from 100% recycled plastic.  Going back to glass is not necessarily any better for the environment.  Glass is heavy which increases transport costs.  The washing process would also be energy expensive.  

    5. Apple may not be as altruistic as some may think with recycling. It may be necessary in order to insure adequate supplies of metals, especially rare earth metals, in order to manufacture new products. 
    dewmegrandact73williamlondonFileMakerFellerwatto_cobra

  • Indonesia says it expects $1 billion from Apple to lift iPhone 16 ban

    kelliekellie
    apple4thewin said:
    ajeffrey said:
    This is just blatant extortion by the Indonesian Govt. Why should Apple invest $1 billion in a country just so they can sell their products there. If I were Apple I would tell them where they can put there request and sell older iPhones, it's only the Indonesian public that will suffer.

    The real question is if Apple make $1 billion in sales in Indonesia 
    Apple needs to make a billion dollars in profits, not sales, in Indonesia, to justify the expenditure. I’m not sure if they manufacture anything there. 
    apple4thewinjas99killroyzeus423watto_cobraneoncat

  • Delta CEO criticizes Microsoft's fragility, praises Apple's stability

    kelliekellie
    The primary cause of the outage was due to Crowdstrike shipping a faulty malware template that either wasn’t tested or was accidentally shipped out unknowingly 

    the secondary cause is every Crowdstrike customer who blindly allowed the update to occur without doing their own testing and validation.  Sure it would be nice to totally trust the vendor, but they don’t suffer the consequences.  

    The third cause of the failure was Microsoft allowing Crowdstrike to run in kernel mode.  So when Crowdstrike choked, it brought down each and every PC. A simple reboot would not fix the problem.  

    The fourth cause of the problem is EU regulators who told Microsoft that if they were going to force applications vendors to use a Microsoft API to access the kernel, that would be considered anti-competitive. So Microsoft had no choice but to allow Crowdstrike unprotected access to the kernel.  Apple is allowed to control access to its kernel. 

    The Delta CEO is criticizing Microsoft purely to try and squeeze money out of Microsoft.  The CEO is clueless about Windows vs Mac.  He’s just trying to shake down Microsoft. The Delta CEO needs to ask the Delta CIO why he allowed Crowdstrike updates to occur without validation and testing.  Trust but verify as Ronald Regan used to say about the Russians. 
    baconstangravnorodommuthuk_vanalingamdk49badmonkdewmewatto_cobra

  • Can Apple innovate if iPhone remains the biggest slice of its revenues?

    kelliekellie
    This article doesn’t give Xerox enough credit.  Xerox invented the GUI which was copied by Apple and Microsoft.  Xerox also invented Ethernet which was initially deployed over a very expensive coaxial cable called Thicknet, which was so named due to the thickness of its coax cable.  And later evolved into ThinNet which was a much thinner and less expensive coaxial cable.  Xerox developed the STAR workstation which ran the GUI software and a STAR server for centralized file storage and sharing.  They also invented the network attached laser printer to print the online developed documents, as there was no way to share documents external to an organization.  The article implies Xerox didn’t productize the GUI software to avoid killing its copier business.  This isn’t accurate as they actually had commercial products for sale using the GUI software.  They failed at marketing and developing a business strategy for this new technology.  Certainly having years of running their cash cow and very profitable copier business made developing a proper business strategy a challenge.  But be clear, the GUI was invented by Xerox and productized.  

    There is a similar story for another Rochester, New York headquartered company , Kodak.  Kodak invented the first digital camera in 1975.  Unlike Xerox, which was an electronics company from its inception, Kodak was a chemical company from its founding in 1888.  It had the new  challenge of learning how to run and manage an electronics company as well as the strategy challenge of developing a new product that ultimately would reduce film sales, their decades old cash cow.  There was lots of internal resistance to making this change. Ultimately Kodak failed at developing a digital image technology business strategy.  

    Innovation isn’t easy.  In many ways it’s easier for younger startup companies, than older mature companies.  Apple is a very mature company now.  Not the young and frisky company it once was.  As a publicly traded company they face the challenges of pleasing Wall Street and share holders.  Don’t underestimate the impact this financial burden has on Apple’s ability to innovate.  There are many comments here referencing Steve Jobs and how Steve was an innovator and Tim Cook isn’t and is more of an operations person.  That may be somewhat true.  But don’t assume that Steve Jobs would have been successful at running a profitable multi trillion dollar company.  That takes a lot of management skills and culture that Steve may not have possessed.  

    Certainly, Apple is in a better position for future innovation than was Kodak and possibly Xerox, especially having the benefit of having lived through the tech innovation cycle.  Kodak and Xerox were at the cusp of the technology revolution, so it’s perhaps understandable, if not excusable, that they struggled with reinventing themselves.  Is AI the next technology wave that will require Apple to reinvent themselves?  Perhaps.  Ultimately, the future will require a company like Apple to be as good at developing software as they are at developing hardware.  I would say historically Apple’s primary strength has been developing devices and hardware.  With software development being a second tier capability/strength.  Software capabilities are what will be needed to truly succeed with AI in the future.  Time will tell if Apple is up to the task. 
    williamlondondewmewatto_cobraneoncat

  • Apple heads to court to try to get massive & vague DOJ antitrust suit dismissed

    kelliekellie
    paisleydisco said:
    " but the case isn't going to end today, it is going to run for years."

    when drumpf's department takes over there will be a shake down for $

    it's all he knows. 
    Could you leave politics and your hatred for Trump out of this?  This suit was initiated during the Biden administration, so it’s really got nothing to do with Trump.  The government is designed for shake downs.  Be it a parking ticket, taxes or something more serious.  It’s got nothing to do with who’s president. 

    9secondkox2williamlondonneoncat

  • iPhone 15 Pro Max vs. iPhone 14 Pro Max -- Specs, price, and features, compared

    kelliekellie
    The Mother Nature part of the announcement was kind of goofy.  The eco push was getting a bit overplayed.  Especially when they said something along the lines of “we won’t rest until all carbon is removed from the atmosphere.”   Better not go that far, or all plants will die as with the rest of us. 
    grandact73Fidonet127diman80

  • Delta CEO criticizes Microsoft's fragility, praises Apple's stability

    kelliekellie
    Ultimately what is probably needed is running virtual machines to serve up apps to basically dumb “terminals” at individual locations.  Reduce the complexity of the work station.  Reduce the risk of problems. 
    DAalsethwatto_cobra

  • Apple stock hammered for third consecutive market day, falls on news of more tariffs

    kelliekellie
    gadgetcanadav2 said:
    We’ll see if Apple goes forward with their announced $500B investment to build data centres. Big corps are shutting their investment wallets due to all the volatility caused by the orange orangutang. 
    Apple has to build AI data centers.  That’s not a maybe, it’s an absolute.  They probably need to build them around the world as well.  I can’t say if they are investing more now in the US than they would have before tariffs, so they can look good.  Perhaps some manufacturing could be done in the US.  Certainly not iPhones.  Perhaps Mac Minis or iMacs? 
    watto_cobra

  • Lighter than normal WWDC expected without significant Apple Intelligence upgrades

    kelliekellie
    Apple has historically been a device company first and a software company second.  AI is all about software an area is not as competent in as hardware.  For decades Apple product announcements have emphasized the physical aspects of their devices - color, thinness, weight, colors, screen sizes, etc.  on an OS level they’ve done OK.  But Apple has always emphasized selling the hardware because the hardware is what gets people locked into their ecosystem. They have never produced stellar applications.  They frequently copy features from independent software developers.  AI is all about software leadership. Apple doesn’t know how to do that.  Even their hardware frequently lags other competitors, especially in the phone segment.  I’ve complained for years that there needs to be better ways to manage devices and configurations.  What better tool to do that you ham AI?  But Apple has never thought that way about device management.  They need some real thinking outside the Apple Box when it comes to AI.  I’m not sure that’s something they are currently capable of. 
    williamlondonelijahg