y2an

Well this was pretty much the remedy for IBM mainframes back in the day, wasn’t it? I don’t see Apple’s ability to create the appropriate API for attached devices including the necessary security and privacy features with which anyone seeking to attach would have to comply. That would seem to comply with the intent here.

The white iPhone 4 was delayed over 10 months because of the physics and chemistry of getting it right. The G5 processor never happened because physics got in the way. Maps was self-inflicted, from trusting too much in the team leader; similarly MobileMe. From the narrative it sounds like the development team has made large strides on Siri but it’s not yet ready for prime time and they don’t want another Maps or MobileMe repeat. That’s a good reason for not launching yet. I don’t recall Apple ever saying exactly when features would arrive, only that they would be delivered over time – and they are, I see small AI touches added to different parts of my phone operating system regularly and they are bleeding into my appreciation of the product. Bad news travels fast, good news rarely travels. Most of the people writing about this have never worked on complex software projects and assume the team is wringing their hands over what to do; the reality will be that they know what to do, they know how long it will take, and they know their capacity – do the math. In an earlier article it was mentioned that there are other higher internal priorities at Apple which also have to be met so this sounds more like a resource contention or a coordination of technologies matter; I’m looking forward to what is unveiled at WWDC.

The target market is businesses who need their employees to have iPhones to run whatever apps their business depends on, which is underscored by the really good all day and all night battery life. Those businesses will be able to buy at bulk prices yet Apple will be able to discount for them while still making acceptable margin given the bill of materials (especially the C1, which cuts maybe as much as $90 off the BOM). Cell phone carriers will love this as well as they will be able to offer it to their customers as a “true, Apple Intelligence” iPhone 16) and not just an iPhone SE, as a starter to get the customer in the door. Apple will sell this gladly to anyone but the retail price is deliberately chosen to encourage the individual consumer to look again at the next phone on the price ladder. I just don’t understand why none of the reviewers or Wall Street commentators ever manage to grasp Apple’s product and pricing strategy.

Moving to a smaller feature size process node isn’t really necessary for a modem. It’s more expensive and would take away capacity from chips which need it, in other words the M4.

Rather than another knee-jerking crowd-pleasing resentment to the pricing, a more interesting article would be one which explored why the prices are set as they are, and what the equivalences would be for competitive products. Someone mentioned needing basically double the RAM in a Windows machine for example. It’s probably also the case that 95% of people will be mare than happy with the base configurations.