qwwera

thedba said:

nolamacguy said:

Dracarys said:

cali said:

"Conflict of interest" because The Verge is paid by iPhone knockoffs to bash Apple.

Are you joking? The Verge never stops praising Apple. 

 care to back that up with links? because i can post nearly any of Patel's irrational jibber. 

Actually Vlad Savov has given Apple plenty praise. Walt Mossberg is also a regular contributor. 
As far as tech publications go, the Verge is one of the better ones. 
Now you want to see trash, head over to CNet, ZDNet and the like. 

Forbes seems really invested in negative articles for the iPhone 7. One right after another. And some really inane. Seems to me like stock manipulation more than anything else. 
Apple has put itself in the crosshairs of stock manipulation in a way we don't see for Exxon, Microsoft, or Amazon. I guess because it's like a celebrity itself in a way that Exxon isn't. Put Apple in a headline and it will get far more clicks than and attention than anyone including Kim Karrdashians butt. 
Celebrity has its price. 

Creepy as Fk. I mean I can see they have a purpose like a dash of helmet cam got a specific reason. But mostly wearing as a casual think is fn creepy 

entropys said:

You do understand, qwwera, that you just described modern 'journalism' in all its forms? 

The fourth estate have come to believe they are players, rather than observers. They form a club, divergent opinion is cast out, and anything that does not align with the club's rules and views is either pilloried, or more effectively, turfed in the forgettery and not reported.

Half-ass reviews with a touch of sensationalism, hastily put together by amateurs and rushed out to be click-bait first??

Yes I gues you're right.  
That's modern joourmalism. In the olden days there were monopolies that would dictate the news.
Now TMZ and Fox News are the Gold Standard. 

What's funny is apparently most of these tech bloggers from all the different sites all worked together at certain times and are chummy enough to call each other for opinions on each other's reviews. They love to pat themselves on the back and smell each other's farts. They go on each other's podcasts to jerk each other off and  see everything through their own little bubble.

I remember when everyone was so eager to praise the first Microsoft Surface Book, all giving it great and glowing  reviews. 
Soon after they landed on customers hands, complaits went through the roof as just about everything on the thing was screwed up. Customers who were suckered by the reviews ended up with bricked pos machines.
Joana Stern from the Wall Street journal was on a podcast at the time admitting that she called her buddies  from The Verge to see what they though as they were both writing their glowing reviews in their eco chamber. Only to see the first Surface Book turn out to be a huge POS.
Same thing happened with the Note 7, they were all on board, they were all going to praise it and shit on Apples headphone 3.5 jack.
Sadly their narrative literally blew up in their face as the gadget they all recomened like the Surface before it was another flawed pos. They pang to to be first with the click bait reviews however half ass, then pretend they are objective.

And about the 3.5  headphone jack that was the beginning of the apocalypse acording to the echo chamber, well the iPhone 7 is still back ordered till god knows when.
The Verge or all these cheesy bloggers have  lost so much credibility that their reviews matter squat.

flaneur said:

qwwera said:

slprescott said:

qwwera said:

Why get into high risk low profit territory with huge products that can mame and kill people. 
Apple should focus on medical device technologies  that can dovetail with their other tiny box high margin products.

Valid question.

Apple may answer that one of their mission goals -- in addition to profit -- is attacking areas that cause problems / inconvenience to a large number of people. Transportation is one of those areas, and Apple seems to be exploring whether this can be the next area where they have a global impact on people's lives.

Your comment about medical device technology is another good area, and we've seen them hiring people in this space the past few years, so that seems to have some momentum already (despite only minimal announced products, so far).

People think we have reached peak iPhone.  But that's because they don't get it. Apple with its new camera technologies that it is developing is but a tiny fraction of the possibilities left. It's all about sensors.
Apple should forget cars and focus on buying as many start-up companies working on novel sensors that will add functionality to the little gadgets we hold in our hands. That's why I mention medical devices as an example. The iPhone, watch, EarPods and whatever else are just the very foundation of so much potential.

Cars, tires, windsheilds, ..let Tesla and Kia play with that. But Apple with their bread and butter little high margin devices have so much more potential, not just for profit, but for the betterment of people on a much grander scale.

yes the grass is greener and cooler on the other side, but Apple is in an enviable position with what it's got. I'd hate to see them squander their talent and resources on lesser and less profitable endeavors.

Cars are also about sensors, or they soon will be. Plus situational intelligence, connectivity, and above all, the ultimate user interface and experience — because they take you somewhere bodily.

People who think deeply about how they can make things that improve human life will be attracted to transportation as a software and hardware opportunity. The auto industry has been stuck in an imperiialistic, ego-based aggression trip for many years now, and it's ripe for revolution. 

The Jobs-Ive approach was always to strip things down to their essentials, ditch all the stupid frills, and find joy in the discovery of pure function. Why not help people move intelligently and sustainably for a change?

I think like CarPlay, or HomeKit Apple can be right there. Apple doesn't have to build the house or the car and still play a huge role. 

Beaides, cars are cool, but they are not the solution the world needs. Musk is right in his hyperloop. The future is in infrastructure. And that's politics. And that's non linear and non logical. That's all bluster and hyperbole and god knows what else.