badmonk

I think the UK/EU (and really every other government agency) needs to decide if they want to prioritize the consumer and the internet writ large or other business interests.

Between pop-ups, surveys, requests for email, tracking permission, the occupation of screen space by ads that blur the line between content and promotion, etc etc, the internet has become progressively un-usable.

But there seems to be some confusion from governments about what is truly important.

Honestly we need to embrace the idea of subscribing to websites we use and not to expect them all to be free.

nubus said:

retrogusto said:

Since 2012, Apple has bought back shares worth $674.9 billion, mostly at a price well below where it’s currently trading, so in retrospect it looks like a pretty good use of the funds

Buying back shares was a terrible use of funds. Apple could have invested in AI like Microsoft or bought shares in MS as the company is performing way better than Apple under Tim Cook. Bought a car manufacturer to actually deliver a car instead of dreaming it and enter the huge market for car financing and services. Even Ford is doing hands off driving something Apple failed to do. How is that possible? Apple could have bought TSMC instead of letting them grow to the point were Nvidia, AMD, Qualcomm, and Intel now all use TSMC. Apple spent a decade as a client investing in output not in control.

Buying back stocks is a lack of faith in the innovation and business model. Apple should do stuff. Instead Tim Cook has decided to sell products at inflated prices, crawl forward, and return most to share holders. That is how tobacco companies and banks operate. 

I disagree wholeheartedly, MSFT’s business model works by overpaying for acquisitions
 to expand their products.  AAPL does not have that corporate philosophy and purchases only small companies to bolster in-house development. I have read such bad advice on this forum about what AAPL should do with its cash, buy an automobile company, buy a media company, etc etc.

Their is a belief among long term good investors that large value acquisitions and mergers actually hurt the individual investor over the long haul because these integrations are really really tough and typically value is not created proportionate to the excessive over valuation of the acquisition.

There is academic data to back this stance up.

On the other hand share purchases tell the world that the company believes in its longterm goals to buy its own stock like an individual shareholder.  This goves me confidence that the company is healthy as well.

A company that has a stock that is at the risk of implosion would never do this.

Warren Buffet knows this and has done well because of it.

As others have just posted the revenue stream is not just from selling services to the customers directly but by selling data to insurance companies, advertisers and I would add law enforcement to the mix.

The internet is dead from scam websites, pop-up reviews for every trivial task, click bait headlines, AI-pushed addiction feeds etc etc.

I love Apple Insider and I pay the subscription and would be willing to pay more for it so I do want this site to thrive.

But it would be great to just cut unwanted content as an Apple user but I wonder if the ad companies will fight this as a free speech, unfettered commerce issue.

And with the Feds and EU fictional monopoly preoccupations I am not sure this will be allowed.

But from my perspective, Apple should “just go for it.”

The idea that some want people to go through a new set-up process in their old phone for the sake of browser choice is having the cure be worse than the disease.  The Apple approach of having a Safari start-up be the trigger for this seems better for the user.