ArchStanton
About
- Banned
- Username
- ArchStanton
- Joined
- Visits
- 5
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 378
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 200
Reactions
-
Apple's iCloud Private Relay feature not available in Belarus, China, Uganda, other countr...
Soli for the win!Soli said:mike1 said:While I agree with your statements in this thread I think the problem with your 7-11 argument is that the company doesn't take the "ethical" stance that beer is a fundamental human right when it opens up stores in areas where the local laws don't allow it to sell alcohol.
The problem with the blanket, black-and-white claims that tnet-primary and other are making is that corporations always have to work within the laws when the operate. If Apple didn't do business in a county where a national law went against their own value system there would be nary a country that Apple could do business, especially the US. I've seen this sort of anti-Apple sentiment ever since Apple regained its mindshare in the market but these comments fail to grasp how a diplomatic presence benefits the people by at least cracking the door whereas completely pulling out would offer no solution and no presence for change.
An excellent, well explained posting.Remember this, everyone yelling that a nation’s laws should not be accommodated, these would be the same people who would yell “you have to accommodate my nation’s laws if you want to do business here”.This is difficult and sensitive diplomacy going on here. With the CCP trying to maintain tight control, Apple(others) in China is a good thing to help keep up the alternate way. You see part of Chinese businessmen wanting to embrace opening to the world, and you see the CCP going after some of them. American and other companies leaving China only embolden the CCP arm.
-
Apple Watch lead Kevin Lynch reportedly transferred to 'Apple Car' team
13485 said:I've been bullish on an Apple Car from the beginning. But I'm beginning to think that this is now just another sign of an overall lack of vision and continuous lack of leadership overseeing whatever vision there was to begin with. It seems that children have been conceived, born, raised, and graduated from college in the time that Apple has been working on the Car, all without any evidence of an actual ship year--or even decade.
Meanwhile...Lucid has rolling stock and production schedules in about half the time. Get a professional to run the "division", stop the endless invention and re-invention and concept tinkering and set up a schedule. This isn't Jonny Ive-ville anymore. Real companies ship.The Apple Car is currently nothing other than a media reported advancing project. Whether it happens is still TBD.
Comparing Apple to Lucid is odd. One’s a mega electronics software service Corp with a huge top line while the other is an investment house(CCI) owned EV producer trying (very) hard to only produce Ecars that meet lofty specs in sufficient number to justify a VERY lofty (and concerning) evaluation — in what is a very crowded and competitive EV space. Most consider their per year production goal to be concerningly difficult to be met. And That goal isn’t going to make them wildly profitable — not even close — just able to make another step in a long process to profitable viability.
A company the size, depth and name brand excellence of Apple (Apple’s wearables revenue sector per year is more than Lucid’s entire uber lofty evaluation, not revenue, it’s big evaluation) would be foolish to hurry! get it to market! it’s about getting units shipped! That’s nonsense. The EV space is yet to see anything of a profitable standalone except Tesla (and that’s not by much). Vast majority of cars bought are still petroleum based, the EV market space is still young, wide open for eventual growth and not even a tiny micro bit dominated. If, a big if, Apple is to bring an EV project to market, it needs to be specs that can be feasibly technologically met, production to sales schedule that is also feasible to a extreme Apple standard, and a final product that is worthy of carrying the Apple name. I don’t know if Apple can do it. If anyone can it is probably Apple but that’s no guarantee whatsoever. But if Apple Car comes to market in 2 or 3 years it will almost certainly make Lucid and many of the other EV standalones nervous. Apple’s ability to ramp production will be tough for most of the EV standalones to match.If it happens I’ll then be bullish on it too (I’ll also have bought as much Apple shares as I can).
-
M1 16-inch MacBook Pro mistakenly listed by Apple Germany
darkvader said:MplsP said:
We’ll, yes and no. The biggest drawbacks are memory and graphics. It’s perfect for a MacBook Air, imac or lower level MacBook Pro, but for people who want more power it does have legitimate limitations.lkrupp said:Apple techies, being what they are, will have an absolute hissy fit if the next Mac uses an M1. The M1 is already yesterday’s news, obsolete, deficient, underpowered and overpriced... and it only been around less than a year.Seeing how Apple said they would replace the entire Mac lineup in 2 years it’s not unreasonable to expect a more powerful version sometime soon.Except they're going to hit the same wall everybody else will.The reality is that the M1 is fine for a toy like an iPad, but it's too limited for anything more than a low-end general purpose computer. 16GB RAM in 2021 is a sad joke.
Keep your day job genius. What you know about the M series chips are about as much as your knowledge to post thoughtfully.
The M series upside is unknown. It may already be near its ceiling but that is extremely unlikely for a large successful company to put big money into development of tech that has near future limitation. In the near future the M series and ARM may be what most personal computing is based off of, or something else may come along to trump it.. But you already know that, right? being the top level thinker your post reveals.
-
Apple falls to number three global smartphone manufacturer globally
I’m sure I know a lot more on the subject than someone who bases their “monopoly” prognosis on how much they hate Apple. Your hooked on phonics thought level aside, duopoly would be the only thing that could remotely be argued. No serious person considers Apple to have prevailing control over the smartphone market, tablet market, PC market, app market, music streaming market, watch market on and on. Well I should say no serious person outside of loudmouth YouTube & media clickbait dolts as well as the small slice of you disturbed internet posters (that are unfortunately found on every corner of the internet) would use the Sherman act word monopoly for a company that doesn’t have prevailing control of a market price. Now you will argue that Apple has price control over the things Apple sells. You’ll embarrass yourself with this argument but I suspect that is something you’re accustomed to.crowley said:
You don't have to be abusing power to be a monopoly, and you don't have to be a monopoly to engage in anti-competitive behaviour. Are you sure that you know what a monopoly is?DAalseth said:
I have. the trouble is that most of these people don’t know what Monopoly, means. They don’t understand that there is a definition that must be met, and that the company must be shown to not only meet that definition, but also be abusing its power.flydog said:retrogusto said:Darn, there goes the monopoly theory.
Not aware of anyone ever alleging that Apple has a monopoly in smartphones.Now you could argue that Apple has engaged in what I’ll loosely call anti competitive acts to gain an unfair market advantage over another, typically smaller company. This would not be a monopoly case. As well it would be very high legal bar to meet. All but the proverbial smoking gun is needed to prove this, so you would be wrong on that too. But at least you would be using actually applicable legal terms. Yet ultimately being wrong is something I suspect you are very accustomed to also. -
Apple employees threaten to quit as company takes hard line stance on remote work
The anti worker? Among the best in class in pay and benefits are asked to come to work part of the week? This is anti worker and being “shit” on and corporate bootlicking? You really do get to see and hear it all on the internet.dysamoria said:The anti-worker hostility shown here is callous, presumptuous, and generally appalling. None of you have any idea what any of these employees’ lives are like.
The reason Apple wants to force every worker into being on site for a certain percentage of time probably has a lot more to do with making sure their insanely expensive building/campus isn’t sitting empty, because that would be embarrassing for a company that cares a lot about their image.
It’s been noted that people don’t like working there. Open floor plans and glass walls/doors suck for actual humans and productivity. The main building is like the Powermac G4 cube and the trashcan Mac Pro: all form; poorly-considered function.
Then there’s the basic fact that the 40-hour workweek and officespace culture is just plain unhealthy.
Instead of being bitter about what you see as “entitled” employees who should get shit on just the same as you do, maybe think about trying to raise the bar for EVERYONE (which includes yourselves). Stop licking the corporate boot and acting like you’re living vicariously through the boot wearers.Best plan for us workers and consumers: companies do a top to bottom clean out of actual dead weight workers every several years. Soon after create new positions and begin filling them with workers that will put in an actual hungry 8 hours that advances the company’s products for consumers, and increasing the domino effect of creating jobs down the line.Dead wood reduction plan: cut you and those who feel coming into the office for part of the week is being shit on. You can go where you’re appreciated and the rest of benefit from your departure. A win-win, buh bye.
