nubus

IIc, IIe, Plus, SE, SE/30, IIcx, Classic, LC, LC II, LC III, Color Classic, LC 475, Centris 610, PB 180c, Duo 210, Quadra 840AV, PowerMac 7500, Power Computing xxx, PowerMac 4400, PowerMac G3 (Beige), PB 1400, AppleVision 1710AV, Newton MP 120, MP 2000, QuickTake 150, eMate 300, iBook (Tangerine), Pismo (PB G3), MacBook Pro (Core), MacBook Pro 15 (mid-2010), OSX86, iPhone 15 Pro.... and waiting for something insanely great! Well, it seems Apple Intelligence is insanely great by functionality - not by name. A new golden era.

About

Username
nubus
Joined
Visits
193
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
3,645
Badges
2
Posts
925

Reactions

1.1KLike382Dislike368Informative

  • Apple admits the Q2 surge in imports won't be enough to stop price hikes

    nubusnubus
    hammeroftruth said:
    mknelson said:
    And if production does move to the US there won't be Tariffs to collect so income taxes will still be a thing.

    And the factories will be automated so very few skilled jobs needed…
    Not this automated crap again. If there was a way to automate the process, don’t you think Apple, who has 2 robots to disassemble iPhones would have made a whole factory already? It’s not technically possible!
    You're both right.

    @mknelson in "it won't generate taxes" - moving people to $3/hour jobs won't help US. It is a country selling services and BNP/capita is at the top. Moving Americans to low income jobs will erode the tax base.

    @hammeroftruth - obviously you're right or well. Apple could probably design iPhones for automated assembly but humans are flexible and salaries are low.
    9secondkox2

  • Apple files appeal against court ruling that mandated App Store changes

    nubusnubus
    youngjm said:
    Apple built the platform from the ground up, with some open source compents, and they are entitiled to be paid for that and for the continued development. 
    Apple isn't legally entitled to payments from anyone for doing research. It is 100% on Apple.

    Apple is however entitled to is patents. That is how we grant companies that innovate an advantage in the market. It is why Qualcomm, Eli Lilly, and more want to fund research. Without legal protection doing research would have no value to companies. Patents are not perfect but clearly enough so that companies do research.

    If a product isn't having a dominant position society is giving some leeway. But for Apple to make a phone where volume buttons only work with Apple speakers... then Apple is taking the phone and using it to win in another market. Not due to the speakers but based on the phone. That is why we have antitrust legislation. We want free markets, competition, and respect for innovation. What we don't want is when Microsoft wiped out all other browsers by installing their own with Windows. Or when Microsoft had special API-calls making it impossible for other developers to create great software on their dominant platform.

    Apple should IMHO focus more on insanely great products and less on job creation for lawyers.
    jibwilliamlondonmuthuk_vanalingam

  • Epic vs. Apple: What Apple is being forced to do to the App Store

    nubusnubus
    foregoneconclusion said:
    bulk001 said:

    Patreon has already said it will decrease prices by 30%. I'd call that a big win. Apple has been hiding this from the judge exactly because it IS a big deal to their profits.
    Don't expect that decrease to last very long. This was never about lowering prices for consumers. It was about increasing revenue. 
    Prices can go down or not, but one thing is sure: The incitement to invest in apps for iOS is up. Not only for the removal of the 43% tariff. Software companies can now get a connection to users (as mentioned in the verdict). This is huge to any business.
    tiredskillswatto_cobra

  • Last quarter before Trump tariffs sees Apple beat Wall Street with $95.4 billion earnings

    nubusnubus
    eriamjh said:
    Apple is still growing.  iPhones are huge but flattening out.   Services are still growing.   I think Apple needs to increase dividends because their payback is low compared to other smaller complies.   
    Inflation is around 4%, Apple delivered 8%, and Microsoft... 18%. Apple is standing still but priced as if the company delivering massive growth.
    As for payback... do you see AAPL as a bond or a company with the promise of delivering growth through innovation and the ability to deliver? Financial leverage is already much higher than at MSFT. And you want even more?
    williamlondon

  • Epic vs. Apple: What Apple is being forced to do to the App Store

    nubusnubus
    ssfe11 said:
    It’s one clueless Judge who is making this decision. Once an intelligent tech savvy court hears the details of this case they will shake their heads in amazement that Judge Rogers ruled this way. 
    Not sure why you feel it is necessary to write about anyone in such language. Did you even read the verdict? This is her third case with Apple and the first where she doesn't let Apple win in full (Apple won most of the case). The verdict is both technical and to the point.

    And the verdict isn't even that important.

    What does matter is that the VP of Finance lied under oath to subvert the verdict and Apple knew he was doing so. Another judge came to the same conclusion. And so this is becoming a criminal investigation against the VP and Apple. Cook or the board must act on it.
    jibwilliamlondonAlex1Nmuthuk_vanalingamtiredskillsjroybala1234elijahgwatto_cobra