Herbivore2

eric_alister said:

Dilger, you should work for Apple PR.

Every time I see a headline that tries to spin Tim Cook's Apple like its Steve Jobs's, I can smell your name on it from a mile away. 

You really don't want to see that Apple's not doing as well as it did 5 years ago, do you? 

Note, I'm not an Apple hater. I've been an avid Apple user for over 20 years — just not a blind avid user. 

Dilger has produced a great deal of thoughtful commentary regarding Apple. 

Why all of the negativity? 

Jobs was a visionary , but do you not remember his days from NeXT? He was too much of a visionary and many of NeXT's products withered on the vine as the technological capabilities simply could not be realized by Jobs' vision. 

The Watch is in the same category. It is a visionary product and one that will one day displace the need for a phone as a communication device. Jobs envisioned it, died before the product could be realized and Cook tried making it a reality. 

While it is a nice product, the technological capabilities just aren't there yet. The radios consume too much power and the battery just doesn't have the capacity to make the product a compelling one. 

It will come. Hopefully Apple makes the product with superior functionality like the iPhone and iPad. The watch is a good product as is but is a luxury, not seen as a must have like the smart phone. 

Apple has great capabilities and hopefully Siri one day Siri exceeds Alexa, Apple maps exceeds Google maps and Apple brings out a revolutionary new product that one day displaces the watch. 

One thing's for certain, Tim Cook has managed Apple's supply chains impeccably, keeping design and quality control exemplary. Apple is doing well and competing very well against the other hardware manufacturers. Google has essentially gotten out of hardware altogether and Microsoft struggles with their surface line of machines. 

Even with Android's 80% marketshare, Google ad profits are still greater on iOS. 

And who really cares about the other 90% of Android devices outside of Apple's iPhones and Samsung's flagship phones where essentially all of the profits are. 

bobroo said:

Here is the proof that Tim and Jony's Apple is an elephant that can't dance. 

And why this sole Samsung related story is being reported on Apple Insider...

Not certain what you are getting at, but stories regarding Samsung are quite common on AI. 

Perhaps the stories don't meet with your approval like an earlier one today that provided information about the exploding battery in the new Galaxy S7. 

How about the one regarding the scratchable screen by soft objects with MOHs score of 3 again on Samsung's newest smartphone flagship. 

I will wait on the release of the Apple Watch 2 and give the market some time before deciding if I even want a smart watch. By then the Samsung product can be had for $50 if I would even want one.  If the Gear watch explodes, I'll take a pass altogether. 

Apple's hardware is still top notch. 

Samsung's engineers should be better than this. In their quest to outdo the iPhone, they must be taking design shortcuts. Fast charging increases the risk for exploding batteries quite substantially. Even Boeing had trouble with lithium batteries catching fire in the 787. 

In engineering it's all about compromise. A smartphone is a compromise of performance, cost and reliability. In the interests of keeping costs controlled, Samsung didn't build in proper controls into their fast charging protocol. They may have great charging performance at a reasonable cost, but sacrificed safety and reliability in the process.  

The whole thing is that outside of Apple, Samsung builds the best hardware. If they are having these kinds of troubles at this price point in competing with the iPhone, it means the rest of the industry is going to some real difficulties moving forward in competing with Apple on a hardware basis. Even Paul Thurrott, the ultimate Windows apologist called out Microsoft regarding the unreliability of the Surface machines' hardware. 

I seriously looked at the Surface. Decided against buying one based on the reports of the hardware's unreliable nature. Decided that a MacBook Pro would be a far better machine to run Windows. If Intel would just deliver the goods regarding Kaby Lake... 

Apple's hardware is still in a class of its own. The fact that Samsung and Microsoft are experiencing these types of problems speaks volumes of Apple's expertise. 

Even Uber, with a significant capital investment from Google ventures doesn't trust Google and are making their own self driving cars. 

The self driving car market is now flooded with competitors. And Google expects to be able to make a profit. 

It won't happen. 

Too bad Apple didn't can Schmidt earlier. 

To to their credit, Google was the first to build an excellent search engine, profiting from it by selling ads. But the company has failed miserably in everything else they have done. 

Their ad revenue is being usurped by Facebook and now, even Uber won't let them be a part of the board. 

I won't be sad to see Google slide into oblivion. I use none of their products. Not even search these days. 

I cannot emphasize this enough. Intel integrated graphics stink. Try using Duet on a Mac laptop with the 12.9" iPad Pro. It is an atrocious experience for what would otherwise be a fantastic tool. The lag simply isn't there when the iPad Pro is attached to an iMac with dedicated GPU. And the desktop doesn't heat up like the laptop when using Duet.  

If Apple cannot or will not supply a MacBook (pro) with a discrete GPU, they absolutely need to build an external solution using the Thunderbolt port which certainly has sufficient bandwidth. 

I am more than wiling to tote around a couple of extra pounds for a discrete GPU and larger battery. For those who want the ultimate in thinness and portability, there is always the MacBook and MacBook Air.