wiggin

srice said:

AAPL corporate tax rate is usually between 25%-26%. It's in their 10K every year. I wish there was better education on this topic -- Apple is not tax aggressive.

But that tax rate is applied to the profit, and profit can be lowered by deducting expenses, including the cost of licensing your own IP from your own foreign company. I'm pretty sure that iTunes wasn't invented in Luxembourg. How did $9 billion of intellectual property end up there in the first place?

I'm not saying Apple undervalued that IP when it was transferred out of the US as Facebook is being investigated for; but you can't just look the tax rate without also looking at the number (profit) that the rate is being applied to. If you deduct the cost of the US-based R&D to create the IP, and then transfer that IP out of the country and pay to license that IP and deduct it as a business expense to lower your US profits, you've lowered your taxes without lowering tax rate.

lkrupp said:

Ever notice when any positive news is posted about Apple it’s always followed by people who come specifically to crap on it? It’s like they can’t stand to read anything nice about Apple.

Without a doubt, the Apple watch is in the top tier of fitness watches. I think what some people "crap on" is the poor reporting by AI, which then leads to over-compensation in the follow-on comments due to the clearly demonstrated bias AI has for all things Apple. Many years ago AI was one of the best places to get all kinds of great info about Apple and the technologies in their products, including critical analysis of the competition. There is still an occasional gem of information to be found here (which makes me keep coming back), but it's mostly click-bait rubbish these days. Feeding meat to the base. This article is a prime example.

franklinjackcon said:

ppietra said:

For more information
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/article-abstract/2566167

Interesting. Always pays to read the original. Based on that one page summary, I think this AI article might be wrong. The Mio Fuse had almost the same results as the Apple Watch so the sentence "The others dropped into the "low 80s," seems to only refer to the Fitbit and Basis

I was wondering how the AI article managed to lump the Mio in with the other low-end watches as that is usually considered one of the better consumer optical HR monitors. Nice bit of selective journalism there, AI. LOL  

It would be interesting to see a more comprehensive study with more devices, including more devices that are in the same higher-end category as the Apple watch (Garmin, Suunto, etc). But as the original research letter (ie, not a full-blown study) said, this was just a "convenience sample" (probably the devices the researches already personally owned LOL) of devices and "results should be confirmed with different types of exercises and with other devices."

Where is the "inside" part of this Inside macOS article? I clicked on the headline expecting to see an article with a bit of technical info into how it works or how to best work with it. Not just a "turn it on and let Sierra manage your files." How about at least listing out the iCloud storage prices or a screen shot of a Finder window showing how to tell if a file is local or iCloud only. And I can think of a lot of "what if" questions that anyone wanting to have a bit more comfort about what's happening with their data would want to know. For instance, what happens if I later reduce my iCloud storage and there is more data than can fit back on my drive. What happens to copies of the purged files that are in my Time Machine or other backup?

AppleInsider said:

For the user to be completely unaware of the installation...

Well, we are talking politicians here...