Xed

applebynature said:

Can one company agree to their terms or negotiate with them one on one rather than waiting for the whole industry to negotiate an agreement? If so, Apple should give them favorable terms and get them to end the strike against only Apple. Then Apple would be the only production company actually producing scripted fiction in the entire industry and it could work out in Apple's favor. We know they have the near-limitless pocketbook to do so. I honestly don't know if this is even feasible or if I'm being naive here, but to me it sounds like that could be a good path for Apple.

It's not against a specific company, but companies that are part of the AMPTP ( Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers). Apple is is apart of that alliance and allowed the AMPTP to negotiate terms for writers of the WGA (Writers Guid of America)—which is made of the WGAW (Writers Guild of America, West ) and the WGAE (Writers Guild of America, East).

They failed to come to an agreement by the deadline, hence the strike. According to the Guild, "writers cannot do any writing, revising, pitching, or discussing future projects with companies that are members of the AMPTP," which would come with penalties, including banishment from the Guild which would affect their income down the road. Additionally, any non-members who write for AMPTP members could find they will not be allowed to join the Guild.

designr said:

avon b7 said:

designr said:

avon b7 said:

tmay said:

avon b7 said:

Xed said:

avon b7 said:

Xed said:

avon b7 said:

anonymouse said:

danox said:

twolf2919 said:

Price is THE decider on whether this headset will be a success.  This author - and others who’ve made the same point that Apple has had supposed failures many times before turn into successes - doesn’t seem to realize this.  When has Apple *ever* introduced a completely new product category at an initial price point of $3k?  Maybe the original Apple 2 (adjusted for inflation) - but nothing since then.   Sure, there are several niche “pro” products in THS range and beyond, but nothing with hoped for mass market appeal.  And  Apple clearly wants this to eventually become the next iPhone.  And I think the AR glasses originally promised for this timeframe had/has this potential - but not some dorky headset costing as much as a used car.

The decider will be the hardware and software integration, and the quality of the programs designed to use the capabilities of the device, if Apple has those things nailed down, then the device will succeed, however no matter what price Apple sets, it will be too much and the complaining will go on and on because many people will want it, but will not be able to afford it.

Even to this day, there are still many financial analysts who think Apple should drop their prices on all products to pick up more marketshare, which, if you know anything about Apple, you know that isn’t their way of doing business.

Yeah, well, remember when all the analysts said that Apple is Doomed™ if they don't release a netbook? 

IMO, the lack of a true netbook was a huge miss. As was the original iMac with only USB1. As was, ironically, the delay in getting USB2 onto Macs. As was not buying Netflix. As was not opening up firewire. As was fiasco on 5G/QC...

Let's not forget the whole concept of NetBoot and where that could have gone for business and education.

The question should not be if Apple was doomed because of those 'errors' but how much more they could have achieved by following through with some moves.

How did that work out for netbook makers? Fizzled out before they ever achieved any decent profits.

Even Apple dropped their 11” MBA because it wasn’t popular enough at that size.

Now there's an ARM version of Windows and SoCs are considerably more powerful and power efficient, but you don't see netbooks making a comeback. Perhaps that's because it was never a great idea. 

The product category evolved. Just like the iPod. 

There was enough business to go around for many companies to sell their products for years before tablets caught on and phones became more versatile. And of course regular laptops are going for very low prices nowadays. 

Tablets of course required a physical keyboard to get close to what a netbook could do and were way behind when it came to could be presented through a browser. 

But the error here for Apple wasn't simply competing in that space but using the product as a hook to catch users. And then the possibility of following through on the NetBoot promise via OSX Server. 

That was a lost opportunity. 

And none of those are netbooks. Netbooks failed miserably. End of story.

It's evolution and netbooks were a huge success and had huge demand in there hey day. 2008/9 saw global sales triple, hitting a high of around 35 million. There was a time when all you basically saw were netbooks. 

It's obvious why, too. 

More hyperbole.

At its peak, netbooks were 20% of the market, but given how short a time span netbooks were "popular", they were a fail. Consumers bought them because they were cheap, but then they realized that they were limited.

Nobody bought a netbook thinking it was remotely more than it was.

Yes, they bought them mainly because they were cheap. That was the whole point. 

They had their moment and were a huge success.

No hyperbole. No fail.

They served a purpose and Apple could have used them in various ways to stimulate further growth. 

As it was, a $500 iPad came along and people swiftly looked for keyboards for them. And still do for anything more than passive or casual use.

And yet...Apple is the most valuable (publicly-traded) company in the world. It appears they survived this "missed opportunity."

And now back to "As you may expect, the internet already says that Apple's headset is doomed, apparently."

And let's not forget that the market cap has nothing really to do with laptops or iPads.

Nothing? Nothing at all? I agree that a majority of Apple's market cap is attributable to iPhone, but not 100%. Certainly, some of their market cap is attributable to their laptops and iPads.

If Apple were to lose everything but the iPhone, which includes Macs, iPads, wearables, and all their services, they'd lose 48% of their revenues overnight. But let's remember that it's not simply the iPhone that brings in customers, but how all these elements work together. It reminds me when Dvorak said that Apple shouldn't bother with anything else but iPods, when it was right on the cusp of the iPod's demise as a product category.

avon b7 said:

anonymouse said:

danox said:

twolf2919 said:

Price is THE decider on whether this headset will be a success.  This author - and others who’ve made the same point that Apple has had supposed failures many times before turn into successes - doesn’t seem to realize this.  When has Apple *ever* introduced a completely new product category at an initial price point of $3k?  Maybe the original Apple 2 (adjusted for inflation) - but nothing since then.   Sure, there are several niche “pro” products in THS range and beyond, but nothing with hoped for mass market appeal.  And  Apple clearly wants this to eventually become the next iPhone.  And I think the AR glasses originally promised for this timeframe had/has this potential - but not some dorky headset costing as much as a used car.

The decider will be the hardware and software integration, and the quality of the programs designed to use the capabilities of the device, if Apple has those things nailed down, then the device will succeed, however no matter what price Apple sets, it will be too much and the complaining will go on and on because many people will want it, but will not be able to afford it.

Even to this day, there are still many financial analysts who think Apple should drop their prices on all products to pick up more marketshare, which, if you know anything about Apple, you know that isn’t their way of doing business.

Yeah, well, remember when all the analysts said that Apple is Doomed™ if they don't release a netbook? 

IMO, the lack of a true netbook was a huge miss. As was the original iMac with only USB1. As was, ironically, the delay in getting USB2 onto Macs. As was not buying Netflix. As was not opening up firewire. As was fiasco on 5G/QC...

Let's not forget the whole concept of NetBoot and where that could have gone for business and education.

The question should not be if Apple was doomed because of those 'errors' but how much more they could have achieved by following through with some moves.

How did that work out for netbook makers? Fizzled out before they ever achieved any decent profits.

Even Apple dropped their 11” MBA because it wasn’t popular enough at that size.

Now there's an ARM version of Windows and SoCs are considerably more powerful and power efficient, but you don't see netbooks making a comeback. Perhaps that's because it was never a great idea. 

danox said:

A whole new ecosystem coming up from Apple next week? should be fun, hardware plus software integration (with a new OS coming?), just in time for the EU, Washington DC, and many of the big 1% third-party developers to complain about, how Apple is not giving them a free ride. "Building better worlds"  

Which is better introducing a new software/hardware ecosystem for developers of all sizes to use, or introducing AI to replace developers and people in time.

I'm sure someone is readying a lawsuit regarding Apple's monopoly on the VR headset market.

chadbag said:

Lol

I don’t think the author has tried to get support or help from any of the services he is shilling for… 

I run my own server (and a small provider) but I would argue that a local ISP (vs a national like Verizon) has more incentive to provide actual help and support than the big guys as they need your money and account more than Google or Apple or anyone.   If you have problems with your email and you don’t get support you’re more likely to change ISP.  And your local ISP is dependent on the local customers. 

You have that completely backwards. ISPs often have poor phone tech support and even worse portals for webmail, along with all the limitations and issues already started by the OP, and no need to care because offering email is not a profit center for them, but indeed costs them money. Additionally, most people can't just switch ISPs easily and anecdotally I know my parents were even questioning whether they should move or not because the ISPs email wouldn't go with them so they'd have to get people to use the new address or pay a fee per month just to keep access*.

* This wasn't even to a different ISP, but simply to a different Time Warner region where their stupid model was name@location.rr.com.