randominternetperson

Really, off-line cloud storage is basically essential now that "we" carry a lifetime of photos and movies around in our pockets. To say nothing of a lifetime of emails, chats, notes, etc., etc. Somewhere along the line, we got accustomed to never having to delete anything.

We've come a long way from the days when we routinely offloaded our photos to our computers and decided what music to load to our iPod or iPhone.

Younger people nowadays are spoiled, not having about this sort of thing, but it does mean that we have generations of people (unknowingly) 100% dependent on datacenters for managing their personal documents. 

This is pretty cool. Too bad 95% of potential users will never find this feature.

This article is my first exposure.

Apple has responded to iPhone 16e critics, and says that engineering choices like a lack of MagSafe that make the device unappealing to the tech-savvy don't matter to the larger market.

Where is the link to the quote where Apple has "responded"?

Oh right, they actually haven't. This article states something that is so obvious as to be tautological: Apple omitted a feature that they don't believe is worth the price for the target audience.

Next up: "Apple believes people will pay $600 for an iPhone 6e."

Oh, I stand corrected: there is a second hand reference to what Apple has apparently said in the linked Daring Fireball article:

But according to Apple representatives, most people in the 16e’s target audience exclusively charge their phones by plugging them into a charging cable. They tend not to use inductive charging at all, and when they do, they might not care that the 16e is stuck with a pokey 7.5W Qi charging speed, when recent more expensive iPhones charge via MagSafe at 15W or even 25W. For me, it’s not the high charging speed I miss most; it’s the snapping into place.2 I think Apple knows the 16e’s intended audience better than I do. Daring Fireball readers aren’t in the 16e demographic; it’s the friends and family members of DF readers who are.

But the main point remains: Apple did what it thought best based on its understanding of the market.

I really don’t understand why the internet talking heads are being so obtuse about this. So many people making their ignorance the headline: “I don’t know who this is for” or complaining that it’s just a watered down iPhone 16. The answer is so simple and obvious that the average consumer will get it immediately. The answer: $200 that stays in your bank account (or doesn’t add to your credit card balance). 

Stabitha_Christie said:

The net result would be Tim Cook and likely the entire board being let go. 

I said:

Maybe some shareholders would call for a vote on overturning this and/or replacing the board. Then the shareholders (most of whom are mutual funds and other institutional investors, but lots are people like you and me) would vote on that and say, "Nah, we're good, keep up the good work, TC and Co."

Stabitha_Christie said:

Perhaps think twice before speaking for other people. 

Not immediately obvious how my prediction of how shareholders (the only people capable of removing the board) would act is "speaking for other people," but your prediction about how that same group would act is not. So, I suppose we should both "think twice."