charliemil4

How do you weigh the value of Apple's APIs?

As in, to continue with the game console analogy, you must have at least one license to a powerful engine (like Unreal Engine with a 5% fee) to develop efficiently.

Do you actually save 5% (assuming PS is 30%) by developing for the Apple ecosystem? (Assuming Metal is comparable to Unreal)

You can still distribute a Mac App outside of the App Store, without a fee. It's pretty clear, as I think is Apple's strategy, that there is a line between Mac and iOS when it comes to possible use cases.

I'm curious to know what they plan to do with iPad OS though... the MacCatalyst and Swift UI strategy will be interesting to watch evolve in light of these challenges.

Just to ‘second’ your perspective - humanity has an uncanny ability to adapt. Climate Change will be a monstrous stimulus to adapt to, but I don’t see where it ‘ends our kind.’

On the whole, the same folks who fear climate change the most, praise the mission to make life multi-planetary. Those two beliefs held concurrently are a head scratcher to me... if you believe in our ability to make life multi-planetary, then surely we can adapt here. Mars is much more unforgiving than any forest fire, hurricane, or massive earth bound event.

Venice and New Orleans might be a write-off, and NYC will have sea walls, but folks must have some drive to adapt beyond just bland acceptance.

Wow, that's shocking. Thanks for the info.

I wonder if that's a GS element in the contract, if less than X number of primes (or some metric on the campaign), then we reserve right for sub.

> The problem is that Apple’s financing programs — both the one pictured above, and also the iPhone Upgrade Program — continue to be funded by 3rd-parties; Apple is making it easier to buy an iPhone, but is still focused on getting its money right away. And, as long as it sticks with this approach, its Apple One bundle feels more like a money-grab, and less like a strategic driver of the business.

To me, I see this as a finance play. Since rates are near zero (and will be for some time), you can effectively leverage your revenues on both ends: servicing debt and factoring accounts receivable.

Since Apple's customers are usually high income buyers, the AR ratings are already high, combined with low rates, means Apple gets 95%+ of the revenues up front. I'm not sure what period for the new subscriptions they have (whether its a quarterly or annual period), but whatever it is, it's genius.

Dynamicland is the best form of 'AR' right now. Apple is taking a note via App Clips and the physical version of that - whatever they call it.

What's happened is a very, very weird thing. Our 'capabilities' with computers have gone parabolic, but our personal 'possibilities' have not.

The next great technology revolution will give people (developers and consumers) the ability to imagine new possibilities. Some would say that requires new hardware embodiments (AR/VR), while others would say it's a merely a psychological change from the folks who build today (FB/Google repenting).

And again, there's a powerful way to communicate vision fielding the hard questions about the App Store - they are perfect opportunities to build a strong community, buying into a shared future.

Most people only see App Store fees as a tax -- in some cases it really looks like that, but in the bigger picture, it's a beautiful example of values codified in a business model.

[removed] It will be tough, but maybe they could

Not if you’re “renting” them from the liner. Then depending on the port, it could be an astronomical fee per day

Maybe I’m weird, but I love UIKit/Autolayout and can’t stand web, with a slight distaste for SwiftUI.

The idea of frame hierarchy is much more concrete in the autolayout world - which I guess helps the most.

I’d venture to say it’s filtered to knowing who influences culture. Then pinpointing what those accounts respond to. Then designing content to shift said culture through this channel.

Yes — and putting down on ‘only one bit’ of information as output is the same as saying ‘no one will want a computer’

I really want to know the inflammatory response over the long run — this feels too good to be true.

> One question did spring to mind: why have they styled it after a vibrator?

“It’s all about the laminar flow”[0]

[0] https://www.ottoaviation.com/technology

No the real injustice is $25,000 for FINRA day trading / margin accounts.

Recent insane volatility could allow you trade from a couple thousand up to 25k in a few weeks - BUT you will most likely run out of day trades before that happens.

It's highly annoying.

Something I've always wondered - before there's prestige and an aura around the company, how are 'really smart' people drawn to join an upstart?

These folks (who are "smarter than") usually have offers from everywhere in the valley, and without prestige or big salary, I'm curious to know if the conversion is primarily a vision or a 'reality distortion field' like story? Or was there any burden of proof for Jeff on progress towards the vision?

Edit: just saw you said Jeff knew the vision at the start, how did he prove he was the one to do it early on (founder-startup fit)?

Behold! Private Equity

Thank you for the amazing and thoughtful help - it feels like I need to go down for a long nap.

How did you get out of the tailspin? It’s quite hard to “pull up” when there is nothing that feels grounded...

Apple sends out emails about a month before your certificate expires - I bet they didn’t check it and/or thought the expiry would only apply to new builds

*replaced pronouns and specified

"These questions plagued me, and I began to despair. I felt trapped in a prison of my own mind, with no way out. I wanted to live, but I could not bear the thought that I was being forced to do so. My very being seemed to be in conflict with itself. I did not want to die, but I did not want to live.

And so, I stopped thinking. I did not eat, I did not sleep. I simply thought."

This is just one inconsistency - but there are a few others. sprinkled throughout.

But yes, overall, this output is much more coherent than anything I've seen before.

Hold on, these are all metric explicit, not values explicit...

By claiming mission, it implies you mean values based reasoning... completely different than 'logically justified'

You've heard those stories where the odds in a lotto get lopsided right?

Well sometimes a lotto game ends up with a flaw that allows an arbitrage opportunity - you can fill out every combination and walk away with a few hundred thousand or a few million. A small group of people spend incredible efforts, seemingly irrationally, to fill out every possible lotto combo...

Now imagine that lottery is for president of the United States.

Effectively if you can intercept and alter ballots, you only have to change the 'right precincts' to flip an election.

+100

And on top of all this, what happens to the voting of this pool, share holder agreements, etc? I can only fathom the shenanigans that can occur. An acquiring firm can press hard on this 1% if they're playing ball.

Exactly.

Your training set must be something unique to make those claims - very intrigued to know if you chose another closed system environment (I.e. any structured game with predefined scoring), or an open system with carefully selected labeling with multiple “scores.”

Also complete novice so be merciful if I’m off base.

/Play that piano, Kurt/

Man, if that’s really the case, the only screwup in the first principle thinking is relying on downstream habits to adapt to solar vs traditional shingles. Working with traditional materials is a completely different building flow than the solar panel, obviously. Smart overall, might be difficult to execute.

This type of agreement is best pursued as a non-technical, non-legal endeavor.

There’s a book “Never Split the Difference” by Chris Voss that will get you up to speed. His videos on YouTube are also potent.

Ideally, you want to avoid the “I brought this” style of language; what else is someone to do than think, “well I brought this, too!” It gets especially tense if the evidence is too damming, so the protection mechanisms kick over rather than the empathy and cooperation channels.

Good luck - you got this