Xed

avon b7 said:

Xed said:

avon b7 said:

Xed said:

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

avon b7 said:

StrangeDays said:

Yeah man, the fact that your chinese knockoff brands didn’t move the needle whatsoever is not the sick burn you think it is. but ok, “first!” 

For handsets, considering it's mainly Chinese, South Korean or US brands, looking at the numbers, the Chinese brands possibly moved the needle most! 

For 5G modems as a component it was possibly Qualcomm but only because of sanctions against Huawei. Although Mediatek might have popped Qualcomm to that particular post. 

For 5G ICT and patents it was probably Huawei.

Apple literally wasn't in the game, made a huge strategic goof and still seems to be trying to overcome the technical challenges.

"First"? And? What’s your point? 

Oh, so now it's the Chinese brands against Apple.

Please note that when Apple entered the "game", they shipped in one single quarter, 25% of the 2020 yearly total, hence the steepest slope of the graph you linked, from 0ctober 2020 thru December 2020. That's the kickstart.

Apple made no "strategic goof", and there was never a downside to how Apple both transitioned to 5G and invested in its own 5G modem.

Exactly! 25% (no idea if that number is correct BTW) isn't kickstarting anything unless you completely ignore the other 75%! 

[...]

Apple Goofed! 

Just like "Apple Goofed" by not releasing a smartphone in 1999 when the Blackberry launched and no way kickstarted the push for smartphones into every user's hands in 2007. It's amazing that we even know the name Apple today... seeing as how they weren't first and all.

Actually, no.

The two situations are not comparable. 

Apple's issues with 5G have nothing to do with being 'first' and everything to do with strategic planning. 

It was strategic planning to not include a marketing buzzword into their phones that wouldn't be of much use to all but a few users and be a power hungry detriment to all. The first 5G chips weren't good, but that can be said about all the early gen cellular chips. This is to be expected which is why it didn't make sense for any reasonable company to jump on the early chipsets.

It was about far more than power usage! 

Why did they include an off-SoC, older (and more power hungry) modem instead of waiting? Assuming that power consumption was so important to them?

The first Qualcomm 5G modem was announced in 2016 (X50l

The X55 was announced in February 2019 and was only its second generation effort.

So much for waiting. 

Did they make a big deal about that during the presentation? No! The focus was on speed and that buzzword: 5G.

At the same time as Apple released the iPhone 12, Huawei had on-SoC 5G modems yet no one was complaining about them being power hungry. They were NSA/SA capable too.

And as for buzzwords, they are what drive everything. It's why Applebhad 'Bionic' chips and a 'Dynamic Island' and every presentation is chock full of buzzwords. 

No prizes for guessing what will be the star of WWDC this year and you can bet buzzwords will be the order of the day. 

1) Do you get paid every time you mention Huawei in a post?

2) Power usage and was an issue, which has been posted already,.

3) Calling their SoC an A11 Bionic is branding, not a buzzword. You ask 10 out of 10 people what Bionic offers Apple's SoC over Fusion, or even which came first and you'll get a blank stare. These may as well be internal chip names. Not a single a person is buying an iPhone or iPad because it has the word Bionic on a spec sheet for the SoC. 5G will trick users, which is why AT&T was based  for sing "5G" in a very sleazy way even though technically many things can be deemed the 5th generation of a thing and therefore it's practically arbitrary unless the parameters are set as to what is being discussed.

avon b7 said:

Xed said:

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

avon b7 said:

StrangeDays said:

Yeah man, the fact that your chinese knockoff brands didn’t move the needle whatsoever is not the sick burn you think it is. but ok, “first!” 

For handsets, considering it's mainly Chinese, South Korean or US brands, looking at the numbers, the Chinese brands possibly moved the needle most! 

For 5G modems as a component it was possibly Qualcomm but only because of sanctions against Huawei. Although Mediatek might have popped Qualcomm to that particular post. 

For 5G ICT and patents it was probably Huawei.

Apple literally wasn't in the game, made a huge strategic goof and still seems to be trying to overcome the technical challenges.

"First"? And? What’s your point? 

Oh, so now it's the Chinese brands against Apple.

Please note that when Apple entered the "game", they shipped in one single quarter, 25% of the 2020 yearly total, hence the steepest slope of the graph you linked, from 0ctober 2020 thru December 2020. That's the kickstart.

Apple made no "strategic goof", and there was never a downside to how Apple both transitioned to 5G and invested in its own 5G modem.

Exactly! 25% (no idea if that number is correct BTW) isn't kickstarting anything unless you completely ignore the other 75%! 

[...]

Apple Goofed! 

Just like "Apple Goofed" by not releasing a smartphone in 1999 when the Blackberry launched and no way kickstarted the push for smartphones into every user's hands in 2007. It's amazing that we even know the name Apple today... seeing as how they weren't first and all.

Actually, no.

The two situations are not comparable. 

Apple's issues with 5G have nothing to do with being 'first' and everything to do with strategic planning. 

It was strategic planning to not include a marketing buzzword into their phones that wouldn't be of much use to all but a few users and be a power hungry detriment to all. The first 5G chips weren't good, but that can be said about all the early gen cellular chips. This is to be expected which is why it didn't make sense for any reasonable company to jump on the early chipsets.

9secondkox2 said:

Since apple hasn’t broken any laws that they could use against them, they just INVENT some. It’s criminal

Waiting for the USA to finally step up and go to bat for American companies operating overseas. 

Otherwise this kind of extortion will continue everywhere unchecked. 

This line of dumb questioning by ignorant grandstanders in public office happens in the US, too. How many times has Cook (and many others from Apple and other tech companies) been before Congress and the Senate to answer foolish inquires? Remember, these are the people that don't want E2EE in iMessage and would love to be able to force Apple to put a backdoor into their OSes.

jellybelly said:

I had trouble getting my Apple Card to go through as Apple Pay over a week ago and had to use my Chase card.  Then a day later the Apple Card worked through Apple Pay.  

Perhaps all cards are going through a maintenance update and are being sequenced through different banks so customers that have an alternate card can switch which card they use.  

I remember back when Apple Pay came out, that VISA and Mastercard were getting terminals updated for a new security measures on newly issued and mandatory replacement cards sent out—and that they required retail stores to replace their terminals. Part of the update on the cards was the hologram on one end of the front of the card. 

IIRC:  It turned out that the new terminals had Apple Pay compatibility turned on and CVS and Home Depot card terminals accepted Apple Pay. CVS and Home Depot were going to adopt Current-C (sp?), championed by Walmart (and consortium of partner retail companies) and as a result, the Apple Pay acceptance was turned off sometime after that when CVS and Home Depot figured out what was happening (or Walmart was pressuring them to hold them to their prior agreement).  Consortium partners started to drop out of the partnership. 
After long delays, Current-C never came out and eventually CVS accepted Apple Pay.  Home Depot only accepted Apple Pay in the last year or two.   

IIRC: Current-C was set up for loyalty programs and was going to collect customer transaction data on device in-App, and monetize it through distribution to Current-C partner retail companies, while Apple Pay transaction had just the required data for the transaction ( the companies can still continue to various purchase and customer data as well as store and branch data through their registers).  Current-C also lacked security on device that Apple Pay held encrypted in the Secure Enclave chip.

1) You can already switch which card you use in ApplePay. That has been there since day one.

2) Home Depot was never a member of MCX for the doomed-from-the-start CurrentC. Home Depot blocks all *Pay systems. Lowe's has finally started adopting ApplePay late last year. Walmart and Home Depot are still the biggest holdouts.

Appleish said:

If Apple had given these details about the prescription requirements in advance, then mine would have not arrived four days after my AVP. 

Between this and the highly inaccurate light seal measuring process, (I Still don't have my correct seal) this has been a bad launch for Apple.

1) I was impressed with how sophisticated the tool works with your iPhone when ordering on my Mac. Maybe it's super convenient for you, but you could always go into an Apple Store or contact Apple to get a  Light Seal that fits better. I don't think it's fair to call it "highly inaccurate" based on your anecdotal experience, just as I wouldn't call it a highly accurate system for all based on my one experience.

2) What details about the Zeiss lens inserts do you feel Apple didn't give you soon enough? I ordered the day of and my lenses came about a week before my AVP. I did have some back and forth with Zeiss since my prescription upload was missing information that required contacting my eye doctor for additional information to be emailed to me. The response from Zeiss was extremely quick. Usually a response that fast is because an automated system sent you a reply but this was clearly a real person on the other end analyzing your written script and letting you know what information was still missing before they could submit you script for processing.