joguide

About

Username
joguide
Joined
Visits
8
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
158
Badges
1
Posts
36

Reactions

38Like4Informative

  • What financial analysts thought about the Apple Silicon Mac announcements

    joguidejoguide
    cloudguy said:
    cornchip said:
    Love how “meh” these all are. Thank goodness Apple doesn’t play to these clowns. 
    OK ... who are the people who didn't own MacBook Air, entry level MacBook Pro and Mac Mini devices before that are going to run out and buy them now? Let's say that I own a Dell Inspiron 7000. I should run right out and get the new M1 MacBook Pro, right? Or maybe not. Because:

    Does this M1 MBP have a touchscreen like my Dell? No.
    Does it have a 2-in-1 design with USI stylus support like my Dell? No.
    Can the M1 MBP with its unified memory match the combined performance of an 11th Gen (10nm) Intel Core i7 with 16 GB of RAM and the Nvidia GeForce MX350 and its 4 GB of RAM? At best, a definite maybe. It is notable that not at any time did Apple claim that it did. Apple primarily compared the M1 Macs to the lower end devices with discrete graphics that it was replacing, as well as "top selling models" that cost half as much as the M1 MacBook Air.
    Can it play my Steam video games, or pretty much any of the software that I need and want? Of course not. 

    A bunch of people who already own Macs are going to buy new ones. A few people who love their iPhones and iPads will try out a MacBook Air or Mac Mini. But that will be it, and the analysts know it. You are expecting these droves of Windows users to completely change their computing needs and wants just to get their hands on a PC with an Apple-designed CPU. Which presumes that the 90-95% of the population that doesn't buy Macs and the 75-85% of the population that doesn't buy iPhones loves everything that Apple makes as much as you do. They don't. They are going to look these MacBooks that still cost a lot more than Windows PCs and now run an even smaller subset of the software that they want and need and continue to pass them up as before, Apple-designed CPU or not. 


    I think you are going to be in for a rude awakening. Anandtech review of the iPhone A14 chips is known to be competitive with anything that Intel or AMD has to offer in a desktop.  M1 chips is going to be fast.

    To your other point, most consumers do not need a faster home computer for email and web browsing.  So any low end, cheap x86 machine is fine, much the way Android phones are fine for the majority of users.  So x86 will not die, but Apple has no interest in the low end market and never has.

    Hardware is only as good as the software, but software typically lags behind hardware.  So the questions is like the Field of Dreams, if they build it--hardware that is 2-3x faster than the current x86, will they (developers) come.  

    More importantly if you need a high end computer, would you pay big money for a computer that is appreciably slower and drains the battery quicker.  Maybe you would, but I wouldn't.  Overtime time, there will be less people like you willing to make that choice.  Pretty much want happened with iPhone and iPad.

    bestkeptsecret

  • Epic Games' CEO responds to Apple's countersuit in Twitter thread

    joguidejoguide
    Orwell's 1984 reference is completely wrong. The correct reference should be Animal Farm.  Tim Sweeney (aka Napoleon the pig) is urging young kids to fight injustice, when it fact it is a cynical ploy to get the Epic App platform side loaded on the Apple App Store.  Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
    headfull0winelolliverFileMakerFellerwatto_cobra

  • Apple shuts down Epic Games developer account

    joguidejoguide
    killroy said:
    GeorgeBMac said:
    seanismorris said:
    I wonder what Epic is thinking...
    I get they are frustrated with the 30% “Apple Tax” but their actions make no sense.

    I'm thinking that for them, they can only win.   They can't lose:
    Their game is to break down the walls of the walled garden.  
    -- If they succeed then they win
    -- if they don't succeed then they go back to obeying the rules -- and have lost very little (but gained a bunch of free publicity!)

    But they look like fools for starting this mess.
    Or...during their absence in the App Store another game comes along such as Fall Guy, and Fortnite becomes a has been game that kids stop playing.
    cornchiplolliverkurai_kageheadfull0winewatto_cobra

  • Epic Games CEO says Apple suit is about 'basic freedoms,' calls Apple a middleman

    joguidejoguide
    Having read the law suit, I think Epic's point is that Apple has an exclusive gateway to iOS which is unfair.  Also Epic feels the service fee is too high (despite the fact it is industry standard rate), and in his case, he does not want or need a billing service.  So the solution is simple.  Apple should let him have what he wants.  

    Apple should create another app store, which allows for side loading.  On this app store, Apple will not do any advertising for developers, curate the programs or do the billing.  So next to the App Store, there will be the "Crap Store."  Epic, and any other freeloading developers, should be allowed to put his game in the Crap Store.  If an iPhone user buys any program from the Crap store, they will have to sign a waiver that states if anything happens to their iPhone related to these side loaded programs, Apple will not be held responsible to fix the problem.  Basically, it allows anyone to institutionalize jail breaking the phone with the condition of caveat emptor.

    The value proposition of the iPhone and App Store is it is dependable and safe place to do business.  It's the biggest reason why iPhone has crushed Android in profits.  Once this becomes implemented, Epic will be begging to come back to the App Store, as he sees his sales go down the tubes.
    watto_cobraDetnator