randominternetperson

[snarky comment self-censored]

Wesley_Hilliard said:

randominternetperson said:

AppleInsider said:

The pricing doesn't change based on the type of devices being covered. That means a customer who covers an iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch under AppleCare One could save up to $11 per month compared to paying for individual plans.
........

AppleCare One can actually save users money, especially if they already have more than one Apple device. For someone with an iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch, separate AppleCare+ plans would cost about $21 a month.

The AppleCare One plan covers all three for $19.99, so you save a bit each month without losing any features. The savings grow as more devices are added.

Where does the $11 figure come from? 

Apple provided the figure. There's lots of ways to arrive at different savings, or even AppleCare One costing you more than AppleCare+. You'll have to do the math on a per device basis. For example, Apple Vision Pro alone is $25 a month, so AppleCare One is a good get.

Ok, but then "That means a customer who covers an iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch under AppleCare One could save up to $11 per month compared to paying for individual plans." probably should say "depending on your devices" rather than "iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch." Or maybe that for the most expensive iPhone, biggest iPad, and Apple Watch Ultra. Ok whatever.

AppleInsider said:

While TollBit does not speculate on the reasons for this, it's likely that the entire available internet has already been scraped. So the companies are pressing on, and in June 2025, a US District Court said they could.
...

A court case against Anthropic has concluded that AI can train on any material

William, I appreciate your reporting in this area, but you have misinterpreted the earlier article about the Anthropic case. The Court was very clear that there is a difference between using materials acquired legally and those that were not. Also that case had nothing to do with web scraping; it was entirely about "pirated" books and books purchased legally.

Here's the conclusion about Anthropic's purported "fair use" of the pirated books:

This order grants summary judgment for Anthropic that the training use was a fair use.  And, it grants that the print-to-digital format change was a fair use for a different reason.  But it denies summary judgment for Anthropic that the pirated library copies must be treated as training copies.   We will have a trial on the pirated copies used to create Anthropic’s central library and the resulting damages, actual or statutory (including for willfulness).  That Anthropic later bought a copy of a book it earlier stole off the internet will not absolve it of liability for the theft but it may affect the extent of statutory damages.

Now, ignoring a robots.txt file and scraping publicly available web pages is not the same as downloading pirated books. That would be a legal question about terms of use, presumably, and that was not at issue in that case. So, maybe a court will rule that ignoring robots.txt files is fine, but the case cited does not say that.

In general, having the same person be chair and CEO is a mistake. It's a mistake I don't think Apple will make. The purpose of the board of directors is to provide strategic oversight of management (including the CEO). I see no reason why Cook would feel he needs to be CEO (Jobs wasn't) or why the board wouldn't find a new independent chair. Time will tell.

MplsP said:

New Vietnam trade deal means Apple American consumers will pay at least five times more in tariffs.

Fixed the title.

The headline is correct. Apple is the importer; Apple pays the tariffs. They will almost certainly pass all or most of that onto us in the form of higher prices, but technically Apple pays the tariffs.