Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Iphone Software The Almighty Buck United States Apple Hardware Technology

Apple Used To Be an Inventor. Now It's Mainly a Landlord. (bloomberg.com) 205

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: For years, analysts and journalists watching Apple have talked up the growing importance of services, as opposed to hardware sales, to the company's top line. But it's only now that Apple's business model truly appears to be shifting toward collecting rent from the company's ecosystem and increasingly relying on gadget sales to perpetuate this rent rather than drive growth. Apple's decision to stop reporting iPhone unit sales underscores the shift. Services have been steadily growing in importance for Apple since 2016, while the share of revenue provided by the flagship gadget, the iPhone, has gone up and down depending on the popularity of different models.

There's a lot of potential for Apple to squeeze a higher rent directly out of its captive user base. Goldman Sachs estimates that only 10 percent of Apple's user base pay for iCloud Storage; in terms of price and service quality, iCloud has been a poor competitor to services provided by Google and some smaller companies such as Dropbox, but that only means Apple can increase revenue from it exponentially if it bothered to compete more aggressively, as it does with another key service, Apple Music. Even that streaming service has relatively low penetration, though, with only about 35 million users last year. Goldman Sachs predicts that number will grow to 83 million by 2020. Goldman's proposal for Apple is to create a services bundle similar to Amazon Prime; for $30 a month or so, subscribers would get access to music, video, 200 GB of storage and phone repair. The investment bank calculates that with just 50 million subscribers, such a bundle could add $18 billion in services revenue in 2019.
"Rent extraction from a user base that finds it hard to go away may sound a bit like extortion," Leonid Bershidsky writes in closing. "But it's more honest and upfront than extracting data from users in ways they often don't understand and then making money off the data, as Facebook does. That honesty is in itself a competitive advantage for Apple as it gradually reimagines itself as more of a services company."

The challenge, Bershidsky writes, "is to grow the services offering fast enough to make up for potential iPhone revenue losses; gadget prices cannot keep going up forever without hurting the top line, and in the end, a phone is just a phone. We only need it to gain access to all the nice digital stuff out there."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Used To Be an Inventor. Now It's Mainly a Landlord.

Comments Filter:
  • Rent Seeking (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JBMcB ( 73720 ) on Saturday November 03, 2018 @08:13AM (#57585396)

    Rent seeking is a code-word for a coercive business transaction. I don't think it fits Apple's situation. The smart phone market is pretty well saturated. The only new revenue you can get is through related devices (watches? headphones?) or services.

    There are plenty of competitors. If one of them can come up with something substantially better then they could easily crush everyone else in the smartphone market.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Apple really doesn't know how to sell. They've had exclusivity as an advantage for so long that all their marketing is based on having a special product that you only need to give people a glimpse of and they will pour into apple stores all over the country to buy. Compare iCloud to the first iPod. You don't sell iCloud with beautiful commercials of people jogging in scenic places.

    • Re:Rent Seeking (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Saturday November 03, 2018 @08:36AM (#57585494)

      Rent seeking is a code-word for a coercive business transaction. I don't think it fits Apple's situation.

      Indeed. What is described in TFA is not "rent-seeking".

      Also, most people have Amazon Prime for the free shipping on their stuff. The movies are music are just extra benefits. The cost is $10 per month. So why would 50 million people pay $30/month for a worse deal? Answer: They wouldn't.

      Bundling phone repair into a monthly service package will just encourage people to fix their phones and keep them longer, which is the last thing Apple wants.

      Apple is the most profitable company in the history of the world. I don't think they need advice from some random journalist about what they are doing wrong.

      Lastly, Apple was never an "inventor".

      • Over my life I've noticed that every sports specialty store gravitates from selling cool hardware to having most of its retail space filled with clothing. The same pattern has been replicated in the internet age too. Geek gear stores grow, expand into new products but the mature end-state is the clothing store.

        The reason I think is the product of repeat-sales* volume * margins / up-front-inventory cost is the highest on clothing so once you discover how to include clothing in your store it just takes over

      • will just encourage people to fix their phones and keep them longer, which is the last thing Apple wants.

        If Apple could guarantee no one would ever buy a new phone, they probably would. They make a ton of money off apps, Apple Music subscriptions, etc. And those have almost no per-unit costs or physical infrastructure requirements. What scares them far more than you not buying another iPhone is buying an Android device.

      • by Agripa ( 139780 )

        Rent seeking is a code-word for a coercive business transaction. I don't think it fits Apple's situation.

        Indeed. What is described in TFA is not "rent-seeking".

        Does it become rent seeking if a contract of adhesion [wikipedia.org] is involved?

    • Re:Rent Seeking (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Kogun ( 170504 ) on Saturday November 03, 2018 @09:33AM (#57585658)
      When Apple's products are specifically designed to work less optimally after 2 years, when the products are purposely designed to not be fixable, when the company seeks to have laws implemented that would prohibit third party repairs, when the digital data is designed to not be transferable to other platforms, then "coercive business transaction" is an apt description.

      Of course, Apple is not the only company trying to maximize this business model.
      • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

        by sphealey ( 2855 )

        - - - - When Apple's products are specifically designed to work less optimally after 2 years, - - - - -

        Not really sure what this is supposed to mean. Apple iPhones easily last 3 years with a bit of care and 5 years for many, and Apple provide extensive OS updates with security patches throughout the reasonable lifespan of the device (compare to generic Android devices which almost never get updates). Batteries do tend to lose capacity over time - this has been known for a hundred years - and Apple has be

        • - - - - When Apple's products are specifically designed to work less optimally after 2 years, - - - - -

          Not really sure what this is supposed to mean.

          This, just the first example I found :-
          https://www.theguardian.com/te... [theguardian.com]

          • by sphealey ( 2855 )

            Yes, I'm well aware of those stories. I doubt very much Apple had any intention of "deliberately slowing down their phones" [with hidden subtext of driving more sales]; it is equally or more likely that they were trying to provide better usability for their customers with older phones. Regulatory agencies don't have to investigate or take intent into account if they don't believe it is necessary, but that doesn't mean a regulatory agency's action is the final word on why an action was taken. Interestingly

      • by Anonymous Coward

        That's such a load of rubbish. Factually over the decades apple computers have historically had almost twice the longevity in bussiness use than PCs. When it comes to phones, anytime there is explosive growth in technology, a rapid replacement cycle manifests. Phones have the natural problem of 1) getting dropped, 2) batteries wearing out and 3) difficulty upgrading software. Apple actually solved the latter one but by the time your batteries wear out, phones have imporved so much that the newer phones

    • Re:Rent Seeking (Score:4, Informative)

      by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Saturday November 03, 2018 @10:19AM (#57585780) Homepage Journal

      The thing the smartphone market was missing was a good universal(NOT CARRIER RUN SEGMENTED JUNGLE OF SHIT) before apple. that 30% and 100 bucks was a pretty goddamned good deal(getting stuff signed for symbian or j2me cost way more - per one release! and the shops you could sell on gave you shit percentages).

      Appstore and google play store fixed that. If you've wondered what really killed Nokia this was a major factor in it, as their attempts were so half hearted because they didn't want to go against operators. They had their Download! etc but .. you would be really, really surprised on what kind of a budget those attempts were ran(displaying nokias motivation) and what kind of money you needed to sort payments for them(again displaying nokias motivation level - you wouldn't believe how good deal that 100$ bucks starting developer fee from apple was compared to the sums you needed to get a popular symbian os licensing platform and accepting payments on it - both in startup cost and per transaction cost for typical mobile payment sizes).

      There is no easy way currently to break in a new smartphone platform in.. Android is already too well established in the lower(and higher too) end.

      also there's kaiOS but thats a transitory ecosystem, just like tizen.

      windows phone failed due to not matching features. launching a smartphone platform with featurephone capabilities was a dumb AF move. it was also tragically funny having ms and nokia people lobby for ports of apps onto the platform that were literally impossible to do at the time on the platform. then when escalating through ms dev relations the answer came back as "you don't need to do that". well, okay then. thanks for the free phone and food I guess.

      anyways about apple, they're making cheaper and cheaper devices and selling them for higher and higher price. It's not their fault that people buy it. they will continue to make them cheaper and cheaper to make.

      also somehow they manage to sell 3 year old devices that will have support dropped in like 1 year. that should be illegal (they do this in asia. apple actually has mid tier phones and has had for years. they just keep selling the old models - and this is new in box models through operators, a lot of it in asia. no refurbs. but new in box phones of 3 year old phones. thats their 200 dollar segment). apple sells them and doesn't give a fuck that the sw support is due to be dropped in just a little while.

      • Re: Rent Seeking (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Dixie_Flatline ( 5077 ) <vincent@jan@goh.gmail@com> on Saturday November 03, 2018 @11:53AM (#57586134) Homepage

        The iPhone 5S was released in 2013, five years ago. It was discontinued in 2015 in most places, 2017 in India. It's still getting software support. There are android phones that never got a single update. Apple has historically had better support for its phones than any other company. I'm on a 4 year upgrade cycle because that's generally how long my phones last (with a thin case).

        I get absolutely every single dollar worth out of my iPhones while I watched friends have endless boot loops on their Pixels (which couldnâ(TM)t be repaired in Canada because google would refer them to the manufacturer and then be referred back to google BY the manufacturer).

        The state of longevity and customer support in the market is fairly poor, but Apple is certainly miles ahead of everyone else.

      • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

        also somehow they manage to sell 3 year old devices that will have support dropped in like 1 year. that should be illegal (they do this in asia. apple actually has mid tier phones and has had for years. they just keep selling the old models - and this is new in box models through operators, a lot of it in asia. no refurbs. but new in box phones of 3 year old phones. thats their 200 dollar segment). apple sells them and doesn't give a fuck that the sw support is due to be dropped in just a little while.

        So glad you can accurately predict the future!

        When it comes to supporting older devices, especially Mobile ones, NOBODY can compare Apple negatively to ANYONE else.

        Period.

        iOS12 (just released about a month ago), supports iPhones back to the 5s.

        That's equivalent to Samsung still Supporting the Galaxy S4 with OS and Security Updates(!!!)

        According to the link below, the last OS Update for the S4 was Android LOLLIPOP, in November, 2015.

        https://www.androidpit.com/gal... [androidpit.com]

        So kindly STFU on this subject. You just lo

    • There are plenty of competitors. If one of them can come up with something substantially better then they could easily crush everyone else in the smartphone market.

      There's a big market space waiting for a secure, less fragmented iteration of Android. Anyone care to occupy it?

    • Rent seeking is a code-word for a coercive business transaction. I don't think it fits Apple's situation. The smart phone market is pretty well saturated. The only new revenue you can get is through related devices (watches? headphones?) or services.

      There are plenty of competitors. If one of them can come up with something substantially better then they could easily crush everyone else in the smartphone market.

      The problem with video is that you either need to strike licensing deals or create your own content. Both Netflix and Amazon realized that they could only make money with their video streaming services if they created their own content. Licensed content is too expensive, they need a different license for each region, etc. By creating your own content, you can make it available everywhere and it ends up costing less than licensing fees.

      In order for Apple to compete in the video market, they would have to

    • by qubezz ( 520511 )
      Pokemon Go has made $2 billion. Apple takes $600 million of that, not for any innovation other than having a device that is locked down so users can't install their own software without the app creator paying the troll toll.

      Rent seeking is what it's always been about.
    • There's no secret to what's happening. Steve Jobs was the innovator at Apple.

      Since he's been gone there has been zero innovation there. In this case it's not really the engineers that innovate, it's the idea guy who sends the engineers the projects they work on and the integrators that take the individual small improvements to hardware and combine them into an actual innovative system. With Jobs gone Apple is just living off the carcass now. Its justa matter of time till they fold.

  • by Tsolias ( 2813011 ) on Saturday November 03, 2018 @08:13AM (#57585400)

    Apple spent less r&d in than AMD in the era where Apple was a duopoly in the smartphone and tablet market with Samsung(no chinese companies back then where so huge) than AMD spent in r&d during their bulldozer days.

    Apple, aside from the firewire, hasn't invented anything. They repackage, copy-pasta ideas, from others.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

    I hate fanboys because their fanboy-ism is based upon marketing and ads. I love fanboys who are fanboys for technical reasons.
    Let the hate flow, I learnt the "foe" feature here 3 years into this account after an "anti-apple" comment.

    Apple is a fashion choice, stop being fashists.

    • Let the hate flow, I learnt the "foe" feature here 3 years into this account after an "anti-apple" comment.

      Apple is a fashion choice, stop being fashists.

      Strange that the article assumes that Apple users are somehow trapped on Apple products. Shall we chat about people who actually brag of how business is effectively locked into Windows?

      Apple's inventions or lack of them are not the point. The point is what companies do with the inventions. Someone's gonna hate on you no matter. I'm on Linux at the moment. At home and work I have Apple and Windows. If I post anything on any of those, I'll get flamed. Meh, whateva.

    • Apple, aside from the firewire, hasn't invented anything. They repackage, copy-pasta ideas, from others.

      So what?

      I don't totally agree with you that Apple just "copy-pasta ideas from others", but even if so, why should I care? Their stuff is generally well designed and high quality. Why shouldn't I just buy whatever product works best for me, completely ignoring who invented what?

      In fact, to be honest, I think a lot of companies would do better to follow established standards instead of trying to invent things. I'm glad Apple is generally using standard USB and Thunderbolt ports, for example, and would pr

    • Apple is a fashion choice, stop being fashists.

      Last time I checked iOS only runs on Apple devices and Mac OS X or OS X *legally* only runs on Macs.

      Perhaps you want to look up what a fanboy/i is or what fashion is.

      I know hundreds of Apple users and most of them are hard core computer users, give them better hardware and a better OS and they switch instantly.

      OTOH if you have a reasonable specced laptop, preferred made from metal, and you install me macOS on it, I might buy it. Just to prove a point. I don't c

    • Innovation on Apple stalled when Steve Jobs died. Now Apple is copying its own products over and over again.

      Sadly, most smartphone manufacturers still think Apple as an innovator, and are afraid of breaking out of the rat race of copying everything Apple does.

      • Innovation on Apple stalled when Steve Jobs died. Now Apple is copying its own products over and over again.

        The Ax series of SoCs ALONE belies your assertion.

        And that's just ONE example.

    • by sphealey ( 2855 )

      Apple is making a return on its investment. Why AMD is still in business is something of a mystery. So I'm not sure citing AMD's R&D spending is a good argument.

      And for whatever Apple are spending on chip research they are getting a heck of an ROI and putting out amazing designs on a routine 2-year cycle.

      • Why AMD is still in business is something of a mystery.

        AMD is responsible for nearly all the modern innovation in high performance x86 CPUs. The modern instruction set is entirely due to AMD (in fact we call it AMD64, even on Intel). AMD invented Hypertransport, which Intel copied as Quickpath. AMD pioneered multichip CPU modules, which Intel will be forced to imitate. Basically everything interesting lately.

    • I love fanboys who are fanboys for technical reasons.

      Then you should LOVE me.

      I frankly don't care much for the vast majority of Apple's ads and videos. I think they actually do a pretty piss-poor job of describing the MERITS of Apple Products and the Apple "Ecosystem" (boy do I hate that term!). But, in most cases, those advantages DO exist, for tech-savvy users like me, those advantages keep me happy, and keep me coming back for more, decade after decade, even though I have plenty of experience on the Dark Side (Windows), and actually develop Windows busines

  • And Microsoft is realizing the same thing. Goods be it phones or OS is subject to too many vagrancies, while services are both higher margin and more consistent. Think of it as betting on the ifs of Vegas, versus the steadiness of bonds.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Technological progress in semiconductors has slowed down to a crawl. It's a zombie business model, buy junk from China and sell it with your brand at a markup. But we pretty much have no reason to upgrade anymore. Market growth in smart phones and computers has stalled, even declining.
    So, what else can they do? Well, services. Services with monthly payments provide a stream of income, and a big stream if you manage to become the market leader. It takes time to get established though, and there are zero guar

    • Hardware is dead

      I'd like to see you compute without it.

    • Technological progress in semiconductors has slowed down to a crawl.

      Not at all. Just because Intel stumbled you think everybody has. But Moore's law just keeps chugging along. [wikipedia.org] AMD pioneered the multi chip module technique, making it a lot cheaper to put many cores into one CPU, giving Moore's law another big boost. EUV is a major hurdle because it changes from refractive to reflective optics, but after the difficult 7nm node, the next two or three nodes will be comparatively easy.

  • not all times are times of opportunities. This is also not different in sciences or art. after relativity was formulated, a time of consolidation and application followed, the same with many other theories. Our modern time just made us extremely impatient. In all areas, science, art or technology. Look back 20 years and see what happened since. It is enormous. A major breakthrough had been the new smart phone interface paradigms and it was immediately adapted by others. The technology improvement since was
  • [...] iCloud has been a poor competitor to services provided by Google and some smaller companies such as Dropbox, but that only means Apple can increase revenue from it exponentially if it bothered to compete more aggressively....

    [...]

    The challenge, Bershidsky writes, "is to grow the services offering fast enough to make up for potential iPhone revenue losses....

    All this assumes a level of competence in software and systems, starting from the very top, that Apple has seldom been able to achieve, and is

    • You can't wave a magic wand and axiomatically create services people will use, let along pay money for, see Google+ for one of the starkest examples

      Exactly the example I was thinking of. Rather an amazing pratfall. The issue: Google has no idea what actually motivates people socially because the founders are, let's call it, a couple of social misfits. Apple can trump that, it's a whole company full of social misfits.

  • Let us leave aside the semantics that Apple is mainly an innovator rather than an inventer, as in manically designing something that may functionally already exist, but resulting in a product experience that is *usually* noticeably better and simpler than the existing one.
    I do like the idea of an all-encompassing simple subscription for all kinds of entertainment incl. books, a cloud service and some kind of extended warranty. No hassle. I can well imagine google, netflix etc eventually also offering such.
  • Clickbait (Score:4, Interesting)

    by nine-times ( 778537 ) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Saturday November 03, 2018 @09:03AM (#57585588) Homepage

    This seems like nonsense to me. Apple's success has never been due to being an "inventor", and they're not currently "rent seeking". Apple is, and has been, primarily a hardware company. They sell Macs, iPads, iPhones, iPods, watches, and accessories. They sell a lot of them because they have a reputation (whether you think it's earned or not) for making high quality and widely supported products that are easy to use. That's still the case, and Apple is showing no sign of moving away from that.

    Are their products inventive? I can see both sides of the debate. Most of their stuff is based off of some technology someone else invented, but on some level you could say that about all technology products. However, MP3 players weren't very popular before iPods. Smart phones weren't relatively unpopular before the iPhone. Tablets weren't selling much until the iPad. Smart phones didn't generally include virtual assistants until Apple introduced Siri. Not many people were wearing smart watches before the Apple Watch. In each case, the product class existed before Apple entered the market, but Apple seemed to introduce the first product in the class that people really wanted, and then a ton of imitating products followed.

    None of those products were invented by Apple, but Apple still creates fairly innovative designs that have changed the way people use technology.

    • they're not currently "rent seeking"

      But Apple wants to be because as anybody can see, I-phone is nearly mined out.

  • by DontBeAMoran ( 4843879 ) on Saturday November 03, 2018 @09:23AM (#57585636)

    For all these reasons, the fact that profits from services will soon be/already are exceeding profits from hardware sales, they should start selling macOS as a stand-alone OS for regular PCs. Simply give a list of supported CPUs/GPUs/chipsets.

    That way, it means more people using macOS, more people subscribing to Apple services, more people buying other Apple devices (phones, tablets, watches, set-top boxes, etc).

  • This is the new era business model, they don't want people to own anything, but to subscribe to everything they can. Actually it started a long time ago with computer software and the licenses changed so you weren't buying the software you were leasing it. Now music, movies, books, magazines, TV, radio, cars and other goods, they want a guaranteed monthly payment. I've read where grocery stores are looking into a model like this where you pay for base monthly food, then buy extras. Your quality of

    • by grumling ( 94709 )

      Well, to be fair there are relatively few films that are watched more than once or twice, and I'll bet the same holds true for books and almost certainly news stories. Having a large library is more of an interior design aesthetic than a valuable asset for most of us, and a liability when it comes time to downsize.

      Qualifiers abound of course. And for whatever reason music seems to be an exception, probably because it lights up nostalgia pathways.

  • Since 2007, as a species we have been playing with slightly improved versions of stuff invented in the 1970s. Our actual innovation has stagnated, and the result is that we are more focused on entertainment products than anything with long-term potential. Signs of the decline.

  • Apple is trying to keep their customer relationship to itself. The other FAANGs are happy to bring third parties into the business/customer relationship (ie advertisers and resellers) because it is a way to get quick growth and allows for singular focus. I also think that the current CEO probably puts a very high premium on privacy for some very personal reasons, and that alone is a good reason to consider paying Apple instead of going the free route.

    Everyone here knows the saying "if you aren't paying for

  • need to look out for invocation elsewhere, guess a good time to start an IT startup ;-)
  • None of the links in the summary go to the article authored by Bershidsky. Instead, it doubles down on putting lipstick on a pig.

    Here's the Bershidsky link:

    Apple Used to Be an Inventor. Now It's Mainly a Landlord. [bloomberg.com]

    Now I have three entries for Bershidsky in my idiots file:

    "Rent extraction from a user base that finds it hard to go away may sound a bit like extortion," Leonid Bershidsky writes in closing. "But it's more honest and upfront than extracting data from users in ways they often don't understand and

  • These pop on /. every week. They never say anything new.
    Airpods have been copied to death. The Apple Watch is the most successful smart watch out there. Solid seeming rumors point to Apple researching foldable phones, air gesture controls, and AR glasses. But none of these are ever mentioned in these useless articles. All they ever do is bemoan how things "used to be better" under Steve Jobs. At this point any points about what Jobs did better have been made a dozen times over. But no, we need to see this
    • Apple watch dropped from 35% to 30% market share [counterpointresearch.com] year over year, to hold a minority share of a market it once owned, while Fitbit Shipments grew 348%.

    • These pop on /. every week. They never say anything new.

      Airpods have been copied to death. The Apple Watch is the most successful smart watch out there. Solid seeming rumors point to Apple researching foldable phones, air gesture controls, and AR glasses.
      But none of these are ever mentioned in these useless articles. All they ever do is bemoan how things "used to be better" under Steve Jobs. At this point any points about what Jobs did better have been made a dozen times over. But no, we need to see this same damned article every week till the end of time.

      MOD PARENT UP!!!

  • 1. Hire only the best staff. On merit who can do the work they got hired for without needing extra support in the company for years.
    2. Have designers in a company who can work on new products that are "new".
    3. Have engineers hired on merit who can do the advanced work and testing.
    4. Ensure the new products work and make a profit.
    5. Test the products to make sure they work in the real world under real conditions.
    6. Have testing done and fix problems well before paying consumers find and report th
    • It was a parody post, right? This is the Apple that can't even make a wireless charger. [theverge.com]

    • 1. Hire only the best staff. On merit who can do the work they got hired for without needing extra support in the company for years.

      2. Have designers in a company who can work on new products that are "new".

      3. Have engineers hired on merit who can do the advanced work and testing.

      4. Ensure the new products work and make a profit.

      5. Test the products to make sure they work in the real world under real conditions.

      6. Have testing done and fix problems well before paying consumers find and report the same problems.

      7. Always have staff learning new skills and hire new staff on merit to bring in new skills.

      Any average company can create a product for existing market conditions. A few brands can take exisiting tech and bring in new advanced features.
      A few of the very best brands every generation can create a new market that never existed.

      Hire the best staff to ensure a brand can make its own new markets every generation that define the use of tech for that generation.

      Its all in having the best staff and best workers. Find the best and support them. People who arrive on time. Who work hard. Who understand new problems and can work on new projects.

      Wow! Sounds like an accurate description of Apple's policies and practices!

  • Each Apple cultist gets a chip implant for the purpose of transferring funds directly from their employer or family to Apple at scheduled times, such as shortly before Apple reporting dates or whatever other times Apple deems to be appropriate, in amounts to be determined by Apple based on sophisticated AI algorithms that take into account the cultist's conditions of employment and those of their immediate family. This is the Apple I-chip.

  • Even though he was a royal arsehole, few would dispute that Steve Jobs was a visionary. Tim Cook, by contrast, is a by-the-book numbers guy. He is as exciting and inspiring as a smelly gym sock. Even a village idiot could've foreseen the path Apple would take with such a figure at the helm. Is anyone really surprised?

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Working...