Sure I understand. I also understand that people sometimes forget their training on how to build their part of a product and so make the same mistake for every unit they touch until they've been corrected.
Except you can buy a very fast pocket computer that makes calls for only $379, the current price of an iPhone 7 refurb directly from Apple, which includes 1-year warranty.
This is a standard marketing strategy and not unique to Apple. You charge more for people who are willing to pay more (early adopters), then phase in a lower ASP as the demand curve shifts toward more typical mid and late stream adopters.
Yet Linus has been screwing over Linux contributors for over 20 years yet you somehow correlated this one specific event to the tipping point that finally pushed him to reconsider his behavior. Not much for logic, eh?
How does the planned Linux meetnig and this announcement have any correlation? That's like saying Linus ate a hamburger, thus this announcement wasn't out of the bule.
It seems to odd that Linus would do this out of the blue. Perhaps a formal complaint has been filed against him somewhere and he's trying to get ahead of the story. This is complete speculation on my part btw.
All the time. In this case there's nothing to negotiate - Apple will set all the terms, the parties will settle on an amount, and the hacker can either take it or leave it. The terms outside consideration wouldn't be negotiable.
Right, because it's impossible for Apple to have a boilerplate contract already on hand and plug in the specifics for a specific exploit in less than a few hours, with the total monetary negotiation taking not much longer. You're reaching.
The hacker wouldn't even need to show the exploit. He can simply state how much the system is compromised by the exploit, and give a general idea on how easy the exploit is to perform. That would be enough for Apple to assign a value to it and draw up the contract. Actual payment would occur once the exploit is demonstrated and proven to match the hacker's claims during the negotiation.
Rather than capping the reward at an arbitrary value, which limits the chances of it being brought to them, Apple should have a policy that negotiates/bids the bounty amount based on the exploit's significance. The process can work by having the hacker demonstrate the exploit to Apple, without revealing how the exploit works, after which they can negotiate the bounty.
In terms of how to convince people to justifying paying $1100+ for a Smartphone. Apple's strategy? Use lots of "best", "awesome", fastest", "cool" adjectives during their presentations.
Slashdot Mirror
Python is definitely the language to use when you want to get the tool developed fast, but not the best if that tool needs to run fast.
Buy low, sell high.
https://www.wiwavelength.com/2018/09/iphone-xs-and-xs-max-mostly-fail-to.html
https://www.wiwavelength.com/2018/09/antennagate-reduxs-if-so-what-can-apple.html
Sure I understand. I also understand that people sometimes forget their training on how to build their part of a product and so make the same mistake for every unit they touch until they've been corrected.
Is Apple bending them over with high prices, shoddy build quality, and class-action-lawsuit-based customer service.
Really, humans rarely forget or mistake how they're supposed to be doing their jobs and only make one-off mistakes instead?
You claim it was a joke, then go on to explain in detail why the claim in your purported joke has merit. I'm confused.
Right, because humans never make a process mistake that applies to more than one unit on the production line?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLk81XnkGUM
Except you can buy a very fast pocket computer that makes calls for only $379, the current price of an iPhone 7 refurb directly from Apple, which includes 1-year warranty.
This is a standard marketing strategy and not unique to Apple. You charge more for people who are willing to pay more (early adopters), then phase in a lower ASP as the demand curve shifts toward more typical mid and late stream adopters.
How big we'll likely never know since China's government statistics are about as reliable as their Happy Meal toys.
Yet Linus has been screwing over Linux contributors for over 20 years yet you somehow correlated this one specific event to the tipping point that finally pushed him to reconsider his behavior. Not much for logic, eh?
Poor graphics are part of the charm of these "classic" systems :)
How does the planned Linux meetnig and this announcement have any correlation? That's like saying Linus ate a hamburger, thus this announcement wasn't out of the bule.
Nope, didn't miss that at all. How does that disprove my theory?
It seems to odd that Linus would do this out of the blue. Perhaps a formal complaint has been filed against him somewhere and he's trying to get ahead of the story. This is complete speculation on my part btw.
All the time. In this case there's nothing to negotiate - Apple will set all the terms, the parties will settle on an amount, and the hacker can either take it or leave it. The terms outside consideration wouldn't be negotiable.
Right, because it's impossible for Apple to have a boilerplate contract already on hand and plug in the specifics for a specific exploit in less than a few hours, with the total monetary negotiation taking not much longer. You're reaching.
The hacker wouldn't even need to show the exploit. He can simply state how much the system is compromised by the exploit, and give a general idea on how easy the exploit is to perform. That would be enough for Apple to assign a value to it and draw up the contract. Actual payment would occur once the exploit is demonstrated and proven to match the hacker's claims during the negotiation.
Rather than capping the reward at an arbitrary value, which limits the chances of it being brought to them, Apple should have a policy that negotiates/bids the bounty amount based on the exploit's significance. The process can work by having the hacker demonstrate the exploit to Apple, without revealing how the exploit works, after which they can negotiate the bounty.
And that's being unprofitable in a huge country like China.
In terms of how to convince people to justifying paying $1100+ for a Smartphone. Apple's strategy? Use lots of "best", "awesome", fastest", "cool" adjectives during their presentations.
It's now almost as good as the Pixel 2 phone released a year ago.
The cockblocking of competing products.