Apple Corporation is Bad for Technology

[Boges]

I do ! Secure, and everything I need is there and functions extremely well, especially the battery life. \

The GF's Samsung is always needing a charge

We'll see if Square Smartphones take off.

[guyser]

We'll see if Square Smartphones take off.

Yea...thats true.

But I think it may as we age. I do a lot of reading and it is much easier than on the smaller screens, wider easier to read . I like that. I know it isnt as cool as the iphone, but it is funny to see kids wanting to see mine and I can tell they're liking what they see. Then they ask about apps......sorry charlie , Im not into apps except for sports standings for the NBA and NHL.

I only ask the NHL app to show me the bottom feeders so I dont have top scroll too long for the Leafs.

[Boges]

Yea...thats true.

But I think it may as we age. I do a lot of reading and it is much easier than on the smaller screens, wider easier to read . I like that. I know it isnt as cool as the iphone, but it is funny to see kids wanting to see mine and I can tell they're liking what they see. Then they ask about apps......sorry charlie , Im not into apps except for sports standings for the NBA and NHL.

I only ask the NHL app to show me the bottom feeders so I dont have top scroll too long for the Leafs.

If you don't care about apps then God Bless you.

Apple and Android do make their smartphones way more functional with all the things you can do beyond just being a communications device. The ability to cast videos from your phone to a Smart TV or Chromecast enabled TV is one thing that I love.

Fitness Apps are cool too. Music integration. I love how Google's services integrate seamlessly with my phone where I can share one thing with another app so easily.

I've never owned a BB so I can't really comment, but the people that rock one are getting fewer and fewer all the time.

[msj]

Even though its soft wood?

Well, it's hard enough so it doesn't bend.

[AngusThermopyle]

LOL! In the end it's all about the bend, or lack there of.

[Boges]

LOL! In the end it's all about the bend, or lack there of.

Apparently these phones bend a lot.

[cybercoma]

The last few replies are interesting. No cares about the slave conditions in which people are building your phones and ipads.

What do you suggest? People stop using everyday items? Do you know how much clothing is made under those conditions? How about the components of almost every single light fixture on the market? What about the televisions? You literally cannot escape it if you tried. Most people who are conscientious of this have to come to terms with the fact that their products are made in this way, while still fighting for the system to change. It's impossible to avoid it.

[cybercoma]

I also don't see people raving about how their iPhone actually works. I guess they're resigned to talking about how awesome 3rd party cases are.

Regarding the working conditions. It does sort of question the idea of "quality". It's being made in the same conditions as the sweatshop that makes your Walmart product. Phone for the Rich indeed.

You're such a fanboy. I don't need to rave about my phone. I don't give a shit what kind of phone people use. You, on the other hand, time and again like to try to shame people for their choices. Get over it.

[Bryan]

What do you suggest? People stop using everyday items? Do you know how much clothing is made under those conditions? How about the components of almost every single light fixture on the market? What about the televisions? You literally cannot escape it if you tried. Most people who are conscientious of this have to come to terms with the fact that their products are made in this way, while still fighting for the system to change. It's impossible to avoid it.

I have to agree. At least Apple is trying. They have also required all of their contracted mineral smelters to submit to independent audits to prove that they are not using conflict minerals. The ones that didn't submit? Dropped.

http://9to5mac.com/2015/02/12/apple-conflict-minerals/

Over 80% of the world's coltan comes from the Congo. It's incredibly difficult -- nearly impossible economically -- to guarantee than none of the coltan you're using in your phones comes from there. Especially when you're talking about the large scale Apple needs these products. Apple doesn't care, they're demanding it because it's the right thing to do, even if it doesn't make business sense.

They can't change everything, but they are in a unique position that they can use their leverage to at least start changes happening.

[kimmy]

Apparently these phones bend a lot.

Psychic spoon-bender Yuri Geller has an explanation for that! I'm not even kidding!

Meanwhile... is anybody else just not that excited about upgrading their phones anymore? I was looking at the new Moto X phones, which I think are physically the most beautiful phones I've ever seen, available with real wood, bamboo, or leather backs. At least, they are if you live in the US, in which case you can go to the Motorola website and select any number of options to customize your phone. If you live in Canada, you have to buy your phone through Telus, and Telus only has 2 varieties. Apparently you just can't buy one unlocked in Canada-- Motorola apparently figures that in Canada it's more lucrative to make exclusivity arrangements with the telecom mafia carriers than to sell to customers. (I refuse to purchase my phone through that business model.)

But, even as pretty as it is, why would I upgrade to a Moto X anyway? I've had my Nexus 4 for two years, and it's still capable of doing everything I want, plus lots of other stuff I haven't even thought of yet. I got upgraded to the latest version of Android OS last month, and I can run any app I've felt like trying. What's my incentive to plunk down a bunch more money for a new phone when my current one is so splendid? Slightly better camera? Slightly faster processor? More storage memory? Previously when I upgraded from my Milestone to my Nexus 4, there was a quantum leap in performance and capability. The hardware and the operating system had all come a long way during the time I owned my Milestone. I'm not sure I can say the same this time. I can't see that a 2015 phone can do anything in particular that I couldn't do with my 2013 phone. I imagine a lot of people who own iPhone 5 variants feel pretty much the same.

For me, I lost any interest in replacing my main computer somewhere around 2010, when I put a new processor into my 2008 setup. I've added more memory since, and replaced the hard disks with solid state drives, but I can't picture myself replacing the whole thing, barring a major hardware failure. It's ridiculously fast. It has ludicrous speed. Maybe you could build a faster computer today, given some non-trivial amount of money, but what's the point? For me, my computer has reached a "don't care anymore" plateau of performance, where a further improvement in speed would be both imperceptible and pointless for the kinds of computer tasks I do.

And for myself and probably for many people, I think cell phones may have also reached a "don't care anymore" plateau. If you go buy a phone today, is it going to do anything to meet your needs significantly better than the phone you already have? For me, the answer is "probably not."

Of course, for some people the answer to that question is "probably not" even if their current phone is a rotary-dial land-line.

-k

[kimmy]

Back on the topic of "Apple is bad for business":

Apple is bad for business. So are Google, Adobe, and Intel. They're among the defendants in a massive anti-trust lawsuit that's in progress. The focus of the lawsuit is collusion between these tech giants for the purpose of keeping tech salaries down. The strategy was conceived by the sainted Steve Jobs (peace be upon him) himself.

Steve Jobs, the chief executive of Apple at the time, could not have been any clearer of his intentions to collude with Google and prevent his company from hiring away employees from his frenemy and vice versa.

“If you hire a single one of these people that means war,” he told a Google executive.

Apple’s human resources sent out a note:

“Please add Google to your ’hands-off’ list. We recently agreed not to recruit from one another so if you hear of any recruiting they are doing against us, please be sure to let me know.”

A trove of similar emails has emerged in the case, many of which have been unearthed and highlighted by Mark Ames of PandoDaily, who has diligently followed the case.

Google’s chief executive, Eric Schmidt, was just as explicit in an email after Mr. Jobs queried him about why Google was trying to hire one of his employees. “I believe we have a policy of no recruiting from Apple and this is a direct inbound request,” Mr. Schmidt wrote to his team. “Can you get this stopped and let me know why this is happening? I will need to send a response back to Apple quickly so please let me know as soon as you can.”

Mr. Schmidt clearly understood the legal jeopardy such an arrangement could create. In another similar email chain about the policy with another technology company that was ostensibly part of the no-hire cartel, he told a colleague to communicate it “verbally since I don’t want to create a paper trail over which we can be sued later.”

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/tech-firms-may-find-no-poaching-pacts-costly/

-k

[msj]

The strategy was conceived by the sainted Steve Jobs (peace be upon him) himself.

-k

I really don't get this attitude.

Who thinks Jobs was a saint?

I do not know a single person who thinks this.

Most people either don't care because he has been dead for years now or, if pushed, think he was a douche bag who made bad decisions when it came to cancer treatment that ultimately cost him his life.

Or maybe that's just me.

[Bonam]

For me, I lost any interest in replacing my main computer somewhere around 2010, when I put a new processor into my 2008 setup. I've added more memory since, and replaced the hard disks with solid state drives, but I can't picture myself replacing the whole thing, barring a major hardware failure. It's ridiculously fast. It has ludicrous speed. Maybe you could build a faster computer today, given some non-trivial amount of money, but what's the point? For me, my computer has reached a "don't care anymore" plateau of performance, where a further improvement in speed would be both imperceptible and pointless for the kinds of computer tasks I do.

And for myself and probably for many people, I think cell phones may have also reached a "don't care anymore" plateau. If you go buy a phone today, is it going to do anything to meet your needs significantly better than the phone you already have? For me, the answer is "probably not."

Of course, for some people the answer to that question is "probably not" even if their current phone is a rotary-dial land-line.

-k

For computers, depending on application, there are very significant gains in performance to be had if you need them. Modern games certainly push the latest hardware to its limits, and advances in GPUs over the last few years put current GPUs at about 10x the speed of ones from 2010. If you try to run the latest games at high resolutions on a GPU from 2010, you'll get very low frame rates. Similarly, for work applications (3d modeling, simulations, computing, video processing, etc), you can definitely notice the benefit of top of the line computers. If you ever try playing 4k video, you may find your computer from 2010 is unable to play it without stuttering heavily. But yes, for people that mostly just browse the web, watch youtube, write emails, write docs in MS office, etc, there's not much benefit from the latest hardware.

As for cell phones... it's kind of the same thing, with certain apps being resource hogs, but probably a smaller portion of phone users actually benefit from the higher specs than the portion of PC users that do. The push into 4k screen for phones does seem pretty silly to me though, I mean, at 1080p, you already can't ever notice the pixelization of the screen unless you bring it right up to within a few cm of your face. It seems like 4k phones will be standard before 4k TVs or monitors, which is dumb, since the extra resolution actually makes a big difference there, but not on the phone. But one of the more useful advances with newer phones has been lower power consumption processors and other electronics, allowing for longer battery life. A couple generations of smart phones ago, you'd be lucky to get 8 hours of battery out of your phone with moderate use. Today, my smartphone battery lasts 2-3 days between charges.

As for the spoon-bender guy... that's hilarious. I hope Apple hires him!

Edited February 16, 2015 by Bonam

[cybercoma]

I have to agree. At least Apple is trying. They have also required all of their contracted mineral smelters to submit to independent audits to prove that they are not using conflict minerals. The ones that didn't submit? Dropped.

http://9to5mac.com/2015/02/12/apple-conflict-minerals/

Over 80% of the world's coltan comes from the Congo. It's incredibly difficult -- nearly impossible economically -- to guarantee than none of the coltan you're using in your phones comes from there. Especially when you're talking about the large scale Apple needs these products. Apple doesn't care, they're demanding it because it's the right thing to do, even if it doesn't make business sense.

They can't change everything, but they are in a unique position that they can use their leverage to at least start changes happening.

Not to derail the thread even further, but the argument reminds me of those who suggest that people who want sustainable energy sources should stop using anything with oil. It's simply not possible and nobody with two braincells to rub together is going to argue we halt oil production overnight.

[cybercoma]

Back on the topic of "Apple is bad for business":

Apple is bad for business. So are Google, Adobe, and Intel. They're among the defendants in a massive anti-trust lawsuit that's in progress. The focus of the lawsuit is collusion between these tech giants for the purpose of keeping tech salaries down. The strategy was conceived by the sainted Steve Jobs (peace be upon him) himself.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/tech-firms-may-find-no-poaching-pacts-costly/

-k

Again, here we are. Is the suggestion that we should boycott these products because industries try to keep salaries down? That's every industry in every corner of the planet. That's capitalism in a nutshell. People's labour produce something of value. The "surplus" of that value goes to the corporation, business owners, the stockholders, the bourgeoisie. Everywhere there is capitalism, there are leeches living off the fruits of the proletariat's labour. Over time they do whatever they can to create greater surpluses, namely through the use of more technology and other labour efficiencies. That technology is what allows the workers to organize and realize what is being robbed of them. It pulls the workers together as much as it benefits the capitalist classes. That is why Marx predicted the bourgeoisie would sow the seeds of its own demise. Luckily for them the state intervened in the mid 20th century to placate the masses with social reforms that allowed them to still get by while being robbed of the true value of their labour by industry. Health care, social insurance, welfare, etc. are all stopgaps to what Marx thought was an inevitable Revolution.

Long story short, capitalism is as capitalism does. Salaries are driven down anywhere there is a capitalist economy.

[Boges]

You're such a fanboy. I don't need to rave about my phone. I don't give a shit what kind of phone people use. You, on the other hand, time and again like to try to shame people for their choices. Get over it.

Why bother post in the thread then? The topic of the debate is debating why Apple is so popular. Many people don't care about having innovative phones.

Kimmy seems to fit the bill perfectly. The Nexus 4 doesn't even have LTE GEEZ!!!

I'm just highlighting that there's nothing all that great about Apple phones.

[cybercoma]

Why bother post in the thread then? The topic of the debate is debating why Apple is so popular. Many people don't care about having innovative phones.

Kimmy seems to fit the bill perfectly. The Nexus 4 doesn't even have LTE GEEZ!!!

I'm just highlighting that there's nothing all that great about Apple phones.

you're holding up your opinion as fact and have in these threads for a long time. Even then you're inconsistent as you say Apple just does things other companies do, but Apple sucks and the other companies don't despite the similarities. It's as bad as the XBOX Playstation fandom or the PC Master Race crowds. People like what they like and you only seem to chime in when someone likes so,ething you deem they shouldn't. Who cares what phone someone uses? They all do practically the same shit in myriad ways.

[Boges]

Who cares what phone someone uses? They all do practically the same shit in myriad ways.

Ultimately I don't care.

But the whole point of discussing technology is trying to decide what's better and what's more innovative.

I wasn't the one that bumped this thread nor did I create it.

The question I ask is what does an iPhone do that it's competitors can't? The answer is pretty much nothing. So why are they so popular? There's something else at play, it's the logo.

[kimmy]

Again, here we are. Is the suggestion that we should boycott these products because industries try to keep salaries down? That's every industry in every corner of the planet. That's capitalism in a nutshell. People's labour produce something of value. The "surplus" of that value goes to the corporation, business owners, the stockholders, the bourgeoisie. Everywhere there is capitalism, there are leeches living off the fruits of the proletariat's labour. Over time they do whatever they can to create greater surpluses, namely through the use of more technology and other labour efficiencies. That technology is what allows the workers to organize and realize what is being robbed of them. It pulls the workers together as much as it benefits the capitalist classes. That is why Marx predicted the bourgeoisie would sow the seeds of its own demise. Luckily for them the state intervened in the mid 20th century to placate the masses with social reforms that allowed them to still get by while being robbed of the true value of their labour by industry. Health care, social insurance, welfare, etc. are all stopgaps to what Marx thought was an inevitable Revolution.

Long story short, capitalism is as capitalism does. Salaries are driven down anywhere there is a capitalist economy.

What went on between Apple and Google and others is an example of why antitrust laws were created.

Unfortunately it's pretty hard to actually prove that this stuff goes on behind the scenes.

-k

[kimmy]

I really don't get this attitude.

Who thinks Jobs was a saint?

Oh? I thought that Jobs was held to be some kind of religious figure among Apple fanatics.

To me, Apple products are kind of like the Leafs or Justin Beiber. I don't have anything against the product itself, but some of the fans can be pretty annoying. One of my friends won't even respond to my text messages anymore because I won't switch to Apple.

-k

[cybercoma]

What went on between Apple and Google and others is an example of why antitrust laws were created.

Unfortunately it's pretty hard to actually prove that this stuff goes on behind the scenes.

-k

It's a lot of bullshit, that's for sure. The people who end up in the government working anti-trust are the ones who can't hack it in finance. The best and brightest are out there gaming the system for their own profit. And why wouldn't they?

What I hate about the tech companies is the absolutely asinine patent wars. Sue first, ask questions later. It's anti-competitive and anti-innovation.

[cybercoma]

I don't have anything against the product itself, but some of the fans can be pretty annoying. One of my friends won't even respond to my text messages anymore because I won't switch to Apple.

-k

+1 on the fans, but the same can be said for Android fans who religiously put down Apple products. These kind of competitive fandoms are ridiculous everywhere, which is why I brought up XBOX/Playstation, as well as the PC Master Race crowd in gaming. You just want to shake these kids and say, "you all like video games! You know that, right!? More games, more choices is better! Stop being an idiot!" I don't want there to be only 1 or 2 players in the game. I want many players all equally competitive, pushing each other to adapt, improve, and make something better. However, industries, almost all industries, are now bent on exclusivity deals and other legislative or contractual monkeying to hold onto their markets. It's bad for consumers and it's bad for the economy, but who gives a shit when you're the lone wolf or one of a couple of wolves sitting at the top and making bank? Edited February 17, 2015 by cybercoma

[WestCoastRunner]

Back on the topic of "Apple is bad for business":

Apple is bad for business. So are Google, Adobe, and Intel. They're among the defendants in a massive anti-trust lawsuit that's in progress. The focus of the lawsuit is collusion between these tech giants for the purpose of keeping tech salaries down. The strategy was conceived by the sainted Steve Jobs (peace be upon him) himself.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/tech-firms-may-find-no-poaching-pacts-costly/

-k

That may be true in Silicon Valley but in other parts of North America, not so much. IT salaries being paid in Vancouver, Toronto, Calgary or Montreal or any other community that employs IT staff, does not care two hoots about what salaries are being paid at Google, Adobe or Intel or even Microsoft.

Having said that, I can't believe that Apple is bad for business. That is giving them far too much credit.

[kimmy]

That may be true in Silicon Valley but in other parts of North America, not so much. IT salaries being paid in Vancouver, Toronto, Calgary or Montreal or any other community that employs IT staff, does not care two hoots about what salaries are being paid at Google, Adobe or Intel or even Microsoft.

Having said that, I can't believe that Apple is bad for business. That is giving them far too much credit.

The collusion between these tech giants most certainly affected the salaries of 60000 to 100000 engineers and programmers in Northern California. Whether it directly affected salaries in Vancouver or Calgary is beside the point. Illegal is illegal, whether people in Vancouver are directly impacted or not. I'm sure the lawyers working on this massive antitrust lawsuit don't give "two hoots" what the effect on salaries in Vancouver were either.

BTW, it does affect salaries in Vancouver and Calgary and elsewhere.

When we lived in Ottawa and dad worked at Nortel, he'd often come home from work and jokingly (?) ask "so, who wants to move to Carolina?" "Who wants to move to Dallas?" because every week he got phone calls from recruiters in places like that. And I am acquainted with a couple of programmers right here in Kim City who are working for companies in Silicon Valley. They don't even have to get out of their pyjamas to go to work.

-k

[TimG]

BTW, it does affect salaries in Vancouver and Calgary and elsewhere.

Software work one of the few fields where salaries are set by something close to a free market. Apple/Google may have colluded but that would have little effect on the over all market because the majority of jobs are at other companies (even in Silicon valley). This anti-trust lawsuit is just a money grab by some over paid lawyers.