tmay

charlesn said:

avon b7 said:

charlesn said:

avon b7 said:

The whole point is choice. 

It can swing both ways but the user must decide, not Apple (or not only Apple at least). 

The user DOES decide at the point of purchase. Don't like the walled garden? Great! Don't buy into it! There's an entire world of Android phones, with far more variety than Apple offers, from which you can choose. People who buy Apple products CHOOSE the walled garden. And what you're saying is that they have no right to make that choice.

They do not do that, simply because the vast majority of users have no idea of the restrictions Apple imposes. 

 For which ZERO data exists to support this. ZERO. But hey, I'll humor your stupidity, so let's play this out: wouldn't the "vast majority of users who had no idea" be shocked and furious when they found out that they were "walled in" by Apple with no way to get out? Wouldn't they reject ever making an iPhone purchase again? Wouldn't they be spreading the word to all their clueless friends who also had "no idea" and were about to make an iPhone purchase? And wouldn't all those friends be rushing to Android to avoid the prison into which Apple was duping them into stumbling unaware? Yeah, except absolutely NONE of that is happening. Apple, with its "too expensive" prices and walled garden into which it is duping the world's population continues to earn around 85% of ALL global smartphone profits, leaving every other handset maker scrambling to grasp whatever tiny share of the crumbs that are left. And, amazingly according to you, this is all based on people not realizing what they're buying... for the past 16 YEARS and counting. Wow, word of Apple's nefarious deeds must travel VERY slowly. But you just keep screaming into the void. 

AppleInsider said:

After a few months of quiet about the subject, and an explicit denial by China regulators in September, there are new reports circulating that China's ban on the iPhone is back on -- and expanding.

iPhone 15

A report on Friday evening claims that the iPhone ban inside China's governmental halls has reared up again, or still, depending on which reports you believe. The report, by Bloomberg claims that state firms and government offices across at least eight provinces are telling employees to start carrying local brands, and not the iPhone, or phones from Samsung.

Citing "people familiar with the matter," the ban is said to be a "major step-up" from September.

The report itself leaves some wiggle room for interpretation.

"It's unclear how many government agencies precisely have issued directives, nor how widespread they've been," Bloomberg reports on Friday. "Different organizations will likely vary in how zealously they enforce internal edicts, with some forbidding Apple devices from the workplace and others barring their use entirely."

The saga, with contradictions from both media and the Chinese government started just before the iPhone 15 launched. In early September, the roller coaster launched, with rumors of a potential China sales ban circulating amongst major media outlets.

Early discussions of the matter included not just a ban on Apple's iPhone in the halls of government, but on the local level as well. They went so far as to claim that China's largest carrier, China Mobile, wouldn't carry the iPhone 15.

These rumors didn't pan out, as iPhone 15 has been for sale in the country. Furthermore, a statement from China regulatory bodies denied the allegations on September 13.

Regarding iPhone 15 sales in China, Apple CEO Tim Cook's commentary regarding sales in the country was more clear than normal. In Apple's quarter ending in October, sales in China were down by 2%, which Cook directly blamed on Mac sales in decline in the country.

In the call's analyst question and answer session, Cook said that the iPhone 15 Pro was doing very well in China.

The accuracy of September's reports, and the new one on Friday evening is questionable given the nature of reports out of China on matters such as this. The impact on Apple's stock price is clear, though.

As happened before, Apple stock took a hit on the news. AAPL closed at 197.57. It immediately took a dive of about a dollar after Bloomberg's report, and is presently at 196.50 in after-hours trading.

This likely isn't the end of the saga. The United States has banned Chinese brand Huawei form sale over security concerns, so the back and forth will likely continue between the countries as Apple sits in the middle.

Read on AppleInsider

avon b7 said:

AppleZulu said:

avon b7 said:

AppleZulu said:

avon b7 said:

geekmee said:

What problem does the foldable iPhone solve again?

Doubling the screen size while not losing portability. 

Multi-tasking with side-by-side apps. 

More immersive gaming. 

Options to use the main camera for selfies. 

Option to use main camera view for subjects to see themselves. 

And of course the option of the best of both worlds in screen options (folded or unfolded). 

Apple will definitely use all of these points in marketing if they release a folding phone. 

These suggestions notwithstanding, there really isn't a compelling use case for a folding iPhone. "Ooo look! It folds!" is good for about twenty minutes of very expensive amusement, but Apple has never been a bells and whistles sort of company. If a folding screen comes from Apple, it's most likely to be an iPad, where greater portability for a larger device could be useful, and a second screen on the outside of the device isn't needed as would be the likely case for a folding phone. 

I think it's safe to say that we are now beyond the novelty effect as the market has spoken. People want larger devices in a smaller form factor. 

Almost five years into the folding era demand is still growing with the main thing holding folding phones back being price. 

A folding tablet will inevitably arrive along with probably triple folding devices.

Scrollable devices will achieve the same goals. 

The market has spoken? Other than your personal advocacy here, I’ve seen no evidence for that. 

The numbers speak for themselves. Almost five years in, there is still plenty of demand and YoY that demand has increased. 

Don't take my word for it.

avon b7 said:

charlesn said:

avon b7 said:

The numbers speak for themselves. Almost five years in, there is still plenty of demand and YoY that demand has increased. 

Don't take my word for it.

Folding phones are the 3D television of mobile devices. The "future" "must have" that is neither. I have to laugh about "still plenty of demand." STILL? There has never been "plenty" of demand for these niche and expensive phones that have miniscule market share. Even riding the subway and walking through midtown NYC each day, I have yet to see one in the wild. Meanwhile, iPhones are beyond ubiquitous. But the world of non-Apple tech has long been filled with shiny object tricks that offer "solutions" to problems that don't exist. Their other trick is loss-leader pricing in phones, which is the reason why--despite dominating Apple by far in overall sales--ALL of the other phone makers combined only earn 15% of global smartphone profits. Apple takes the other 85%. 

When I mentioned the 'novelty effect' it was a nod to 3D TVs that had a four year honeymoon (2010-2014 give or take).

The same cannot be said of folding phones which are showing positive growth in a flat smartphone market. YoY growth. 

It's very likely that Apple is working on such a phone/tablet or whatever, precisely because there is a market for them. 

No. They are not ubiquitous by any means but, ironically, the first one I saw in the wild was with a old-ish lady on a bus! That was a few years ago now. Since then I've seen more. My brother switched his entire family over.

As for profits, what does that have to do with anything? 

I'd rather a company plough resources into R&D/products that meet consumer needs than deliberately hold things back and then drip feed me with them. Even the simplest of things like unlocking a phone with FaceID in landscape. It took them years to do that.

Other companies have remained profitable yet spent more on R&D. 

I'd rather a company plough resources into R&D/products that meet consumer needs than deliberately hold things back and then drip feed me with them. Even the simplest of things like unlocking a phone with FaceID in landscape. It took them years to do that.

Other companies have remained profitable yet spent more on R&D. 

Apple's total R&D expenditure for the 2023 fiscal year stands at nearly US$30 billion, a nearly 14% increase from the previous year's US$26.251 billion, and a substantial 36.5% growth compared to 2021.Nov 9, 2023

Huawei Spent Almost USD24 Billion on R&D in 2023 to Deal With US Tech Sanctions, Founder Says

chelin said:

tmay said:

Scot1 said:

As a Canadian, while, I don’t support legislation to force Apple to open up their eco stream, make no mistake, the EU is as economically powerful as the United States. 

Based on GDP comparisons between the U.S. and the EU, you made a mistake.

U.S. GDP in 2022 was about $25 T

EU GDP in 2022 was about $16 T

The U.S. largest trading partner is Canada, followed by Mexico, China, and then the EU.

The populations of NAFTA, and the EU are about the same at 450 million.

What's interesting is that the U.S. shifting supply chains out of China is particularly benefitting Mexico and the State of Texas.

Seems like you’ve got some rounding problems gdp for 2022 was

EU $17.8
US $25.5

but also NAFTA was dissolved a few years back.

But other economists, including Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Cathleen Cimino-Isaacs of the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE), have emphasized that increased trade produces overall gains for the U.S. economy. Some jobs are lost due to imports, but others are created, and consumers benefit significantly from falling prices and often improved quality of goods. Their 2014 PIIE study of NAFTA’s effects found a net loss of about fifteen thousand jobs per year due to the pact—but gains of roughly $450,000 for each job lost, in the form of higher productivity and lower consumer prices. 

Scot1 said:

As a Canadian, while, I don’t support legislation to force Apple to open up their eco stream, make no mistake, the EU is as economically powerful as the United States.