So you haven’t even understood my main point. I don’t want them to pivot towards AI. Because of AI and cloud computing instances, Apple faces a real threat to their hardware business. Once people are used to running things on cloud and ordering compute power online, Apple’s hardware specs will have no relevance. Who would want to spend $1500 on hardware when they can rent compute as per their requirements? Once that happens to regular computers, our mobile phones will follow the same suit. This is where Apple might have to pivot towards thin client manufacturing and that’s where the cookie crumbles. Less money from hardware business. Apple would be forced to adapt or become irrelevant.
I sincerely hope I am wrong about this. ☹️
I also get it that initially, cloud instances will be dirt cheap subscriptions. When Big-Tech companies have taken out every single hardware manufacturer out of the market, then it will be a proper money squeeze where it would be more costlier than owning the powerful hardware itself. Just like how monopolies/duopolies work. But that is for after 5-10 years.
I’m not doubting there will be a permanent impact, longstanding effects in some form to personal computing (or sort of lack thereof) whether the “AI” bubble bursts or deflates.
But is the sky falling? Are we really headed for the Matrix or Terminator land?
Morons chasing money. Selfish liars trying to save face. Etc.
Speaking on the Bg2 Pod, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said power, not compute, is biggest data center constraint
www.datacenterdynamics.com
A historical example:
Speaking of arrogant, excessively wealthy twits:
Mutual fund Fidelity, which owns stake in social media platform, marks down value of its shares in disclosure obtained by Axios
www.theguardian.com
To round it out, I’ll include a Hollywood depiction:
And the more excess money these morons have, the more they’re willing to toss it around and hope someone hands it back to them with extra.
NVIDIA cutting consumer production?
In this case, the influencer is seemingly correct. That is, Nvidia did the same for GeForce 40 series — which Nvidia also pulled back plenty early after their oops (i.e., eventually allowed the surplus and lost potential profits) during the 30 series window.
We never saw MSRP go down with GPUs after the crypto craze in 2020/2021. MSRP here NOT scalpers. You honestly think the RTX 5090 will go back down to $2,000 after the jump to $5,000 (rumored price)?
This, the non-1% getting pulverized, has been the path of the economy for decades, at least in the U.S.
This chart compares the median household income in the United States to the median price of new houses sold in the country.
www.statista.com
This calculator uses the official Consumer Price Index for Cars from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Cars costing $15,000 in 1947 would cost $76,882.59 in 2026.
www.in2013dollars.com
Average weekly earnings are $23.24 today, the same as in 1973 when adjusted for inflation.
www.weforum.org
I once came across a site with selectable charts though I didn’t bookmark it and can’t locate it again.
Anyway...
Regarding the rumors as well as predictions of an immediate dystopian hellscape… I respect a lot of the analysis from Steve (i.e., GamersNexus) but he also has at least some bias and gets caught up in drama — as one source example.
In fact, for (only) a brief period, Steve reminded fans/viewers that Nvidia’s advertised price was the
base MSRP, which was in response to the common mistaken reference of the abbreviation MSRP. For example, saying/asking “Is the Astral 5090’s $1,360 price above MSRP worth it?” is at best careless. Why? Because the
ROG Astral GeForce RTX 5090’s manufacturer’s price is $3,359.99. The Astral’s price is not $2,000 and never was.
If you want a very simplistic takeaway: take the tongue of any greedy/seflsih person, whether small-time or trillionaire, with a grain of salt.
