Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Bye, Bye for now Apple, it has been fun!
- Thread starter Technerd108
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I can speak about this kind of personal/family "revolution" people might want, as most of old users above the half century years old. What I see in the initial post is, the main arguments are issues about the system, not the company. Apple is like this because is inside a society that is like this, and change to Microsoft back and forward won't change anything. The only alternative that make some sense is Linux. My Macbook has both macOS and Linux Mint, and my PC gamer has Linux as main OS, with a Windows as an alternative. I have tried, but can't go any further than this right now - Apple and MS owns me.
So, forget about this illusion of the power of the people, customer rights, etc.. all bls. The market must be better regulated globally, we must come to an agreement with the Chinese, etc. or nothing is gonna change. Otherwise, just pay what they want and don't complain, please!
So, forget about this illusion of the power of the people, customer rights, etc.. all bls. The market must be better regulated globally, we must come to an agreement with the Chinese, etc. or nothing is gonna change. Otherwise, just pay what they want and don't complain, please!
I agree with the sentiment that one should not complain, in words that is. Action is the only real leverage. If enough people refused to purchase new machines for a couple of years. You bet the companies would listen. It all comes down to the cash flow.
As for government regulation... there is way to much of it already. That is how the multi national companies successfully stomps the smaller companies, by lobbying for more regulations.
At least that is how I see it
Be careful with your judgement. After a fresh installation it's normal that the OS has a lot to put in place and zillions of files to index. That will drive the fans for a while. But after a couple of hours of using it, it will normalize.
They don't? I wonder where all the bug reports go then. They come from such things as:
-Auto-reporting of crashes from systems unless disabled by the user.
-User reports via customer service calls and chats.
-User reports via the Apple Community site, monitored by staff who escalate reports, which results in some users being contacted to further investigate reports.
-User reports to Apple stores and the dealer network, for which Apple maintain a feedback channel.
-User reports via Apple's /feedback resource.
-Developers, who have bug report resources.
-Security specialists.
There is a triage process, where valid bug reports are escalated to relevant specialist teams, depending on the product.
They must be the only significant software or systems producer not to attempt any tracking of these reports. Or alternatively you may be confusing the fact they don't generally discuss these things in public, with them not taking appropriate measures. But that's Apple, they never have. Nor do many others of course because bug fixing is a hugely dynamic business. But the fact they don't provide feedback on bug fixes to the public doesn't mean they don't actually do anything. It just means they don't tell you.
And of course they fix things they know about. Not always at the same level of priority as a user with a bug problem might wish. And sometimes, as happens with Google, MS, Adobe and others, they're in a hurry to fix one thing and cause another to break in the process. It's a sad and inevitable part of making stuff too complicated.
I switch between the two every day. I can tell you that the finder is significantly worse than file explorer in terms of interface/user interaction performance, but there are far too many variables in software, specifications, memory management, drive speeds, interface technologies and about 150 other data points including system up time for there to be much in the way of credible 'performance' measurements for direct comparison.
In use cases where Windows is faster and smoother, I use Windows. In use cases where macOS is better as a user experience, I use macOS. It isn't 'performance', but it is absolutely which is the best tool for the specific job.
Tim is a not a great CEO, way too many dull boring products, the whole watch patent should have caused a firing of him from Apple.. But no, we get to enjoy more lifeless WWDC.. joy!!
The fans never stopped working at high speed on Windows. Looked in the internet to find out why. I have a MBP, a T2 one, with an additional AMD graphics, which by the way macOS never uses, appears to be the problem for bootcamp Windows. Maybe, will try again sometime in the next weekend. Won't waste a weekday evening for that. If I could install Linux with the touchbar working, I could do without Windows in the MBP.
Does it have a T2 chip and a touchbar? Is everything working? What doesn't?
I have a 2014 16" MBP with a NVidia chip. Works like a charm installed from a Rufus produced install stick.
No BootCamp installation, direct Windows install. I only used some Apple drivers from BootCamp like the trackpad.
Windows 11 is my single OS on that device.
I can alternatively boot macOS or Linux on external SSD blades.
I'm not a fan of Tim Cook, but no matter what metric you use to measure a CEO, Tim Cook has exceeded beyond any expectations.
No one expected him to succeed as he was stuck in the shadow of Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs stepped down as CEO in 2011, Apple's market capitalization was 322.8 billion
Today apple's market cap is not measured in billions but trillions
To put that in perspective 1 billion dollars laid out end to end is about 96,900 miles - that's not even 1/2 way to the moon. A trillion would be 96,906,656 miles, that's farther then the earth's distance from the sun (93.4 million miles). I'm just trying to put in scope how much larger a trillion is over a billion.
There is no way a company can achieve this level success in 13 years unless they have a great organization, and at the head of that organization a great ceo.
Trillion vs. billions vs. millions, its absolutely mind boggling on how big a trillion is. I like pictures, even word pictures and seeing how the worth of Apple in dollars bills could stretch to sun, back to earth, and then back to the sun is so mind boggling large. Its crazy, of how much that truly is. The sun is so far away that it takes 8 minutes for light to reach us from the sun.
It is just an electronic entry(ies) in bank accounts, in $s. What would happen when Yuan becomes the go to currency for international payments in the near future? It is already happening between countries and some companies, Yuan displacing the $. Certain oil producing countries are accepting payments in Yuan for transactions bypassing the $, and they are massive transactions. Some countries are already paying each other in their own currencies, bypassing the $ these days.
You're missing my point, I used that to show the scale of growth from a billion dollar company to a trillion dollar company, that's all
As said, the point is Apple's growth, not actual value, but it is also worth pointing out that the global economy - including China - is still functioning under the dollar standard, since international trade of almost any kind relies on a single, calculable, trading value of currencies. Individual entities can trade in local currencies or even bitcoin, but the value of the trade renders down to comparative dollar value and dollar cost to the parties involved.
Global banking and financing structures are built around the dollar standard and have been for 50 years - for the simplicity of this same principle, which became important when the (prior) gold standard became too unwieldy, and somewhat volatile since gold producing economies had 'unfair' advantages. What China (in particular) and others are doing is not so much supplanting the dollar standard, which really gains them little or nothing, but manipulating it instead, which is financially much more lucrative.
How it happened and why is outlined at https://www.financial-dictionary.info/terms/dollar-standard/ if you're interested.
Here's one for you... If you take an old airplane engine propeller driven, and set it at 3000RPM and let it spin at that for a month, it still will not even be a BILLION!
Not for simplicity, but for US domination of that "global" banking. Just like that, there could be large technological internet based companies, as far as they are based in the US, but not otherwise, for example TikTok, Huawei...so, the US try to kill them, without much success, though. Anyway, the US$ is based on a bank entry, not anything stable. The US "ally" Saudi is dealing in Yuan with China (and some other countries) these days, not through petro$. So, a trillion $s today, might not be much tomorrow. If China won't produce what the US citizen needs, it'd be quite hard, won't it? China holds the upper hand, isn't it? Or, the deciding hand.
Last edited:
It is entirely for simplicity in the financial market. Two entities operating in different local currencies have to have a common 'language' to do business in, and when it was clear the gold standard didn't really work, the dollar was chosen as the means it would be done.
Whether and how is largely immaterial to the point.
What isn't immaterial however is the fact that large economies that theoretically could move to supplant the dollar with their own can actually benefit far more, economically, by using the dollar standard against itself, as China does by buying US debt (and gold to bolster reserves and help stabilize their own currency) than by attempting to supplant the dollar standard.
This is not to dispute your last point, because the reality is that yes indeed, China really does hold the upper hand. There are many reasons this is so, amongst them the blatant theft of western intellectual property on the back of state regulation of foreign business operations, the fact that theirs is a high production/low wage economy allowing rapid expansion and western businesses being drawn to its manufacturing capacities, and the Chinese government manipulating their currency to keep the economy tilted heavily in the state's favor. However, economically, if China wanted to move global economies from the dollar, there are easier ways they could do it than undermining the dollar standard and all the institutions that rely on it.
The assumption seems broadly to be that it is in China's interest for global economic foundations to remain as they are than to change them. They can get far more incoming investment and capital by manipulating their currency value rather than engineering change.
Apple didn't go from "zero to hero" in 13 years.
The trajectory was well established and things were really just "launching" at the time Steve got sick and ultimately passed away. All the work leading up to that point is really the driver of where we are now.
The first 5-ish +/- years after Steve passed were really just reaping what was already planned.
(Apple has products and plans mapped 3-6 years out most always)
What happened next?
The 2013 MacPro mistake, the AW which needed several iterations to even have an identity (it wasn't luxury fashion after all!) and the 2015/2016-2019 MacBook Era (truly horrendous) -- it took roundtables and years to fix those Mac mistakes.
iPhone has just been on cruise control if we are honest. Tweak a shape or button, add to the cameras, rip people off on accessories and upgrade pricing .... repeat...
It'd be a fascinating case study to play out some alternative CEO situations and see how particularly important Tim Cook has been ... vs a variety of other potentials.
We can never know, but I'd argue that many many CEOs could have navigated Apple right to where they are now and that any number of alternatives could have Apple in an even better spot, especially if we look at what has been spent on that has gone nowhere -- and the years and years wasted on mistakes like the butterfly keyboard and TouchBar and Car and Scuba Mask (just random examples)...
...and now where Apple finds itself, increasingly in the crosshairs of regulators worldwide.
All the history aside ... with where things are now, I'd argue it's time for a new direction at the top
Nothing lasts forever and those that don't disrupt themselves do get disrupted one way or another.
The trajectory was well established and things were really just "launching" at the time Steve got sick and ultimately passed away. All the work leading up to that point is really the driver of where we are now.
The first 5-ish +/- years after Steve passed were really just reaping what was already planned.
(Apple has products and plans mapped 3-6 years out most always)
What happened next?
The 2013 MacPro mistake, the AW which needed several iterations to even have an identity (it wasn't luxury fashion after all!) and the 2015/2016-2019 MacBook Era (truly horrendous) -- it took roundtables and years to fix those Mac mistakes.
iPhone has just been on cruise control if we are honest. Tweak a shape or button, add to the cameras, rip people off on accessories and upgrade pricing .... repeat...
It'd be a fascinating case study to play out some alternative CEO situations and see how particularly important Tim Cook has been ... vs a variety of other potentials.
We can never know, but I'd argue that many many CEOs could have navigated Apple right to where they are now and that any number of alternatives could have Apple in an even better spot, especially if we look at what has been spent on that has gone nowhere -- and the years and years wasted on mistakes like the butterfly keyboard and TouchBar and Car and Scuba Mask (just random examples)...
...and now where Apple finds itself, increasingly in the crosshairs of regulators worldwide.
All the history aside ... with where things are now, I'd argue it's time for a new direction at the top
Nothing lasts forever and those that don't disrupt themselves do get disrupted one way or another.
Last edited:
No, it was for US domination of that "financial" market.
No, that's how the US is creating and maintaining its economy. As $ is the US currency, the US can break other countries economies at will.
China won't ever tell why it is buying the US debt. Buying gold is alright, as it can be used to do business with other countries, and make the Yuan tough.
If you make something today, it can be copied tomorrow by anyone. There's no such thing as western intellectual property. Looks like all/most of that is created by eastern people, maybe living in the west.
The US is not much of a market to China than the world outside the US today. The US is just 127 million households.
If it leads to regulation, absolutely
I'm firmly in the John Siracusa camp here
Apple should have made many different proactive moves to avoid regulatory issues
The last thing you want in their position (or that of any large player) is the government making rules.
Governments just aren't well equipped the task of informed and sensible tech regulation and it ends up having many many negative downstream consequences you now are legally required to deal with.
It's not the market it can sell to - that's the entire point. It's the market for its incoming investment and the IP it can gain from it. Otherwise, largely, I don't agree with your perspective, but I appreciate it.
Anyway, enough off topic from me. That link above to the Herold Financial Dictionary has leads in it for anyone curious to read on.