Also Apple: We don't want to invest as much in parts of the ecosystem that have relatively low returns.
There's a lot to like about Apple, but their closed ecosystem and adversity to consumer repair rights ensure I will never buy one of their products.
In software, on the other hand, the latest macOS update introduced a bug in Notes where now if I hit the Tab key (entering an actual tab character), that whole line of text becomes invisible. Just invisible. I can highlight the text and see that it's still there, but without highlighting, it's invisible. It's very reproducible, this is not an obscure corner case. And this is at a time when Apple is attempting to ramp up its online services like Notes.
But putting that aside, I still see that as an execution flaw, or at least, it's a way in which design and execution are so intertwined that the distinction no longer makes sense. A computer with a non-replacable keyboard that breaks after a year is a badly-executed product. The way to execute it better would be a keyboard that doesn't break, whatever design decisions that entails.
So what you're saying is it was a design flaw from a design company.
1) Enable dark mode
2) Open a new note
3) Tab twice, then type text which will be invisible
It appears to be any line with two or more tabs of indentation. Not two or more relative to the previous line, but two or more period.
The biggest part of their business has shifted from computers to phones but I doubt they expect the iPhone to be their biggest product in the future forever, so I don’t think they would pigeonhole themselves when their name and logo is so ubiquitous.
Companies like Apple, Nike, Mercedes, Coca-Cola will never completely change the name (maybe some variations here and there, without touching the core name) simply because the brand is so recognizable. It would be throwing money and image down the drain and it would just cause confusion.
In Germany both are known. Daimler the business, Mercedes the car...
Kinda Apple and iPhone...then Mac (aka Mercedes Benz Trucks?!)
Another interesting case is when HP decided to spin off their PC business: they gave the HP brand to that new company.
I wonder what results in these dissimilar approaches? Are these cultural? are these youthful company versus decades-old bureaucracy?
Also, I wouldn't call Google a youthful company, even if Apple is 44 years old.
This seems to be a primary driver of the software-rot found all across Apple's ecosystem. iOS is generally pretty well-maintained; macOS less-so. Apps like Music are kept in better condition than, say, Podcasts. Etc. You can almost directly correlate how unpopular a piece (or feature) of its first-party software is with how buggy it is. Which I guess makes some amount of sense, but it really tarnishes Apple's image as a company selling high-end products.