LyrArc Article Gist
The iphone 16e 2025 for $599 more battery, more camera and larger screen offers more features at the lower end of the price range. One can see this as a phone that helps tackle the cost of living crisis that could hurt Apple sales from buyers with moderate incomes who are cutting back. It could also target a growing middle class buyer segment in India. The e in 16e could stand for economy buyers who want basics in the Apple and could attract upper income buyers of Xiaomi , Huawei and Samsung. Apple iphones have strengths in: seamless ecosytem navigation interface reliable and secure ios software higher resale value Apple discontinues support for older iphones after about 7 years. iPhone 13's can still be used in 2025 4 years old, a good time to change would be by 2026. iPhone 15 was introduced in 2023 which means a good time for changing it is 2028 using a 5 year change which balances the need to update and  update to have access to newer iphones. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman cites Apple as the largest company in the U.S. in terms of its valuation but having only 43,000 employees in the U.S. He asks the question- why does Apple get most of its manufacturing done in China? Apple indirectly employs about 700,000 people at its suppliers, with most of them in China. Companies contribute to a country's economy by creating successful clusters of research, innovation and manufacturing. In Apple's case, to the great detriment of the U.S. economy, the manufacturing part is being done entirely overseas. If cost is the only factor for this, then the question remains how German manufacturing has managed to surivive and grow with wages that are higher than in the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
PC shipments worldwide declined by 14% in the first quarter of 2013, compared to the prior year quarter, according to IDC. Gartner Research's estimate for the first quarter PC shipments shows a decline of 11.2%. IDC analysts say the introduction of Windows 8 with touch screen capabilities has not reversed this trend. It may have exacerbated the trend because Windows 8 made changes that reduced the PC experience to bring in touch screen and other features available on tablets, and made the product more confusing to use. This view of IDC is confirmed by some companies which say the incremental value of Windows 8 is not worth the cost of training employees to use the new PC's with Windows 8.

LyrArc Article Gist
Matthew Slaughter of the Tuck School, Dartmouth, says that the principle of comparitive advantage should determine what America exports and imports. Under comparitive advantage each country concentrates its energies on the particular goods and services that it does better than other countries. Free trade operates under the idea of comparitive advantage, but in practice it is quite different than its textbook economic counterpart. It is constantly changing as new countries or industries in different countries try to upset the existing pattern. Under a textbook example Airbus should not exist because Boeing was the most efficient manufacturer upto that time, and new entrants in a industry are nurtured for years with support from the governments of their countries. And in some situations the governments may exclude certain companies or industries from support such as Komatsu and construction equipment in postwar Japan, and Infosys and software outsourcing in India, and still survive and grow. Under comparitive advantage Japan should still be importing construction equipment from Caterpillar in the US, and there would be no serious competition in that industry. This would work to the detriment of the principle of competition in free trade which is just as important to free trade as the idea of comparitive advantage, with new entrants in an industry upsetting the old way of doing things and creating price/quality improvements. Slaughter simply pulls back off the shelf the old idea of comparitive advantage without seriously considering its real life aspects. Without dealing with trade distortion from currency manipulation, from the impact on jobs, without considering the continuing critical role of manufacturing in developed economies to provide the standards of living for a large middle class, and creating the kind of society that people of developed countries aspire to. He mentions GE's Immelt and the President's Council on Jobs, but makes no effort to engage Immelt 's statement in his recent op-ed article in the Washington Post, that the concept of transitioning from a export-oriented economic powerhouse to a services led consumption based economy could be done without loss of jobs, prosperity and prestige, was fundamentally wrong. He has only one line for manufacturing's role in America's economy. This line says knowledge intensive industries such as education and software are just as important as manufacturing, but fails to mention that manufacturing has received less attention in recent decades. In so doing he is discounting his own profession of concern for the high rate of joblessness in the U.S., and the need for a new focus on manufacturing in the U.S. to reverse that trend. By saying that imports are not a sign of failure but can raise standards of living, and leaving it at that, Slaughter does not acknowledge that consumer debt that US consumers have taken on in the process certainly affects future prospects for the US economy. And he makes no mention of the need for rebalancing the world economy, which is exactly how free trade should work ideally. Countries that have high imports export more to rebalance the world trading system, as currency valuations are allowed to adjust makig their exports more attractive. By not taking into account the realities of free trade, and the need for practical measures to rebalance without policy induced distortions by state run economies, Slaughter ignores the idea of free trade that works as it should and for all countries. The irony is that Immelt's own committment to jobs and competitiveness has been questioned in online blogs and most recently by an editorial in the Wall Street Journal on January 26, 2011, titled "The Misallocators." That editorial refers to the outsize role of GE Capital in GE's earnings during the past decade, and the lack of credibility of a focus on competitiveness and jobs that this creates for GE. It mentions the loss of 34,000 GE jobs in the US during the last decade. ...