MplsP

Xed said:

avon b7 said:

Xed said:

avon b7 said:

Sometimes it is better for him not to say anything. This is one of those moments. When spin smells to much like spin it loses value fast. 

The move itself is a good move. Now the best move would be to design for repair and make them easier to carry out.

How is it spin? You are an Android shill but you are still smart enough to understand that Cook makes moves that he believes will benefit Apple, specifically Apple’s share price. If you think Cook was not part of this decision or that he failed understand the forces at play determine what was the best course of action for Apple then you really don’t understand why Apple is worth $2.5 trillion nor why it took in nearly $400 billion in revenue for 2021.

Apple has spent millions on lobbying against right to repair in general and made devices progressively harder to repair. Sometimes requiring non faulty or damaged parts to be replaced as part of a repair. It hasn't been able to guarantee its own staff won't damage a device on taking it apart. Case in point when I took an iPhone in for a battery replacement, I was required to sign a form accepting that the technician could break the device just by trying to get into it and in such case they would hand it back damaged or offer me a refurbished unit at a price I had to accept before handing the device over. This is because the devices are not designed for repair. They are geared for replacement.

In all these years Apple has done little to nothing to give users options for self repair. 

Now we get a surprise about turn in tactics and I'm sure it is because Apple sees itself under growing scrutiny and needs a few bones to throw out.

Good moves, on the face of it but in no way in line with their previous practices. 

Of course, the decision needs to be 'sold' (that's understandable from a marketing and PR perspective) but you can go too far. 

Tim is spinning this as Apple doing good and helping users, leading us to believe they always had users front and foremost for repair. That isn't the case. Never has been. Even years ago a Scandinavian consumer body took Apple to task demonstrating a fault that Apple denied existed. Apple is always front and foremost. Fast forward and we have the question about that short screen connector in laptops which Apple denied is a problem in spite of making it longer in newer designs. 

Like I said, when spin goes to far, it's better not to say anything and let commentators do the selling. So far, this move seems to have been well accepted. The devil will be in the details but on face value it is a move in the right direction. Just don't ask me to believe Apple decided to do this from internal will. This, IMO, is a direct result of external pressures. 

The EU does not impose change without consultation. Apple has participated in discussions and knows what's likely coming down the pipe. We will surely see more efforts over the coming years to reverse current tactics on design and repair. 

We can expect a lot more spin as Apple details its changes as 'voluntary' before directives come into effect. 

1) You need to learn to write more succinctly instead of repeating yourself. Your verbal diarrhea is a bit much on the best of days.

2) Again, this is not out of line for Apple. Their goal is what is best for Apple. If that means offering some repair guides, tools, and parts to benefit their bottom line in the long run then they'll do it. If they feel that it's best for them to stop they will. It's called business. Do I need to remind you of any of the countess other changes that  Apple and every other company makes when laws change, public opinion changes, tech changes. Just fucking enjoy that it's gong to be an option the time being.

jpellino said:

IreneW said:

Well, let's just say that if their engineers are spending 45 minutes per day, just waiting far a compilation to finish, doing nothing else, they are doing it wrong.

Even if they cut that in half.

Not so much doing nothing else but trying to do something else but really looking over your shoulder to see if it compiles or throws a piston...

lkrupp said:

“shilling for Apple...” is the most common response here on AppleInsider when something positive about Apple is published.

avon b7 said:

techconc said:

MplsP said:

melgross said:

It had better be a damn good modem, or Apple will be crucified over it.

Agreed. Part of me wishes Apple would have stuck it to QC rather than settling, but at the time the settlement seemed to be the smartest business move. The thing is, QC does make good modems. They may be expensive or have crooked business practices but in the end, the consumer cares about function so if Apple comes out with a modem that is significantly worse, no one will be happy.

Intel tried and failed. (of course Intel hasn't exactly been wowing with anything lately.) Ideally, Apple will have a modem that's on par with QC and that they can integrate into their chips, maximizing power efficiency and manufacturing efficiency - I hope they succeed.

Apple knows they need to meet or exceed what Qualcomm can do in order to satisfy their customer base.  I'd expect this to be a big talking point when they role this out and I expect they'd have competitive features to brag about.  QC does indeed make great modems.  However, Apple's chip design team is also best in class, so even Apple's first effort is likely to be better than most expect.  Another advantage Apple has is that they get access to TSMC's more advanced process before Qualcomm does due to Apple's larger capital investments, etc.

It would be better to keep expectations low. Meeting or exceeding what more established players might achieve in their fourth or fifth generation products could be asking too much. 

Apple isn't the only best in class chip designer out there and they are competing with companies like Qualcomm and Huawei which have decades of accumulated R&D and knowhow in modems, antenna designs and were architects in the core technologies behind 5G.

Just having an own brand offering will suffice and if it isn't the best or equal best out there, few people will change their purchase plans for that alone. 

lkrupp said:

zoetmb said:

Good for Apple, but unless NSO was violating copyright or parents or Apple’s licensing agreements, they might not have a case (unfortunately). 

Nonsense. Apple is alleging NSO’s software has damaged Apple customers. It has nothing to do with copyright or patents.