Last Active
  • Apple's services event receives rocky reception from industry and critics

    ndnyc said:
    “Apple isn't interested in dominating any markets. They are interested in producing quality products and services that appeal to their customers.”

    Both laughably wrong. Apple absolutely wants to dominate markets... maybe not market-share, per se. Quality products like what? Their keyboards? Their Maps? Their productivity apps/services (Pages, Numbers, Keynote and Cloud)? Music?

    The fact is Apple is failing on multiple fronts. And now in the past months, they’ve lost two of their top chip designers. This is the beginning of the end. Time will prove me right.

    mmk? I'm 62. I probably won't live long enough for 'time to prove you right......'

    I've heard all this before. It has basically been a constant thrumming, since right around 1997 when Jobs returned to helm the company... for the following 15 years+, as they approached becoming the most valuable global company in the world, almost daily there were reports of doom & gloom and the failures and imminent collapse of Apple... for over 15 years, continuously!

    How is this any different? A company that has grown to over 160,000 employees by 2018 is going to collapse because two chip devs left? Because their Maps app isn't as good as Google's (yet)?

    Saying Apple is "failing on multiple fronts" is ludicrous. For every so-called "failure", I can point to a hundred things they're doing well and right. Quite the opposite of "the beginning of the end". 

    It's funny that as I've read through this thread, I've seen people criticizing Apple for over-diversifying, then declaring them untenable because they basically aren't diverse enough. They diversify specifically to offset potential market weakness in other areas. It's a good thing for a company to do. Apple has always gone after things they think they can improve on. If they can't, they often drop it (like the AirPower Charger). The "thousand no's for every yes" thing at work...

    Just one of your examples: they continue to improve Maps. No, it still isn't the best service on the planet. They came very late to that game. You don't build a "Google Maps" type platform overnight, and catching up is hard. Google Maps wasn't really all that wonderful either, the first few years it was out. But it had a 'novelty effect' that bought it lots of early forgiveness. Apple hasn't enjoyed that, nor should they. But Maps is super useful now, and can't be called a "failure" by any measure.

    Especially considering it's used more than any other mapping service within the Apple ecosystem. And it works fine! Yes, needed improvements abound, but this, like all of Apple's products and services is constantly improving, incrementally, over time.That's just how they operate across the board. Laying a strong foundation, and building on it over time.

    I look at their ecosystem today, compared to the one in place 10 years ago... and really, wow. To say they've been "failing" is again, pretty ludicrous. More projection than reality, I'm afraid.

    Just one opinion.

  • Comparing AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, & Verizon's unlimited wireless plans for iPhone in 2019

    The T-Mobile One "Unlimited 55" plan is a great one for us older folks. You overlooked that in the article. Also, you didn't compare the prices for adding an extra line for Apple Watch cellular.

    I've been using iPhone since v1.0, so I suffered through that horrible first five years of the AT&T exclusive. Never going back to them. Ever.

    I had been using T-Mobile prepaid service since 2014. That was $40 a month for unlimited talk, text, and data (5GB a month at LTE speed, the rest in 3G). That was fine for me, until I bought an Apple Watch (cellular) last year.

    I switched to the T-Mobile One "Unlimited 55+" service, adding an extra line for the Watch. The base price is $55 a month for unlimited talk, text, data (throttles to 3G after 50GB), Netflix, unlimited video streams (480p), free roaming to Canada/Mexico and a big one for me, unlimited text/data in 210 countries. Base price for the extra line for the Apple Watch is $15 (actually under the 55+ plan any two lines are $70/mo before the auto pay discount, so you can apply it to Apple Watch or not).

    I save $10/mo using Auto Pay (direct from bank monthly payments), so my total monthly comes out to $60 for two lines, which is pretty great compared to most.

    As far as service coverage, I'm in an location that has both small-urban and semi-rural areas (Boise, Idaho). I've been up here for about four years, and although the coverage was occasionally lacking a few years ago, it's solid and entirely on par with everyone else up here now. The old idea that T-Mobile was behind on coverage is pretty much a thing of the past now.

    Finally, I can't say enough about T-Mobile's support and customer service. That is where they really shine. Compared to my experiences with customer service at AT&T, it's like night and day...

    Finally, I really like that T-Mobile states the price for the service, and that's the price you pay. No hidden fees or additional charges. I hated how AT&T charged a base price of $80/mo, then added fees and charges galore until it arrived at more like $130/mo for each line... outrageous!

    Anyway, I can't recommend T-Mobile enough. Price, service, support, perks... all good. (I'm not affiliated in any way, just a happy customer). If you're over 55, it's pretty hard to beat.
    Andy.Hardwakebigpicscurtis hannah
  • Apple cancels AirPower wireless charging mat, citing quality issues

    "...we've concluded AirPower will not achieve our high standards..."
    What this says to me is, they couldn't "stabilize" the performance, etc. (aka 'achieve our high standards') using a bill of materials (BOM, or cost of included components) that came in at a price point they found reasonable. They could probably do just fine if it were at a higher price point. I think they were trying to come in around $150 retail. A higher price, but as a multi-device charger, very competitive with similar lower-priced single-device chargers.
    It's likely they simply couldn't achieve their high-quality goals at a price that made any sense. I work with a Toy R&D company that has products live and die entirely on the reality of the BOM. A perfect example was an interactive "smart drone" we worked on that was a highly interactive "gaming drone" with AR/VR features, etc.. Cool idea, but the BOM made it impossible to produce. There was no way to achieve the target $200 retail price point when, to make the toy really work, it cost $150 in parts just to manufacture...
    I'm guessing the AirPower mat was a similar situation...
  • Apple pays teenager for discovery of Group FaceTime bug with bug bounty, scholarship

    Good idea, unless he decides to be a pig farmer for a living.
  • If you think Tim Cook is 'robbing' you, then so was Steve Jobs

    lkrupp said:
    chasm said:
    Thanks for this. I know it’s an economic truism that the public broadly thinks of costs as fixed or getting lower over time.
    Everything goes up in price due to inflation. I think the public is well aware that the price of food, energy, goods, services, and the like continue to rise. A gallon of milk costs more today than ten years ago. Food producers give the illusion that prices are stable but you only get 4lbs of sugar instead of 5lbs now, twenty ounces instead of 32 ounces.
    It's all relative. Wages should also rise to keep up with inflation (but they don't always do that). When people talk about the cost of things "in 1990 dollars" it's comparing the relative cost of products. The fact is, relative to inflation, those costs have gone down. You can think of it like this (in oversimplified terms): Back when the minimum wage was $3 and change, a gallon of milk cost about $1. Now, the minimum wage is around $8, and a gallon of milk costs about $2.50. Pretty much no change as a percent of income. So the price isn't actually greater relative to inflation and income overall... In most cases however, although the "dollar amount" is higher (but not always), the actual relative cost of things is less compared to what it cost 10 years ago to buy the same thing. Consumer electronics are a perfect example of that. I bought a 60" UHD HDR "smart TV" for $500 and change last year. The higher end models can cost $2,000... but in 1990? A 50" Plasma screen cost $5,000. And that was in 1990 dollars. That would be something like $20,000 now... As long as income rises to match inflation, and the relative cost of goods keep coming down, small increases in things like "fruit and dairy" are easily offset. We feel like we get more for our money. If, if, if... Most people don't feel like their income is keeping up, but that's more a political issue which I'm not going to delve into here...