Stumptowner

This is the perfect function for a "studio" like Apple+!  Create 2-hour movies for theaters and 3-hour+ director's cuts for online streaming!  The best of both worlds and thy feed on each other with very little waste.  Imagine how many versions of The Lord of the Rings could have been effectively edited and made available to generations of viewers if this had been part of the plan!!  Tom Bombadil gives a "thumbs up!"  Anyone who whines about anything over 2-hours can safely ignore it and be ignored.

Awesome looking and looks to last a lifetime, but I can't see paying more than $99 for something like that ... even if it is worth it.

I would be interested in what Apple feels is the current and future audience for the MBAirs.  Is it evolving?  There has been the faction of executive travelers who need light, relatively simple machines to carry around and do most work in the cloud.  They don't need to edit 8k video, use PS, or have the need for lots of ports.  They can afford to pay for the best, minimalistic tech and materials, but probably won't want a bright red laptop.  Then there are the somewhat wealthier students or other consumers who also don't need much, but who might fit the old iBook type with colors and "just let me get online, do email and IG stuff."

I just bring this up because as the MBPro's get back to real pro features and multiple ports, and perhaps the MacBooks remain the somewhat clunkier, but reasonably priced mac laptop for most consumers - I really hope Apple can again differentiate their customers in a way that gives everyone options and continues to grow the ecosystem.

Of course, it might be that the MBAirs are just the laptop for those who really want an iPadPro, but can't give up on MacOS.

chadbag said:

darkvader said:

15% corporate tax is still FAR too low.  Ideally corporate income tax rates should be at least as high as individual income tax rates, which for Ireland the top rate seems to be 40%.

And remember, corporations only pay income taxes on profits, expenses (like salaries) are deductible.  That's why cutting the corporate tax rate is HORRIBLE if you're trying to create jobs or increase salaries, low corporate tax rates encourage layoffs and low salaries to reduce expenses so more profit can be extracted.

If tax laws are written correctly, passing off profits to smaller subsidiaries will be impossible, for minimum taxation purposes it'll be the global 'holding company' that will determine the rate.

Actually, corporate tax rates should be 0.  People would get paid more and your economy would grow.   Corporations don't pay taxes.  Their customers do. 

Unfortunately, you are only 80% correct.  "Corporations don't pay taxes.  Their customers do" is a nice bumper sticker, but it isn't reality.  Corporations pay taxes because they earn income, they make investments, they use public services (fire, transportation) and utilities and guess what, they also have "rights" that are almost similar to those of a person (a problem in itself) that are upheld by court systems that need to be paid.  The corporations who can do so more efficiently don't have as many expenses to pass on to customers as corporations who are less efficient.  So, if you want a corporate tax rate to really be 0, you need to change all of the other benefits and subsidies that corporations enjoy first.

The issue for me is the it creates/continues the feeling that Apple cannot be trusted for consumers to invest in an ecosystem - an ecosystem that is really the heart and soul of the company - because for completely opaque reasons and unpredictable timeframes can just go away.  It doesn't matter if the next big thing is revolutionary - it doesn't matter (as with floppy disks, multiple ports, etc.) if they push the industry past comfort - it is just bad policy.  Maybe if Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy, it would be necessary.  If the HomePod sales were even close to pay for its production and updates - it would be worth the PR 1000-fold.  Either that or at least be transparent.  The "secret reveal" and "wait for the rumor" style of marketing is no longer as innovative as it has been.