Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

trifid

macrumors 68020
May 10, 2011
2,070
4,945
Is that to say that breakthrough innovation is magically supposed to be there all the time? After we landed on the moon did it mean that we were a failure after that by not landing on mars in the next decade?

Apple missed the boat with a revolutionary TV service, you know, the one Steve Jobs said he 'cracked'. We know Apple tried negotiations with providers and failed. I wonder why? If Steve Jobs was alive we might be living under an era of revolutionary TV service, and people might have been dropping cable subscriptions in mass. Maybe Apple was asking of obscenely high profit margins to cable providers?

Apple's focus is on profits, not vision.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,313
24,050
Gotta be in it to win it
Apple missed the boat with a revolutionary TV service, you know, the one Steve Jobs said he 'cracked'. We know Apple tried negotiations with providers and failed. I wonder why? If Steve Jobs was alive we might be living under an era of revolutionary TV service, and people might have been dropping cable subscriptions in mass. Maybe Apple was asking of obscenely high profit margins to cable providers?

Apple's focus is on profits, not vision.
It's already been debunked that Apple is profit focused. Saying so is just so much Internet hyperbole.
 

kdarling

macrumors P6
Who repackaged it first and made it into a product line?

If you mean what major company made it to market first with a capacitive screen and finger friendly UI, that's Apple. If you mean who was first to demo such ideas, that would not be Apple.

Who was responsible for the first App Store on a phone?

Palm maybe? Plus some carriers in Europe put the Handango Store app on their smartphones years before Apple did their own walled garden version.

In fact, most people consider the first iPhone to be a feature phone, not a smartphone, since it did not support native third party apps and was missing common apps such as a video cam or MMS.

Did any phone even have a proper Retina display at that time?

Yep, there were retina screens three years before the iPhone had one.

About the same time in mid 2007 that the first iPhone went on sale, Toshiba began selling their Protege smartphone with 310 ppi. There were also a couple of other non-smartphones with high resolution displays.

Who made the world's first proper touch focused device not requiring a stylus?

Was it the 1982 TRON desk? Or maybe the late 80s / early 90s control consoles and PADDs on Star Trek: The Next Generation? :D

Actually, the IBM Simon, the world's first smartphone back in 1993 (which incidentally was a touch phone) presented large enough buttons to be mostly used without a stylus. (Except the keyboard.) Btw, it also had an app store. Apple did not invent anything basically new about smartphones or touch devices. In fact, they had quite a historical template to use and improve.

Other smartphones between then and the iPhone also experimented with being finger friendly, including several very cool designs shown in 2006, which no doubt influenced Apple.

concept_phones.PNG


Samsung actually sold a finger-only touch phone in mid 2006... over a year before the iPhone went on sale:

2006_samsung_SGH-Z610.png


A Linux phone with multi-touch capacitive screen and pinch zoom was even announced two months before the iPhone:

open_moko_gizmodo_jan.png

For those and other reasons, industry insiders were not surprised by the iPhone.

But I'd say that the first really serious attempt at a finger friendly UI was the 2000 Norwegian FreePad. Nope, not a smartphone (although you could make calls and use it for faxes), but you did say "device".



Like the iPad sold a decade later, its UI was created specifically to be touch friendly, and its core apps designed so that they would be "so easy to use, that your grandmother can use it", as the FreePad's creators put it.

Its specs read just like an iPad would've back then... including having a dedicated app store.

The FreePad was even used in one of the first large scale USA textbook-on-tablet school tests back in 2003. (USAToday - 5.15.2003) That old article reads like a current iPad article would.

Alas, it came out a few years too early, and not from a big name company.

Anyway, I guess the point is that Apple, with the Mac or iPod or iPhone or iPad, did not do truly breakthrough innovations on its own. Instead it took known concepts, then greatly refined and packaged them very attractively. This was Jobs' marketing forte.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rjohnstone

Radon87000

macrumors 604
Nov 29, 2013
7,775
6,251
.

See as far as services go I trust Apple more with my info than google and they (Apple) have a better service infrastructure for what I need.

If you think Apple gives your data any more respect than Google does you got another think coming.Lisa Was bragging about how many emails they have shown to the govt the other day
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,313
24,050
Gotta be in it to win it
If you think Apple gives your data any more respect than Google does you got another think coming.Lisa Was bragging about how many emails they have shown to the govt the other day
Emails are not in my frame of reference as I don't use icloud email.
[doublepost=1478751141][/doublepost]
How?Where was it debunked?They have been greedier than ever since TC took over
If you think any company puts profits first and customers second, then here is a fellow who is widely regarded. You may want to have a look.

So your opinion is that apple under jobs was "greedy", but that doesn't mean the company puts profits first. That's internet hyperbole as you cannot "prove" that statement. And as "greedy" as you say they are, they seem to be doing just fine. (edit: so any company http://www.vertu.com/us/en/home that charges a price higher than what you deem is the cutoff, must be greedy?)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Drucker

Your discussion does not make logical sense since you buy apple products. That act of buying their products means you find value in their products and finding value means you are willing to pay their "greedy" price. Especially with the laundry list of issues you have with the company since Timmy took the helm. Not to mention the nearest competitor sells their product at an equivalent price.
 
Last edited:

trifid

macrumors 68020
May 10, 2011
2,070
4,945
lol, @I7guy dude you are hilarious

I'd love to know how soldering ram on mac mini isn't 100% profits first, user-experience second, big FU from tim cook.

And 16gb iphones for nearly a decade, while 32gb literally costs $2 more. User experience again, second, in the name of profits.

Greedgate to new heights.
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,313
24,050
Gotta be in it to win it
lol, @I7guy dude you are hilarious

I'd love to know how soldering ram on mac mini isn't 100% profits first, user-experience second, big FU from tim cook.

And 16gb iphones for nearly a decade, while 32gb literally costs $2 more. User experience again, second, in the name of profits.

Greedgate to new heights.
Hyperbole at it's finest. ;)
 

trifid

macrumors 68020
May 10, 2011
2,070
4,945
Hyperbole at it's finest. ;)

Why did Apple solder ram in the mac mini?

$300 - Apple's 16GB ram upgrade on the mac mini
$70 - 3rd party seller 16GB ram upgrade if the mac mini were upgradable

Apple is making absurd profits thanks to the soldering which doesn't make the mac mini thinner or add any value. Is that hyperbole? To me it's clear facts.
 

Radon87000

macrumors 604
Nov 29, 2013
7,775
6,251
Emails are not in my frame of reference as I don't use icloud email.
Point is they tracked customer data and gave it to the authorities.Its actually hilarious you believe that Apple is noble regarding your data and Google is that evil monster who breaches individual privacy.They both are the same.Difference is Google tells you upfront what they are gonna do while Apple hides it under their marketing fine font
[doublepost=1478751141][/doublepost]
If you think any company puts profits first and customers second, then here is a fellow who is widely regarded. You may want to have a look.

So your opinion is that apple under jobs was "greedy", but that doesn't mean the company puts profits first. That's internet hyperbole as you cannot "prove" that statement. And as "greedy" as you say they are, they seem to be doing just fine. (edit: so any company http://www.vertu.com/us/en/home that charges a price higher than what you deem is the cutoff, must be greedy?)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Drucker
The era of Peter Drucker has long gone.Its all about money and profits now.Here is a laundry list of Timmy putting profits before customers

1.16GB iPhones when literally every competitor in existence has migrated to 32GB base for years
2.Skimping on components to cut costs resulting in Touch Disease on iPhone 6
3.Removing LED lights from the Apple logo to save costs.Basically sacrificed a key design component
4.Trying to force people to get their phones repaired EXCLUSIVELY with Apple with the Error 53 fiasco
5.STILL using a 750P screen on a 2016 flagship is inexcusable
6.No wireless charging,Reusing old design 3 times in a row and literally using old cases in case of the iPhone SE
7.Removing the silent switch from the iPad
8.Removing the headphone jack and saving cost by not putting another speaker in its place and trying to fool unsuspecting customers by making the speaker cutout look like it has a speaker when it doesnt
9.Intentionally slowing down old phones consecutively with every release to get peopel to buy new ones
10.Using last year technology in new MacBooks.Not using Kabylake processors and using cheaper AMD Architecture instead of the superior NVIDIA Pascal.Everyone knows AMD are a budget brand compared to NVIDIA.

Your discussion does not make logical sense since you buy apple products. That act of buying their products means you find value in their products and finding value means you are willing to pay their "greedy" price. Especially with the laundry list of issues you have with the company since Timmy took the helm. Not to mention the nearest competitor sells their product at an equivalent price.
I buy Apple products because for me they are well within my budget to buy a new one every year.But I recognize that the prices they are charging are ridiculous and they are greedy with their margins.Just because I can afford them doesnt mean I dont recognize this fact

The nearest competitor doesnt enjoy a similar margin.They are providing wireless charging,OLED Curved edge display,glass back,more expensive internals at the same price
 

trifid

macrumors 68020
May 10, 2011
2,070
4,945
@Radon87000

5400 rpm drives on 4k imacs
ram soldering on mac mini, imacs
proprietary connectors like lightning with high licensing fees
non-serviceable batteries in apple pencil, macbooks, etc
app store 30% cut from music streaming services like Spotify
32gb ipad "pro" 12"
16gb iPhones for a decade
$10000 gold Apple watch
dongles
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,313
24,050
Gotta be in it to win it
Point is they tracked customer data and gave it to the authorities.Its actually hilarious you believe that Apple is noble regarding your data and Google is that evil monster who breaches individual privacy.They both are the same.Difference is Google tells you upfront what they are gonna do while Apple hides it under their marketing fine font
[doublepost=1478751141][/doublepost]

You do know that in the US emails are about the one thing that every company and ISP has to monitor and turn over if requested. You did know that. Right?:rolleyes:

The era of Peter Drucker has long gone.Its all about money and profits now.
Can't say that response surprised me, because it doesn't fit in with one of the most innovative and most valuable companies in the world. (And I'll add to the hyperbole here, of course that the iphone 1 prices was reduced because of jobs greed was not spoken about. Timmy never reduced the prices of their goods, two minutes after it hit the stores.)

Here is a laundry list of Timmy putting profits before customers

1.16GB iPhones when literally every competitor in existence has migrated to 32GB base for years
2.Skimping on components to cut costs resulting in Touch Disease on iPhone 6
3.Removing LED lights from the Apple logo to save costs.Basically sacrificed a key design component
4.Trying to force people to get their phones repaired EXCLUSIVELY with Apple with the Error 53 fiasco
5.STILL using a 750P screen on a 2016 flagship is inexcusable
6.No wireless charging,Reusing old design 3 times in a row and literally using old cases in case of the iPhone SE
7.Removing the silent switch from the iPad
8.Removing the headphone jack and saving cost by not putting another speaker in its place and trying to fool unsuspecting customers by making the speaker cutout look like it has a speaker when it doesnt
9.Intentionally slowing down old phones consecutively with every release to get peopel to buy new ones
10.Using last year technology in new MacBooks.Not using Kabylake processors and using cheaper AMD Architecture instead of the superior NVIDIA Pascal.Everyone knows AMD are a budget brand compared to NVIDIA.


I buy Apple products because for me they are well within my budget to buy a new one every year.But I recognize that the prices they are charging are ridiculous and they are greedy with their margins.Just because I can afford them doesnt mean I dont recognize this fact

The nearest competitor doesnt enjoy a similar margin.They are providing wireless charging,OLED Curved edge display,glass back,more expensive internals at the same price

All you have proven with that list is how wildly successful apple is under timmy and with 1B devices out there there are sure to be some issues. The list reflects both tin foil conspiracy type of logic along with suppositions and dots are connected with invisible ink.

And you know exactly how much competitors phone cost to make, including R&D, including components and give them a pass because they "don't make as much"?

There's some sound logic in this post.:oops:
[doublepost=1478781247][/doublepost]
Why did Apple solder ram in the mac mini?

$300 - Apple's 16GB ram upgrade on the mac mini
$70 - 3rd party seller 16GB ram upgrade if the mac mini were upgradable

Apple is making absurd profits thanks to the soldering which doesn't make the mac mini thinner or add any value. Is that hyperbole? To me it's clear facts.
I don't know, do you? I'll answer, no you don't unless you were privvy to apples internal management discussions.

Can you cite the real reason without hyperbole?

Apples business model is it's business. I'm not sure why people have this aversion to companies making money, complain about it on a public internet forum and then buy their products? That is a huge non-sequitor.
[doublepost=1478781662][/doublepost]
@Radon87000

5400 rpm drives on 4k imacs
ram soldering on mac mini, imacs
proprietary connectors like lightning with high licensing fees
non-serviceable batteries in apple pencil, macbooks, etc
app store 30% cut from music streaming services like Spotify
32gb ipad "pro" 12"
16gb iPhones for a decade
$10000 gold Apple watch
dongles
Apple is entitled to charge what it wants and earn whatever margin they want. You on the other hand can buy any product you want. By buying an apple product you are placing the value of the product more than some of the irrational posting that has gone one about "greed", which is purely an trollish type of opinion.

I don't understand why people, who truly believe to the core, that apple is "greedy" (along with the other hyperbole posted) buy their products?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: greytux

Olganech

macrumors regular
Mar 21, 2015
210
127
The iPhone is definitely positioned as the "luxury" alternative, in terms of design, and utility. It's positioned to be the device that people aspire to own. And carriers make that a reality by providing monthly payment plans.

But make no mistake... iPhone, iPad, Mac, the retail experience...all are positioned to make you want to own one at least partly because of the status it implies.

iPhone's are no longer luxury items since they are now so common anyone can have one.
 

trifid

macrumors 68020
May 10, 2011
2,070
4,945
Apples business model is it's business. I'm not sure why people have this aversion to companies making money, complain about it on a public internet forum and then buy their products? That is a huge non-sequitor.

Apple is entitled to charge what it wants and earn whatever margin they want. You on the other hand can buy any product you want. By buying an apple product you are placing the value of the product more than some of the irrational posting that has gone one about "greed", which is purely an trollish type of opinion.

I don't understand why people, who truly believe to the core, that apple is "greedy" (along with the other hyperbole posted) buy their products?

Hey bro you are utterly and completely missing the point.

We are discussing how our favorite company is going off path, how they are focusing on investor contentment and not vision. Is that wrong? You know who else discussed Apple going off path and becoming greedy? None other than Steve Jobs. Why? Because he loved Apple and hated Apple going off path. That's what we are doing here. And yes a company can get greedy and make mistakes.

You don't believe me?

Here's the transcript and video link below of Steve Jobs analyzing how about Apple became greedy in the 90s and lost vision:

“they cared about making a lot of money… they got very greedy and instead of following the original trajectory of the original vision which was to make this thing an appliance and get this out there to as many people as possible, they went for profits, and they made outlandish profits for about 4 years, one of the most profitable companies in america for 4 years, and what that cost them was their future, because what they should have been doing was making rational profits…”

See video at 39:00

 
Last edited:

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,313
24,050
Gotta be in it to win it
Hey bro you are utterly and completely missing the point.

We are discussing how our favorite company is going off path, how they are focusing on investor contentment and not vision. Is that wrong? You know who else discussed Apple going off path and becoming greedy? None other than Steve Jobs. Why? Because he loved Apple and hated Apple going off path. That's what we are doing here. And yes a company can get greedy and make mistakes.
I trimmed this post down a little to get rid of what doesn't apply in 2016.

If Apple is "greedy" jobs started it, based on reducing the cost of iPhone right after release.

So that corporate culture started from jobs, Timmy is only continuing what jobs started. But greed is still a trollish opinion not a fact.

case in point I'm buying Apple products, so to me their products at the price point offer value. Are they expensive, sure. Worth it? Sure. Greedy is just more Internet hyperbole.

Btw when you say a company can get greedy and make mistakes, Samsung is a prime example.
 

Radon87000

macrumors 604
Nov 29, 2013
7,775
6,251
You do know that in the US emails are about the one thing that every company and ISP has to monitor and turn over if requested. You did know that. Right?:rolleyes:
This is the reality behind Apple's marketing thanks to Wikileaks.

https://9to5mac.com/2016/10/25/lisa-jackson-podesta-email/

"Thousands of times every month, we give governments information about Apple customers and devices, in response to warrants and other forms of legal process. We have a team that responds to those requests 24 hours a day. Strong encryption does not eliminate Apple’s ability to give law enforcement meta-data or any of a number of other very useful categories of data."

For some context, the email was sent while Apple was preparing to publicly voice its opposition to the controversial UK Investigatory Powers Bill that would require Apple to hold a key to encrypted smartphones and services such as iMessage and FaceTime.

Talk about irony.So tell me.How is Google any different than Apple that you dont entrust them with your data


Can't say that response surprised me, because it doesn't fit in with one of the most innovative and most valuable companies in the world. (And I'll add to the hyperbole here, of course that the iphone 1 prices was reduced because of jobs greed was not spoken about. Timmy never reduced the prices of their goods, two minutes after it hit the stores.)



All you have proven with that list is how wildly successful apple is under timmy and with 1B devices out there there are sure to be some issues. The list reflects both tin foil conspiracy type of logic along with suppositions and dots are connected with invisible ink.

Your post implies that you agreed with me.You said Apple was successful based on my 10 points which I had already agreed with if you read the line before I start my list.Profits before customers.

All of what I mentioned is facts.Where is the tin foil conspiracy.Point out the specific points please

And you know exactly how much competitors phone cost to make, including R&D, including components and give them a pass because they "don't make as much"?
Check iFixit.iPhone 7 costs the lowest to make compared to the S7 Edge while enjoying higher margins at the same time
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,313
24,050
Gotta be in it to win it
This is the reality behind Apple's marketing thanks to Wikileaks.

"Thousands of times every month, we give governments information about Apple customers and devices, in response to warrants and other forms of legal process. We have a team that responds to those requests 24 hours a day. Strong encryption does not eliminate Apple’s ability to give law enforcement meta-data or any of a number of other very useful categories of data."

Moved the goal posts and then agreed with me. Got it.:rolleyes:

What apple didn't do was break into the iphone the FBI requested they do so.

Your post implies that you agreed with me.You said Apple was successful based on my 10 points which I had already agreed with if you read the line before I start my list.Profits before customers.

All of what I mentioned is facts.Where is the tin foil conspiracy.Point out the specific points please


Check iFixit.iPhone 7 costs the lowest to make compared to the S7 Edge while enjoying higher margins at the same time
Please reread. All that was said was apple is wildly successful thanks for Timmy and his inventions catapulting apple right up there. Planned obsolescence is the biggest tin foil theory that somehow keeps getting regurgitated as "fact" (aka hyperbole). And ifixit knows exactly how much the iphone 7 costs to build, how much R and D went into the components for the iphone and what apples margins are? That's called hyperbole (again).o_O

And maybe Samsung should reduce the cost of its phones. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/galaxy-s7.1944292/page-222#post-23882413
 
Last edited:

Radon87000

macrumors 604
Nov 29, 2013
7,775
6,251
The so called innovator Tim Cook is now releasing the official iPhone version of the S7 Edge .Its going to be revolutionary and mindblowing and of course its wild success will be credited to Cook
 

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,313
24,050
Gotta be in it to win it
The innovator Tim Cook is now releasing the official iPhone version of the S7 Edge .Its going to be revolutionary and mindblowing and of course its wild success will be credited to Cook
Glad you finally acknowledged Tims contributions to Apple. What will be revolutionary and mindblowing will be that it just works. Oh by the way, I fixed your post.

And Samsung copied sharp with the bezels, 2014 aquos, and has copied Apple fairly robustly as well.
 

Radon87000

macrumors 604
Nov 29, 2013
7,775
6,251
Glad you finally acknowledged Tims contributions to Apple. What will be revolutionary and mindblowing will be that it just works. Oh by the way, I fixed your post.
Oh really?So the S7 Edge doesnt just work?

And Samsung copied sharp with the bezels, 2014 aquos, and has copied Apple fairly robustly as well.
No they didnt.The Aquos still has a chin at the bottom.No phone currently in existence is truly "bezel free" which is what Sammy is doing next year

This concept gives us an idea of how bezel free would look like.I have no doubt Samsung will be first on this followed by Apple closely on its heels

iphone-8-concept-video.jpg



Xiaomi is somewhat close to it
23-1440x1080.jpg

[doublepost=1478934231][/doublepost]
What apple didn't do was break into the iphone the FBI requested they do so.
Cellebrite got the job done.Who needs Apple when they exist.Just recently indain Govt also reportedly bought that tool.I think its pretty fishy that Apple doesnt seem to care


Please reread. All that was said was apple is wildly successful thanks for Timmy and his inventions catapulting apple right up there. Planned obsolescence is the biggest tin foil theory that somehow keeps getting regurgitated as "fact" (aka hyperbole). And ifixit knows exactly how much the iphone 7 costs to build, how much R and D went into the components for the iphone and what apples margins are? That's called hyperbole (again).o_O
He put profits BEFORE CUSTOMERS.This is the point being discussed

Concrete proof of planned obsolscence.Whats funny in the test below is the consecutive order in which each iOS version wins.iOS 6 is first followed by 7,8,9,10 in consecutive order.But yes this video is "tin foil conspiracY":rolleyes:



Also did you know Apple spent far less on R&D than Samsung
http://www.sammobile.com/2016/01/26/samsungs-rd-spending-was-over-14-billion-in-2015/

iFixit is always right on the money in component costs as thats their business.There will be some variance with the actual cost structure but you can expect the real total cost to be around the same ballpark.


Oh and Apple also copies Samsung pretty robustly

iPhones also shatter on impact.Not sure what the point is here.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rjohnstone

I7guy

macrumors Nehalem
Nov 30, 2013
34,313
24,050
Gotta be in it to win it
Oh really?So the S7 Edge doesnt just work?

No, didn't you call it a "so-called" innovation?

No they didnt.The Aquos still has a chin at the bottom.No phone currently in existence is truly "bezel free" which is what Sammy is doing next year

This concept gives us an idea of how bezel free would look like.I have no doubt Samsung will be first on this followed by Apple closely on its heels

Xiaomi is somewhat close to it
So a distinction is being made being somewhat copied or plagiarized and fully copied or fully plagarized? Think that is commonly being referred to as "moving the goalposts" to suit your argument.

Cellebrite got the job done.Who needs Apple when they exist.Just recently indain Govt also reportedly bought that tool.I think its pretty fishy that Apple doesnt seem to care
What does this have to do with anything remotely related to the thread title? And how would you know internally the discussions around it?

He put profits BEFORE CUSTOMERS.This is the point being discussed

Concrete proof of planned obsolscence.Whats funny in the test below is the consecutive order in which each iOS version wins.iOS 6 is first followed by 7,8,9,10 in consecutive order.But yes this video is "tin foil conspiracY":rolleyes:

Does the bolded refer to the Note 7 fiasco. I'm glad you understand your own logical fallacies.:rolleyes:

Also did you know Apple spent far less on R&D than Samsung
Did you know Apple and Samsung have two completely different business models, and different businesses with different capital needs and perhaps different R&D requirements?

iFixit is always right on the money in component costs as thats their business.There will be some variance with the actual cost structure but you can expect the real total cost to be around the same ballpark.


Oh and Apple also copies Samsung pretty robustly


iPhones also shatter on impact.Not sure what the point is here.
I can look at a tire and tell you how much the material costs, does that mean I know how much the Ferrari costs to build, what the r&d is, how many people had to be payed to make it happen and how much the factory costs to produce it? How much the company spends on support and warranty service? etc. After you dump a few hundred million or maybe much more into r&d, marketing, sales, salaries, factories, software development costs, distribution etc producing 50 million plus devices, ifixit says: "yep only $6.27" worth of parts. Anybody can make a phone like this, right? You only need a few billion to get started.

ifixit doesn't have a business, btw.

Seems like it's worse for the s7, using youtube as "absolute proof". Galaxy "costs more" is less durable, iphone "costs less" more durable and looks classic. One reason I'm happy with aluminum.

So in general, moving goal posts, fallacious argument, blame shifting, and lots of hyperbole just continue to keep on coming.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: greytux

iDento

macrumors 6502a
Sep 8, 2011
855
1,472
iCloud Servers
We only barely stuck with iPhone this year when we bought an SE, until then Apple did not even make a phone we were interested in. But a phone is a phone. With Apple not caring any more about my professional computer needs I see no reason to care about the iPhone. Yep it is a great device, but I won't be in two different ecosystems. No Apple computer, no Apple iPhone. This is the first time in my history that I am not recommending Apple products to family and friends. Fanboy status shrugged off.
I'm in the same bout, but where to go?

For Android, Chrome is a joke.
For Windows, Windows Phones are a joke, M$ didn't get it fixed yet.
Linux? Well!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: nt5672

SteveW928

macrumors 68000
May 28, 2010
1,834
1,380
Victoria, B.C. Canada
1. I am working at one of Canadian largest bank. We have so many in house application that runs on Windows and we even use some DOS based application (by the way, I love these DOS based application, so much faster on doing stuff). ... What I can say is, switch to Mac makes zero sense to business perspective. It is pointless, costly and it will take long time for people to getting use to.

Switching from anything to anything is always expensive (time/money). The question is more around how it should have been done in the first place, and/or whether the costs-savings in terms of problems and productivity have been factored in. Apparently IBM thinks it's worth it in their case. (And, today, it's far less worth it than it was a two or three decades ago.)

Any company would have to decide on a case-by-case basis, but historically, it isn't like most IT departments even looked.

what is middle class to you?
in the USA it's what every person can afford who has credit. The iphone is not luxury.

Can anyone spot the problem here??? Hopefully the rest of the world is a bit smarter than that!

It's amazing how some think their personal experience represents meaningful statistics that holds true when applied to tens or hundreds of millions of people.

Yes, but the 'marketshare' stats are also quite problematic. They are usually based on shipments, and Android is MUCH more broadly used, even on devices that are hardly smart-phones. They don't really reflect usage, which is a more important metric. In reality, it's somewhere between 'marketshare' and the observation of the above folks.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.