3 ms·
It looks like the article focuses much more on how the processes Apple employs are expensive, laborious, and challenging – which make them difficult to replicat
by lelandfe 5y ago
It looks like the article focuses much more on how the processes Apple employs are expensive, laborious, and challenging – which make them difficult to replicate.
> Pretty much no company, big or small, can afford to do these things. Yes, Apple has done a great job building many of these products and yes, consumers have come to love many of these difficult-to-manufacture features. But you are not Apple
- stevehawk 5y agoIt started about fifteen years ago, but Apple discovered that a great use for their extra cash flow was to buy up the processes they (and their competitors) would need in the future. When a screen manufacturer needed money to do the next big thing, then Apple would chip in significant funding and own a percentage of the new joint venture. They would not only get priority and lower prices on orders, but they profited from anyone else buying the same tech. Apple now owns an exclusive license to Liquidmetal, is a significant investor in Corning (Gorilla Glass), invested heavily in a Toshiba LCD plant, paid LG (for LCD) and various SSD manufacturers massive upfront payments for priority and/or exclusivity.
- anko 5y agoany idea what liquidmetal is used for?
- ksec 5y agoSIM ejector
- ethbr0 5y agoNot just predicting, but driving. With the iPhone market share, Apple has been in a good seat to define what consumers expect from {generation+1} devices. Which makes it a bit easier to acquire / pre-book the relevant manufacturing capacity, when you know you're going to make a surprise announcement of it as a major feature in the future. After which, everyone else eventually ends up at the same upstream manufacturers, or trying to duplicate the technology...