rob53

chasm said:

Here’s what will happen:

1, Alternative App Stores will eventually open in Europe. Apple will still have some level of approval/control on how they run their business. Curious people will go check it out.

2. At some point, one of them will start offering malware disguised as apps, or be discovered to be selling customer data to spammers.

3. Apple or authorities will shut down that store, but the damage will be done.

4. Everyone will flock to the “real” App Store because of security and privacy guarantees the alternative stores will not be able to truthfully offer. Android users have already figured this out — alternative stores exist, but primarily for apps Google doesn’t allow, and they do 1/100,000th the business the Play Store does.

5. Experiment marked as “failed.”

#1 This first alternative App Store will be government controlled, forcing all iPhone users in the country to use it in the name of protecting citizens rights. Of course we all know that means they'll be spying on every citizen using an iPhone.

#2 See #1 because malware will be written by the government controlled communications departments so they can see everything than happens on every government-controlled phone. I call it malware because it's something I wouldn't normally install. The malware will be injected through government apps under the guise of something similar to the US IRS or another government agency everyone has to use to file documents, like taxes.

#3 Apple won't have the ability to shut anything down approved by the EU, they'll only have control where the Apple App Store is the only one available (along with at least USA corporate and government app stores and their ability to install apps--luckily I don't work for the government anymore and they couldn't touch my personal phone anyway, only government phones, which I agree with.

#4 Everyone might still go back to the real Apple App Store but damage will already have been done with government-sponsored malware installed. 

#5 The EU will NEVER admit this failed.

"It was also reasoned by Masimo that the U.S. public would not be affected by an Apple Watch import ban as the sensor isn't "essential to the public health or welfare." This was due to Apple's warnings in fine print that the measurements from the sensor "should not be relied upon for medical purposes," Masimo declared." If the Apple sensor isn't of any medical value then why is Masimo suing Apple? Is Apple's implementation inferior to Masimo's? Is Apple's implementation even similar to Masimo's? Who actually owns the original pulse oximetry patents? Is Masimo violating someone else's patents? 

How many people actually upgrade their computers? I’m sure there’s some study that shows only a minor amount of people even think about upgrading their existing hardware, they simply replace it. 

I don't see the iMac as being a "ladder rung" and I definitely don't believe it will be an afterthought in a couple decades. Everything changes but the iMac was revolutionary when it first came out (mine was delivered on the first day it was released) and it will continue as a consumer all-in-one for years to come. Apple keeps pushing laptops because they feel portability is what everyone wants. This might be true but there is a maximum size a laptop can be and still remain portable. There will continue to be a use in businesses and government installations where computers are not allowed to leave the building. This is where an iMac fits in with its power and simplicity. Sure, go ahead and use a PC in a box attached to a small screen and see how long people can work before their eyesight is ruined (same with laptops). I know schools are using garbage chromebooks, usually because they are cheap and can be replaced easier than real computers, but that doesn't mean they're what students really need or want. 

I've said elsewhere that Apple can only do so much within the space limitations of the 24" iMac. It's an amazing computer, especially for its light weight and power consumption. To me it's perfect for higher grade students and some college computer labs. That said, when Apple released the Mac Studio, the Mac Pro was dead. Every user who wants the power the Mac Pro provided can now get more power in a computer smaller than the Apple Cube (which I used at work for a few years). For those of you/us who want the latest technology and most power, going backwards a little to separate components, should be looking at the Mac Studio and whatever display they can afford. Apple enjoys building top of the line hardware, which, unfortunately comes with top of the line costs and their displays are the prime example of this. Of course, Apple's displays are actually 3/4 of an iMac just missing the user computer. The guts of their displays can't be touched by any other company and, I repeat, you pay for it. My 2019 Core i9, 8core (almost) fully loaded iMac cost well over $5K. I put together a Mac Studio M2 Max with similar specs along with a Studio Display and the new hardware is not only less expensive but knocks the socks off my Intel iMac. I bought this iMac from my son who bought it for doing animation (he changed directions and the market for Intel iMacs has crashed so I bought it for $1500). The combination of Mac Studio with Studio Display is going to become the best way to replace the 27" iMac, allowing the user to keep the display longer while upgrading just the computer portion. This is the future iMac Pro available right now in two size options, 27" and 32" displays. When looking at professional systems that use multiple displays, why force yourself into having a display that can't be moved or positioned like the others. Just buy the version of a Mac Studio you want to have for a few to several years then add on the size and number of displays your business requires. 

eriamjh said:

There’s likely some information missing here, but a portion of sales tax going back to a company?   That’s fishy. 

Local sales tax goes to local businesses so I can see Apple receiving some of these taxes to support police, fire, utility companies and whatever else might benefit Apple. Apple is a huge employer in Cupertino. Until they list what every company in CA provides in taxes and what portion of those taxes goes back to these companies, including Apple (directly and indirectly), we can only speculate on whether Apple and Cupertino has done anything wrong. Of course, we probably won’t hear about this again if Apple hasn’t done anything wrong.