gatorguy
About
- Username
- gatorguy
- Joined
- Visits
- 572
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 18,916
- Badges
- 3
- Posts
- 24,766
Reactions
-
What Apple products will get hit the hardest by Trump's new tariff orders
Stabitha_Christie said:So, the tariffs were announced in April and then delayed for 90 days. At the point where the tariff were delayed we were promised "90 deals in 90 days" In that time Trump claimed he had made deals with 200 countries despite there not being 200 countries to actually make deals with. This week we will hit the 90 days with exactly two deals made. -
Foxconn mysteriously tells Chinese workers to quit India and return to China
anthogag said:Zuckerberg could be paying Chinese workers to quit Foxconn to help stop the spread of Apple Intelligence.
"...Foxconn has been telling Chinese workers to return (to China), for about the last two months. So far over 300 Chinese workers have left, and one source claimed that most people remaining are support staff from Taiwan."
-
Trump's new China trade deal is still bad for US business & consumers
bwik said:Who pays a tariff fully depends on whether there is a substitute supplier or buyer. The columnist confidently declares buyers pay for tarriffs. Yes, they do, if there is no alternative supplier anywhere on Earth who sells a comparable product. But most products do have alternative sellers. This means the seller must pay some of, or in many cases, near 100% of the tariff. Don’t take my word for it (two degrees from leading universities in this subject). Ask ChatGPT.
By definition a tariff is a tax imposed on foreign-made goods, paid by the importing business to its home country's government. You seem to disagree, so a couple of examples please. -
Trump Mobile drops false 'made in America' promise
sdw2001 said:randominternetperson said:I was going to post that this article is misleading by saying that "However, President Trump is still in control of the trust and has the ability to make decisions that affect the company." Because, obviously, the only appropriate way a trust could be set up would be as a blind trust (like every other president used) where they explicitly relinquish control over their business/investments.
But then I fact checked this and I was a fool to give Trump any benefit of the doubt. Trump didn't set up a blind trust at all; he retains "significant influence or control over the activities of the trust."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2025/05/06/trump-organization-admits-president-still-controls-his-business-in-new-filing/
Every President for 50 years not-named-Trump has put their businesses into a blind trust. Is conflict of interest not a thing if your name is Trump, but the public expects better optics from all the others? Legal and ethical are of course different standards, and doing so is not a legal requirement. IMO it should be.
Remember how Joe Biden was demonized by Trump for his son Hunter potentially making any money from Presidential connections? Donald Trump has frequently accused Hunter Biden of using his father's name and position for financial gain. Trump's campaign, for example, ran an ad stating: "The question is not why Hunter Biden used his name to get these gigs. It's why Joe Biden let him do it." Yet here we now with a different ethical standard. Is that OK with you? -
Car makers reject CarPlay Ultra as an Apple overreach
MplsP said:AppleZulu said:cropr said:sflagel said:robin huber said:sflagel said:it is ludicrous for a car manufacturer to give Apple access to all its car systems, which will invariably lead to Apple becoming the gatekeeper to the entire tech stack of a car. This in addition to the branding impact. CarPlay is not the end of evolution, for example, the music app is well on CarPlay. Audi music controls are much better.
But I do agree that car manufacturers are reluctant to hand over control to an external party who manages the display and its UI for everything that is not music. What if Car Play Ultra drives, for whatever reason, a car critical component in a such a way that the car is about to crash. Who will take responsibility?
The car manufacturer might not have the best skill to develop a great UI on a touch screen, but a car manufacturer has much higher skill level than Apple when it comes to handling car critical exceptions in real time.
I see things as Apple trying to limit the advantages of in-vehicle smartphone use to iOS devices since the CarPlay Ultra interface won't work without one, disadvantage anyone who owns not-an-iPhone. Android Automotive doesn't care.
TLDR: Android Automotive works as the UX whether the owner has an Android phone, iPhone, or no phone at all. CarPlay Ultra will not. If my understanding is wrong, feel free to post a correction source.