What has the note got to do with this? The X is far closer in size, specs and usage to the S8. Also £800 cheap? Seriously?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Decision to Slash iPhone X Production Volume in Q1 2018 Could Delay Future OLED Models
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What has the note got to do with this? The X is far closer in size, specs and usage to the S8. Also £800 cheap? Seriously?
Circular reasoning at its finest. Apple only cares about the financial bottom line because I assume Apple only cares about the financial bottom line.
This one is squarely on Tim inheriting a Steve Jobs problem. He (Jobs) should have seen the convergence coming of PCs and tablet formats. Cook has to deal with Apple successes as well as Apple mis-steps. Don't get me wrong, you can't beat ipad, but Jobs should have been visionary enough to see where the market was going and planned accordingly.
What the heck, i'll bite....
I never majored in business studies so my definitions may be off but...
Circular reasoning dictates that the founding premise of my argument must be false, however I believe my assumptions here are reasonable based on the fact that Apple Inc. is a joint-stock company who's valuation is influenced by it's listing on a stock exchange (albeit closely-held but still publicly traded none the less) with a mandate requiring leadership to answer to the ambitions of a board of directors and an incentive to maximize its share-holder's revenue.
In other words, Apple is hustling so as to make hella bank - and I don't think it's a wrong of me to assume so. In fact, I think the fallacy is assuming in anything otherwise (I'd say naive but the arrogance of your comment makes me inclined to believe you're just willfully ignorant to the realities of capitalism).
Furthermore, I've gone on to list a few examples of how recent decisions & behavior from Apple's leadership are in keeping with the motive of maximizing monetization.
Here's one more example, in this interview with Mashable SVP hardware engineering Dan Riccio not-so-subtly implies that the release of the iPhone X was brought forward a year early, with the 'between the lines implication' being that Apple was worried it would loose customers, and hence MONEY, to the S8, Note 8 & other competitors.
That's as close as hearing it from the horse's mouth as you're going to get.
Now your argument may be that my use of the word "only cares about" was extreme but I stand by it and you'd be arguing semantics.
Yes you can argue that Apple cares about the environment, user privacy, accessibility, etc but I call BS on that too. It just happens that these issues align with maximizing profit at the moment (in one way or the other) and should they every contradict the bottomline out the window they'll go. Want proof? See how easily Apple banned VPN apps in China when the government there threatened to stop iPhone sales if Apple did not comply. Or how about the immoral way they've been shipping away savings to tax havens and avoiding any moral obligation to pay their fair share of taxes?
I never majored in business studies so my definitions may be off but...
Circular reasoning dictates that the founding premise of my argument must be false, however I believe my assumptions here are reasonable based on the fact that Apple Inc. is a joint-stock company who's valuation is influenced by it's listing on a stock exchange (albeit closely-held but still publicly traded none the less) with a mandate requiring leadership to answer to the ambitions of a board of directors and an incentive to maximize its share-holder's revenue.
In other words, Apple is hustling so as to make hella bank - and I don't think it's a wrong of me to assume so. In fact, I think the fallacy is assuming in anything otherwise (I'd say naive but the arrogance of your comment makes me inclined to believe you're just willfully ignorant to the realities of capitalism).
Furthermore, I've gone on to list a few examples of how recent decisions & behavior from Apple's leadership are in keeping with the motive of maximizing monetization.
Here's one more example, in this interview with Mashable SVP hardware engineering Dan Riccio not-so-subtly implies that the release of the iPhone X was brought forward a year early, with the 'between the lines implication' being that Apple was worried it would loose customers, and hence MONEY, to the S8, Note 8 & other competitors.
That's as close as hearing it from the horse's mouth as you're going to get.
Now your argument may be that my use of the word "only cares about" was extreme but I stand by it and you'd be arguing semantics.
Yes you can argue that Apple cares about the environment, user privacy, accessibility, etc but I call BS on that too. It just happens that these issues align with maximizing profit at the moment (in one way or the other) and should they every contradict the bottomline out the window they'll go. Want proof? See how easily Apple banned VPN apps in China when the government there threatened to stop iPhone sales if Apple did not comply. Or how about the immoral way they've been shipping away savings to tax havens and avoiding any moral obligation to pay their fair share of taxes?
Last edited:
It is easy to focus on apple. All big american companies are using the same tax loopholes, there is a lot of talk about working conditions of chinese workers, but all the big tech companies are using foxconn and other chinese suppliers, that have the same working conditions.
And about losing to the s8/s8+ and note 8: iphone 8/plus om its own easily bests the sales figures of these high end samsungs.
Google in China? They are just starting over there, so i am curious if they can handle the pressure and use their principles.
This doesn’ t make things allright of course. But in my perception all the people are giving apple a hard time, because their products are too expensive. They don’ t care about amazon , because it is cheap, while using the same tax loopholes, using foxconn for their cheap echos, etc.
As long as people can get something cheap, they don’ t care about ethics.
Hypocracy at its worst.
I have no issue with anything applenis doing as long as it’s legal. We could argue semantics about the way tax strategies are employed, but Apple ceo fiduciary responsibility is under an obligation to maximize profits while minimizing taxes, legally.
As far as mashable, I call that hearsay, but you can take away what you will from it.
Logic to stop production in the summer of 2018 if there is an iPhone X 2 for September.
I do not quite understand the logic of saying that they stop because of the little success while they make a 2nd version.
It is logical that the iPhone X is not maintained by lowering the price (as it was done in recent years for other iPhones 6, 6S 7 etc ...) because it has an extremely expensive component (the OLED screen) . It is logical that Apple prefers to simply replace it (probably at a similar price).
I do not quite understand the logic of saying that they stop because of the little success while they make a 2nd version.
It is logical that the iPhone X is not maintained by lowering the price (as it was done in recent years for other iPhones 6, 6S 7 etc ...) because it has an extremely expensive component (the OLED screen) . It is logical that Apple prefers to simply replace it (probably at a similar price).
Last edited:
I think Steve Jobs was a little busy worrying about trying to stay alive, fighting terminal cancer and making sure all his affairs were in order before it was all over. If someone takes credit for success they need to accept the bad that comes with their mistakes.
I have no ill will towards Tim Cook or Apple but Steve Jobs righted the Apple ship before he set sail. It's now up to the current crew running things to maintain the course. If things go awry then it's on them. It's been roughly 7 years since Steve Jobs passed away and Apple has had a lot of success since then. Those 7 good years are all on Cook and Co. and they have to accept the bad if they guessed wrong on product decisions. The problem I see is that Apple never had a backup plan when Steve Jobs was gone.
If we take the personal travesty Mr. Jobs went through aside, he got things right and he got things wrong. You can’t acknowledge what Jobs got right without acknowledging there were some mid-steps with iPad being one of them.
yes, keep telling yourself that. Iphones outside of North American and Japan are the minority. The market has grown so much, of course iphones will be great business. Always easy for a fool to part with his money
Or Apple's primary focus on the user experience from Jony Ive down through the product teams allows the bean counters to maximize profits. Just as Steve Jobs intended.