sirlance99
About
- Username
- sirlance99
- Joined
- Visits
- 104
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,789
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 1,293
Reactions
-
Apple to debut 8-inch foldable iPhone in 2023, Kuo says
StrangeDays said:avon b7 said:Beats said:If Apple does release this it will be a revolutionary product or even a new invention and DONE RIGHT.
The usual iKnockoff morons will claim Apple copied Samsung even though it was in development forever and done right.
Theres no reason for a foldable iPhone. If Apple releases this it will have features we haven’t dreamed of.
Have you ever wondered why anything folds?
So, let's set the folding aspect aside for a second. What possible function that we haven't dreamt of could find itself on Apple's version and not be applicable to Apple's non folding phones?
Patents? Do you think that only Apple thought of folding phones and patented an idea?
By your own baseless definition, Apple will become a knockoff merchant of folding phones. You'll have to live with that irony.
Not that anyone will care because it just doesn't matter. If you think there is a market for folding phones, why not cater to it?
Apple will have learnt from previous and existing ideas. It will have dissected current and past folding phones. It will have its own ideas too.
As for being a knockoff should they do a folding device…doubtful. While your crummy Chinese brands just ape Apple products, imitating them poorly, Apple doesn’t do that when it enters late. It enters with something that works in a much more compelling way. We’ve seen this pattern time and again. I have no reason to think this time would be any different.I’m sure will make this foldable phone one day soon. -
Apple unveils new 12.9-inch iPad Pro with mini LED Liquid Retina XDR display
StrangeDays said:k2kw said:So there is really no reason why macOS couldn’t be installed on the IPP.
i see SuperOS emerging. IPadPro with the new Keyboard for theIMac running macOS would be great. They just to put 16 GB ram in this with a big SSD.Edit: and external monitor. -
Apple cites web, third-party markets as evidence against App Store dominance
ericthehalfbee said:sirlance99 said:ericthehalfbee said:^ Two bullshit posts in a row. Bravo.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it.
Lies. Which makes you a liar. You have no proof that the "majority" of people disagree with me. I'd say the majority of trolls on AI don't agree with me, mainly because of years of making fools of them.
OTOH, I have actual proof that most people don't agree with Epic:
First off, the North Dakota vote. Epic and their bill were easily defeated 36-11. Seems like most of them agree with me. Today we find out the Arizona vote didn't even come up for discussion - it died on the vine (as it should have). I win again.
The most compelling proof is the Coalition for App Fairness. They've been around for 7 months and their Twitter account hasn't even hit 1,200 followers. Every single one of their tweets gets anywhere from 0-3 comments. Even the usual Apple trolls/haters stay away and can't be bothered to post. It's a wasteland. As to the Coalition itself - they haven't even hit 50 members yet. Of the hundreds of thousands of iOS developers only a very tiny fraction of a fraction of a fraction of developers have bothered to sign up. How can you sit there and claim most people disagree with me (and Apple) when in the real world developers are avoiding Sweeney and his fellow whiners like the plague they are?
Sorry, but a bunch of trolls who are so ignorant/arrogant that they think they actually represent the majority of people are not a reliable source of how everyone thinks.This isn’t your forum to control anymore. People can love Apple and Apple products, much like I do, and still call out Apple when they fail miserably or are on the wrong side. You, and a few other of your cohorts on here for some reason can’t have that. It’s ok. I forgive you and the others. -
Apple cites web, third-party markets as evidence against App Store dominance
ericthehalfbee said:^ Two bullshit posts in a row. Bravo.
Now run and collect whatever paltry sum Sweeney is paying you to post this drivel in the hopes of tricking stupid people into believing it. -
HomePod is sold out, but isn't dead yet - Apple's 'end of life' explained
dewme said:JWSC said:
It is also clear that they have a habit of neglecting other key products. A company the size of Apple should have ample resources to devote to all the product spaces that they choose to be in. Yet Apple does not appear to have a strategy or roadmap of what product spaces they want to be in 5-10 years down the road. Like many others, I find this to be a deeply troubling sign of rudderless and sclerotic management.I think you've fallen for the "infinite resources" assumption. Apple is exactly choosing what markets they want to be in. The expensive, large format smart speaker market the original HomePod is part of is not one of those markets. They had it out there long enough to see how it would do and how competitors would respond. The ones who responded or launched similar products around the same price point aren't exactly riding a wave of unbound sales. I expect the Echo Studio will suffer the same fate as the HomePod. Without insider access to Apple's strategic planning we don't know whether the HomePod's demise was a strategic failure, an execution failure, a marketing failure, or whatever.I'm very interested in how would you even begin to know that Apple has or does not have "a strategy or roadmap of what product spaces they want to be in 5-10 years down the road." Unless you are part of Apple's strategic planning team or on the board of directors how would you be privy to that information, especially forward looking strategy? If you're doing this by looking backwards (armchair quarterbacking) you're only seeing the products that survived Apple's strategic cut for release, got released to the market, and either succeeded or failed in the market. This is only a piece of the puzzle and is easily muddied by failures in marketing, execution, changing consumer preferences, and external market factors that are wholly distinct from strategy and roadmapping.To assess the quality of, or score, Apple's strategy and roadmap you would have to see what did not survive Apple's strategic cuts. There is just as much to learn from the non-survivors as there is to learn from the survivors. Failure to consider non-survivors and focus solely on survivors is a common cognitive bias known as "survivorship bias." This leads to overly optimistic or overly pessimistic assumptions due to the lack of visibility, and that's even before consideration for the possible other causes of failure previously mentioned.