zoetmb

SpamSandwich said:

It's outrageous that these cities and states extort large businesses to provide all of these "extras" to pander to the residents instead of being grateful the businesses decided to locate there and bring business and jobs to their area.

It's outrageous that these highly profitable companies extort cities and states to provide these "extra" $213 million in incentives in order to create just 50 permanent jobs.  That's $4.26 million per job.    How does that make any sense?   Why bother?  This is just so politicians can claim they created jobs.    Hell, pay me $4.26 million per employee and I'll hire every single unemployed person in Iowa.   They don't even have to work.  I'll just send them a check for $50,000 every year for the next 40 years and I'll keep the other $2.26 million per employee!    Hell...I'll pay them $75K per year each and I'll keep the other $1.26 million per employee...why be greedy?

A $100 million fund, but Apple pays only $1 million per year?   Is that a joke?   So Iowa can pay off the public facilities they're going to build in 2117?   

And it's costing Apple $3250 per square foot to build the place (including land costs I would assume).   That sounds kind of costly to me considering it's not much more than a warehouse with a lot of air conditioning.  

radarthekat said:

Hmm, why go exclusive?  Clearly Red wouldn't need to unless Apple wanted them to.  Could Apple be thinking in terms of an acquisition?  Maybe use these cameras exclusively to create its future body of AppleTV and Apple Music content as a means of promoting the hardware, and creating tighter integration into the Apple ecosystem?  Is this crazy thinking?  I'm not at all conversant in this realm.  Could there be some smoke here? 

I don't think so, but if Apple really wants to get back into pro markets, an acquisition of Red would be a great idea.  But having said that, Apple has been in and out of those markets so many times, I don't think the industry is ready to place their trust in Apple once again.   Totally independent small-scale filmmakers are somewhat of another story.   

I think this is nothing more than Red buying the equivalent of FinalCut Pro "coupons" at a discount.  And remember that the camera isn't exclusive to Apple, only this particular kit is.   

I was in Malmo, Sweden a few weeks ago staying in a home on a very quiet street.   Just that block was being repaved and the street was sometimes completely blocked off to cars.   Maps noted that you couldn't drive down the block.    I was extremely impressed.  It wasn't like it was a long-term, large scale construction project.   I can't even figure out how "they" would know.   On the other hand, on a trip to a museum outside of Copenhagen, there was lots of local construction and Maps (and Google Maps) couldn't get us to the parking lot.   

My biggest problem with Maps (Google Maps and some other mapping apps I use are guilty of this as well) is not the accuracy of the maps or the accuracy of the driving route, but rather the accuracy of the search.   When one types "pizza" or "hospital" or whatever, it should prioritize the closest places unless you indicate elsewhere and it frequently gives results 14 states away.  

I notice that all the apps seem to frequently have problems with addresses in Queens, NY.   Queens addresses are easy because the first digits usually represent the cross street.   112-20 75th Avenue indicates that the cross street is 112th street.   And yet the mapping programs frequently get it wrong anyway and put you miles away.

I never realized there were tiers.  I always thought the developers set whatever prices they wanted (including free) and Apple took 30%.   Are there tiers in all countries?

I have mixed feeling about this.  On the one hand, I don't see how a company can be forced to supply repair manuals and parts to anyone if they don't want to.   On the other, I think that claiming that the ability to repair means Apple's trade secrets are going to be revealed or that security is going to be impaired is absurd.   The jack in my iPhone 4 or 5 (I don't remember which) died and I bought a new part from iFixit.   Just because I followed their instructions and took the phone apart to install that lower circuit board doesn't mean I understood a thing about how the phone worked or what each of the chips were for.    How does it hurt Apple if they enable others to do things like replace screens, which is the most common phone repair?   Seeing as how labor intensive repairs are, I doubt Apple makes substantial money at it.   

But I do agree that Apple's stance on this as well as the non-upgradability and non-repairability of many of their products flies in the face of the claimed environmental responsibility.   I think it's absurd (as I've stated many times before) that I could change the battery, memory and storage in my late-2008 MBP and I can't do it in my late-2016 MBP.   As much as I hate Windows, this just might be my last Mac.   

Apple shouldn't be trying to force us to buy new hardware because they purposely make it hard or impossible to repair/upgrade, they should be convincing us to buy new hardware because the improved functionality and performance creates such value that we want to.