Herbivore2

Google cannot build decent hardware. They make no money in hardware. They relying the hardware manufacturers for their model. They have fostered cutthroat competition in hardware and through their software  licensing are guaranteed a profit while the manufacturers struggle to stay afloat.  

When the hardware manufacturers want to include their own apps that compete with Google Play, Google disallows it. 

Google stole the iOS interface and stole Java to produce Android. They didn't develop WebKit but usurped it and now attempting to do the same with Swift. 

As Android is forced into being rewritten, Samsung should have a golden opportunity to push Tizen. 

European laws are European laws. Google needs to abide by them or leave the European market like they did with China. Simple as that. 

I myself don't want to pay 80% of my income in taxes. It's why I don't live in Europe. Google can whine about it all they want and their apologists can rant and rave about it. It doesn't change anything. Apple's business model seems acceptable and Google's is not. 

Maybe Comey would like help in defecting to North Korea. I am certain he could gain great insight into what happens when a government has absolute control of their citizens with no privacy rights. 

The North Korean government would have no compunction in forcing a company to wantonly violate any vestigial right privacy. Comey would feel right at home. Or he could defect to ISIS held territory.

And I would like to purchase a one ticket to Pyongyang for Senator Feinstein. If my own senator supports the notion of placing a backdoor into otherwise secure software, he will lose my vote forever also. 

disneylandman said:

So parents are buying their spoiled teenagers an Apple Watch.  How nice.  They lose their phones and break them constantly, so I wonder if this is even true.  I have never seen a teenager wear an Apple Watch, and I have only seen a handful of people wearing one around Los Angeles...and it has been a year since the thing got released.  Best part is the small amount of people wearing an Apple Watch are using their iPhone instead!  Their biggest complaint is how slow it is.  Take a look around, no one wears a smart watch because people are smart enough to realize they do not need a device duplicated by a phone.

If you do not own an Apple Watch, it's best to stop making ridiculous statements. The CPU is not "slow" by any means. 

Apple did make sacrifices and forced to tether the watch to the iPhone for the sake of battery life. 

Which brings me to the most legitimate criticism of the watch. Not speed, but battery life. 

The watch has a sufficient battery for those who are able to charge it up every night. However, not everyone can. 

When Apple builds the S2 on the most advanced manufacturing node, most of the issues will be addressed. The 28 nm Samsung process doesn't offer the performance or power consumption of TSMC's 16 nm FF with upcoming InFO process. 

I myself may purchase a generation 2 watch if the watch is able to make calls independent from a phone. Pop in a Bluetooth headset and I would be good to go. 

There is great potential in the watch. I am just not interested in the current version. I wasn't interested in the newly released iPod either all those years ago. And we know how that turned out. 

As for Mel Gross' post regarding the complexity of porting OS X to the A series, it is a complicated issue. But Apple has ported the Mac OS from 68k to PPC and moved from Mac OS to OS X. They then moved OS X from PPC over to x86. And they did it as a vastly smaller company with minuscule resources to what they have now. 

The real question is whether porting OS X to the A series is worth the effort. And it probably is not. Development on OS X is paltry in comparison to iOS. 

Hence, the real issue is when Apple adds additional functionality into iOS that eliminates the need for a conventional laptop altogether. 

Intel is losing its ability to compete. And that trend will accelerate. It has far more to do with economics than physics. 

The sales of conventional desktops and laptops are falling off substantially. The public does most of their computing on mobile devices. Intel no longer has the capital to continue investing in its own manufacturing process. The laws of physics haven't prevented TSMC's development of the Integrated Fan Out process. And it isn't preventing them from achieving 10 nm before Intel. It's making Intel's acquisition of Altera look foolish. Xilinx is planning on manufacturing their FPGAs on TSMCs 7 nm process. And the first one out with a 7 nm product is virtually assured of achieving dominant market share. 

Apple may have a problem when an iPad or even an iPhone outperforms Intel's best portable CPU computationally. Especially for far lower cost. Likely it will be Intel taking the egg off of its own face. 

Intel would seem safe on the desktop for now. But Apple has plans to build out their own cloud. Designing a high performance ARM chip would seem to be in the works. 

M over at semiwiki, they have written about TSMC developing two separate 7 nm nodes. One for mobile CPUs and the other for high performance CPUs. 

There would seem to be someone out there wanting to build high performance CPUs on the 7 nm process node and at high enough volumes to justify TSMC investing into developing the process. I could be wrong, but it would seem a strong indication that Apple may be planning on building a high performance ARM CPU using that process. And it that's true, Intel is in deep trouble. 

Mr. Gross seems to think that Intel's position is secure, but all the evidence is pointing to a massive shift away from x86 and over to the ARM ISA. All being lead by Apple. 

And to think that Otellini turned down Jobs for the opportunity of building the CPU for the original iPhone. 

Sorry Google. Not interested. I will continue using Apple maps as will the vast majority of users on iOS who won't care to take the time to install Google maps. 

I won't install spyware on my phone.