franklinjackcon

The Verge seemed to complain about Face ID outdoors. Any thoughts AI or they are just being picky?

cali said:

Apple needs to acquire Starbucks next. Wireless charging always reminds me of this. Sounds pointless until it “clicks”.

Wireless charging tables for iDevices and new Qi MacBooks!

Today at Apple events. Apple gathering spots.

Starbucks Gift cards with Apple purchases. ApplePay rewards. 

Finally the Apple Cafes Steve Jobs wanted... in every city.

This would be a repeat of the Beats deal. Won’t make sense until it does. 

Why would Apple want to spend $80B+ on a coffee company? They've had charging tables there for years, Starbucks does it for free to bring in customers. A partnership might make sense but acquisition would be a total waste of money.

AppleInsider said:

In a deal that values Lyft at $11 billion, Google's parent company Alphabet has invested $1 billion into the ride sharing service, more than a year after Apple placed its own $1 billion bet on Chinese taxi provider Didi Chuxing.

Strange way to phrase it considering Google invested in Uber in 2013, which at the time was Google Venture's biggest ever investment

patchythepirate said:

That’s a shame. Switching back to Uber now. 

See above - Google as far as I know, still has that stake, about 7%, at least for now

gmgravytrain said:

Unfortunately, most teens can't actually afford to buy iPhones. Wall Street knows this, so while Apple's share price hangs around $155 (barely moving), Netflix is around $200 a share and both Amazon and Google's share price are sitting around $1000. Apple, as usual, has taken far bigger losses than any of the FANG stocks. Why? Because analysts don't think Apple will be able to sell many iPhones for $999. Maybe they're right.

You know the $ amount of the share price means almost nothing right? A company could have 5 shares worth $1M each and it would be a small company. Plot Amazon and Alphabet against Apple over the last year and Apple is ahead. Netflix is growing but it's also about one tenth the size of Apple and barely making a profit

yoyo2222 said:

larrystar said:

 It’s really sad to think that because of tax loopholes in the law the US didn’t get those billions in taxes. Shame on you Apple! 

Apple didn't write the loopholes into law. Apple's board (like all publicly traded companies) is required by law to work for the benefit of it's owners, the stockholders. They would be breaking their fiscal responsibility to give money to a government (in taxes) that isn't required by the laws of that government. Shame on you for not working harder to have the tax laws changed.

This fiscal responsibility line is simply not true. By the same logic, anything that protects the environment but costs Apple is also fiscally irresponsible too. They can abide by the spirit of the tax laws rather than the letter and call it corporate responsibility, the same way they do when they switch to renewable energy. There is nothing in the law that requires them to eek out every tax dollar and risk being sued by governments.