AppleZulu

avon b7 said:

AppleZulu said:

Once again, consumer choice happens when selecting the device. If you want a managed, secure system, get an iPhone. If you want to be able to side load unregulated third-party stuff, get an Android phone. Forcing Apple to be more like Android results in less consumer choice, not more. 

Consumer choice can only truly happen when the consumer is aware of the choices. 

I've said many times before, I have never met anyone (and I've asked questions specifically) who is even remotely aware of the limitations imposed by Apple (all without informing the customer).

If those limitations were up front and the consumer signed off on them specifically, I would have zero problems with the limitations. 

I have repeatedly gone further and suggested such information might even be all that is needed for legislation to cease requiring Apple and others open up elements of their systems. 

What's to lose? What possible problem could Apple have with informing customers of its impositions if most people here are making the explicit claim that users 'choose' Apple precisely for what those limitations bring? 

People buy iPhones because they want the privacy, security and stability. These are features that Apple advertises, and they’re possible specifically because of their “walled garden” approach. You don’t need to survey people about the detailed implications of side-loading third-party apps. People also choose iPhone because they don’t have to think about how they work. They just work. Forcing Apple to make iPhones more like Android undermines those reasons people choose iPhones. 

9secondkox2 said:

Idk. If apple was giving this show life, it would have been more respectful to use cook in the “good guy who knows better” role instead of a competitor. So now, Cook is indirectly included on the other side of that. Not so cool. 

While I commend Apple for not interfering with a show creators wishes, it’s probably only bevause  tje creator is an established name and not an indie or lesser known. Apple has Ben know to turn a deaf ear to the peasants” but turn the whole apple Mach in on a dime for Taylor swift for example. 

This one just shows who won the power play over a tv show. Tom Hank’s once complained bitterly about how controlling apple was over a movie he starred in. But it seems apple doesn’t want to lose shows or talent and has decided to loosen its grip. That’s a good thing. 

However, I also am a firm believer that people are people and though Rogan got the greenlight for season 2, it’s only bevause the show is a hit. If it was just ok or mildly successful, hee get told to take a hike. And he may run into issues with other projects that aren’t obvious winners. 

You do have to wonder why Netflix instead of apple. Hopefully he shares some of his reasoning behind that. 

Don't read so much into it. The whole point of the episode is the anonymity of Hollywood studio presidents when it comes to credit for the films they make. Rogan's character just wants his mother to see him be thanked by the star of one of his movies at the Golden Globes. People know who Tim Cook is and what he does. I've never heard of the Netflix guy before this, and neither have you. I still wouldn't recognize him if he showed up on my porch with his daughter selling Girl Scout cookies. That's why he was the better choice to do a cameo as a studio boss telling Rogan's character to put it in his stars' contracts to thank him at awards shows and then get over himself and accept his anonymity. Everybody knows who Tim Cook is, so he's not the guy to be making that point.

The perfectly meta cameo in The Studio for Tim Cook has already come and gone. I even looked for it, because it would've been a chef's kiss in an already brilliant episode.

***spoiler alert***

The Oner is only the second episode. Seth Rogan is the Studio boss, excitedly going to the set where a movie's final scene being filmed. The conceit of the episode is that the director is filming the scene as a "oner," an extended scene shot with a single camera, with no cuts or edits. Raising the stakes even more, the scene is being filmed in the "golden hour" right before sunset, so there is only time to try to shoot the scene maybe twice before the sun goes down and the lighting is gone.

Rogan's studio head just loves movies and wants to see this being done, but it's common knowledge that a studio boss on set only complicates things and puts everyone on edge, especially when they start interfering by offering "notes" to the creatives. The director and performers will tell the boss he's welcome (especially if they think they can get perks or more money out of him), but they really, really don't want him there. Of course, Rogan's character immediately starts interfering and messing everything up. 

The brilliance of this episode is that it is itself filmed as a oner at sunset, and with only a single take possible, because the final scene has to land just after sunset as the streetlights are coming on. So the episode is already meta, in that the filming of the episode had to go perfectly in a single take, even as everything goes wrong in the plot of the story.

So the perfect Tim Cook cameo would have had him somewhere in the background of this episode, giving notes to an actor or member of the crew. It's not necessary to an already brilliant episode, but it would have been perfection.

Once again, consumer choice happens when selecting the device. If you want a managed, secure system, get an iPhone. If you want to be able to side load unregulated third-party stuff, get an Android phone. Forcing Apple to be more like Android results in less consumer choice, not more. 

MassiveAttack said:

inkling said:

Apple's Eddy Cue is guessing that the iPhone will eventually be replaced by AI

Did Eddie Cue miss his medications that day? The only way AI will replace phones, including iPhones, is if we all quit talking to one another and spend our time conversing with AI bots. I doubt that will happen, and I wonder about the sanity much less good sense of those who claim otherwise.

Nobody knew how iPhone would work until it came out becasue people could not imagine a world with iPhones. People thought Nokia will sell their phones forever. 
Yes.. Lack of imagination. 
We think that nothing can replace iPhones. But but but.... 

Recently, Tim Cook has made poor choices and decisions like listening to Luca, timid spending for chips, lack of LLM studies, their incompetent Siri, AppStore policy etc.

I would not be surprised if Apple is facing a "Nokia moment" right now. Apple can still be a big player with war chest in the future, but it is up to Apple.

Apple can´t afford to protect their reputation by their legacy. Kodak went down, because Kodak was too proud of what Kodak achieved. They did not innovate and disrupt to protect their legacy.

This is the same case for Apple.

And Apple may not make a silly decision from now on in this survival game.

Tim Cook still has excellent experts. He just needs to listen to them. Without Phil Schiller and Eddie Cue, Apple would not be where Apple is today.

This is a clickbait, but Eddie Cue says that iPhone usage may not be as crazy as now. And AI makes people less dependent on phones and wearables.

For the record, Apple isn't currently experiencing a "Nokia moment."

Also for the record, LLM artificial intelligence isn't what everyone's hyping it up to be. It's a probabilistic program that analyzes a data input query and uses a really large database of other data to predict the most likely string of characters to offer in response. It isn't thinking. It isn't conscious or near conscious. The thing it does better than humans is index an idetic memory of all data used to "train" it. No human can collect and accurately recall that volume of data. On the other hand, no functional AI can be trained on the comparatively small amount of data that any human of reasonable intelligence requires. LLM AI is just an elaborate mimic. It isn't capable of original thought or creativity. The huge database of other people's content can make its mimicry seem like original thought or creativity, but it produces neither. Additionally, as more AI is used to create content that's then published on the internet, it creates a feedback loop that makes future AI dumber or at best pushes it toward a faltering grade C average. As probabilistic output becomes training data input, the peak of the AI training data bell curve gets higher and higher. Moreover, as wrong answers and hallucinations are generated, regurgitated and dumped right back into the training data pool, it increases the probability that future AI will continue to generate even more wrong answers and hallucinations.