wiggin

Mikeymike said:

Huh?  I don't even understand this comparison test.
How does it have any useful meaning if they left out the inclusion of the Galaxy S7 on AT&T?

The story is why isn't the iPhone 7 as fast on Verizon as the S7 is, using the same modem. The reference to the iPhone 7 on ATT is only to support the hypothesis that Apple may be artificially limiting their device on Verizon to keep in more inline with an iPhone 7 on ATT.

You could include the S7 on ATT only if it used the same modems in question, which from the above post looks like they don't. So that data point would be irrelevant.

jkichline said:

People don't understand nor do they appreciate the art and design of a finely-crafted book.  This is not a run-of-the-mill, paperback on cheap paper and crap, generic blank ink.  This is work of art about works of art.  The paper is specially blended and handled, there are probably multiple inks and coating. 450 pages with a binding that will last and a specially designed cover that appears to be embossed... all of these things add up to the cost of a book.  It is not priced to be a pedestrian magazine, it's designed, built and priced to be a collector's item that will be timeless.

If you don't understand that, then you don't understand Apple.  They don't design things to be cheap and thrown away. They design things to last... to be functional works of art. This book is not only a testament to that, but the very embodiment of that underlying mantra.

I agree with you about the quality of the book perhaps justifying the price. But I think the real question is why did they create the book in the first place?

If the book is a testament to anything, it's a testament to Apple's hubris.

brian green said:

jbdragon said:

sog35 said:

Why is Apple even doing this?

Just gives more fuel to the fire that making iPhones in the USA is a good idea.

More then $200 more on the base price iPhone is just crazy. To get a Plus version with 256 gig's will be like $1500. Who's going to pay these kind of prices? I'm not going to pay $880 for a lowest end iPhone. I'd have to go to the crap Android Platform.

The L.A. Times did a story on tariffs that you all might find particularly enlightening.  You can read it here:

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-navarro-trump-trade-china-tariffs-20160721-snap-story.html

I see this as nothing but a good thing for the US and the people whom live here.  It's a whole lot of jobs created here.  I'll let the Chinese worry about themselves.

So the US should levy a tariff against China because Chinese worker safety and environmental regulations aren't as strict as the US's? That's one of the 5 points to the author's arguments. I don't disagree with the fact about their regulations, but it's a bit arrogant (fitting Trump's personality) to assume that the US has the right to dictate such terms to another. What's next, China slaps a tariff on any US goods entering their country because US workers are threatened by our lax gun control laws resulting in violence against workers?

The other claims in the article may be valid (currency manipulation, export subsidies, etc), but that still doesn't mean the US could get away with his proposed 45% tariff without expecting some retaliation. That's the problem with Trump, he expects he can do whatever he wants because he's basically gotten away with it all his life. His tried and true tactic of threatening lawsuits or declaring bankruptcy to make problems go away simply isn't going to work here.

If economic retaliation isn't a viable option for China their next option would be to aggressively accelerate their moves to take over the South China sea and put a strangle-hold on all trade in the region. It's not a simple linear problem to solve. There are many, many dimensions that have to be balanced. 

onlyhope said:

wiggin said:

They don't have to. The President has the power to implement limited tariffs without Congressional approval.

News Flash: Apple Corp. moves company Headquarters to Geneva.  Apple now a Swiss Corporation.

What then, a world-wide Trade War?

You don't understand how tariffs work. It's not a tax on the company to make the product, it's a fee to bring it into the country. Where Apple is HQ'd is irrelevant. If they want to bring product into the US they'd have to pay the tariff.

rogifan_new said:

tmay said:

sog35 said:

Why is Apple even doing this?

Just gives more fuel to the fire that making iPhones in the USA is a good idea.

Uh, so that Apple isn't caught flat-footed when President (Elect) Trump and the Republican Congress legislate new tariffs, if they actually do that. Apple needs to know what the costs are.

Even then, I would note that these would only be shipped and sold within the U.S. and possible Canadian markets, and competitors would have the same tariff hurdle. The tradeoff is higher prices against increased U.S. jobs, but those jobs aren't going to the rust belt without subsidies, so yet again, cost increases. Most of the jobs will end up in Southern population centers, Texas primarily, and those jobs will go to first and second generation Hispanic Americans, who will be more accepting of a lower wage base.

The republican congress is never going to pass tarrifs.

They don't have to. The President has the power to implement limited tariffs without Congressional approval.