Last Active
  • Apple offers fix to avoid Swiss scrutiny over Apple Pay's interruption of rival payment ap...

    Before the tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists chime in, Apple generally has sensible defaults. NFC causes something to launch, in this case the default is Apple Pay/Wallet. If some random app can cause anything to launch, that wouldn't be iOS, it would be Android. Then you'd see that video of a random dude with a handheld POS terminal tapping random strangers' asses, hoping to trigger payments. Then there'd be an outcry over Apple's lack of security consciousness and we'd have another round of "Apple is doomed!" articles.
  • Qualcomm urging Chinese courts to extend sales ban to iPhone XS & XR

    rcfa said:
    Apple should just make a hostile takeover of Qualcomm, fire the entire management without golden parachutes, sell off the assets, hire key personnel, and liquidate the rest.

    That would give the kind of signal that would stop this sort of nonsense.
    Why? Too expensive funancially and pr wise... it is better to wait it out. With that behavior, Q will be belly up in no time.
    Agree that QCOM is overvalued. Current market cap at around $70B, even if Apple fails in recovering the $1B in dispute, the net value change is 1/70 = 1.4%. Easily within a day's trading range.
  • DriveSavers launches passcode-beating iPhone cracking service for the public

    Rayz2016 said:

    I attended a presentation once where the company sales director said his development team could guarantee their software was 100% bug free.

    We didn't partner with him because he was obviously lying.
    Well technically it is possible. Especially if the software was an inconsequential one-liner like "Hello World".

    More complicated software can be bug-free in the sense of having a deterministic outcome given foreseeable inputs. TLA was invented by Lamport for this reason.
  • DriveSavers launches passcode-beating iPhone cracking service for the public

    mfryd said:

    If they have reverse-engineered Apple's private key from the public key, then their claims are quite believable.  If they've been using their corporate spare computer cycles over the past few years to look for this, perhaps they have gotten lucky?
    A few problems with this thesis:

    1. Apple's private encryption key is more valuable on the black market than having to solicit orders from random end users with questionable means to pay.
    2. The sale of a company's private encryption key on the black market is likely to attract law enforcement.
    3. The computing power necessary to derive Apple's private encryption key is unlikely to be found in a single, non-state actor.
    4. If a solution to #3 can be found, the solution is more valuable than the private key itself. Indeed, it would make the person who discovered it the richest person alive.

  • Reports of a 'second wave' of iPhone production cuts are probably wrong

    512ke said:
    1) the dollar is really strong creating sales headwinds, 2) Apple was surely tipped off before the public that Trump is about to hit Apple products with tariffs in the USA, 3) global smartphone demand is on the decline, and 4) despite making progress with watches and services, Apple still relies heavily on the iPhone for the lion's share of its revenue.

    Those and similar factors could prove that even a broken clock tells the correct time twice a day. Maybe all the years of gloomy thinking will come true for the naysayers, and Apple will become the value rather than growth stock they've been predicting incorrectly for a decade or more. 
    1. Not the first time the dollar has been strengthening over Apple's history.
    2. Would a person who could afford the latest Ferrari, Lamborghini etc be deterred by a price increase of 10%? No! Some might even welcome it, since it signals their supposed wealth/disposable income compared to plebs. Of course, the slippery slope argument says that we will reach a point where a price is too high for even the richest people. Applying that to Apple's situation: is $1000 too much for a smartphone? They introduced the iPhone X last year and, despite similar protestations from the financial and tech press, they turned in another solid year of profits. Now, ask yourself this question: would the public pay $300K for a Kia, or would it pay $300K for a Ferrari? There is your answer.
    3. By this measure then Facebook and Google would have much lower valuations since they are one-trick ponies and have >90% of their revenue from advertising alone. Plus backlash from the global community for messing with their elections, disinformation etc.