redstater
About
- Banned
- Username
- redstater
- Joined
- Visits
- 12
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- -12
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 49
Reactions
-
Apple looks to debut Siri SDK at WWDC, developing Amazon Echo competitor
"The smart home space is heating up as tech giants like Amazon, Apple and most recently Google put their considerable weight behind in-house initiatives." Sure. Right. Google launched their IoT strategy in 2014. That was when they launched voice-driven wearables and smart TV/TV box products and oh yes paid $2.3 billion for Nest. It didn't get off the ground because Samsung and LG went their own way with their own IoT platforms; Samsung's based on Tizen and LG based on webOS (renamed lgOS). Then Google tried again by launching an IoT platform based on a stripped-down version of Android called Brillo and an API called Weave. That was slightly more successful, as Google's go-to gadget company Asus, Kwikset and a couple more companies have Brillo/Weave gadgets launching this year (a door lock, a smart bridge and a Wi-Fi chip). Speaking of Wi-Fi chips, Google's OnHub routers (built by Asus) run ChromeOS. LG, playing both sides of the aisle, committed to trying their hand at Brillo-based appliances this year in addition to their own platform, because their lgOS based devices haven't been as successful as Samsung's (insecure and hackable) Tizen ones. So considering that they bought Nest (who also owns Dropcam) and launched other products as part of their IoT strategy before Apple even announced HomeKit, saying "most recently Google" is ridiculous. Google's "most recent" development is merely adding a competitor to Amazon Echo to their platform. Incidentally, I always find it humorous that whenever someone else launches a product or feature after Apple, that player is accused of "copying" or "infringing" but when Apple is the second (or third or fourth) to the party, there are always claims that "Apple was researching our own product before the competition launched theirs." So ... right. The device launched nearly 2 years ago. How long does it take to put iOS in a speaker? When you have already been making iPods for 14 years and iPods have run iOS sincd 2007!!!. At the very most this was an idea that Apple considered but mothballed only to revive when other companies demonstrated that it was a good idea. Nothing wrong with Apple coming out with their own speaker because Apple was known for great audio even before the iPod, but feeling the need to claim "no we were first REALLY!" just diminishes the #1 company in the world. -
New 13" MacBook to launch in Q3, end development of MacBook Air insider says
MacBook Air as an entry level device for $700 or even $500 is a bad idea why? If Apple is able to manufacture the things for $250 and sell then for $500, what is the problem? Do you want Apple products to be for the masses or don't you? Or would you rather them remain a product for the elite? Another thing: an entry level MacBook Air wouldn't even need the A9 or another ARM chip, which everyone wants to see happen for geeky tech reasons, not because it fills an actual market need. (Never mind the fact that it would force Apple to tune one version of OS X for ARM and another for x86 and maintain two separate OS streams; something that has never been Apple's thing - it is more like what Microsoft and Google specialize in - and should never be.) Instead, it could simply use a cheaper Intel i-series chip (not a Pentium or Celeron type that is being used for Chromebooks and cheaper Windows 10 devices) than are in the MacBook Pros, which quite honestly should cost the same as an A9 anyway. It may even cost less! If Apple is able to build a quality machine that capably runs Mac OS X and sell it for $500-$700 and still make a large per-device margin, then why not? It could target Windows users, public schools and even the users of better Chromebooks (which run about $350-$400). If there is a downside, explain it to me. And if the claim is that Apple cannot POSSIBLY make a device with an i3 or i5 processor that capably runs OS X for that amount of money, make that case also. Kind of difficult to do so if you ask me when you consider that the Mac Mini already starts at $499. (Had I known of the Mac Mini's existence I would not have bought my last Windows PC. I am still hoping that the thing kicks the bucket soon so I can replace it with one.) http://www.apple.com/mac-mini/. -
IDC: $200-350 Chromebooks shipped 37% more U.S. units in Q1 vs Apple's $1,200 MacBooks
All this columnist had to do was state that it took the best quarter ever for Chromebooks to surpass MacBook sales in a quarter where everyone is waiting for the new MacBooks come out and as such the only ones buying them are A) deal hunters and emergency purchases. That is something that is actually true. But instead, we get several paragraphs of caterwauling. Look, we know that Chrome OS is a failed product because Google failed to create compelling software and services for it, and third party developers similarly failed because either A) they are all developing for iOS or Google failed to create good Chrome OS products for them to model their own after. But it is curious: education is the one area where Google actually did make useful products and tools for ChromeOS. And it happens to be the only area where Google has made headway. Google is probably hoping that kids who use Chrome OS in school will buy them for home use, but there is no evidence of that happening. They are also probably hoping that making inroads in the education sector will lead to purchasing managers who acquire them also buying them when they leave government for the private sector, but Apple's longtime penetration in education didn't gain them private sector market share either. As for the "their analysis didn't include iPads" thing ... these same analysts reported that Chromebooks surpassed iPads in education 2 years ago. Many Apple advocates - including those on this very blog from searching past articles - disputed those findings, but now they are beyond dispute, and the only purpose that raising it here does is to ridiculously call the analysts biased. However, no one was calling these same analysts biased from 3Q 2014 until 4Q 2015 when they are all reporting record sales for iPhones and MacBooks and dropping Android and Windows market share. It is only when they report bad news - even if that news only seems bad in context - that everyone wants to knock and discredit them. But here is the reality: schools quickly found 3 things about iPads. 1. They lacked GOOD educational tools to supplement existing classroom instruction, and they lacked the time, money and resources to restructure their curriculum and pedagogy around iPads, especially when a viable alternative already existed. See the LAUSD/Pearson/iPad scandal - which this blog more than adequately covered - for a textbook illustration on that (very bad pun intended). 2. They lacked the IT tools to manage all the iPads. This is something that Apple has never provided for any of their products going back to the PC era and is one of the main reasons why PCs got entrenched in the enterprise to begin with. Only when it became possible to sync Apple devices with Microsoft's Active Directory and Exchange products did this begin to change in the enterprise, but surprise, surprise - public schools, who tend not to have the same IT resources as private companies do, especially at the school level as opposed to the school/government management office building level - find Google's tools for Chromebooks far more easier to manage than Windows Server also. Until Apple actually comes out with enterprise-type software and services for their hardware, something that they could have and should have done 25 years ago this is not going to change. 3. iPads mean tiny screens, no keyboards or mice, no multi-tasking and no USB drives. Meaning that unless you are a very technically skilled person - which 99% of teachers and their pupils tend not to be - they are very difficult to use for productivity type tasks. Yes, you can get an iPad Pro and trick it out with accessories like the keyboard and stylus but A) that doesn't remove the problem with quickly and easily transferring files and oh yes that increases the cost to like $1500. Which means you may as well get a MacBook. In fact, a school district recently replaced their iPad "toys" with MacBooks, as an article on this very site stated. Now note: this was a wealthy, suburban northeastern school districts who could afford $1500 per student on MacBooks. For 80% of school districts, including Tim Cook's own former high school, it is either a $250 iPad Mini (with the 7.9' screen and no input device beyond the touchscreen) and a $250 Chromebook with the keyboard, touchpad, and for which you can get cheap USB mice from anywhere. So relax. Chrome OS is still a failed product and MacBooks are still a very successful one. But this is primarily due to the failure of Google's "web and cloud based OS" strategy, not of any merit of Apple (or for that matter Microsoft, who by the way still has a much larger education presence than iOS, Mac OS X and Chrome OS combined). Had Google simply come out with a more user friendly version of Debian to accompany Chrome OS (right now you can only access Debian in developer mode and it isn't user-friendly; it is just Debian) with a compelling suite of apps and services to go with it, they might have gotten headway. As it is, they are going to just stick Android apps written for mobile phones in a memory and CPU-sucking Android VM container on a tablet OS, which will perform terribly and be thoroughly useless for everyone except the die-hard Google fans. Meaning that if you are looking for a cheap PC, a Windows one (whether Windows 10 or Windows 7 if you can find it) will continue to be a much better deal than anything in the Google ecosystem ... if for only because 80% of the benefits of ChromeOS can be had by simply running the Chrome browser on Windows. Sure, the Android apps won't be on the Chrome browser for Windows (only because Google is stupid enough to close off a potentially huge revenue stream but that is another issue for another day) but who cares ... those were developed for phones anyway, and there are a lot of much better Windows applications available that do the same thing. -
IDC: $200-350 Chromebooks shipped 37% more U.S. units in Q1 vs Apple's $1,200 MacBooks
foggyhill said:The dumbest fracking thing ever posted on Apple Insider.
Apple should 100% create a A chip laptop, that would kill Chrome books in an instant because they're margins is so thin the wouldn't be able to compete. -
IDC: $200-350 Chromebooks shipped 37% more U.S. units in Q1 vs Apple's $1,200 MacBooks
Herbivore2 said:Google really is headed for a crisis. They desperately need to move the user base to web based search. The iOS keyboard is essentially a Hail Mary pass.
They missed on their revenue numbers for the last quarter. Cost per click revenue is down and Facebook allows for far more precise targeting of digital ads. Amazon is moving its membership to their app, bypassing Google search all together.
Chromebooks going into schools aren't going to do anything to fix Google's long term problems.
Google is going in multiple directions, including some that involve very major capital investments like fiber. Other than digital search ads, they do not dominate the profits in any other segment. And Microsoft is beginning to take search marketshare with Bing. The company is unfocused and undisciplined.
The more I analyze Google, the more I realize that the company is headed for a crash.
Apple is going to take Qualcomm's modem business and give it to Intel. It means that QCOM's profits rapidly decline. Intel gets into the iPhone and has a guaranteed source of profits on the dominant mobile platform. Apple continues to invest in TSMC and in return TSMC produces state of the art CPUs that no one else can touch for mobile performance. Snapdragon performance won't keep up. Either for CPU performance or for modem performance.
Android gets relegated to second tier hardware with the Snapdragon and Exynos CPUs being built on a less capable process.
And if Apple gets exclusivity for Intel's 3D XPoint memory on mobile devices, all of the air will be sucked out of the Android market.