Tim Cook: Innovation 'Deeply Embedded' In Apple, Company Has 'No Issue' Coming Up With New Ideas

[TrentS]

Duh!

Of course it won't be forever. Nothing lasts forever.

Time last forever. How are you going to stop time from occurring?

 

[TrentS]

Drone Power!

I think if Apple really wanted to be innovative, or at least expand their portfolio of products, they should be getting into the drone industry. Apple could try to be the first company to come out with a drone personal companion, which is basically a personal hovering computer next to you at all times ( recording events, feeding you important information, alerting you about potential danger around you, retrieve small items for you, chat up a conversation with you, navigate you on an outdoor adventure, be your tour guide when visiting other cities, etc... )

Now that would be cool!

 

[symphara]

Why are people so wrapped up in the 64-bit thing?

64-bit processor. So what? Is a device with a 64-bit processor always faster than a 32-bit one? Of course not. Even when using similar tech, the CPU frequency, cache size, type and speed of memory, type and speed of flash etc. will matter more.

For application developers having native 64-bit support is more than irrelevant, it is in fact transparent. The compiler abstracts this level of detail.

For the OS having native 64-bit support means that it can address more than 4Gb of RAM. Ironically, Apple iOS devices not only don't reach anywhere as much, but in fact are RAM-starved. Compared to my wife's 32-bit Nexus 7 (2013), my 64-bit Mini Retina is far less fluid at switching apps, because it has 1Gb of memory while the Nexus has 2Gb.

This 64 vs 32 bit debate is a bit like the megapixels race: more is surely better. And still, I have 2-3 megapixel scans from SLR 35mm film which no empteen megapixels phone camera can match in quality. Imagine that!

 

[subsonix]

Guess ARM better pay back that wad of money Apple gave them to license the tech then.

Why? They are paying to get the right to use the instruction set, that is, making an ARM compatible CPU.

 

[mdelvecchio]

Really? So this is why Apple did not came up with anything new since Jobs departure. Really, really sad, just sad. It is not exactly a break-through to make things wider, smaller, longer, lighter or add colors.

making things smaller, thinner, lighter is certainly innovation and often involves manufacturing breakthrus. youre just ignorant to it. products and techniques dont improve themselves.

as apple has always said, under jobs, it's a matter of saying "No." jobs boasted that apple will say "No" to new good ideas all the time -- they are only interested in the great ideas, and implementing them thoughtfully in a small product catalog.

learn your apple history, please.

----------

Bleh, Apple's not the company it used to be. Tim Cook, you stink, and so do your speeches.

trolling aside, apple is the most profitable mobile maker, AND pc maker. theyre the biggest and most successful tech firm in history of the planet. clearly he's doing it right.

but im curious -- where's your company? what are you doing thats so great?

 

[Pilgrim1099]

trolling aside, apple is the most profitable mobile maker, AND pc maker. theyre the biggest and most successful tech firm in history of the planet. clearly he's doing it right.



but im curious -- where's your company? what are you doing thats so great?

Cook is NOT doing it right these days. He's rehashing the same damn cheerleader speech every time Wall Street goes over his company's performance.

He's no better than any politician that lies to cover their a$$es.

 

[symphara]

Why? They are paying to get the right to use the instruction set, that is, making an ARM compatible CPU.

It's not the instruction set but the ARM core itself that they license, unless Apple has fully cloned ARMv8 which I very much doubt

Usually when you make your SoC you buy the various bits essentially as blueprints: the general-purpose core, cache, the memory controller, the GPU core(s), various accelerators/MACs/interfaces to peripherals etc and then you stick them together into a bigger blueprint, lay it out in a particular technology using expensive software, and then pay a factory to burn the silicon/pin/package the chip, and voila, you have an A7 or whatever.

There's nothing special about the A7, including its much vaunted 64-bit support. It's entirely in step with the current tech level at that TDP, the rest being Apple marketing blurb having as much value as "the 64-bit A7 is magical and shiny, and has patented rounded corners".

 

[Mike MA]

Because Jobs has only been gone for two and a half years. It took seven years between the iPod and the iPhone.

Good point.

Arguably, Apple has done far more in the past two and a half years than they did in the seven years between the iPod and the iPhone.

I doubt. They developed or enhanced existing products, often in an impressive manner. But Apple did basically the same 5 years ago, only with fewer products. More products, more updates.

 

[subsonix]

It's not the instruction set but the ARM core itself that they license, unless Apple has fully cloned ARMv8 which I very much doubt

It's not the ARM core they license, the A7 (and A6) are not Cortex chips. It's well established at this point. Apple acquired PA Semi and has also hired lots of talent and are well equipped to make this in house, which is what they do.

There's nothing special about the A7, including its much vaunted 64-bit support. It's entirely in step with the current tech level at that TDP, the rest being Apple marketing blurb having as much value as "the 64-bit A7 is magical and shiny, and has patented rounded corners".

Completely wrong, the A6 and A7 are Apple designs. The reason people get hang up on the 64 bit part is probably because that's what people are familiar with, ignoring the rest of ARMv8 or simply equating the two. When someone mentions ARM and 64 bits, that means the new v8 instruction set, which happens to be 64 bits.

 

[zipa]

a MacBook Air would not be able to run an apache server, a plex media server, along side a mail service with my domain, and an open directory.

Why not? Anything made in this millenium would run that without breaking a sweat.

 

[LordVic]

Why not? Anything made in this millenium would run that without breaking a sweat.

2nding to prove point.

I'm currently running a server that runs Apache, Rtorrent for my torrent box, Plex, a few different irssi clients, and IRC server, SMTP server, and general buffoonery and file server that you would use a home server for.

its running on a Core2Duo with 4GB ram and it handles a 1080p stream fine while doing the rest.

I'm fully convinced If i wanted to, i could run this on my Macbook Air.

 

[Antares]

I, for one, am very excited for whatever new products are coming from Apple. Looking forward to integrating more of them into my life!

He better prove it, soon.

Or else!

 

[ericinboston]

They'll be just fine. People have to cool it.

----------



Because Jobs has only been gone for two and a half years. It took seven years between the iPod and the iPhone. Arguably, Apple has done far more in the past two and a half years than they did in the seven years between the iPod and the iPhone.

I agree with you and I agree with the original poster about not much creativity the past few years.

Jobs may only be gone 2.5+ years, but when he left, the iPad was almost into its 3rd release...and of course all the other products that Apple had back in Oct 2011 (when Jobs died...iphone, ipod, imac, etc) were very mature.

Nobody really expects Apple (or any tech company that makes physical products) to come up with great new inventions every 1-3 years....but Apple has been peddling the same old iOS-powered devices for 10 years or so now.

Wall Street wants to know what's in the pipeline. Investors want to know if Apple is going to introduce some great new technology or are we going to see the iPhone 11 before something "new" comes out. Seriously.

Apple certainly is not going out of business tomorrow...but just as the stock can quickly shoot up, it can quickly come back down if investors believe that Apple has hit a plateau. That's what investors watch...they want return on their investment. They may wait a few years but not forever.

 

[k995]

So by your definition nobody is really innovating. Just making screens bigger with higher pixel density isn't innovation. The stylus certainly isn't new so adding that to a phone can't be innovation either. Google Chromebook is just a cheap laptop which Windows OEMs have been doing for ages. Curved TVs I guess might be considered innovative but we've yet to see a market for them. Seems more like TV makers trying to find a reason for people to buy new TVs (same could be said about 4K

Google glass and chromebooks certainly are innovations.

Do tell me what apple has done that is simular (so not made something smaller/thinner/faster/more colors/...) in the last couple of years.

At best its bring the trackpad to desktop with magic mouse and multituck trackpad but thats about it .

 

[tdream]

Haha Tim, what have you innovated since you arrived? A trash can isn't innovation. Moving peripherals from the inside to the outside isn't innovation.

 

[mgauss7]

Cortland/mgauss prediction for iTV and iWatch

The iTV is needed. The iWatch is not:

Reasons for the iTV:
Quick finding of "all BlackList in order", finding of "if you liked this you will..."
Quick one button purchase of the Obama watch, the blue Sheldon watch...etc.
Quick purchase of dresses, homes, cars in the show, better price than Amazon (Amazon has 40 people selling toilet paper at 17% cost to the seller, Apple can do better in its purchasing and pricing)
Suggestions that instantly go to the cue
Smart mode, if you are seeing an L.A. show, pre approved homes in your budget let you buy them at the press of a button..."honey we are moving"...
Smart mode if you are seeing a Jerusalem show a pop up shows you the well priced 2 week tour, the 1 week tour, etc.
The iTV shows a big picture for many issues
While you are watching a Jerusalem show, you are told about a new discovery you can visit at the push of a button
One button services and food delivered, cleaning services show up
One button reselling of previously purchased products, "auto eBay"
Auto merging of husband and wife and kids interests during or after the show.
Instant delivery services for over the counter Walgreens run, supermarket,
Instant delivery and setup services for Apple products

iWatch problems:
People don't all like to look the same. Miley will dump it if she sees Barbra with it
Its ugly to see your doctor finger twerking the 3 buttons trying to work in 1" square
Its a small screen, with inferior capabilites of something in your pocket
Too many competitors all with trite advantages

 

[symphara]

Completely wrong, the A6 and A7 are Apple designs.

I didn't say they weren't Apple designs, so you can put the straw-man back in the attic. Innovative, they aren't. Even if the A7 was written from scratch - which I just don't believe it is, having worked in the industry (and I grant your correction that the A7 doesn't have a Cortex inside, like some previous designs), they still wouldn't be innovative. There's in fact a simple test: they could take the 32-bit 8-core CPU from the Galaxy S4, put it in iPhone 6, call that the A8, a major upgrade (it's got 8 cores, it's magical!!!!) and all the Apple aficionados would be in violent agreement. Nobody could tell the difference, because there's just not that much difference between the CPUs of most phones in the >$300 price bracket.

Sorry to disappoint you: the A7 just isn't special. It's just the usual iteration on top of the previous one, and transitions from 32 to 64 bits we've seen before, actually, a long, long time ago.

Apple and innovation are a contradiction of terms. Apple is toxic to the industry in respect to innovation in general, since they're patenting lots of utterly trivial stuff and then behaving like any other greedy, unethical patent troll.

Let's not beat around the bush: they sell fashion tech. It's not tech innovation they have to sell, but innovation in how much they can titillate the public so they can overcharge large premiums for shiny stuff running, frankly, sub-par software.

Why are you so ashamed that you like fashion tech? Most of us have an appreciation for white shiny crap with rounded corners!

 

[subsonix]

I didn't say they weren't Apple designs, so you can put the straw-man back in the attic.

You said there was nothing special about the A7. Being a Apple design makes it special by definition, it's not the ARM Cortex, it's also not any other design.

Innovative, they aren't. Even if the A7 was written from scratch - which I just don't believe it is

I think the very least you should do is to use Google to look this up before you make outlandish statements, it's easy.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-review/2
https://www.mikeash.com/pyblog/friday-qa-2013-09-27-arm64-and-you.html

----------

Sorry to disappoint you: the A7 just isn't special. It's just the usual iteration on top of the previous one, and transitions from 32 to 64 bits we've seen before, actually, a long, long time ago.

This is just wrong, it's clear that you do not know what you are talking about at this point. See the link above about the new instruction set, it's not just a transition to 64 bits.

 

[zipa]

Why are you so ashamed that you like fashion tech? Most of us have an appreciation for white shiny crap with rounded corners!

This. As long as they keep making them shinier and rounder than the equivalent crap from Samsung or Lenovo, I will likely keep buying them. For instance, I'd love to try out the Note 3, but the faux leather back is just so damn cheesy that I can't bring myself to buy one. Same with windows laptops. Fake carbon fibre, three dozens of "Dogpoop inside" and "Designed for Blind people!" stickers on top... No thanks.

I hold no pretense that Apple products are in meaningful way better than their competitors. They look nice, they work nice and as long as I can get them for closely the same price (not talking about twice the price or more) and they work for my needed use cases I see no reason not to buy them.

 

[everything-i]

According to Steve Jobs, it took them two years. At least that's what he said in his keynote: "I've been waiting for this moment for TWO years."

An let's say it as it is: When a company with more than 80,000 employees supports only a fistful of products and only manages to release thinner and faster versions of the already existing ones, then I wonder where that innovation is Apple keeps boasting about. After the original iPad was released, they've only brought minor evolutionary releases of already existing products to the market. I think that's called "model upgrading" - Modellpflege. Innovation is too big a word for it, but of course it sounds better in interviews and advertisements.

Apple's not focusing on innovative products, they're just focusing on milking their cash cows. After all, they're just another American corporation.

This argument doesn't really hold water, you don't know what innovative products are in the works until they come to market. There may be many in the works but they take a lot of time to bring to fruition. The iPhone took 2 years to bring to market but the iPad had already been being designed for years when they decided to create a phone using the technology they had created for it, then it took them years after iPhone to actually get the iPad to market. To create something truly new and different takes a lot of time and effort.

 

[vomhorizon]

Google glass and chromebooks certainly are innovations.

Do tell me what apple has done that is simular (so not made something smaller/thinner/faster/more colors/...) in the last couple of years.

Why use only the last couple of years as a reference? When apple has had plenty on its table in the last few years to refresh existing products. Apple has never traditionally entered new market categories every year...They took their time for the ipad, iphone etc and Their CEO has claimed that they have been working on new categories for some time and they'll bear fruit later this year. Whats so complicated with this? If and when apple comes out with a new product and it is really what everyone expects from apple would you say that google has not innovated since the last few months or years?

 

[Digital Skunk]

So there was never a fingerprint scanner in any other industry that worked in the past? Wow!

Exactly! There also was never a phone or a tablet computer before Apple.

There are also computers that outperform the new Mac Pro. Perhaps it hasn't been matched in wow factor, but there are dual cpu setups out there that do perform better.

Single CPU setups that out perform the Mac Pro.

or else what ?

This

This

And this

New stuff that works as advertised. There are very few companies that have a solid* track record of that.

*not prefect but solid.

Let me know where you want to put that goalpost so I can nail my counter argument.

I know for a fact that I will mention the super 24/7 rock solid performance of any HP or Dell professional workstation and someone's just going to start shuffling that goalpost left and right.

Those computers cost more and don't have OS X. They also lack Thunderbolt.

Wrong, they do have Thunderbolt. Visit the site once in a while just to make sure you're right before mentioning things like this.

Your definition of working must be different from most. If it's possible to scan a finger print I suppose that's technically working but I think most people would only classify a scanner as working if it scans successfully most of the time on the first try.

See, goalpost has been MOVED!

 

[indiekiduk]

Apple had the first mainstream fingerprint scanner on a phone, but working fingerprint scanners have been around for quite a while prior to that.

Ohhh reeeallly?

HP iPaq 5550 2002. It was a swipe instead of a press but it was just as (in)accurate as the 5S, that is the odd time in many it fails to recognise.

The fingerprint is the most boring feature to be added to a phone, the problem is Tim Cook just loves it and soon he'll be saying, oh the mac pro failed because it didn't have touchID and the iPad Air failed because it didn't have touch ID. No because touchID is simply boring, and the reason the Air is failing is because its no lighter than the iPad 2 so we hate being lied to. Oh and we hate Cook trying to sell us last years phone in a crap plastic case.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Ohhh reeeallly?

Image

HP iPaq 5550 2002. It was a swipe instead of a press but it was just as (in)accurate as the 5S, that is the odd time in many it fails to recognise.

The fingerprint is the most boring feature to be added to a phone, the problem is Tim Cook just loves it and soon he'll be saying, oh the mac pro failed because it didn't have touchID and the iPad Air failed because it didn't have touch ID. No because touchID is simply boring, and the reason the Air is failing is because its no lighter than the iPad 2 so we hate being lied to. Oh and we hate Cook trying to sell us last years phone in a crap plastic case.

As I said, working fingerprint scanners were around for years before they were used on the iPhone.

 

[numlock]

trolling aside, apple is the most profitable mobile maker, AND pc maker. theyre the biggest and most successful tech firm in history of the planet. clearly he's doing it right.

but im curious -- where's your company? what are you doing thats so great?

seriously what is the point in comments like this? would i have to own a skyrise or two to criticize donald trump? be a president for three terms to criticize obama?

the poster you quoted may have been quite rude but your post is the trolling one if anything.

if tim cook cant handle being called out in a post then he should be more careful about what he says and has been saying and if you cant handle it then you are in for a harder time.