> Anybody saying this is a response to recent anti-trust headlines doesn't understand how a company the size of Apple works. When an announcement like this is made, it means this program has been in the works for YEARS.
Apple knows it has been skirting the line and likely has many programs in place to deploy if and when the time is right.
> Anybody saying this is a response to recent anti-trust headlines doesn't understand how a company the size of Apple works. When an announcement like this is made, it means this program has been in the works for YEARS.
They can perfectly build the program and keep it on hold/maintenance internally, and when the threat of legal action/bad brand image arrives, launch it.
> Anybody saying this is a response to recent anti-trust headlines doesn't understand how a company the size of Apple works. When an announcement like this is made, it means this program has been in the works for YEARS.
It's likely they have many pro-consumer and anti-consumer initiatives in the works at any given time. Public opinion can still impact whether those initiatives get accelerated or delayed.
> Anybody saying this is a response to recent anti-trust headlines doesn't understand how a company the size of Apple works. When an announcement like this is made, it means this program has been in the works for YEARS.
I know how companies of this size work. When they have regulatory/pr/legal risk, they can move really fast for their size. Don’t know if that’s the case here, but given it only covers subset of parts of few latest models, limited to USA initially, and will likely take a few years to properly expand, it could totally be rushed in timeline of under a year.
Did any publicly evidence appear officially or accidentally on the internet that Apple is working on such a project (for Microsoft the situation is known)? I am just a kind of person who prefers strongly to look at the evidence instead of rumors, speculations and hopes.
>Huh? This seems totally backwards to me. Stripping down an acquisition to incorporate it into the acquiring company is the ultimate competitor crushing strategy;
It's not as if Apple lacks competition capable of doing the exact same.
This only makes sense if you know nothing about Apple's business.
You really think they're doing this to save $50 from ~5m Macs? You really think all this upheaval is for a mere $250m a year in savings? It'll cost them 10x that in pain alone to migrate to a new platform.
Come on now....$250m is nothing at Apple scale. Think bigger. Even if you hate Apple, think bigger about their nefariousness (if your view is that they have bad intentions - one I don't agree with).
> It's just that in my perception Apple (or most any big business) is short sighted.
Ok, so let me restate what your position seems to be: you acknowledge that the move is in their long term best interests, but you assume that they must be doing this for other reasons, because you’ve already decided that.
> That Apple is swimming in money just makes things like this more jarring.
This is a common theme. Big Tech Company X is rich therefore they should be able to do Y. But corporations don't really work that way, they build a monopoly around a few domains and then their organization is structured to maintain that monopoly. It's the exception, not the norm, for established companies to gain competency in a new domain, and it usually comes with an acquisition or a special initiative by senior management.
> Apple is engaging in this activity of their own free will for sake of their own commercial gain and are not being incentivized or coerced by the government in any way.
Honest question: how do you know this, for sure? Or is your comment supposed to be read as an allegation phrased as fact?
Apple knows it has been skirting the line and likely has many programs in place to deploy if and when the time is right.
reply