ascii

GeorgeBMac said:

I have one complaint about the Apple Watch:   My carrier doesn't support the LTE version so I'm stuck with the Series 1.

... Oh wait!  That's not Apple's fault...

I guess I love it.

applesauce007 said:

I think Volkswagen is a much better partner for Apple for many reasons.

1.  Volkswagen has the coolest electric minibus ever built and with Apple technology, they would sell like iPhones.
2.  Volkswagen can better afford to do this time wise using one of their subsidiaries without disrupting their existing plans.
3.  Volkswagen is developing their "ID" electric vehicles from scratch instead of retrofitting. (see video below)
4.  Volkswagen is probably less committed to Intel / MobileEye technologies and more willing to working with Apple.

rogifan_new said:

sflocal said:

rogifan_new said:

sflocal said:

As a software for 30+ years, these "developers" are an embarrassment.  They do not represent me, or countless others that live in what is generally known as "Reality".

They are more than welcome to create software to sell independently.  Go right ahead.  Code the software, set up a website to sell it, hire the people to run it, handle billing, merchant accounts, fraud, hire a security team to make sure your website doesn't get hacked and inject malware/ransomware/viruses into your app binaries, and hire a marketing person/team to actually sell your product.

And don't forget to maybe create physical copies to sell in retail stores that no one visits anymore.

Morons.  

30% is a BARGAIN considering what Apple does by handling everything, freeing the developer to focus on their product.  I'll bet these are 20-something whiners that have zero clue what it takes to run an actual business.  It's because of ecosystems like Apple's App Store that gives the Joe-developer access to literally hundreds of MILLIONS of potential customers all over the world.  

Face it... if you can't make a living on 70% of the revenue, then you're not going to make that living on anything higher.  In business-speak, it means your "app" is crap.  

Unbelievable the arrogance that people like these have.  Last time I checked, Android doesn't have those "limitations".  They're more than welcome to give Apple the finger and go elsewhere.  Oh yeah.. I forgot.. no one pays for Android apps.  smh. 

One of the leaders behind this is Brent Simmons who’s been writing apps for Apple computers for almost 40 years. I find it amusing that AI posters who think Apple can do no wrongs are calling others arrogant. And if you think 30% is a bargain then why isn’t Apple charging 40% or 50%? And why did they make changes to subscription apps taking only 15% after the first year?

And so what? If he's been writing apps for 40+ years, and he's still chiming that he can barely get buy on whatever apps he's creating, sounds to me like he's doing something wrong. The App Store is 10 years old.  That's given him 30 years doing things the old-fashion way.  What was his overhead when he was doing it himself selling all these pre-iOS apps?  Did he have a side job?  Did he do all his work as an employee at another company, having others to deal with the headaches of running that business?

It is arrogant because in essence what they're doing is blaming Apple for their apps not making the kind of money they want.  It would take at LEAST 30% if not more of one's resources to do it themselves.  Perhaps Apple will some day drop the rate, and if they do, great!  I personally think it's still a bargain considering what they do and in return getting access to millions of people in an easy way.  I do know how much work is involved in running a software business.  I've been a contract software engineer for 30+ years.  It's brutal, and I don't even do much iOS work!

He's more than welcome to sell his apps on the Android platform.  By your logic he'll make way more since they don't take any percentage of sales.

70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.  Sounds like he's forgotten his history on how cut-throat that business was before the advent of app-stores.

What’s wrong with trials though? Why is Apple against letting people try software before they buy it? That seems better than making people pay up front and having to offer refunds,

Soli said:

sflocal said:

Soli said:

Maybe this year we'll see the components shrink so the notch can decrease in size, although getting short on the vertical plane could result in a smaller status bar height which may be problematic. At least bringing it in closer so that some of the missing items can come back would be nice. They've certainly designed their UI around the notch not existing in its current form.

Completely agree.  I see the notch and the components within it shrink more and more as each subsequent model comes out.  Apple has proven time and time again that if anyone can advance mobile tech, it's them.  Perhaps one day the it'll be able to shrink it enough to squeeze it within the outside frame, or come out with whatever future tech that will replace FaceID that's invisible?

There's always the potential for side-by-side pixels for the display and cameras (and sensors). This may not yield a perfect display in that area, but if they could keep it in the Status Bar area which is just black with some simple icons and text, it may not be a bad trade off.

• https://appleinsider.com/articles/17/01/10/apple-patent-paves-way-for-iphone-with-full-face-display-ar-heads-up-windows

Now, I'm sure someone will have read my previous paragraph and have immediately noted that this trade off will not be so kind once you play a video fullscreen in landscape mode, but I'd argue that's a good trade off if it means you can get rid of the completely display-less area of the notch and that the default mode will still be the same as it is now because going to the vertical edges also means cutting off the corners of the video.

And then there's also behind the display.

• https://appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/08/apple_files_patent_for_camera_hidden_behind_display

If either of these can be employed for the FaceTime camera, the IR camera, light sensor, and other Face ID sensors, the only thing that will need to have a cut out might be the microphone, which could be placed at the edge of the display as the corner rounds at the top (which I think HTC was doing years ago). Although, maybe an array of microscopic perforations (per the patent) could also be used for the microphone, but I also wonder about that getting clogged so I'm guessing that's not going to be included if this tech ever happens unless they can find a way to create a study membrane over those perforations that will still allow sound to pass with ease.

SpamSandwich said:

ascii said:

SpamSandwich said:

Offshoring IP and engaging in complex accounting procedures and using international laws to do this is a reasonable thing to do for Apple, a company in a position to exploit these laws. All perfectly legal. 

Yep and I think people who advocate the government side in this are operating from the assumption that it will benefit society more if the government has that money rather than Apple. But will it?

Apple actually invests a lot in projects to benefit the community (such as their clean energy programs). And being a private entity spending their own money, they probably make those dollars go further for society than a hypothetical government department would.

Taking that a step further, it's not Apple's job to benefit society. It's their job to provide something people want (legally) and make a profit. That's all. If they can provide additional things to customers which don't harm customers or their business, so much the better. But they aren't obligated to do anything beyond basic business functions.