Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Again, I don't wear an Apple Watch, but I don't see how anyone can argue it isn't a smash hit that millions of people find useful - it's estimated that Apple makes around $40 billion a year in revenue from the watch.

For comparison purposes, here are some companies with ~$40 billion in revenue: Uber, Lufthansa, Qualcomm, Porsche, Eli Lilly.
 
Actually I don't see why Apple shouldn't switch to a two-year upgrade cycle. Major hardware update every other year and each year software bug update and feature updates. In a way, switching to two-year upgrade cycle could help reduce electronic waste. It seems good consumer practice to not consume so much.
Apple hardware releases are mostly unrelated to peoples' upgrade cycles. Sure, there is that tiny group of tech enthusiasts and journalists that upgrade every year, but 99% of the world updates their phone when the old one is out of date. Also, I have never ever thrown out an iPhone, even a 3 year old one can be sold on the second hand market.

My point being that the frequency of Apple's releases does not make any difference to electronic waste.

As an example, in my small office of 4 people, one owns an 11, one a 13, one a 14 and one a 15. No one is updating their phone this year.
 
Apple hardware releases are mostly unrelated to peoples' upgrade cycles. Sure, there is that tiny group of tech enthusiasts and journalists that upgrade every year, but 99% of the world updates their phone when the old one is out of date. Also, I have never ever thrown out an iPhone, even a 3 year old one can be sold on the second hand market.

My point being that the frequency of Apple's releases does not make any difference to electronic waste.

I disagree. The simple supply and demand theory (which actually is more sophisticated that commonly relayed) suggests when there is demand there is supply. But the fact also is that supply side can and does influence the demand side. Supply side WILL and HAS influenced the demand side by creating demand.

Creating hype is one way to try to get consumers abandon their devices earlier than otherwise.

All of us are highly manipulable. We'd like to think we are autonomous but we are often less autonomous than we think. And even those of us who say this aren't often in the know of HOW we are being manipulated whether consciously or unintentionally.

As an example, in my small office of 4 people, one owns an 11, one a 13, one a 14 and one a 15. No one is updating their phone this year.

Your point doesn't demonstrate that Apple can't influence how often people upgrade their devices. What it demonstrates is that there isn't a direct 1:1 correspondence, which is true. Just because Apple upgrades their devices doesn't mean therefore users will upgrade. Of course not. But it also doesn't mean that it doesn't increase influence or potential to influence upgrade desires.
 
Actually I don't see why Apple shouldn't switch to a two-year upgrade cycle. Major hardware update every other year and each year software bug update and feature updates. In a way, switching to two-year upgrade cycle could help reduce electronic waste. It seems good consumer practice to not consume so much.
It’s not like a majority of customers upgrade every year. Some people do crave the new, but most are on a 2-4 year cycle.
 
I disagree. The simple supply and demand theory (which actually is more sophisticated that commonly relayed) suggests when there is demand there is supply. But the fact also is that supply side can and does influence the demand side. Supply side WILL and HAS influenced the demand side by creating demand.

Creating hype is one way to try to get consumers abandon their devices earlier than otherwise.

All of us are highly manipulable. We'd like to think we are autonomous but we are often less autonomous than we think. And even those of us who say this aren't often in the know of HOW we are being manipulated whether consciously or unintentionally.



Your point doesn't demonstrate that Apple can't influence how often people upgrade their devices. What it demonstrates is that there isn't a direct 1:1 correspondence, which is true. Just because Apple upgrades their devices doesn't mean therefore users will upgrade. Of course not. But it also doesn't mean that it doesn't increase influence or potential to influence upgrade desires.
I already made the point that the effect you’re describing is small, and almost exclusively the realm of tech enthusiasts and journalists. Of course we can argue forever About how big the effect is, but there are very few people already who update more frequently than every 2 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert
I disagree. The simple supply and demand theory (which actually is more sophisticated that commonly relayed) suggests when there is demand there is supply. But the fact also is that supply side can and does influence the demand side. Supply side WILL and HAS influenced the demand side by creating demand.

Creating hype is one way to try to get consumers abandon their devices earlier than otherwise.

All of us are highly manipulable. We'd like to think we are autonomous but we are often less autonomous than we think. And even those of us who say this aren't often in the know of HOW we are being manipulated whether consciously or unintentionally.



Your point doesn't demonstrate that Apple can't influence how often people upgrade their devices. What it demonstrates is that there isn't a direct 1:1 correspondence, which is true. Just because Apple upgrades their devices doesn't mean therefore users will upgrade. Of course not. But it also doesn't mean that it doesn't increase influence or potential to influence upgrade desires.
An associated issue is that Apple is not the sole company selling mobile phones. It is a competitive business, Apple would be at a commercial disadvantage if Samsung, Google, etc. are releasing models annually. Aside from many of the users here on MR, the bulk of mobile phone customers are not very technically savvy. But understand buying this years model vs last years model people can grasp. It is just like automobiles, televisions, and lots of the major purchases. Customers don't want last years model, if the can get another brand that is offing this years model. Does not really matter if the only difference is a label, last year = bad, this year = good. So the only way to to a slower update rate, is if you get the entire industry to conform at the same time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert
I don't think I understand the criticism.

I bet there are iOS 18 versions that are only for internal release that are not for developers and much less for the general public as betas. Apple can have its own internal versions running and testing their AI. Why not?
Sure they's internal version of iOS 18 that have AI right now. I'm just saying that the chip that designed "with Apple intelligence" as a focus is not the A18/A18 Pro. My bet is we going to see Apple ramping up their neural engine big time in the coming years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flybass
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.