chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,426
|
Post by chinacat on Sept 9, 2017 8:49:49 GMT -8
At long last here we are, on the cusp of The Big Event. Unless Apple completely blows this, which seems extremely unlikely, AFB should be a happy place from now until the new year, at least. While the new phones will certainly be the focus and driver for the next few months, iOS11 and its associated new and improved apps will be a strong supporting factor. Apple's App Store is about to get a lot better with iOS 11 provides some insight/guesses about some of what may be revealed. Millions of people are still using old iPhones ahead of the iPhone 8 launch gives some data on the size of the potential upgrade market. In our house, Fabulous Spouse and I have been on a regular two-year cycle, and this would be a normal upgrade year for us anyway, which turns out to be a happy coincidence. Apple donates $5 million to hurricane relief, makes it easier for customers to donate notes Apple's efforts to support those affected by the tragic events associated with Hurricane Irma. I am sure that many here have already taken the opportunity to provide help for those affected by the developing tragedy.
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,426
|
Post by chinacat on Sept 9, 2017 9:29:40 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by dmiller on Sept 9, 2017 9:50:18 GMT -8
I wonder what effect we'll have from the Equifax hack...
Most of the US now needs to put a credit freeze on themselves to prevent identity theft.
You can't get a new iPhone on Apple's program while frozen. (May also not be able to upgrade from a previous iPhone already on the program, to a new one, while frozen as Citizens One may need to create a new loan in the process?)
However you look at it, this is inconvenient at least, and more likely a bigger hassle. It creates FRICTION, and friction is a bad thing.
|
|
|
Post by aaplcrazie on Sept 9, 2017 12:19:12 GMT -8
How about Bloody Equifax being held Criminally Liable for once? If you sign up for there "Monitoring Service" you are compelled to waive all your rights! And how abut the 3 Senior Execs including the CFO selling $1.8 Million worth of shares before anyone was made aware the breech had occurred. And then naturally charging yet another F@#$%Ing Fee to Freeze Your Credit Account Fuck@#g Deplorable!! And in News some deplorable leaked the IOS11 Gold Master. So sadly Secrets are being spilled before The Event @ Steve Jobs Theater as IOS11 gets picked through. UGH tinyurl.com/ycmf5c85(macrumors)
|
|
|
Post by gtrplyr on Sept 9, 2017 16:36:34 GMT -8
I wonder what effect we'll have from the Equifax hack... Most of the US now needs to put a credit freeze on themselves to prevent identity theft. You can't get a new iPhone on Apple's program while frozen. (May also not be able to upgrade from a previous iPhone already on the program, to a new one, while frozen as Citizens One may need to create a new loan in the process?) However you look at it, this is inconvenient at least, and more likely a bigger hassle. It creates FRICTION, and friction is a bad thing. My wife and I have had a credit "freeze" with all 3 reporting agencies for a few years now. Yes, it's a pain to open any kind of credit but I sleep well knowing that .... that being said , it's pretty easy to place a "temporary" lift if you need to open an account or have your credit checked. Often times they will send you a code which you can give the merchant in order to process a credit app. It's really the one of the best and cheapest ways to help protect your credit.
|
|
chinacat
Moderator
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,426
|
Post by chinacat on Sept 9, 2017 18:30:51 GMT -8
And in News some deplorable leaked the IOS11 Gold Master. So sadly Secrets are being spilled before The Event @ Steve Jobs Theater as IOS11 gets picked From the leak, according to MacRumors: Apple will call the smartphones the iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus (for the two LCD devices), and iPhone X (for the OLED model). These names will replace the iPhone 7s, iPhone 7s Plus, and iPhone 8 monikers that have been attached to each respective model over the past few months. --- So my question is, assuming that the X is related to the tenth anniversary, what is that model called next year? Does it disappear next year and all of its unique features get mainstreamed into the iPhone 9/Plus? I certainly can't see an iPhone XI. We'll see.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,182
|
Post by JDSoCal on Sept 9, 2017 23:02:28 GMT -8
Easy now! We Trump voters have feelings too! From the leak, according to MacRumors: Apple will call the smartphones the iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus (for the two LCD devices), and iPhone X (for the OLED model). These names will replace the iPhone 7s, iPhone 7s Plus, and iPhone 8 monikers that have been attached to each respective model over the past few months. The consistent rumor being, of course, facial recognition to not only unlock iPhones, but to draw emojis' expressions.
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Sept 10, 2017 4:24:42 GMT -8
I remember some concern voiced on the board back in June when Tim Cook took a stand against withdrawing from the Paris agreement with a few folks expressing their opinion that he should be pursuing maximum value for shareholders instead. When a former contributing *member* of this board posted this on his Facebook page I thought it was an interesting and creative interplay between the two directions that companies could pursue. One of the commenters on the cartoon voiced this thought: If the climate deniers are wrong we may be doomed. If the climate change believers are wrong we get clearer air.
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Sept 10, 2017 4:57:54 GMT -8
I wonder what effect we'll have from the Equifax hack... Most of the US now needs to put a credit freeze on themselves to prevent identity theft. Equifax's solution:
|
|
|
Post by macster on Sept 10, 2017 7:57:07 GMT -8
I remember some concern voiced on the board back in June when Tim Cook took a stand against withdrawing from the Paris agreement with a few folks expressing their opinion that he should be pursuing maximum value for shareholders instead. When a former contributing *member* of this board posted this on his Facebook page I thought it was an interesting and creative interplay between the two directions that companies could pursue. One of the commenters on the cartoon voiced this thought: If the climate deniers are wrong we may be doomed. If the climate change believers are wrong we get clearer air. My goodness turn off the moaning leftist MSM. Of course we should have clean air and water and there is no indication that the Trump administration is against it other than a few administrative inefficiencies that have been defunded. In my monitoring of these hurricanes I’ve heard no proof of climate change, but I’ve read the leftist MSM news sources have been spewing hurricane climate denier claims with no proof. Hurricane Irma is not the strongest ever recorded (It had the longest period of Cat 5 winds) and Harvey just stalled over the Houston area. The facts are that Cat 4 and 5 hurricanes hitting the US have occurred less over the last 10/15 years since the beginning of the recorded last century. Don’t rely on tv and print if thats all you observe, question them, search. You may have residence out west experiencing a heat wave but settle down, its called a heat wave. The northeast is experiencing a cool front. but generally the weather is normal on a curve of 100 years. I have checked the waters in the gulf and caribbean and the waters are near normal for this time of year. Irma had perfect incubating conditions. Another example of false sea rise reporting is in Miami where city is actually sinking from the weight of overbuilding. The Paris agreement is just a bad deal for the Americans, letting a few competitors off the hook for many years while the US leapfrogs over the world in clean energy anyway, even without the Paris accord. Tim Cook should stay out of politics. He and his enablers at Apple have made a few mistakes lately mostly because of ignorance. Example, giving to the Red Cross who are widely rated highly inefficient. Giving to the SPLC who hoard millions in offshore accounts, pay their executives exorbitant salaries and discriminate politically against innocent organizations. Do not worship Cook, He’s somewhat immature in these matters. I'm surprised you didn't post this in the dungeon and I feel bad for not doing the same. Looking forward to tuesday.
|
|
|
Post by aaplcrazie on Sept 10, 2017 9:58:44 GMT -8
Easy now! We Trump voters have feelings too! From the leak, according to MacRumors: Apple will call the smartphones the iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus (for the two LCD devices), and iPhone X (for the OLED model). These names will replace the iPhone 7s, iPhone 7s Plus, and iPhone 8 monikers that have been attached to each respective model over the past few months. The consistent rumor being, of course, facial recognition to not only unlock iPhones, but to draw emojis' expressions. Duly noted JD... I will endeavor to behave
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,182
|
Post by JDSoCal on Sept 10, 2017 10:45:30 GMT -8
I remember some concern voiced on the board back in June when Tim Cook took a stand against withdrawing from the Paris agreement with a few folks expressing their opinion that he should be pursuing maximum value for shareholders instead. When a former contributing *member* of this board posted this on his Facebook page I thought it was an interesting and creative interplay between the two directions that companies could pursue. One of the commenters on the cartoon voiced this thought: If the climate deniers are wrong we may be doomed. If the climate change believers are wrong we get clearer air. LOL cleaner air. CO2 is not a pollutant. Carbon is essential to all life. Plants thrive on more CO2. Climate religion is BS. The world was much hotter long ago when there was much less PPM of CO2 in the air. I challenge anyone to show me a climate model in the past 1, 5, or 10 years that has been predictive without doctoring the data. That includes 11 years without a landfall hurricane until the past month. Anyway, go iPhone X!
|
|
|
Post by deasys on Sept 10, 2017 12:12:11 GMT -8
I remember some concern voiced on the board back in June when Tim Cook took a stand against withdrawing from the Paris agreement with a few folks expressing their opinion that he should be pursuing maximum value for shareholders instead. When a former contributing *member* of this board posted this on his Facebook page I thought it was an interesting and creative interplay between the two directions that companies could pursue. One of the commenters on the cartoon voiced this thought: If the climate deniers are wrong we may be doomed. If the climate change believers are wrong we get clearer air. LOL cleaner air. CO2 is not a pollutant. Carbon is essential to all life. Plants thrive on more CO2. And we thrive on oxygen. Since when is data "religion?" How long ago? This starts 22,000 years ago—keep scrolling all the way to the bottom (sources at top right): A Timeline of Earth's Average Temperature
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Sept 10, 2017 12:51:42 GMT -8
I remember some concern voiced on the board back in June when Tim Cook took a stand against withdrawing from the Paris agreement with a few folks expressing their opinion that he should be pursuing maximum value for shareholders instead. When a former contributing *member* of this board posted this on his Facebook page I thought it was an interesting and creative interplay between the two directions that companies could pursue. One of the commenters on the cartoon voiced this thought: If the climate deniers are wrong we may be doomed. If the climate change believers are wrong we get clearer air. LOL cleaner air. CO2 is not a pollutant. Carbon is essential to all life. Plants thrive on more CO2. Climate religion is BS. The world was much hotter long ago when there was much less PPM of CO2 in the air. Climate religion is BS? That's as much of an argument as if I said, "Climate denial is BS". That is...it's no argument at all. Here's a link to the folks to whom I listen: Scientific consensus: Earth's climate is warming. A bunch of hucksters and crackpots like NASA, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Meteorological Society, etc Check it out JD. I didn't see a reference to Al Gore anywhere on the page but perhaps I overlooked it. I'd be happy to peruse any scientific information to which you would like to provide a link.
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,182
|
Post by JDSoCal on Sept 10, 2017 13:41:49 GMT -8
Deasys, I don't consider "Webcomics" to be authoritative. It is well known that there was a warmer period in the middle ages than now. But of course that didn't fit the narrative, so they had to alter the data to fit the theory. Lucky Choices, First off, science is not about consensus (theories are, but laws are not). It isn't voting for the prom queen. Science is about forming a theory, and subjecting that theory to peer review; for a theory to become a law, it must be proven with experiments that are consistent with the scientific method, subject to controls (e.g., eliminating solar radiation and volcanic effects, and natural systemic variation) and yield valid, unaltered observable data. And it must be repeatable every single time without fail, and a single scientist can disprove it. Please, again, show us a single model that has been predictive of world climate without altered data after the fact. Plus, it must be predictive going forward to be scientifically valid. It isn't my job to present an alternative theory; it is the climate scientists' job to defend their own theories with rock solid, unassailable data. Keep in mind that altering data isn't some crackpot conspiracy theory. Climate "scientists" readily admit that they alter data. That's how we got the holy grail of climate "science": the "hockey stick" by Michael Mann. Steve McIntyre has shown its bogus math = junk science. And yes, NASA are crackpots. More likely, they are desperate for funding and present what the check-writers want to hear. Example: NASA claimed 2016 was the hottest year ever by .04 degrees. The problem is, the margin of error in their own measurements is .1 degree! Please, defend that "science" instead of appealing to authority fallacies. The NOAA? Ha, they use land-based temperature measurements, and totally ignore the much more comprehensive and accurate satellite measurements which show no warming since 1990. Sorry for the long post. JD
|
|
|
Post by david on Sept 10, 2017 14:10:45 GMT -8
Deasys, I don't consider "Webcomics" to be authoritative. It is well known that there was a warmer period in the middle ages than now. But of course that didn't fit the narrative, so they had to alter the data to fit the theory. Lucky Choices, First off, science is not about consensus (theories are, but laws are not). It isn't voting for the prom queen. Science is about forming a theory, and subjecting that theory to peer review; for a theory to become a law, it must be proven with experiments that are consistent with the scientific method, subject to controls (e.g., eliminating solar radiation and volcanic effects, and natural systemic variation) and yield valid, unaltered observable data. And it must be repeatable every single time without fail, and a single scientist can disprove it. Please, again, show us a single model that has been predictive of world climate without altered data after the fact. Plus, it must be predictive going forward to be scientifically valid. It isn't my job to present an alternative theory; it is the climate scientists' job to defend their own theories with rock solid, unassailable data. Keep in mind that altering data isn't some crackpot conspiracy theory. Climate "scientists" readily admit that they alter data. That's how we got the holy grail of climate "science": the "hockey stick" by Michael Mann. Steve McIntyre has shown its bogus math = junk science. And yes, NASA are crackpots. More likely, they are desperate for funding and present what the check-writers want to hear. Example: NASA claimed 2016 was the hottest year ever by .04 degrees. The problem is, the margin of error in their own measurements is .1 degree! Please, defend that "science" instead of appealing to authority fallacies. The NOAA? Ha, they use land-based temperature measurements, and totally ignore the much more comprehensive and accurate satellite measurements which show no warming since 1990. Sorry for the long post. JD Good grief. LOL.
|
|
|
Post by gtrplyr on Sept 10, 2017 17:04:34 GMT -8
Ok ... I'm cleaning this up .
I wrote a very terse response and it's not sitting well with me. I'm going to rephrase this nicely.
Bottom line .... Apple is a GREEN company ... Tim Cook believes in climate change and they are spending HUNDREDS of millions and probably more like Billions running the company in a way that reflects that. In addition , politically Tim Cook has made it very clear where he stands on multiple issues and it's pretty much 180 degrees from what is going on in the WH right now ... on many issues: Transgender bans, Paris Climate accords, Racial equality, Gender equality ... I could go on but you get the idea.
I would personally have trouble investing in a company that held views that I found so offensive or were so completely against what I believed ... profits be dammed. That's why my money is in Apple and Tesla as I like what both companies are doing ... in general terms. I don't care how much money I could make investing in Phillip Morris .. I won't do it.
I LOVE the direction and actions Apple takes and when I read about some of the things Tim does I feel very proud to be a shareholder .... I'll leave it at that.
|
|
|
Post by zzmac on Sept 10, 2017 18:19:56 GMT -8
For you skeptics, please listen to this full podcast. itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/waking-up-with-sam-harris/id733163012?mt=2&i=1000391877073Deasys, I don't consider "Webcomics" to be authoritative. It is well known that there was a warmer period in the middle ages than now. But of course that didn't fit the narrative, so they had to alter the data to fit the theory. Lucky Choices, First off, science is not about consensus (theories are, but laws are not). It isn't voting for the prom queen. Science is about forming a theory, and subjecting that theory to peer review; for a theory to become a law, it must be proven with experiments that are consistent with the scientific method, subject to controls (e.g., eliminating solar radiation and volcanic effects, and natural systemic variation) and yield valid, unaltered observable data. And it must be repeatable every single time without fail, and a single scientist can disprove it. Please, again, show us a single model that has been predictive of world climate without altered data after the fact. Plus, it must be predictive going forward to be scientifically valid. It isn't my job to present an alternative theory; it is the climate scientists' job to defend their own theories with rock solid, unassailable data. Keep in mind that altering data isn't some crackpot conspiracy theory. Climate "scientists" readily admit that they alter data. That's how we got the holy grail of climate "science": the "hockey stick" by Michael Mann. Steve McIntyre has shown its bogus math = junk science. And yes, NASA are crackpots. More likely, they are desperate for funding and present what the check-writers want to hear. Example: NASA claimed 2016 was the hottest year ever by .04 degrees. The problem is, the margin of error in their own measurements is .1 degree! Please, defend that "science" instead of appealing to authority fallacies. The NOAA? Ha, they use land-based temperature measurements, and totally ignore the much more comprehensive and accurate satellite measurements which show no warming since 1990. Sorry for the long post. JD
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,182
|
Post by JDSoCal on Sept 10, 2017 18:40:19 GMT -8
All men of science are skeptics. I've never listened to a podcast in my life. Too ADD. Got a bullet point version? *** Anyway, I'm finally getting my 77-yr-old dad his first iPhone; my 4-month-old warranty replacement 7+, to be precise. So I'll be getting an 8 ASAP. Let's hope it is awesome. 📱💥
|
|
|
Post by Luckychoices on Sept 10, 2017 20:50:58 GMT -8
I don't care how much money I could make investing in Phillip Morris .. I won't do it. +100 I can't imagine how *anyone* can invest in a company that must focus on selling their product to new young customers to help replace the customers who die or suffer severe health consequences as a long-term result of *using* those same products.
|
|
|
Post by deasys on Sept 10, 2017 21:27:17 GMT -8
Deasys, I don't consider "Webcomics" to be authoritative. You apparently missed my note that the illustration's sources were noted at the top right. In the discussion of McIntyre's criticism of the "hockey stick," your citation states that, "The outcome [of the US National Academy of Sciences investigation] was the North Report, published in 2006, which endorsed the MBH studies with a few reservations." The North Report essentially upholds the "hockey stick" findings of Mann, Bradley, and Hughes (MBH). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Reporten.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_graph
|
|
JDSoCal
Member
Aspiring oligarch
Posts: 4,182
|
Post by JDSoCal on Sept 11, 2017 9:15:13 GMT -8
Deasys, I don't consider "Webcomics" to be authoritative. You apparently missed my note that the illustration's sources were noted at the top right. In the discussion of McIntyre's criticism of the "hockey stick," your citation states that, "The outcome [of the US National Academy of Sciences investigation] was the North Report, published in 2006, which endorsed the MBH studies with a few reservations." The North Report essentially upholds the "hockey stick" findings of Mann, Bradley, and Hughes (MBH). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Reporten.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_graphRespectfully my friend, the North Report in no way refutes any of McIntyre and McKitrick's findings. And they stand by their criticisms of Mann's "parlor tricks" to achieve his hockey stick graph. It's junk science. Also, the Climategate e-mail scandal remains.
|
|