davidw

About

Username
davidw
Joined
Visits
187
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
4,776
Badges
1
Posts
2,204

Reactions

2.4KLike46Dislike470Informative

  • Apple Watch racial bias lawsuit dismissed with prejudice

    davidwdavidw
    kmkmd said:
    You’re more comfortable using a $10 pulse oximeter from Amazon that was probably made in the same factory that makes 1,000 other unrelated products?  Good luck to you. 
    I don't know much about the specific allegations surrounding the watch and the suit. However, finger pulse oximeters sample the blood through the fingernail and underlying skin -- which is pigment free (unless you use fingernail polish). Therefore, fingertip pulse oximeters are not influenced by skin pigmentation.


    That is false. It's been known since the development of the pulse oximeters (over twenty years ago) that their accuracy of are affected by a persons skin pigmentation. Even the clinical ones used by doctors.




    ronnmuthuk_vanalingamMplsP

  • App Store terms probably won't stop X from turning off the block feature

    davidwdavidw
    drdavid said:

    Oh, hail thee great Musk.... (bows to the great one)

    Blocking gets abused too much by those that want to have the last word without hearing a rebuttal, so I applaud this experimental change.

    Abused? Freedom of association (which includes freedom to not associate) means I am not required to listen to someone’s bs. No matter how much you personally value getting “the last word”. 
    That's the function of "mute". That is still available. A user can "mute" another user and not ever have to see any of their comments. That's your  right to "freedom of association". However, when a user "block" another user, that is preventing other users from exercising their "freedom of association". Even if the other users completely agree with you that the comments of the user you blocked, are BS, they might have a better understanding of the "spirit of the law" we here in the US refer to ....... as our 1st Amendment rights.

    Now I'm never been on twitter (X), but I'm assuming the "mute" function on twitter (X) works the same way as on most of the other forums that I am familiar with. Including this one. "Muting" protects my right to "freedom of association" by not having to see any of the comments of the user that I don't agree with and "blocking" would be me censoring the user whose comments I don't agree with, by preventing them from commenting at all.    
    muthuk_vanalingamwilliamlondonwatto_cobra9secondkox2

  • Apple finally reaches one billion paid subscriptions milestone

    davidwdavidw
    Your headline and the first two sentences are FALSE. It's subscribers, not subscriptions. They likely have had several billion subscriptions for quite a while. This new milestone is stating that there are 1 Billion individual people who have at least one subscription of some kind through Apple. It's an important distinction and one that I'm not surprised AI got wrong in the freakin headline itself.

    What you are saying can't possibly be correct. There are only 1B unique iPhone users and 2B Apple devices in use. But the bulk of those users of Apple devices, like the Apple Watch, AirPods, Home Pods. AirTags, etc. are used by people that owns an iPhone, these would not be unique users. The Apple TV is a rounding error. The iPad might be the only Apple device where a good percents might not own an iPhone. So let's be conservative and say that there are 1.25B unique Apple device users. So what you're saying is that 1B of those 1.25B unique Apple device users, subscribes to at least 1 paid subscription services with their Apple device. That is a huge percentage. That amounts to nearly every iPhone user is a subscriber.

    Apple counts a subscriber as a user that pays for a subscription to any one of the numbers of services from which Apple derides revenue from. Including to third parties in their Apple App Store. If a user subscribes to Apple Music and Apple TV+, that one individual user counts as 2 subscribers. And if the same individual also pays for a WSJ subscription using the Apple App Store, he counts as 3 subscribers.

    Think about this ......... "Apple reached 900 million paid "subscribers" by the fourth quarter of 2022. And in May of 2023, the company confirmed it had achieved 975 million paid "subscribers" on its platform." This means that if Apple is now at 1B "subscribers", they got 100M new "subscribers" in the past 9 months. In the past 9 months, Apple did not gain anywhere close to 100M new unique individuals to their platform. They only sold about 180M iPhones and out of those over 80% of them were purchased by iPhone users upgrading. That don't leave a lot of room for 100M new " individual subscribers".

    Apple "paid subscription" number is the same as their "subscriber" number. It has to work this way. Say that there are 40M Apple users that subscribes to  Apple TV+ and 85M Apple users that subscribes to Apple Music. And out of those 125M subscribers, 25M subscribes to both. Apple will say that between Apple TV+ and Apple Music  there are 125M subscribers. Even though there are only 100M individual subscribers between them. 

     

    muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra

  • Apple edges out Wall Street, with weak iPhone sales saved by Services surge

    davidwdavidw
    Skeptical said:
    Could it be that people are iPhone saturated and people aren’t dying to get one? Pure conjecture but this could be a consideration. 
    FYI- The global mobile phone market been saturated for several years now. Over 95% of people that can own a mobile ,do. And over 80% of those mobile phones are smartphones. So for both Android phones and iPhones. the market is considered saturated. 

    But iPhones only have 23% of that mobile phone market. Only 5% in India. They have much more room to grow if they can convince some of the 75% of Android users to switch. And the number of "switchers" (of new iPhone sales) have been back in the low double digit lately. Android phones on the other hand can only lose market share. Over 85% of new iPhone purchases are from users that already own an iPhone. There are much less iPhones users to convince to switch. 

    The most determining factors now, in regards to iPhone sales, is the economy and the upgrade cycle. With the economy, both Android and iPhones have taken a hit. Global mobile phone sales is down (YoY) in the low teens. Much bigger hit in the Android phone market. Having only a 2% loss in iPhone sales (this Q, YoY) is a testament of how popular the iPhone still is.

    https://www.techradar.com/news/mobile-phone-sales-have-fallen-once-again-despite-some-signs-of-recovery

    The upgrade cycle is more of a factor for iPhone sales. The economy will recover but with iPhone users holding on to their iPhones longer with every new iPhone sold, potential new sales gets more delayed. It use to be about every two years that the average iPhone users would upgrade their iPhones to the latest one. Those were the days when mobile services subsidized a new mobile phone, with the signing of a two year contract. Now, with less subsidy incentives over the years, the average user upgrade cycle have increased to over three years and sill increasing. Along with how long Apple support their older iPhones with software and security updates, there's less of an incentive to upgrade, unless one needs/wants the newest features in the latest iPhones. But with over 1B iPhone users and a loyalty rating of nearly 85%, that comes to about 750M new iPhones sales that Apple can almost count on, over every 3-4 years. (figuring in there's still a good percentage that will hold on to their iPhones for over 4 years or until its end of life in 8-10 years.)  
    tmaydewmejas99radarthekatwatto_cobraAlex1N

  • Epic asks U.S. Supreme Court to enforce lower court's App Store order

    davidwdavidw
    chasm said:
    Funny thing is if Apple loses it only helps other developers but not Epic since they’re banned from
    The App Store.
    That’s correct. Under no scenario would Apple have to allow Epic back in.

    Moreover, numerous courts all over the world have ruled that Apple is 100 percent entitled to charge a fee for creating, running, and administering the App Store, and that such a fee would be applicable **even if** Apple itself or some other authority made them accept payments from alternative providers.

    Mind you, as noted previously, 85 percent of developers don’t pay any fee at all, and small developers who do less that $1million/year don’t pay 30 percent, so there’s little chance at this stage that any court is going to find the fees excessive.
    Or Apple can implement sometime like what Google has. A method where developers can give their customers a choice of billing system and still allow Apple to easily collect their commission, that would be discounted if the customer chooses the developer method. I'm sure Apple already has such a billing method ready, in case the courts finally  rule their "anti-steering" policy illegal. Giving the customer a choice of payment systems can not be construed as "anti-steering" or "steering" on part of Apple or the developers.  

    https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/12570971?hl=en

    https://techcrunch.com/2022/11/10/google-play-to-pilot-third-party-billing-in-new-markets-including-u-s-bumble-joins-spotify-as-early-tester/
    muthuk_vanalingam