They are comparing a global economy (Apps) to a local US market.

What's the profit of global Hollywood sales?

Apple repeatedly said they would manufacture in the US should it be able to man those plants and that is not the case right now. There's no manufacturing plant in the US that would be able to sustain the volume requirements.

Tim Cook often commented on this. Best they could do for now was to build Mac Pros in US. It's a much smaller volume.

*cough* Canada *cough* Korea *cough *Vietnam* *cough* Somali *cough* Iraq *cough* Afganistan

Imbecile. Learn history. And have the balls to sign your post rather than surrendering to anonymous coward posting and making comments.

Just a note regarding "can view twelve targets at once".

That's just not the point of a telescope array; rather the contrary. The point is to utilise large number of smaller telescopes to point at the same object to gather more light. This simulates a larger mirror minus the greater atmospheric distorsion they provide. Anything above 12" gets really finicky about distorsion, requiring lasers to help compensate: the laser is used to compare the projected point in the upper atmosphere in order to compensate using adaptive optics. All that is terribly expensive.

The real advancement is in software where all of the (in this case 12) telescopes in the array, are composited into a single image of greater accuracy & resolution.

Wich is precisely why someone will end up buying it. Or would want to.

The patent portfolio is non-negligible, the BIM server still profitable and the QNX side or the business (head units in cars) still generate lots of revenus.

I think it's stupid no one actually tried to snatch them up.

That's debatable because the fifth law didn't apply to robotics but life in general. Daniel was moved by the first four.

Points taken though.

My (office-provided) 5th gen iTouch (more akin to an iPhone 5) still is supported and has the same apps access as other iPhont (or universal iPad) apps. With the exceptions of those apps that are marked as requiring hardware my iPod doesn't have (calling).

Not having iPhones, I would probably get an iTouch. It's a pretty decent device. But kinda pointless if you have an iPhone.

Before I get asked, I'm a professional iOS 5 developer. That's why I have plenty iHardware around.

And to keep objective, between my iPhone 1 and my 4s, I skipped the 3G, 3GS and 4 while I used an atrocious alternative. Never again.

Four. There where four laws.

My iPhone 4s is (release oct 2011) is still supported.

(Though I replaced it with a newer device, I still use it as an iTouch for various reasons).

My thoughts as well but it's still surprising a chunk of ice would still be on the vehicle after it went supersonic.

That's a hell of a lot of friction.

Undead Blackhole (+1)

Have you had regret nightmares since unleashing STL?

And how do you figure they are wasting space? Ever examined the content of their apps?

It's all about distribution issues. One-size-fits-all ends up requiring App developers to ship with 1x, 2x and now 3x bitmaps for the artwork. This does inflate apps, just as having multiple interface files specialization for multiple device sizes (~iphone & ~ipad xib files, or the bloating AutoLayout + Size Classes super storyboards). It's inevitable.

But Apple is also taking steps towards reduced bitmap footprints.

As of iOS 7, there has been FAR fewer bitmaps in the core OS in favour of lighter (visually and storage-wise) user interfaces.

With the introduction of PDF-based image assets that auto-compiles all the required resolutions, developers are now in a position to gradually rid themselves of the burden of maintaining multiple bitmaps (those where getting quite a hassle in large projects where every image was a trio of increasing sized bitmaps).

In OS X, PDF images are rendered natively and bypass the asset compiler. In iOS 8, the path is paved for abandoning bitmaps altogether.

So, no, Apple is not making their OS fatter on purpose. It's the cost of added features and backward compatibility that does that.

Breaking into VPN isn't that easy.

A bajillion dollars wont work.

You need rubber.