Re: I am not a crook
Isn't "crooked accounting and piss poor due diligence" also a possibility? Knowing HP as I do, that latter half seems likely no matter what type of accounting Autonomy had.
12863 posts • joined 12 Feb 2011
If the iPad was the last innovation (in 2010) then the two before it would be the iPhone in 2007 and iPod in 2001. That's only three in a decade. So its been just under four years now, and it was six between the iPod and iPhone. A bit too early to claim innovation is "over".
If they don't introduce another product that impacts the market in a way similar to how the iPod, iPhone and iPad did by 2020, that's one thing, but it is way too early to bet against them. All the rumblings and hirings prove they're getting involved in the medical field in some fashion, and are quite similar to the rumblings about the iPhone before it came out.
But like the iPhone, no one knows what form it will take yet and what the capabilities will be. Everyone is assuming it will be a nice looking Fitbit with an Apple logo, but it won't be that any more than the iPhone was a phone with a clickwheel interface as some people guessed. They aren't throwing me-too products at the wall and seeing what sticks, like Samsung with their lame Gear watch. They're trying to produce something that people will find genuinely useful and want to buy.
Even if some reading this won't ever buy it because it is an Apple product, if it re-shapes the expectations of buyers in a product category as they did with the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, the competing product you might buy won't be designed until after Apple's is released.
No, they can't bring themselves to release a cheaper phone which will attract lower profit.
Given that the dislike of the 5C has translated into more 5S sales rather than lost sales for Apple, that seems to be the right strategy. Maybe the iPhone 6C will have a case covered in porcupine quills, to further depress its sales and push even more people toward the 6S :)
Having a device predict the weather is stupid, when it has a way to go to the internet and get a far better prediction than even a supercomputer in your basement could do if it had only a single weather station on your roof as input.
I hardly think Apple is going to sell temperature/humidity data off these devices. Let's say they wanted to do that, and there was even money in it (and I already doubt both those things) Its readings are only useful if it is outside, not sitting in the sun, not in my pocket or hands, etc. Your idea is one of the stupidest I've ever heard, and sounds like you're just trying to think of ways for Apple to screw over its customers. The positional data on where its users are is far more valuable and they don't sell that, and even made it very difficult for apps to collect - more difficult than for Android apps to do the same. If they don't sell that, they're going to try to sell useless environmental data for a fraction of a penny per user? Pull the other one.
You can get your altitude within 15 meters using GPS. I highly doubt a barometer - especially a tiny one inside a smartphone - is accurate enough and the barometer readings at "nearby" stations are timely and the location similar enough that a smartphone barometer can do better.
The only place I see barometer readings for altitude being useful are when you're under a tree canopy so you don't have a clear view of the sky and can't use GPS - but in such cases where you'd actually care about elevation (say you're on a hike in the mountains) you'd often also be outside of cellular range and wouldn't be able to access a network to get the reading for a nearby weather station, and/or the nearest weather station isn't so near.
Nevermind that knowing one's altitude is generally not all that important, at least not compared to knowing one's latitude and longitude. The latter two are needed to be able to find how to get from point A to point B. But Google Maps directions don't include getting you to the correct floor in a skyscraper, and even if they did they'd do it by knowing what floor the office is on, not calculating how many floors you need to go up to reach the desired altitude!
I'm not saying a barometer is utterly useless, but there are plenty of features that could be added to smartphones that 1% of people will find useful, but if you want the Swiss Army Knife of smartphones that includes a bunch of niche features just for the hell of it, you buy a Samsung Galaxy, not an iPhone.
You do realize that pressure changes not only with altitude but with weather, right? Today my house is 700 ft above sea level, tomorrow it is 1100 ft above sea level because a storm moved in!
I'm not sure what the point of a barometer in a phone is. Maybe it is part of the temperate and humidity sensor so if you add those two you get the other whether you need/want it or not.
I'm really uncertain what the value is even for a temperature & humidity sensor. Apple doesn't add things just to add them, they would have some use in mind. Of course, rumor has had Apple introducing a TV set for about three years now so this could be yet another false rumor, or maybe they're putting such a sensor in a watch and not a phone - for training being able to tell the ambient temperature, or your skin temperature, would be a lot more useful than having such a sensor in a phone.
If people who didn't like the 5C were going to Samsung instead of the 5S, then it would be a failure, but there's no evidence that's happening. The extra 5S sales from people who would have bought a 5C if they liked it are more profitable for Apple than the 5C sales they displaced.
Is the US or EU doing anything about it, or is it "buyer beware" in our hemisphere? China may be behind in some regards as far as freedom to browse the web unfettered, criticize their leadership, or keeping the environment clean, but looks like they're in front in at least some ways as far as consumer protection.
Funny how that works.
I was thinking the same thing. The iPad had this from day one, as did Android tablets. I can understand offering a version with only wireless, as that's what I'd buy if I purchased any sort of tablet, but taking a year and a half to finally offer a tablet with cellular data and talking it up as if it is a big advance staggers me every bit as much as it staggered you.
If Microsoft is trying to sell these tablets as being more functional than the competition, shouldn't they be making it easier to use that functionality wherever you want? I guess what everyone suspected is probably true - they designed it based on talking to business IT leaders to find out what they wanted in a tablet. They were hoping to create a tablet to prevent iPads from expanding the BYOD movement they'd created, by making the Surface something the IT department could point to and say "sorry, we can't support that iPad, if you want a tablet you should buy this Surface, it runs Windows apps and we can lock it down via AD just like the PC on your desk so of course you Mr. User will want this instead!"
A tablet designed to work in a corporate environment doesn't need/want cellular data, because they have wireless available in their offices and the IT department doesn't want to deal with data plans for tablets.
He's saying that wired connections are mostly pointless because most students are using devices wirelessly (whether or not they have a way to plug them in via a wire) and because of the money being wasted on putting in wired ports that aren't needed/used, they're not able to spend enough on decent wireless OR on sufficient external bandwidth to reach beyond the wireless network to whatever the students are needing to access (district wide instructional server, internet, whatever)
Is that bit at the end really true? I've never seen anything like that, what I've heard is that Jobs got one or two labels to agree to his pricing, and used it as leverage to pressure the others to go along. If he'd launched without agreements in place, Apple would have been sued before his iPod presentation was even complete. Those RIAA lawyers make Apple's lawyers look like paralegals by comparison!
Yes, I think it is beyond thinking as Apple hasn't seemed too interested in copying what Samsung does at all, let alone in advance. They haven't even made a big iPhone yet, and they haven't required early access to Samsung's plans to know the next Galaxy will be at least as big as the one before it, year after year.
Not saying Apple hasn't done of the same things after Samsung did them, but whether they actually copied Samsung (or one of the other Android vendors that did those things before Samsung with less fanfare) or whatever that doesn't mean they'd want early access to their plans to copy them sooner. Apple's sales don't seem to be affected by not having stuff Samsung owners consider indispensable, like NFC.
Yeah, I'm sure Apple is going to sell out for the few thousands of Macs that will sell into the DoD which is Windows through and through. Because, you know, they need those extra few million in sales to go with the tens of billions they sell every quarter.
But feel free to continue with the conspiracy theories. Did Google get their code from the Roswell saucer, or was that Facebook? I keep forgetting.
Considering Apple was last on the NSA's list of "cooperating" companies, years after Microsoft, Google and Facebook caved, I don't think this is too likely to be the case, especially with all the attention that such NSA cooperation has received of late.
You know the old saw: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.
Apple could really benefit from the hiring of a world recognized security expert to lead their efforts, with commensurate budget to enable him to hire people as needed to identify and plug these gaps. Apple seems to be where Microsoft was a decade ago before they were forced by the pressure from all sides to take security more seriously. Hopefully Apple won't have to go through a "Code Red" type scenario and be embarrassed into it, but will be smart enough to do it of their own volition.
I have to hand it to whoever put this together, it is social engineering at its finest. People who hold bitcoins are 10000x more likely to download that zip file than those who don't, that is one well targeted attack. I wonder how many bitcoins that guy got?
For the conspiracy theorists who think it was the BoJ or the Fed who stole the bitcoins trying to destabilize a "competitor", realize that a state actor would be using far more sophisticated malware. Something more like Stuxnet. By the time it was discovered so many wallets would have been emptied bitcoin would be toast.
Nevermind that microUSB will be obsolete and replaced by the reversible Type-C USB connector before this goes into effect in 2017. That's the problem with mandates like that, they freeze tech in the past.
Imagine if in 2004 they mandated that a smartphone has to include a euro key, to make it easier to type in monetary figures, but they wrote it in a way that assumed a physical keyboard. No one would care in 2004, but 10 years later it would be a bit of a problem keeping the EU stuck in the past :)
I always thought it was some sort of search aggregator that got in your way when you were looking for places to buy something on Google when "Shopping" doesn't provide anything useful. At least the links I've followed just have a link for "contact supplier" and not for actually buying anything.
If that's worth $200 billion, man am I ever in the wrong line of work!
Really? So you can uninstall the phone app and the settings app from Android? I doubt that, unless you root it (and I imagine you can delete those apps from your iPhone if you jailbreak it, though whether it works afterwards is anyone's guess)
Just about every app could theoretically be uninstalled from an iPhone if you wanted to allow anything to be uninstalled. If you are using your phone as an iPod, why not delete the phone app, mail app, messages app, app store app, camera app and so on. The problem is, if you let people uninstall stuff at random, some will do it by accident and there's no way to get them back.
I'm more than willing to pay a tiny price in one-time inconvenience to move unused apps to a folder or alternate screen, or just ignore them, so that I don't have to worry if a five year old grabbed my phone for a moment I won't find I've lost my Safari app with no way to get it back.
If you want that level of control, you don't want an iPhone. Get an Android and compile your OS from source so you can compile out options you don't want cluttering up your kernel.
So what does it matter how many things are in your "crap" folder?
Nothing takes up screen real estate, because unless you're idiot, that folder called "crap" isn't on your home screen or any other screen you normally use. What's the difference between having a folder on a screen you never visit and having a dozen apps on a screen you never visit?
Can be turned off, as some of us like being able to refer to text messages from five years ago :)
It would be nice if they made it easier to scroll back that far though, and you didn't need to hit "load more messages" a bunch of times for conversations with many thousands of texts to go back to the beginning.
I didn't read your post to suggest there would be two .londons, but a comment on the stupidity of creating new TLDs in the first place. If the net splits, there may be two .londons and two cisco.coms. If there was some reason I'd want access to the "other" cisco.com I'm sure someone would write a software layer to make it possible (www.cisco.com.real and www.cisco.com.alt)
The ultimate control is still maintained by the operators of the root DNS servers, which are spread out all over the world. I imagine they'd have a conference call and get some short term and longer term plans figured out if ICANN went rogue.
Worst case if there was a split in the root server operators (say between China and the west) you'd end up with two internets, but for most of us that sort of split would be pretty much invisible.
Google has who knows how many petabytes of unused disk space, why would they be aggressive about deleting stuff even if the user says "yes, I really really really want you to delete this"? Anything the user deletes, whether accidentally or deliberately, should not actually be unlinked and overwritten but rather simply hidden from the user until it has aged a month or so and a background garbage collection process can take care of deleting it "for real".
If Apple and Microsoft have this figured out, with the trash can and recycler being better than nothing in this regard, why is Google courting disaster in this way? They found the bug and announced it, big deal. All software has bugs, even Google's, and it is unlikely that this was the only such bug in their software.
Don't confuse "Toyota is supporting iOS first" with "Toyota is supporting only iOS".
Why are you worried about Apple paying to lock out Android phones? Where have they EVER paid someone to lock out Android? Better zip up, I think your fanboy is showing.
They'd see all the in-car stuff that has been announced, whether for iOS or Android, doesn't actually run either OS, but instead runs QNX. So they'll all support both of them eventually, the announcements are merely about which is supported first. In fact, even if you bought a 2015 Toyota and it supported only iOS, it would probably take only a firmware update for Android support to be added later.
This is all a bunch of wailing and gnashing of teeth for nothing...
Who made up the big iPad, and want to back off that prediction when they realize the 12.9 Retina screens were destined for MacBook Air like I said all along.
Like how they try to salvage their reputation by claiming that Apple binned the idea, rather than admitting "we were wrong and Apple was never going to do that in the first place, because there's no market for giant tablets"
Whatever the numbers in my "strawman" example it is hard to imagine how they'd need more cables than there are rooms, and even if they buy the official ones from Apple at full price (rather than talking to them about a chain-wide discount or freebie in some sort of quid pro quo) they still cost less than the rooms at any hotel that would think it is worthwhile to provide cables.
It is hardly a "substantial" costs to hotels to provide Lightning cables for guests who forget theirs. What do they need, one cable per every 30 or 50 guests? Yeah, that'll break the bank in a 500 room hotel that clears $100K a day! If the guest doesn't return it, add the cost to their bill.
Charging pads cost far more (since I assume they'd install them in every room, if you are loaned them like a cable it is pointless - might as well loan those guests a cable) Given that there are still competing standards that could be quite high if the wireless charging standard you install loses out in a couple years. I imagine there were a few high end hotels that installed HD-DVD players to their eventual regret :)
No, because they aren't claiming Replicant would fix this hole. If there's a separate lower level (realtime, no doubt) OS running on the modem, it wouldn't matter what OS is running on the main CPU. Maybe this is something they discovered while replacing various proprietary bits of Android and had to write the interface that talks to the modem.
Definitely want to learn more about this, and what modems may be vulnerable. Maybe the NSA doesn't care if a phone is running Android, iOS, Blackberry or WP, if they've got a way to break into the Qualcomm modem's OS to do what they want...
So they shouldn't bother doing it until every home in the country can be so connected? People living on $1.50/day don't have much use for a 10 gigabit fiber connection.
If it requires 1% of GDP for 8 years, and it ends up increasing GDP by 1% (not adding 1% to growth, just increasing the base a single percent) it would more than pay for itself. Will it add 1% to their GDP? I have no idea, but I'd prefer wasting money on something like that which might grow the economy versus spending it on pointless wars like the US and UK.
There are many players already competing for customers from $25 all the way up, and just about all of them manufacture their phones in China.
Doesn't sound like he's going to bring anything new to the table with what will probably be a "me too" Android phone that will be lost in the sea of competitors. Glad I don't have any money in this destined-to-fail venture.
The market has already demonstrated almost no one needs/wants a phone that acts as a projector, or those phones that already exist with this capability would have been hot sellers.
But if you ignore the clickbait of making this about smartphones, would this technology make proper projectors better than current ones in some way? The article says this is a new way of doing things, but doesn't really explain why it is better than current solutions aside from not having moving parts. That's nice and all, but current LCD projectors aren't breaking down due to moving parts problems as far as I know...
That it is synthesizable is a big assumption, however. I believe PA Semi's designs were full custom, thus I wouldn't be surprised if the same is true of the A6 and A7, and hence future designs.
Typically you do a synthesizable design for cost savings, and a full custom design for maximum performance when cost is less of an issue. I think Apple is more likely to pursue the latter strategy.
I doubt Apple would have two suppliers for the same chip. The two fabs use completely different design rules, so they'd have to have two separate designs. Not impossible, but doesn't fit with how Apple has done things before, unless they're doing it to allow squeezing both on price.
Seems more likely that there are multiple varieties of A8 (i.e. like the A6/A6X) and one would be made by one fab and the other by the other fab.
Assuming there is something orbiting our sun at a distance and occasionally tossing comets our way, why does it have to be a normal planetary body? Maybe the reason we can't see it is because it is a clump of dark matter (assuming, of course, that there is such a thing as dark matter and it isn't just a convenient placeholder for a misunderstanding of physics)
A brown dwarf captured by our sun would serve the same purpose, be effectively invisible, and as a result of capture would have a very eccentric orbit.
From a story about TSMC 20nm production: "At present TSMC is producing chips using 20nm fabrication process at select modules of fabs 12 and 14. Starting from May, the company will initiate 20nm production at the fab 15 modules 3 and 4."
That's more 20nm fabs in May than Samsung has 28nm fabs today, so Apple would already be more resilient to fab problems with TSMC than if they stayed with Samsung. The one advantage of Samsung is that they share process technology with IBM and Global Foundries so there would be some overflow if Apple needed more production than planned, but TSMC is larger than all three put together so that's not a problem either.
Of course, this all assumes that the rumors are true. Apple has been rumored to switch to TSMC for a couple years now, no one will know for certain until the weekend after the iPhone 6 is released and IHS does their usual teardown analysis to see who made what parts and estimate the BOM costing.
They might make multiple versions of the A8, like there was with the A5 (A5X) and A6 (A6X) that were used in the iPad. But there's only one reason I can think of why they might want to put a quad core CPU in an iPhone.
If they add the ability to have plug it into a monitor, and use a bluetooth keyboard/mouse, and when it detects those it runs full OS X, then the extra cores come in handy. I've been thinking for a few years they're going to do that, but I'm sure it takes a long time to get all the pieces in place so it works just as well as a real Mac in every way. Its easy to do a half ass job of this, which is why the half ass attempts to do it on Android have been ignored.
First, Apple sold 4 million iPhones a week the first three months it was out, and while it isn't selling that fast now, it is probably at least 2 million iPhones a week. If 1/4 are 5Cs, then the 3 million 5C in inventory requires only 6 weeks of sales, and it will be six months before the 6 comes out and the 5C is (presumably) retired. They are hardly going to be left holding the bag on these, and have no need to discount them.
Second, the point of the 5C was never to be low cost - that was just wishful thinking from stupid analysts who think Apple needs to try to challenge Android on a market share basis. In the past they've just kept the identical model from before as the new low end model, but they couldn't do that this time. The 5C adds a bunch of LTE bands the 5 lacked, and has various other internal changes. You can't see two different phones under the same model name.
I think they also realized that selling last year's high end model as next year's discount model devalues that high end model. The iPhone market has changed, people keep phones for two years now rather than replacing them on a yearly basis. So they created a separate model to be the low end version, so the '5' is still high end, just last year's high end.
Maybe the reason the 5C didn't meet expectations is because they botched the design and people don't want a plastic iPhone, and selling phones in colors when people who want their phone in bright colors can put them in a case and get EXACTLY the color they want is probably a waste of time.
It'll be interesting to see if the 5S survives unchanged as the low end model when the 6 comes out, or if they tweak it into a 5GS or something like that.
It has been six months now, surely they aren't still selling them faster than they can make them anymore as people start to wait for the iPhone 6, which may be the most significant change in 4 years. You want to have some inventory, so people who want one can buy it immediately instead of having to wait as was the case for the first few months.
If they can't selling 3 million more 5Cs in the next six months then having that inventory is a problem, but I highly doubt that will be an issue.
Apple surely doesn't mind that the 5C isn't selling as many as they thought, because those customers are buying 5Ses instead which are more profitable for Apple.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019