- Last Active
applesauce007 said:rogifan_new said:red oak said:This, if true, is a bad move. 3rd party solutions are (still) a mess. Their software absolutely sucks. There is no integration with Apple products.
This, plus the decision not to make their own monitors, makes Apple very unreliable has I look at my personal tech roadmap. I increasingly can't count on them
Apple has no business working on the next version of WiFi because at 10 Gb/s, 802.11ax is not needed for homes and small businesses.
The next version of your cellular network known as 5G will provide Gigabit per second speed which is more than enough for homes and most businesses.
People may wish to get a wired gigabit connection to their home in case they have dead spots in the house but it is really not needed.
Remember at&t's Randall Stephenson and Time Warner's Jeffrey Bewkes talking about it at WSJ.D Live?
Check out time frame 26:30 in the video below.
2. >70% of aggregate internet data demand is video and this %age is projected to grow over time (as 4K/UHD becomes standard). Cellular networks are not designed to move large amounts of video. Even in a US-centric world, data caps and cost will limit the potential of mobile-only internet service. In emerging and developed markets, wifi offloading is going to be critical for internet infrastructure to keep up with demand.
But it's good to know you have it all figured out. From watching AT&T & Time Warner folks no less.
flaneur said:blastdoor said:
With the laptops, the path is to pack the most power possible in the most portable possible package. They just released proof of this, and one key strategic technology was bet on by Apple back in 2011, five years ago, when they started putting money into IGZO production development with Sharp. This is the "oxide backplane" that Ive talks about in the MacPro design video that more than anything else has made the shrink in the new form factor possible.
I'd say go to the Apple store and compare the new 13-inch non-Touch Bar with its predecessor, in overall size and in the brilliance of the display, snd you will see the path for the pros. But you probably won't see. Roger Fingas doesn't get it, Marco Arment doesn't get it. Why should you be able to get it?
I think people who talk about professional users they mean video, audio, print/photo - the folks who helped keep Apple alive in the worst years of the Wintel Wars. Abandoning Aperture, the long development cycles (and dodgy prosumer decisions) for the MacPro, Logic and FCP (and as important, Apple's silence about an evolutionary timeline) are real indicators for users in those segments.
Revenue wise, these users probably represent less than Apple's college aged users, so there's a certain bottom line logic to these decisions. With the billions spent acquiring beats and the r&d and marketing spent on emojis, it's infuriating to many people that Tim Cook's Apple can't seem to walk the consumer walk and chew the professional gum at the same time.
One solution: Wrap up the pro end of the desktop business along with key software into a division, give it sufficient autonomy and adequate funding and let them delight the small but ardent consumer segment.
sockrolid said:AppleInsider said:
"We unanimously were very compelled by [the Touch Bar] as a direction, based on, one, using it, and also having the sense this is the beginning of a very interesting direction," Ive said. "But [it] still just marks a beginning."AppleInsider said:
That could make it much easier to eliminate the trackpad and sense gestures directly over the virtual key surface.
Even less wasted motion that way. But only if it improves the experience of using the keyboard.
No, not integrating the OSes, just letting us use those brand new TouchBar capabilities with, say, a 12.9" ipadPro as a super peripheral. Will have a much bigger bang than a 1/2" wide strip. With the changes to MacOS and Mac software to support touchbar, all the elements are there.
All that iPad real estate paired in slave mode to a MacOS rebuilt for *optional* touch peripheral use? Game changer!
foregoneconclusion said:I really enjoy Apple Music and give Apple credit for trying to up the ante for artists, but the term "flat" is not necessarily a positive one when it comes to payment schemes...similar to "flat" taxes.
Nowadays, digital streams can be measured perfectly (accurate reporting is another story). 'Flat' as used in the article only refers to eliminating carve outs so that every stream is accounted and paid for. That's fair.
This is only done for statutory licenses - ie. the copyright owners can't stop anyone who is willing to pay the statutory minimum from using the music. Whether statutory licenses should apply to digital streams is a big question. Any musician/rights owner who wanted to license for less than the statutory minimum is free to do so (this is where competition is important so a big company doesn't arm twist desperate artists into receiving less than the statutory minimum).
Sorry, but Apple has recently taken as bold and as decisive of a hard turn to starboard that is possible, a hard turn that will decide their fate for at least the next decade and beyond with the release of the first generation of Apple Silicon Macintosh computers. They have essentially severed the relationship that has provided sustainment for the commodity personal computer market for the past 35 plus years, i.e., Mother Intel always there feeding new silicon for system builders to hang their futures on.Cool story and all but Apple didn’t use Intel chips until 2005. Even with your implied caveat about commodity PC market, the Mac Silicon move is nowhere as momentous as you make it sound. More like a decade and a half blip in a 5 decade existence.