Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple is a traditional business

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 248 posts

Re: Apple is a traditional business

#221

Post by jldugger »

pier25 wrote: post #201
wmeredith wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The innovation of the iPhone was in the execution. The ideas were around, along with a ton of failed attempts at it. A computer in your pocket had been an idea for decades. Apple made one that a critical mass of people could/would actually use.

Yes, but Apple couldn't have made the iPhone without a touch screen, ARM, Wifi, etc, hence claiming that Apple is the sole responsible of past and future innovation in their product line is naive.

Nokia had all those things, and still lost out to a company who upgraded their popular MP3 player to support cellular.

Re: Apple is a traditional business

#222

Post by kgwgk »

dang wrote: post #219
kgwgk wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Apple is a rock of common sense in an industry that’s gone rogue" (the subtitle) would be better. "Apple is the perfect tech company for this day and age, an example to the rest of Silicon Valley" (the take-home message in the first line) would be better. The Apple "is a traditional business" remark refers to the main point of this opinion piece, which appears right before that statement: "This is a time when compan…

"Apple is a rock of common sense in an industry that’s gone rogue" is too baity, even more than the original title we changed. It's guaranteed to provoke objections if we put it in there. Ditto with "perfect tech company"—can you imagine the arguments that would lead to? You're welcome to make a bot to track title changes. People have done this kind of thing from time to time, e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?i…

The problem with opinion articles is that they are not "objective" by definition. A representative title cannot be objective. It's unfortunate that interesting articles (they may be somewhat interesting, if they get to the front page) are devalued by listing them under aseptic, uninteresting, click-repellent titles.

Re: Apple is a traditional business

#223

Post by [deleted] »

imron wrote: post #116
wilsonnb wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really wasn't as massive a leap as you make it out to be. It's likely that we would have ended up with something very similar to today's smartphones even if the iPhone had never existed. It wasn't the first smartphone. It wasn't the first phone to use a capacitive touch screen. The first iPhone didn't even have the app store - it launched with the 3G a year after the the first iPhone was released, if I remember co…

> It's likely that we would have ended up with something very similar to today's smartphones even if the iPhone had never existed. I'm not so sure. A picture says a thousand words: https://www.cultofmac.com/145083/what-phones-looked-like-bef...

[deleted]

Re: Apple is a traditional business

#224

Post by pwinnski »

RyanShook wrote: post #36

Apple’s market cap will keep rising for the next few years without any innovation through buybacks and service revenue from existing devices. But the fact that they’re not talking about new products or hinting at anything down the line concerns me...

They haven't discussed new products or hinted at anything down the line at any point in the last 12+ years, and aren't about to start.

Re: Apple is a traditional business

#225

Post by pwinnski »

airstrike wrote: post #30
zeveb wrote: post #23

I'm very fond of Apple's business stance; my concern is not with it, but with their technological stance. Apple products are built on lock-in; they are proprietary and closed, not open. Frankly, at this point they're not even really all that good (in fact, sometimes embarrassingly bad — something not limited to Apple!). I want the freedom to tinker, the freedom to review, the freedom to extend. That's why I use Linux…

I'd settle for iMessage and FaceTime being open...

In the case of FaceTime, it's VirnetX that's to blame. Apple's pledge to open-source it ran hard into a lawsuit from VirnetX that required Apple to redesign and still currently has them paying $439M to VirnetX for patent infringement.

Re: Apple is a traditional business

#226

Post by hungerstrike »

scarface74 wrote: post #176
zeveb wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So what can't you "tinker" with that you would like on OS X - The kernel (yes, there's Darwin — I don't believe it's possible to replace a working macOS kernel with my own build) - The window manager - The Finder - Cocoa - Safari - XCode (although I believe some components are open source) - iMessage - Facetime

The Window Manager - nothing stopping you from using XWindows. The Finder - it's just a file manager, what's stopping you from using any other file manager? Cocoa - is just a Framework for building Mac apps. Nothing stopping you from using another Framework Xcode - just an IDE on top of open source build tools. IMessage - just a messaging program. Nothing stopping you from using another messaging program. FaceTime -…

Pfffft. Yeah there's "nothing stopping you" except for everything.

You can't get rid of the window manager, the Finder or the Dock. Heck, you can't even stop Finder from running in any supported way and even if you manage to, you can't replace Finder in every program to open or save files.

You can't replace the Dock because Apple won't let you modify a private API for describing available screen space. Every Dock replacement has the same bug - windows end up behind the replacement dock when you maximize them.

Even Microsoft gives you hooks to change things like the Taskbar, Explorer and so on where Apple gives you nothing.

Re: Apple is a traditional business

#227

Post by loxs »

wpdev_63 wrote: post #192
loxs wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even so, I'm not in the USA and don't plan on visiting very soon. And I'm pretty damn sure my government doesn't have access to it.

You really should give some context to what you say or it's meaningless. Also if you reside in one of the countries within the 14 eyes, they do have access to your phone[0]. It's a really good reason to think twice about buying american products and visiting their country knowing that they are creating a surveillance state. Wouldn't you agree? [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes#Other_international_...

I don't understand what you mean with the remark about context. But otherwise no, I don't live in any of these countries. Also, it's not that I "don't care". It's just that by what I know, Apple is the least risk to my privacy and well being.

Re: Apple is a traditional business

#228

Post by IncRnd »

pier25 wrote: post #202
IncRnd wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah, but don't forget that the pieces to be able to create the iPhone had to be there first. Like the LG Prada?

No, like touch screens, ARM, Wifi, etc.

:) That was my point. All of those were on the LG Prada.

Re: Apple is a traditional business

#229

Post by airstrike »

jmull wrote: post #53
airstrike wrote: post #27

I only wish the author hadn't forgotten to mention the quintessential non-Apple company: SNAP[0] Many say the current game of musical chairs is overdue for a pause. My money (not literally) is on Tech stocks taking the biggest hit. But as the article put it, Apple isn't a Tech company -- it's a manufacturer (and superb retailer!) of products that are observably differentiated, as they clearly command higher prices fo…

> But as the article put it, Apple isn't a Tech company That's not what the article says. In fact, it says "Apple is the perfect tech company..." I'd like to hear a definition of "tech company" and doesn't include Apple.

I meant "not just a Tech company"... I guess that's what I get for not sleeping

Re: Apple is a traditional business

#230

Post by acchow »

oflannabhra wrote: post #11

> ...this is a time when Amazon is pushing innovations that don’t solve any real-world problems but may create some: like smart speakers, with their threat of big brother-style surveillance in exchange for a minimal increase in convenience, or complex and expensive cashierless stores that won’t deliver much of an improvement to our shopping experience but may cost underprivileged people their jobs. This is a time whe…

> expensive cashierless stores that won’t deliver much of an improvement to our shopping experience

Having to lineup to checkout is definitely the most time-consuming and unpleasant part of shopping. It's why I way prefer online shopping.

At a busy time at the grocer, I take 3 minutes to pick up the 3 things I want. Then all of the checkout lanes are backed up for >10 minutes. Even self check-out.

Post reply on HN