Internal Apple document: FY'14 Planning Offsite - <AUTHOR> http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/216526160?access_key=key-1uv8ibrvnzr4dnx0fu5c&allow_share=true&escape=false&view_mode=scroll <comment><USER2> This strikes me as very boring, non-Apple style thinking. I don't think the experience of a 5 inch phone is better than a 4 inch phone. But it is _a bigger number_ and thus easy to market. And things that are easy to market are the playground of boring companies.

Apple, on the other hand, should look at these numbers and say "people obviously want something _new._ " Giant phones are being heavily marketed as the new thing, so people are buying them. Not because it feels good to try to shove a small book into a front pocket, or that they love having to use both hands to type out text messages.

A boring business would follow the heard because they don't know how to distinguish customer needs from customer inertia. Apple, traditionally, is very good at knowing when something is a trend, and when something speaks to a deeper human need.

I sincerely hope that Apple has not become a boring company.

<comment><USER3> Have you actually tried using a 5 inch phone? I think you may change your mind if you haven't. Trying to use someone's iPhone X after using my Nexus 5 is quite frankly laughable to say the least.

<comment><USER4> I have the iPhone as a _phone_. I make calls with it, keep it in my pocket, and other uses are secondary (albeit common). Insofar as it's uncomfortably small for some uses, that's why an iPad is usually in arm's reach. Sure, 5" is more usable for many applications than 4", but ~10" is much more so. Make the phone more than 4" and I'm apt to just not carry it, as it won't reasonably fit in my pocket and looks/feels like a wall held to my ear.

iPad + iPhone Nano = winning combination. If Apple makes a 6" iPhone, I'd sure hope they at _least_ retain the 4" version, if not shrink & optimize for a much smaller version. I need a phone that excels at being a _phone_ and integrates well into the iOS ecosystem; got my tablet for applications needing a more complex/larger interface.

<comment><USER5> >> I have the iPhone as a phone.

Yes, but this is _your_ use case.

While there are a lot of people who share your use case, there are probably a lot more people who don't.

Which is why the product diversity on the market right now is good. There's a decent chance that you'll find a phone that will work for your particular use case.

<comment><USER6> What concerns me (and I'm sure many others who don't like the idea of a larger iPhone) is that the iPhone 5s is currently the only flagship phone under 4.5". Sure, you can get smaller budget smartphones, but if you want a small high-end phone, it's Apple or nothing.

If the rumors are true and Apple decides to make the iPhone 6 4.7" and 5.5", what do I get next time I'm ready for an upgrade? I think it's silly for Apple to leave money on the table by only selling the current form factor when there's obviously a lot of demand for a larger iPhone, but it's equally silly to ignore the market for smaller phones like every other smartphone manufacturer is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Apple faces a severe _potential_ financial crisis in coming years -- one that dwarfs Microsoft's. They rely so heavily on the premium subsidy for their revenue that if the subsidy is merely brought down to normal levels they will see a huge drop in revenue -- and this assumes that they keep selling the same number of phones.

Now that there are viable alternatives in Android, and to a lesser extent Windows Phones, with much lower subsidies, I think you'll see the carriers push these other devices.

And if we move to a model where consumers pay for the full price of the phone (which is what much of the world does today), then you'll actually see iPhone sales fall. Sub $200 low-margin phones are the future. Apple can still do well with a premium phone -- especially if the camera is really good, but I think it's a tougher niche than the high-end PC market.

<comment><USER8> >Why being insanely profitable is bad for Apple

Microsoft fans have been making this argument for 15 years or more. They said Apple should copy Dell and sell cheap enterprise desktops with low margins because that was where the money was. Then they said Apple should copy Asus and HP and sell cheap netbooks with low margins because that was the future. Then people said Apple should be making a really cheap ebook reader to compete with the Kindle.

People are constantly advising Apple that they should get into low margin markets and compete on price with companies that are barely breaking even. This advice seems to mostly be based on what they want the market to look like, more than how it actually is.

<comment><USER7> To be clear I think Apple has a great model, but they need to be realistic that it won't last. The only markets in the world that the iPhone has substantial market share is in countries with subsidies (at least I believe so). In markets with no subsidy, Android is killing.

As the US (and the world) moves more to a non-subsidy model I think this disproportionately impacts the iPhone. All OEMs will have to deal with this, but Samsung, LG, Huawei, Coolpad, are used to this world already as they sell really well worldwide. iPhone hasn't figured out how to sell full price phones around the world.

<comment><USER9> > As the US (and the world) moves more to a non-subsidy model I think this > disproportionately impacts the iPhone.

This is the exact model Apple's computer division deals with, and they're wildly profitable compared to most PC vendors even though they charge premium prices all around. What's different about phones?

<comment><USER10> The computer division is funded by the overall success of Apple. It allows the computer division to have a bigger budget to spend on things like marketing and R&D. It's not a coincidence that the computer division has been doing so much better since Apple had other mega-successes that serve as the cash cow for the entire company.

 _If_ the iPhone ever ceases to be as profitable it will have a ripple-effect throughout the entire company as they scramble to find the next thing that will replace those lost profits.

<comment><USER11> Actually, Apple spends remarkably little on R&D, perhaps even to a fault. The third chart on this page from Asymco [1] is interesting, especially considering Apple's R&D is for computers, phones, and whatever other lines they're developing, and the R&D for a company like HTC is likely to be clustered around its narrower product lines.

[1] [http://www.asymco.com/2012/01/30/you-cannot-buy- innovation/?...](http://www.asymco.com/2012/01/30/you-cannot-buy- innovation/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Asymco+%28asymco%29)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I think this is a case of Apple's stubborness giving them a little bite in the ass. It took them a long time to come out with the iPad mini because they didn't believe in the inbetween tablet size, and now it's taken them far longer than it should've to come out with a bigger iPhone. Apple was late to the party with 4G as well.

I think once a bigger iPhone drops it will put a big gust of wind in their sails but I also think that Apple needs to be skating to where the puck will be if they want to keep their place as the premium manufacturer. If they're 2 or 3 years behind what Android (Samsung really) phones have the narrative that Samsung is more innovative is going to gain steam.

The other looming challenge for Apple is that software services are growing as a differentiator in phone ecosystems. Most of the Google services thoroughly outclass iCloud, meaning that iCloud doesn't give the Apple the competitive boost that it could.

<comment><USER13> >Apple was late to the party with 4G as well.

I remember the battery life being just awful on LTE phones until around the time the iPhone 5 came out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I remember when everyone was bagging on the iPhone for being 'so big'. "who is going to put that damn thing up to their face? They look hilarious! What is this, 1990?"

Really amazing how times change. I think it's because when the iPhone came out, no one could think of using their Phone for everything that they are now used for - so it just seemed like overkill. Now for a lot of people, it's their computer.

<comment><USER15> Maybe that should be taken as an indication that there isn't any one size that will suit everyone's needs. Some people want a phone that is larger than an iPhone and some people want one that is smaller than an iPhone. Those people are served well by other phone manufacturers who have a variety of sizes, but aren't well served by Apple who only makes one size of phone.

<comment><USER16> Apple makes their iphone screen that size because it is part of their tailored user experience (ie: you can reach each part of the phone with your thumb and developers can target that screen size) and because of uniformity (You know a case will fit and you know what to expect). If apple started making their phones larger it would disrupt that experience they built and would introduce fragmentation.

Apple does consider screen size though, thats why the ipad mini was released and the ipad itself was made even though Steve Jobs hated the idea of a tablet, so it's not entirely unplausable that they would release an iphablet alongside the next iphone, and as this document shows they are aware of the problem.

Apple has also considered the price aspect of the document too, with the iphone 5c, so time will tell what else they'll try.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I wonder how a document that says "Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only makes it into the wild.

<comment><USER18> It was turned over during discovery and released with court documents in the Apple vs. Samsung litigation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I'm surprised keyboard size is mentioned only once so far. When I have to type Chinese a bigger screen is a lot more accurate. I switched to my current iPhone 5c from a Lumia 920. Typing Chinese has been a major setback for me. (Typing English is not that much different though)

</comment><comment><USER20> For Apple to maintain the lead they have had they need to continue to innovate new types of products, not just keep improving what they have. I think there is plenty of opportunity for this. Think smart appliances, houses, cars. The question is whether they still have the ability to do that with Jobs gone. Time will tell.

Edit: Probably the most likely new category would be wearable computing now that I think about it. Longterm perhaps electronics integrated with the body.

<comment><USER21> They've done some impressive things on the hardware front recently--the Mac Pro redesign and streamlining their MacBook line come to mind--but since the iPhone 4, which had some incredible innovations like the antenna and Retina display, their mobile line has only seen predictable iteration. I expect the iPhone 6 to be a significant deviation in form factor from the iPhone 4/5/5S because Apple is run by smart people who are rarely late to the party.

<comment><USER22> I hate to be the anti-Apple cynic here, but really? Higher resolution screens, a smaller computer and discontinuing products?

That really doesn't strike me as that impressive.

<comment><USER21> The retina display was a significant achievement and you need only compare the ppi counts of its contemporaries to see that.

<comment><USER22> The first retina display was made by Samsung I believe, and was higher than its contemporaries but not by a gigantic degree.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Where are their 4K displays? ... That's what I'm waiting for :)

<comment><USER24> They recommend to buy this 4K display (it is not produced by Apple) if you own a Mac Pro 2013 or a MacBook Pro 2013:

[http://store.apple.com/ca/product/HD971LL/A/sharp-32-pn-k321...](http://store.apple.com/ca/product/HD971LL/A/sharp-32-pn-k321-4k-ultra- hd-led-monitor?fnode=53)

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> This is all over the internet today. Why is this a bad thing? Everyone knows the smartphone market is maturing (or matured) Samsung/Google has exhausted all its options (all screen sizes) where as Apple still has the bigger screen sizes to release. So we know Apple atleast one more product cycle to go through.

</comment><comment><USER26> Apple needs to show customers what they want, that's the real issue. Since Jobs died, Apple hasn't really created a new product category that none of us knew we wanted. Instead, they've made defensive moves by making their existing products cheaper and more attractive.

<comment><USER27> _Since Jobs died, Apple hasn 't really created a new product category that none of us knew we wanted._

Jobs died a relatively short time ago; even when he was at Apple, it's not like they created new product categories all that often - maybe every 3–5 years?

I can't help but feel people have expectations which are a little too high.

<comment><USER28> This. In its 35+ years Apple created - or at least codified - the personal computer, the mp3 player, and the modern smartphone. I think it's closer to a big new product category every 5-10 years, really.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Seems more like "The customers we don't have want what we don't have"

<comment><USER30> Or "Prospects (tive customers) want what we don't have"

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> I guess Apple really _is_ doomed! Based on these three pages of a document.

</comment><comment><USER32> Its dated only a year ago.. Id have hoped they would have been working on this obvious problem for a lot longer

</comment><comment><USER33> Better mind those second derivatives.

</comment><comment><USER34> I'm hoping for 2,272 x 1280 5-6 inch screens this year

</comment><comment><USER35> Authenticity? It's bullshit because Apple is successful because it doesn't follow every trend and it's not serving the low margin non premium segment.

<comment><USER36> It's a court exhibit, filed in Apple v. Samsung. It shows up on the pacer docket. It's authentic (AFAICT), presumably part of discovery apple was required to turn over to samsung.</comment></comment>


What Does "Gamer" Mean? - <AUTHOR> http://heartonomy.com/2013/04/what-does-gamer-mean/

<comment><USER2> I wouldn't say that many games actually "empower creation" at all. There are a few, of course: the SimCity family, the Dwarf Fortress family (including Minecraft), maybe even Garry's Mod. But most games aren't like that. Even the Civilization family and the open-world sandboxes still follow a more or less set narrative, and while it's possible to digress to some degree, the game still imparts a strong sense of what you "should" be doing.

That's not to say that (most) games are just "passive media to be consumed." Most gaming, while not a creative experience, is nonetheless active in that it engages the brain in a kind of interaction. But I'm forced to argue that to say that playing a video game is, in and of itself, an act of creation is just too much of a stretch. In truth, it rarely is.</comment>


Theoretical physicist Julian Schwinger 1918-1994 Biographical Memoir (2008) [pdf] - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Looks like you might have submitted this with an invalid URL? Sounds like a good post, if you want to try again.

<comment><AUTHOR> Here is the new link: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10197486](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10197486)</comment></comment>


The Free Territory of Trieste (1947–1954) - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Territory_of_Trieste <comment><USER2> possibly related: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sunrise_(World_War_I...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sunrise_\(World_War_II\))

<comment><AUTHOR> They may have happened in the same region, but it looks like Operation Sunrise happened in spring 1945 in the Northern Italian region. Whereas, the Free Territory of Treiste was a microstate artifact of a WWII.</comment></comment>


Send incoming SMS to any Slack channel - <AUTHOR> http://blog.messagebird.com/2015/11/send-incoming-sms-to-slack/ <comment><USER2> Their 'Pricing' heading on the VMM page is a bit misleading. It states "No setup fees. No monthly fees." but a VMM costs 25 euros a month, with a minimum period of 1 year.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for your feedback. Our standard product - (bulk) SMS services - has no setup costs or subscription model whatsoever (pay for what you use only). For the VMN and (shared) short code services, there are monthly costs. We will make sure the quoted text will not be showed at those pages anymore. Thanks again.</comment></comment>


NASA's First Standard Spacecraft Computer (1984) - <AUTHOR> http://fermatslibrary.com/s/development-and-application-of-nasas-first-standard-spacecraft-computer <comment><USER2> I highly recommend this documentary: [https://youtu.be/9YA7X5we8ng](https://youtu.be/9YA7X5we8ng)

This youtube channel has more great NASA documentaries as well.

<comment><USER3> Wow! So cool. This is why I love HN. I just spent the last 3 hours reading the paper and then watched the documentary.

Amazing engineering.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> In the early 80's I worked on a Jovial compiler and runtime libraries for the Mil Std 1750A processor (which was a spec delivered from several companies in hardware) used by the Airforce and also used on various NASA spacecraft, in my case we used it on the F16 Fighter. Fairly sophisticated for back then, an antique today.

</comment><comment><USER5> Anyone interested in old NASA retro-computers might enjoy this: [http://www.retrotechnology.com/memship/memship.html](http://www.retrotechnology.com/memship/memship.html)

<comment><USER6> And anyone interested in the history of old NASA computers might enjoy this: [http://history.nasa.gov/computers/contents.html](http://history.nasa.gov/computers/contents.html)

<comment><USER7> Don't forget this classic!

[http://www.flownet.com/gat/jpl-lisp.html](http://www.flownet.com/gat/jpl- lisp.html)</comment></comment></comment>


Degree gets you a tech job – or your money back - <AUTHOR> http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2016/01/13/degree-gets-you-tech-job-your-money-back/78703230/ <comment><USER2> Does this marketing actually work? If so, then I could charge people $5000 for a 'job skills development course' with a money-back guarantee. Maybe I make them read a book or something so they don't get suspicious. If they get a job, I profit; if they don't, no real loss to me. If 30% of the people find a job, then my expected value is 0.30 * $5000 = $1500. Plus even if someone doesn't find a job, they might not bother with the hassle of turning in the guarantee(the old rebate trick). The guarantee is free money for me even if it's completely ineffective or even actively harmful to the person.

Udacity are mainly online courses, so I imagine it's pretty low-cost to offer their courses to people who turn in the degree. It seems like one should be suspicious of altering their trust level in Udacity even with this guarantee.

Then again, it does at least get the incentives right for them, since they would make more money with a better program. So in the long-term, maybe it's a good thing.</comment>


Does anyone here on HN have experience of FaceFlow? - <AUTHOR> https://www.faceflow.com/ <comment> old-fart Seems like i do too, Caroline! I've worked on elaborating a version of faceflow's communication system framework following Dany's goals and ideas for the project.

If you have any questions, concerns, feel free to ask Dany or have a go at a guest session on faceflow.com

</comment><comment><USER2> I do, I'm the founder :-)</comment>


There is always a prime between p and p*6/5 for p≥25 - <AUTHOR> http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS/Repository/1.0/Disseminate?handle=euclid.pja/1195570997&view=body&content-type=pdf_1 <comment><USER2> This seems to be a pdf but it doesn't work on my phone (which seems to support most pdfs)

The topic seems interesting though</comment>


Visualizing algorithms - <AUTHOR> http://bost.ocks.org/mike/algorithms/ <comment><USER2> Discussion from a bit over a year ago: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7949995](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7949995)

</comment><comment><USER3> Everytime I see one of his (Mike Bostock) posts I want to find a problem to use d3 on.</comment>


Missing Piece of Antikythera Mechanism Found on Aegean Seabed - <AUTHOR> https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/.premium.MAGAZINE-missing-piece-of-antikythera-mechanism-found-on-aegean-seabed-1.6640779 <comment><USER2> Non-paywall link: [https://outline.com/https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/.pre...](https://outline.com/https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/.premium.MAGAZINE- missing-piece-of-antikythera-mechanism-found-on-aegean-seabed-1.6640779)

This reminds me of one of my favorite YouTube channels, Clickspring: an inspiring clockmaker and machinist who's currently documenting a full reproduction of the Antikythera Mechanism: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML4tw_UzqZE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML4tw_UzqZE) . Highly recommend for anyone who is fascinated by the care that goes into handmade mechanical devices.</comment>


Secure timestamping and confidential auditing [2006] - <AUTHOR> http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2006/01/secure-timestamping-and-confidential.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting concept, but a bit short on details. Anyone know a good place to read more about this kind of thing?</comment>


A Brief History of the Lawn Chair - <AUTHOR> https://www.valetmag.com/living/gear/2020/aluminum-webbed-lawn-chair-history-062220.php <comment><USER2> Some context for the article: before widespread electrification, aluminium was a rich people thing (eg, silverware sets out of Al instead of Ag) but government support[1] produced almost-too-cheap-to-meter aluminium[2].

People buying lawn chairs in the 1950's were probably old enough to remember aluminium and plastic as having been luxury goods in their childhoods.

[1] on the US side: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act_of_1950...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act_of_1950#Cold_War)

[2] in the USSR, I've heard they wound up even making hula hoops out of the stuff. Ever more paper clips, comrades!

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-r9XNmqQHk&t=2720](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-r9XNmqQHk&t=2720)

<comment><USER3> > People buying lawn chairs in the 1950's were probably old enough to remember > aluminium and plastic as having been luxury goods in their childhoods.

Perhaps, but aluminum chairs seem like a no-brainer anyway. The basic properties of aluminum considered strictly as a material are (1) it's easy to lift; and (2) it doesn't rust. Both of those are obviously what you want in a portable chair.

The folding chairs that I'm familiar with seem to be mainly iron, and definitely do rust.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Does anyone else think it's a bit self defeating to describe this product affordable and ubiquitous and then have a link to shop charging $60 for them?

<comment><USER2> We have some that we've inherited from my wife's grandparents. That'd be about USD 1/year until now, and they're still functional (although they have spent most of their lives stored out of UV, YMMV).

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Can't mention the history of the Lawn Chair without bringing up the first recorded Lawn Chair flight. [https://medium.com/lessons-from-history/the- strange-sad-odys...](https://medium.com/lessons-from-history/the-strange-sad- odyssey-of-lawn-chair-larry-3b943991179c)

</comment><comment><USER6> Funny, I don't think I've ever sat on one of those webbed chairs. There's two of the folding camp chairs in the garage, though. In a similar vein, I could've sworn there was a post a while back about those white plastic chairs, but I can't seem to find it right now.

<comment><USER7> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22392686](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22392686)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> We were just discussing this past weekend how folding lawn chairs are far more comfortable than the "bag chairs" that have become so popular in recent years. Plus they seem to be quite a bit more durable.

<comment><USER9> Nothing beats a plastic Adirondack though, comfort and durability!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Similarly, the foldable MacLaren baby stroller was designed by Owen Finley MacLaren, who designed the undercarriage for the Supermarine Spitfire...

<comment><USER6> Not to be confused with McLaren, which does cars.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Build a discussion platform for open-source projects. Does anybody care? - <AUTHOR>

It should be a community site which allows programmers discuss any technical stuff related to open-source projects. Each user will be able to follow project in order to see posts related to it, as well as submit his own technical posts.<p>What do you think? <comment><USER2> I think it would be cool! I love open source stuff, and I love chatting.

<http://advogato.org> was the second ever social networking site, and it was for open source/free software people. It is still there, but I no longer use it for some reason.

<http://lwn.net> is a weekly news zine with vigorous and informed discussion in the comments.

You can always use a discussion site like convore for open source discussion.

</comment><comment><USER3> Correct me if i'm wrong but I think that is the goal of <http://convore.com/>

<comment><AUTHOR> "Convore is a quick way to instant message with groups of friends in real- time. Join public or private groups and talk about anything!"

It's a chat. But I meant something like improved Google Groups fully focused on programming</comment></comment>