avon b7

tht said:

Sounds crazy to use a new battery chemistry on a thin iPhone, and one with a silicon anode to boot. 

Thought one of the issues with silicon anodes was they expand more, and battery casings need to account for this. A thin battery with silicon anodes sounds challenging here?

I think things have become clearer now that we are on third or fourth generation silicon carbon batteries in smartphones and there have been no major issues. Over ten Android manufacturers are currently using them today. 

Huawei developed a silicon carbon design back in 2018 and filed patents for it in June 2019.

https://www.grepow.com/industry-news/Silicon-Carbon-Composite-Material.html

Manufacturing is typically outsourced to TDK. 

"Huawei high silicon anode battery

JMaille said:

I find it curious that something that tells you a fact that is absolutely true is referred to as a "scare screen."  

Also why would this be a scare screen for people who are intentionally looking for apps that don't use Apple's eco-structure?

Amd finally, does anyone know whether the EU has something like the 5th and 14th amendments to the US Constitution that explicitly prevent the government and the courts from forcing someone to provide things to others without compensation?  --- Oh, wait, I guess that doesn't matter, we don't follow those rules in the US anymore so why should the EU?

This subject came up in the US court case.

Calling it a 'scare screen' is absolutely fine IMO because that is what it is and Apple is well aware of the fact. 

Apple even tried to defend itself in court (the word that popped up during the trial was 'scary') by claiming that it was a term of art or some other crazy justification. I do not remember the exact words but the court outright rejected that explanation saying it strained common sense.

Factual or not, the purpose of that screen is to seed doubt in the mind of the user (a scare tactic) and we can reach that reasonable conclusion as internal communication on this kind of wording was revealed during the court process.

I don't know if the EU will see it as reasonable or not but Apple is playing with fire by deliberately treading the compliance/non-compliance line. 

The term malicious compliance isn't far off the mark but Apple chose its path and will have to deal with the consequences. 

doggone said:

entropys said:

No doubt it can be put into some late models with digital clusters. But why would a manufacturer update a say, 2021 car when they can encourage you to buy a new one?

Two words Consumer Loyalty.  One of the things I loved about the iPhone when it was launched was the fact that the screen could be modified.  iPhone customers are extremely loyal and a lot of that is that the phones can last for a long time and the customers don't feel like they are stuck in 2021 because the OS updates change the look and feel. 
So you end up with a spectrum of customers, some of which hang on to an iPhone until it dies and others who change their phone every year.  But they all come back to Apple.

It's the perception that the car is old and not supported by the manufacturer.  I have a 2017 Prius with the same old boring display in the center console.  I bring the car into to Toyota for service as needed but they've never updated the system.  It's eight years old now and because it's only done 60K and isn't breaking down there is no reason to buy a new one.  But in a few years time I will and it is likely that it isn't going to be a Toyota.  Definitely an electric car and one of the key criteria will be that it has to have good CarPlay interactivity and the ability to update the system easily.  

Another reason why the iPhone is so successful is the app experience.  The comment about GM making their own infotainment system shows how short sighted they are.  By engaging in customers who treasure their phones and give them an experience they recognize will win over new customers.  Let the customer choose whether they want CarPlay or Google car experience.  You'll get more loyalty that way.

Consumers definitely switch from iPhone to other brands. And from other brands to iPhone. 

Not in huge numbers but enough to warrant migration apps being available on both sides. 

There may be loyalty to a product, something that is common for many brands but Apple doesn't make cars so it is at an immediate disadvantage if it wants to get CarPlay onto someone else's product in detriment to their own solutions (in-house or not). 

If we take CarPlay a step further (CarPlay Ultra) and seek deeper integration into another brand's product, things get much more difficult. 

GM said it would continue to support CarPlay in a fashion similar to that that it currently supports but that it would be developing its own system in collaboration with Google.

As a consumer you can make your decision on whatever grounds you like but you may find that people buy cars mainly for the car and not for the phone system that connects to it. 

Historically, car interfaces have been clunky and left without updates but if you look at CarPlay today it looks just as outdated when compared to some competitors. 

CarPlay has lagged far, far behind the Chinese NEVs on every level (and there are a lot of levels that CarPlay never ever reached). 

Even in 2021, CarPlay was lagging behind many Chinese players and will definitely continue to do so for one simple reason. Apple doesn't make cars. 

As the US market transitions to NEVs one would expect the onboard systems to be updated and kept up to date because they will basically be digital car batteries on wheels running mini data centers.

The 'car', in the classic sense, will cease to be what we know it to be now and move into the digital era where software will be everything. Along with communication with road infrastructure. That will require constant updates to the onboard software. Without it, your new car might cease to operate correctly.

Obviously that can be good or bad depending on how you view progress in this field. 

As for consumer choice, I'm all for it, but let's not forget that Apple is being battered worldwide with investigations and requirements precisely because it has limited consumer choice. 

You might have to settle for an iPhone connection that extends the iPhone side of things without that deep integration with the car. 

Some of the big traditional manufacturers have run into serious software issues and have signed deals with companies that already have their own solutions (including not only standard and deep integration but also the entire self driving side, AI and ICT tasks). Apple will find it hard to provide something similar if it isn't responsible for key hardware technologies inside the car. 

And if you ever get the chance to experience some of the Chinese systems for example, you might even decide CarPlay (in whatever form) isn't the best option. 

I would guess Tesla is in a similar situation to the Chinese with its onboard solutions but Tesla doesn't have its own phones. I don't know much about Tesla's software interfaces so that's guesswork on my part. At least Tesla isn't providing its solutions to third parties AFAIK. That could be a slight advantage for Apple in the US at least. 

Maybe Apple should move to Canada. 

I saw this this morning (also citing Reuters) but these figures seem a little extreme:

"Apple's iPhone shipments in China plunged nearly 50% in March 2025, as Huawei reclaims dominance and U.S. tariffs push Apple to shift focus to India. With rising local competition, policy headwinds, and AI lags, Apple faces mounting pressure in its second-largest market. "

https://www.fortuneindia.com/technology/apples-china-sales-plunge-50-as-huawei-surges-tariffs-bite-and-india-gains-ground/123087

There are headwinds and they are persistent, like Tim Cook said during the earnings call but a 50% drop, if only for a month, seems somewhat off. 

Sales (discounts) from major third party vendors in China have been basically continuous for more than two years now. Apple has been joining the party on occasion too and that is a clear sign that things are not good, but 50%?

I think there are a lot of (relatively) smaller issues coming together to have a negative impact. 

The model spread (although vastly increased from times gone by) might not be hitting the right notes. At the premium and ultra premium end (be it for cameras, folding or even flip phones) Apple could be losing sales. 

AI is obviously WIP at Apple and China just makes that scenario worse. 

'Smart Cars' are having a massive rush. One of China's largest German car dealerships recently switched to Huawei based cars. Xiaomi's car is receiving rave reviews. Some foreign car manufacturers are shipping cars with HarmonyOS and/or ADAS from Huawei. That's on top of the 20+ models from Chinese vendors. It's not far fetched to think some (most?) owners (and family members) of those cars will not be using iPhones. 

Then there is the 'patriotic' side that might push users to go with the 'home' brands. 

Plus the subsidies etc. 

Tough times for sure but not unexpected as this has been the case for a few years now and the discounts appeared to be having some success. I have to doubt that 50% drop figure though.