Wesley_Hilliard

phoenix1386 said:

It is always amusing to see sites such as this one do what they do, even if seems completely supine. I’ve always wondered why. Are they paid by Apple to use ‘serendipitously’ in a headline? Why not just say the fact? Why add a qualifier aimed at making it look like it was sheer luck? 

You think the CEO of Apple doesn’t know what’s coming from the White House that affects his company? Oh, the naïveté. 

If you read the article you'd know this stock sale was set in 2020. What you're describing is insider trading and illegal.

applesauce007 said:

I thought only the finished Apple products were imported to the US.
The parts should ship directly to the factories and bypass tarrifs.
The only tariffs are for the final products imported to the US and Apple could absorb that or get it waived.
Moreover Apple could have stocked up before the tariff announcements and the tariffs may be over before stock is depleted.

So it is not sooo bad for Apple.

The market makers are just messing with Apple stocks.

Nope, this is wrong. It's on all goods, parts, materials. Even if final assembly was in the United States, most of the iPhone parts and materials have to be sourced from elsewhere. The US just doesn't have the materials. This hits Apple no matter what and in a big way.

"An old fashioned term that we use -- groceries. I used it on the campaign. It's such an old fashioned term, but a beautiful term. Groceries. It says a bag with different things in it."

bulk001 said:

Wesley Hilliard said:

9secondkox2 said:

Tim’s ai, headset, and car haven’t panned out so far. 

Would love to see a return to the days of Apple not releasing something until it’s 100% ready and captivating. I’ll give Cook’s car a pass since it was never officially announced. 

Even the watch was closely guarded. And it was a success when it finally launched. A return to form in that regard would be most welcome. 

No more public experiments and betas please. 

I'll never understand what people mean when they say this other than "I don't like it so it didn't pan out." By what metrics are you measuring the panning? 

Other than delaying one feature, Apple Intelligence is doing fine. Apple didn't promise a sentient machine like others in the space did. Is that a bad thing? Them delaying something that isn't ready instead of releasing it anyway is exactly what you're asking Apple to do, yet you're criticizing them for it.

And unless you know something about how Apple Vision Pro has done so far and Apple's expectation for the product, there's no way of knowing "how it panned out." It's been pretty awesome from my perspective.

Right you are. Now back to making your emojis or whatever emoji related feature Apple brought to its “intelligence”

Ah you're so close you might actually realize that "AI" is overhyped nonsense that increases productivity in some respects. Genmoji is actually a great example of what Apple got right with its AI initiative in spite of your sad troll attempt. I also happen to get a lot of use out of the Writing Tools function, and summaries in email, messages, and notifications help greatly with triage.

neoncat said:

Mr. Hilliard, you're a fine writer and I enjoy your articles. But your increasing need to challenge readers with parochial arguments in the comments is a bad look (not that my opinion matters, of course.)

I have no real skin in this game—I don't live in the EU. I tend to like more open systems than more closed, but I get the advantages Apple's approach brings, even if it also brings tremendous baggage and restrictions that deserve to be challenged. More importantly, however: Dominos have an interesting way of continuing to fall. The longer Apple digs in its heels, the less control it will have over outcomes. Which is such classic Apple behavior: Kick and scream until the terms are fully dictated and then they have zero chance to represent their viewpoint, whether on behalf of their customers or their own financial goals. They should let go of the App Store before the whole thing, bad *and* good, gets burned to the ground. 

Nothing I said contradicts what you said here. I'm not sure what you mean by saying my posts are some kind of church gospel. As I've said on Bluesky and other places, more than one thing can be true.

Apple digging in its heels isn't great. It's in a troublesome issue of its own making. However, the EU is overstepping by making demands it doesn't always seem to understand. Compel Apple to open up, but on its terms and timeline. Don't force hastily made changes that could be compromising to users.

My comment was directed at the original poster's comment about envying alternative app stores, which I do not. I'm happy that regulations enabled things like emulators without much trouble, but asking Apple to destroy its business model to make way for competitors that can't keep up, now that's an issue.

People like me that buy Apple for the closed ecosystem of products like that it's built on privacy and security first, then opened up in certain ways to allow more third-party interaction later. It's time for Apple to allow more smart watch functionality outside of Apple Watch, for example. But asking Apple to open up AirPlay and other proprietary systems is incredibly short sighted.

What's the point of competition if the EU regulates all the competitors to operate identically. That's not user choice, that's the kind of dystopia where all the brands in the store have been removed in the name of equality. I don't want to have an Android phone, so I didn't buy one. I don't want the EU to force Apple to make iOS into Android.

That said, regulations are helpful in pushing companies into making consumer-friendly decisions.