Last Active
  • Apple Pay isn't working for some Chase customers

    I had trouble getting my Apple Card to go through as Apple Pay over a week ago and had to use my Chase card.  Then a day later the Apple Card worked through Apple Pay.  
    Perhaps all cards are going through a maintenance update and are being sequenced through different banks so customers that have an alternate card can switch which card they use.  

    I remember back when Apple Pay came out, that VISA and Mastercard were getting terminals updated for a new security measures on newly issued and mandatory replacement cards sent out—and that they required retail stores to replace their terminals. Part of the update on the cards was the hologram on one end of the front of the card. 

    IIRC:  It turned out that the new terminals had Apple Pay compatibility turned on and CVS and Home Depot card terminals accepted Apple Pay. CVS and Home Depot were going to adopt Current-C (sp?), championed by Walmart (and consortium of partner retail companies) and as a result, the Apple Pay acceptance was turned off sometime after that when CVS and Home Depot figured out what was happening (or Walmart was pressuring them to hold them to their prior agreement).  Consortium partners started to drop out of the partnership. 
    After long delays, Current-C never came out and eventually CVS accepted Apple Pay.  Home Depot only accepted Apple Pay in the last year or two.   

    IIRC: Current-C was set up for loyalty programs and was going to collect customer transaction data on device in-App, and monetize it through distribution to Current-C partner retail companies, while Apple Pay transaction had just the required data for the transaction ( the companies can still continue to various purchase and customer data as well as store and branch data through their registers).  Current-C also lacked security on device that Apple Pay held encrypted in the Secure Enclave chip.
  • Apple could be just a year away from being worth $4 trillion

    I’ve been invested in the market, especially Apple/AAPL, for over 20 years.  
    Over that time I have read analysts’ comments on AAPL.  Almost all consistently under-rated AAPL. 

    Along came Daniel Ives, and he has been consistently good on his analysis and seeing where Apple was headed in product, demand and AAPL pricing.  On three occasions of large market correction or the recession of 2008–2009, he was only a little behind me in seeing that Apple had developed into a port-in-the-storm, recovering well ahead of other stocks. I pondered the $4-trillion mark in November with some back-of-the-envelope calculations plus seeing hints of positive variance in upgrade cycles, subscription/service expansions and product pipelines along with function expansion of existing products. Then in December he posed the $4-trillion target.  I’ll be happy. 
  • No M3 13-inch MacBook Pro at 'Scary Fast' event, says Gurman

    1.)   I don’t think anyone has predicted that 24” iMacs might be upgraded not only with M2 but also with M2 Pro and M2 Max SOC as “scary fast” options. I’d expect the M2 Max will be faster than the base M3.

    For the iMac 24”, that could be a “scary” fast option of interest for many—including folks with a Studio Display they already have or would get so they’d have a two monitor system with power in the tank. 

    There could be an introduction of a 27” or 30” or 32” iMac with the M2 Pro or M2 Max.   That would make sense. It would fill a long time stretch of no upgrades on that product. The M2 Pro & M2 Max are already in production and this would avoid the supply crunch on the M3 SOC. 

    2.)  Another thought is—why would Apple schedule a reveal and compete for audience just when game 3 of the World Series starts?

    Maybe the reveal will followed by (or be in) a series of ads during the World Series game, with a bigger ad just before the game start of 5:03pm PDT, and a repeat or second ad during 7th inning stretch.  And short 20 second or less ads during the game hi-lighting gaming on iPhone and the new iMacs as reinforcement teasers. It would be a rather larger audience and during a sporting event, in which they might also reveal expanded MLB showings beyond the Friday night deal. 

  • Apple is asking iPhone suppliers for screens without any bezel

    mayfly said:
    There is a phrase in this article that understates what I'd think is a much bigger issue:
    "increased vulnerability to external shocks"

    With no metal bezel surrounding a glass lens, seems like it would be way more likely to break due to accidents that current phones survive intact. They're going to have to explore a radically different glass technology to prevent that. Or they could just use current glass tech, and make more money on repairs, I suppose.
    Hint... the "lens" is not made of glass.
    I’ve heard the glass covering the display on the iPhone referred to as ‘lens’ in the past.  It might be ‘engineer-speak’ or a British term.  In the US, we think a lens is on the camera or in glasses, a microscope or telescope. A lens is glass ( or clear plastic) we look through that transmits light and bends the light to form an image that is enlarged, reduced or otherwise distorted. Yet we have sunglasses the have no distortion, just a filtering of light. So, yes, I can see the display glass referred to as a lens. 

    Where we in the US refer to a ‘hood’ on the front of a car, the Brits say ‘bonnet’. What we call a ‘windshield’ is referred to as a ‘windscreen’ by Brits.  I can see calling the face of the iPhone a lens that we look through to see the image displayed on or under film layers. 
    Gorilla glass that Apple uses has had many iterations over the years.  It approaches the hardness and scratch resistance of some metals.  Tougher than nails. 
    I’d think that’s the protection that does the job, unless the display film comes all the way to the edge of the glass—and can be harmed by just the edge being hit. 

    My concern could be reliable touch rejection from gripping the iPhone with fingers encroaching on the edges of the display. I’d take a guess that Apple thought of that a long time ago and it won’t be a problem. I guess I’m not really concerned about that after all.
  • Apple's headset drastically changed over time & top execs are skeptical

    Think of it as a hobby for Apple in the short term similar to the Apple TV box. 
    Sometimes Apple has to have an evolving product in the market.  

    The key will be content and how it’s shown—and that’s where Apple will excel. Not just entertaining content, but massive real world content.  They may be able to improve Street View information overlays and a better 3D experience, starting with just a couple of cities and building on that. 

    Crowd sourcing content might also contribute to an expanding hardware and content ecosystem. You might be able to contribute environment data using the device’s onboard cameras and GPS and other sensors adding in machine learning, combining multiple user’s data to create an ever increasing detailed view of the world around us. 

    I expect the first year to be mostly developer sales with a high price tag or subscription that is partially returnable upon exchange of unit for version two. This will be a slowly gaining set of assets that will accelerate in the second and third year. 

    It will still have some wow factor on release. In addition to developers, well heeled Apple enthusiasts will also afford the risk of version one. 

    Another thought is leasing or subscription of the devices, and getting credit against the lease or towards early payoff by credit points scored in a game of collecting the real world data.  That would be gaming motivation and financial motivation.

    There’s also great curiosity in why so many iPad Apps are easily adaptable or already ok to use on the device. What’s that about?????

    I can’t wait to see the introduction but I will wait.  It’s only weeks away.