- Last Active
jas99 said:This is a very good thing. I was very relieved to read this article.Having a great deal of experience in the auto industry over decades, I can tell you this is a field that Apple should stay away from.
It could be the worst of all businesses, bettter only than the hospitality industry. The auto industry has incredibly low margins, is highly capital intensive, has a great deal of exposure to lawsuits, and the list of negative attributes goes on and on.The ability to say, “No.” is one of Apple‘s greatest strengths.
I am not sure what Apple could have brought to the table here that was so different. I think a few years ago, tech types did not see cars as cars, but holding pens for humans while a car drove them from A to B and thus consumers of whatever infotainment the owners of the screen content management could present to their eyeballs. It turns our automatic driving us harder than everyone thought and you can't service a car without a network of expensive service centres (those pesky dealers that somehow insist on making a living fixing cars). This turns out to be a very different business model and maybe not worth it for Apple at this time?
caladanian said:Electric Porsche 918 - Boxster/Cayman probably? Interesting development.
saf said:They need to roll this out to everyone as soon as possible. It's a safety issue, if you aren't connected to the cabin audio system, you're likely to miss safety announcements. It's not cool when you miss the instructions that tell if you're going to die as the aircraft plunges into the sea.
Amazing to see all the fabricated assumptions defending Apple's decision to prevent third party repairs. Not qualified you say. How do you know if they are qualified? You assume this to defend Apple's position. Apple should not be held responsible if an "unqualified" person uses non Apple parts. Of course Apple is nor responsible. Who in their right mind would blame Apple? The warranty would be voided. Of course the warranty would be voided. If it were under warranty, they'd have taken it to Apple for free repair in the first place!
The argument here is that mane repairs can be carried out by competent techs with access to parts but Apple (like many companies) choose to discourage this for money and to make their lives easier by not having to deal with botched repairs. The other side of the argument is that consumers have rights (companies have certain legal obligations in this world) and one right is the right to reasonable repairs for devices where reasonable repairs are possible.
AppleZulu said:This is irresponsible reporting. The headline and lede make it seem like this was somehow a failure on the part of the iPad itself. It was not.
Read on, and you'll understand that the issue was that, once dropped, the iPad became a wedged-in obstruction to flight control mechanisms. The same would've been the case if the dropped item had been a Microsoft Surface, or a paper notebook in a rigid binder. There is no fault in the hardware design or software operation of the iPad itself.