bluefire1 said:

Thanks Tim for pursuing these core technologies, but could you first significantly increase the battery life of the iPhone?

 

Sorry, but no we won't be doing that.  We ensure that all our devices have just enough battery life on the day you buy them.  That way, in a years time they won't, because of the way Li-ion batteries start degrading the minute they are manufactured.  So, at around three years - remember we told you that's all the life you could expect - your device will have half the battery life it did when new and you will find it intollerable, which should be really good incentive for you to buy another from us.  A lot of people think we are obsessed with thinness, that's OK, we don't mind that, but really, with all the technological advancements from our suppliers, if we kept our products the same thickness, we would have to fill them up with battery, then the device would last a lot longer than 'enough' on the day you bought it, so in three years, you might still find it useful.  I'm sure you can see why that isn't in anyone's interest.

EsquireCats said:

Having followed the complaints from early on, I believe the locals have done themselves a tremendous disservice.

Once the first data centre is built they'll realise that their (frequently irrational) fears were unfounded - only to endure another 10 years of construction noise and interruption.

They should have just allowed it all to be built simultaneously, it would minimise the traffic impact and dust, while also providing the strongest boost to the economy. Instead it'll be a slow negligible addition over several years with a combination of long term road congestion/interruption for the minimum economic boost.

I'd place bets that after the first is built the rest will be approved in one hit.

If you read some of the articles about this, it is very obvious that the locals have been very reasonable, even accommodating.  Apple don't want to build all 8 server halls simultaneously, and even if they had wished to, doing so would have dragged out construction based disruption for a considerable period of time. As the article notes, they have approved the first stage, meaning Apple themselves have plans to build it over time, not all at once.

You have little understanding of the nature of the location Apple chose to build this.  Building all the halls simultaneously would have been a long drawn out nightmare for the locals.  This is not an industrial location with roads and infrastructure designed to service it.  Personally I share the views of some who have asked why Apple couldn't have built this in an existing business park or similarly zoned area.  Plonking this in the middle of a quiet rural setting seems completely inappropriate.  You don't seem to appreciate it, but Apple have actually had a very smooth ride with this, despite some articles designed to make it seem otherwise.

This is likely the main route construction traffic will have to use to reach the site:



By taking this approach they have basically said, go ahead lets see if your promises and assurances are met.  That seems entirely logical and reasonable to me.  There would be plenty of places where locals would have been screaming and protesting not to allow it to be built at all.

latifbp said:

Passive-aggressive Euro-freaks... Just Dislike my comment with zero counter argument 

Did a nasty Euro-nanny take your rattle away this morning?

digitalclips said:

Great news.  My only worry being from that part of the world is will there be enough sunshine

What is sunshine?  And why do people seem to think the sky is blue?

Samsung poisons Foxconn workers causing quarterly loss.