avon b7

rob53 said:

Here we go again, someone who knows next to nothing about how rechargeable batteries work. Why is it nobody cares about all their battery operated devices needing new batteries? We hardly ever hear about those but everyone is complaining about Apple's batteries as if they expect them to last forever. People need to get a grip and realize we're not using Star Trek era power sources that last longer but also don't last forever. As for Apple being required to give people free replacement batteries, if the courts demand this then I'm suing every manufacturer of battery operated devices for a lifetime supply of batteries, starting with my rechargeable batteries in my power tools. It's the same thing and don't get me started on Apple changing software to slow their devices down a bit to extend the life of the power in their batteries. This makes sense and people should appreciate it. As for the law firms going after Apple, I think Congress should investigate them and all the other ambulance chasing lawyers. Get rid of them. 

2014 - 75 million units 

2015 - 108 million units

2016 - 139.3 million units

2017 - 153 million units (provisional)

Maybe this guy had some WIP accidentally go live. 

muthuk_vanalingam said:

avon b7 said:

This information also came from Digitimes and just a few weeks ago. Seeing as Globalfoundries will probably be entering the 7nm fray, there would appear to be more potential capacity than with 10nm. Yields permitting.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Globalfoundries-and-Samsung-reportedly-competing-for-contract-to-produce-Huawei-s-Kirin-ARM-SoCs.259548.0.html

But how much is the demand for the top of the line Kirin SoCs? Around 20 million per year (including all Mate, P and Honor series phones) is my guess. Relatively, this is a smaller number than even Qualcomm's top SoCs of the respective year. Would Samsung be really competing with others to get this business, which HELPs their close competitor big time? I doubt it.

tmay said:

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

avon b7 said:

radarthekat said:

avon b7 said:

muthuk_vanalingam said:

avon b7 said:

fred1 said:

So much EU bashing, and why?  Do you live in the EU? (Have you ever even been to an EU country?). Did you say that the US shouldn’t exist when Congress was supposedly investigating where Aplle stashes its profits?

These EU officials are doing their job: enforcing the tax laws. Why does this seem so strange to you?

Yes. You are right. I commented in another thread on exactly what the commissioner has said now someone tried to claim I was using 'weasel' words. LOL.

All of this is being investigated as we speak. The amount of documents in this leak is vast, so vast that the work will take time to be carried out. We have already seen some prickly documents.

While all the information is verified and cross referenced, the commissioners and ministers of member states will formerly require the individuals and companies to 'fill in any gaps' on previous declarations in the cases of open investigations. 

We will see, much further down the line, just how legal the actions of those involved is, but in the case of Apple they have taken a battering in public opinion through the revelations in the press. That is precisely why Apple made a statement in the first place.

Some people seem to be having trouble accepting this, others just hate the EU.

I would be worried if the EU didn't do anything. You can be sure the US is also perusing the documents too.

Trying to make out this hasn't been a PR nightmare is frankly difficult to understand.

Actually I can guess why people in this forum think that this is NOT a PR nightmare, but you think otherwise. I got time to read only Apple's statement on this issue and I must add - it looked fairly reasonable to me (with my limited knowledge on this topic of taxation of international companies like Apple). I have NOT gone through even a SINGLE article yet on Paradise papers, what information was leaked into public domain etc. Since I have not gone through the actual story but has read only Apple's version, I have not commented on this thread yet. I can easily imagine others in this forum NOT having gone through even a single article on Paradise papers but only Apple's statement. And still comment on the topic based on their prior wealth of knowledge on taxation (which I don't have). It could be possible that only you and very few others have gone through the story from both sides while commenting.

That is definitely feasible. However, the reality is there for all to see.

If Apple has made a formal statement mere hours after this went public it should be clear that this is a major issue.

The Paradise Papers have been handed over to over 100 respected news outlets for study and documentary style reports have already been aired. 

It doesn't even matter if Apple is innocent of course. The fact that documents like the questionnaire, however normal they may be among multinationals, have reached the public domain is of paramount concern to Apple PR. The risk of some damaging mails being found among the data is also there.

I have yet to see a news piece of this subject that doesn't mention Apple and I am sure that that is a situation Apple is very worried about in its PR department which must be a hive of activity right now.

You only have to dip into the comments sections of press outlets to gauge opinion.

You seem to think Apple’s early response implies Apple is ‘worried’ about something.  It’s more reasonable to conclude that Apple made an early response simply due to the fact the Paradise Papers are being looked at by so many news outlets; a timely response provides Apple with boilerplate it can point to each time some reporter comes calling, rather than tediously responding individually to each in succession.
See also Occam’s Razor.

Yes. I think Apple is worried. Very worried. The 'early response' you speak of is pure PR.

Apple rarely discusses these delicate issues precisely because they don't transmit well into the public domain, however well you present them.

It's far easier to defend why you have been faithful to your wife than why you haven't. Unless of course you claimed you were but in reality you weren't.

They were 'forced' to make a statement after the original EU investigation results and again with the Paradise Papers. Damage control. PR.

This time they went on the defensive and the result has done them few favours IMO.

The New York Times took just a few very short paragraphs to take a stab at Tim Cook's comments to a US committee a few years ago investigating Apple's tax practices where he blustered (probably for dramatic effect) that Apple didn't have its cash stashed away on a Caribbean island. The Times then quickly reminds us that that was actually true, before casually throwing in a reference to a European island, and with one flash of the pen, the damage is done.

Apple should know better. This time around you have more than 100 of the world's top investigative journalism outlets perusing an almost endless flow of sensitive data. That is reason enough to be worried.

Lines like 'we pay more taxes than anyone else' may be fine for your mother but not for these guys. I can guarantee you that that line will be lit up in Christmas lights and then shot down in flames if even so much of an inkling of doubt emerges from the papers.

Do we have that inkling? Yes, we do. The EU investigation. Now, that has to stand up to inspection and it will be a while before we know the results but it's there. Just like the Paradise Papers are here now and it will also take a while to join the dots.

In the meantime, only Apple and its lawyers know what is possibly among those documents and how 'clean' they are. And I am referring to both the legal and moral aspects here because some groups will attack one aspect while others will go for the other.

Apple knows this will not blow over. It will come back time after time until everything has been laid bare.

The problem is people aren't interested in reasons why they did what they did or didn't do. They are swayed by how the information is presented and Apple has little control over that and if they get caught lobbying it would be worse.

People remember Star Wars for the bad guys, not the good guys. An investigative article throwing flowers at Apple has little chance of breaking ground but a splash of wrongdoing is all it takes for snowballs to start growing.

Less FUD, more facts.

The facts are there was a EU investigation and Apple wasn't shown in good light.

The facts are that there was a US enquiry and Apple wasn't shown in good light.

The facts are the Paradise Papers are being poured over by hundreds of the world's top investigative journalists and even after just scratching the surface are not showing Apple in good light.

The facts are Tim Cook made statements after all three incidences arose. Those statements are receiving attention and it's not the kind of attention Apple likes to have.

I could go on but those are the facts with no FUD anywhere to be seen.

Nobody has accused Apple of anything except the EU but it's not accusations that matter. It's being mentioned in the same breath as the Paradise Papers. That in itself is reason enough for concern at Apple.

You just outlined what FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) is, and laid it on thick.
Let me know when Apple has done something illegal, because so far, I'm not seeing that.

Perhaps you aren't seeing the forest for the trees. The whole point of what I commented on regarding PR, has nothing to do with Apple actually doing anything illegal or not but simply having these issues on the table in the first place and how the wider public interprets them. That interpretation will largely be based on how the information is presented, NOT on whether there is any actual wrongdoing or not. If you call that FUD, fine, but don't attribute it to me 

These are not issues I have put forward. They are issues that the US government, the EU and now the Paradise Papers have put forward and Apple has chosen to respond to.

Although you believe otherwise, I believe it is a PR nightmare for all of the reasons I have already mentioned.

This AI article is just one of hundreds popping up all over the globe. Each one will have offspring as more details emerge. It's logical that people have an interest. Moreso as the Paradise Papers have an instant and negative backdrop. Something that attracts people and something that Apple, as one of the named parties, would of course want to disassociate itself from.

That's where PR will be working overtime.

A perfect example of a PR disaster is Twitter going to 280 words.

What Apple is doing is just inside baseball stuff; average people's eyes glaze over from the complexity of it. 

You are spreading FUD; that's obvious from your posts, but knock yourself out.

cali said:

avon b7 said:

This is a damage control statement. The article by the BBC is a damning revelation that leaves Apple in a bad moral light.

The questionnaire leak alone paints a picture which will make everyone in PR at Apple squirm.

This is going to be like quicksand in the sense that any move to defend itself will probably make things worse. Just like this statement has done. I can see it being torn apart line by line for deliberately trying to distract from the reality that the leaks have put onto the table.

Apple has been the largest tax payer in the world this isn’t news.

iPhone X sales are off the charts and more to come from other products. This is “damage control” from the iKnockoff paid media.