Apple suspends sales of its new LG 5K monitor due to hardware issues

I really don't think Apple had anything to do with anything more than the general design, this is more of a "make us a monitor" type situation

>>58932654
Apple always has their say in products like this. It was a joint effort fuck-up.

That monitor was retard-tier from the beginning.

Not only did the ugliness of those mismatched bezels probably break space-time continuum and gave steve jobs cancer, the decision for apple to drop their own displays was full retard.

let me explain - apple didn't really innovate in the monitor department, they got top of the line panels from LG etc., slapped an apple logo in the back and charged an extra £200 or so for it.

Tim Cook the bean counter saw that they were breaking even with this business, and decided to get rid of it to invest more capital in businesses like iPhone where they made 5 times per dollar invested.

The idiots failed to realise that those monitors had a purpose. Putting that apple logo in every creative agency office, every posh home, it was people paying for apple's branding.

Now that's gone.

As much as I would like to be on the Apple hate train this isn't Apple's fault for the bad hardware, blame LG for that. Apple's only mistake was basically giving it the Apple Seal of Approval and apple sheep flocked to it

>>58932626
>its new
Apple had nothing to do with it. They're just selling it.

LG made it.

It's hilarious that shit blogs like BI are trying to blame Apple for it.


And OP's just another mentally unstable hater. kek

>>58932683
>Now that's gone.
Thank god it was obnoxious.

Cant wait for apple to almost die then just become more like microsoft. The two are becoming each other more each year. Pushing me to linux.

>>58932626
>we're Apple!

>LG
>Apple

>>58932735
Apple is still at fault for making the shit "Mac approved" possibly knowing about the 5Ghz wifi interface issue.

>>58932626
>10 cents worth of shielding? We don't need it! Fuck you, we're Apple!
but the thing you linked says that they're suspending sales, which means they acknowledge you do need it. unless the story is saying that some government body stepped in and forced them to.

mock them for fucking up and letting LG do testing and shit (i doubt very much that Apple would have gotten involved in testing the device; they probably were just involved in speccing it out), but point your criticism at the things that are actually relevant.

>the ugliness of those mismatched bezels probably break space-time continuum and gave steve jobs cancer
when did the drama queen come to /g/? just say it's ugly. you leave yourself no room to escalate your hyperbole when you see something genuinely nauseatingly ugly.

File: 1485383818384.png (912KB, 1110x1080px) Image search: [Google]

912KB, 1110x1080px

>>58932735
>i-it's not apple's fault!
>they just put their logo and seal of approval on it!
>a-apple haters BTFO!

This is what shilltards actually believe.

>>58932838
not him, but let's be realistic here. do you think apple rolled up their sleeves and did any of the testing? if you do, you're a nut. they probably told LG to make the specs like x-y-z, and then gave some feedback on the aesthetic look of the thing at a few rounds, and then claimed credit at launch.

if they were going to do much more than that, then what would have been the point of letting LG sell it under their own brand?

File: 1483856210010.jpg (274KB, 1000x710px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 1000x710px

>>58932735
>designed by apple and made by lg

>>"""""Apple had nothing to do with it."""""

>>58932838
there's an apple logo on it?
show me anon.

File: 5k copy.png (473KB, 700x522px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 700x522px

>>58932897
Ok. What now, dumbass?
>in before "IT'S NOT THE FRUIT LOGO IT DOESN'T COUNT"

>>58932735
I'm sure it wasn't apple's fault either that when you plug a USB into a MBP the wifi stops working because the people who made USB aren't apple right? Even though apple asked for it, designed it, and knew of the issue from the beginning right?

>>58932996
LG's logo is clearly bigger therefore its not an apple product.

>>58932626
blame LG not apple

>>58933067
You might be on to something here, buddy.

File: 1471165806668.jpg (283KB, 654x1740px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 654x1740px

>>58932872
go back on your meds anon... before mods ban you yet again. kek

>>58932996
That's the Mac logo.

>>58933280
>thats the mac logo, not the apple logo, that means apple dindu nuffin

>>58932683
ok there's a lot wrong with that statement but let's get to the most important bits first
Do you think Apple fabbed their own displays in the past?

>>58933305
Yeah, pretty much. Just like how most hardware that has the Windows logo on it has nothing to do with Microsoft.

MKBHD's "positive" review of the monitor made me lose all faith in him. It was obviously a shitty fucking monitor, but he avoided saying anything bad with it as to not upset the LG overlords.

File: are you being retarded on purpose.jpg (247KB, 1224x1445px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 1224x1445px

>>58933383
>the windows logo has nothing to do with microsoft
>microsoft commissioned their logo to be on the product

>>58932996
Holy shit you're dumb

Thats just the logo to say it's compatible with Macs, which is stupid to have on a display anyway.

Tons of non apple products have that on the box. I bought a external hard drive last year that had it on it, and I don't think Apple had anything to do with the making of that hard drive.

>>58933430
>thats just a logo to say its compatible with mac
>clearly not compatible with macs as its shitting the bed left and right

>>58933430
If Apple has so little control, why were they able to halt sales of the monitor? You know they were selling and supporting it directly from their website, right? This isn't just a case of a 3rd party slapping their logo on it.

File: smugsatania.png (338KB, 671x719px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 671x719px

>>58933430
http://www.apple.com/ca/shop/product/HKN62LL/A/lg-ultrafine-5k-display
https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT207448

File: 51IW8LBNHdL.jpg (51KB, 336x500px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 336x500px

>>58932996
Guess Apple made Age of Empires too right?

>>58933496
see
>>58933466
>>58933494

retard.

>>58933466
Why would Apple need to be in control to do that?

The product is defective, LG would have halted the sales regardless if Apple was collaborating with them or not.

The "halting of sales" is also only on Apples website, which they can choose to prevent any product thats on there from being shipped, whether they made it or not.

File: 1478996322234.gif (3MB, 377x372px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 377x372px

Mactoddlers WILL defend this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA8vDBY6bCs&t=52m45s

>>58933353
>claims many factual inaccuracies
>doesn't give any examples or correct anything

>>58933597
52m 45s

File: 1468161218990.jpg (207KB, 675x827px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 675x827px

>>58933597
MACTODDLERS

ETERNALLY

BLOWN

THE

FUCK

OUT

How will mactoddlers ever recover?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkp__bUoNaw&t=46m22s

>>58933494
>If the LG UltraFine 5K Display doesn't power on or you continue to have issues with video displaying correctly after following the steps in the article above, contact LG to get service for your display.
Notice how you don't contact Apple for hardware issues.

Why would you want a monitor for a laptop anyway. Just get the 5k imac. It would cost much less than macbook pro + monitor.

"You're holding it wrong"
"Keep it out of wifi"

>>58932626

>buying an LG product

LG is complete shit.

Example LG G4

>>58934087
the fact that apple has stopped selling it means that they're not saying "keep it out of wifi", though. you understand that, right? apple didn't stop selling the iPhone when people complained about how it dropped signal.

piling on apple is fun, but doing it this desperately looks like we're weak. it's embarrassing that apple has to stop selling this thing at all; that's the headline. this contorted narrative that apple is also blaming users or pretending it's not an issue is factually incorrect. get a grip on reality, guys.

>>58933494
>ports
>one thunderbolt3 and three usb3
Well the Mac logo makes a lot of sense now seeing Apple blocked one of the initial popular Thunderbolt3 chips.

>>58934149
/g/ents, the Apple reality distortion field is in full effect here.

>>58932683
>bezels
First time I'd seen them in a close-up shot...fucking abysmal. Apple's brand is so strong they can put their name on any old shit and people will think it looks great.

>>58934200
jordan, you need to get a grip.

>>58934200
says the tripfag

>LG IN CHARGE OF ANYTHING

File: 1455556955155.gif (2MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 200x200px

>>58933597
>>58933851
MACTODDLERS

ETERNALLY

BLOWN

THE

FUCK

OUT

>>58934699
22 posters

>>58932626
Fucking Apple, what a bunch of greedy fucks.

>>58933851
MACTODDLERS BTFO

File: SCREEEEEEE.jpg (33KB, 295x320px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 295x320px

>>58932654
>>58932705
>>58932735
>>58932783
>>58932828
>>58933125
>>58933430
>>58934529
Just wanted to remind you guys that the touch disease thing happening to the iPhone 6 was because Apple left out the underfill and shielding on the motherboard. Seems a little suspicious that a monitor that Apple sells would also have this amazing lack of shielding. Just a coincidence? Probably not. This is what we call "defective by design", better known as planned obsolescence. These big companies want your electronics to break after a set period of time. It should be illegal to sell customers a product that is defective by design. Apple is run by greedy, evil jews who will try to screw customers out of every penny. This shielding could be added to dozens of units for pennies. There's no excuse, and I don't think customers would mind paying an extra 15 cents if they know it'll make the device last another 5 years. Apple and LG are intentionally fucking you.

I bet the monitor bootloops too.

>>58937010
>Just a coincidence? Probably not.
skepticism of conspiracy would be healthier than skepticism of coincidence, but i guess as long as you don't vote or drive i don't care what you do.

>>58937010
>Apple is run by greedy, evil jews who will try to screw customers out of every penny.
This is the case of every corporation. GM was fined close to a billion dollars because they figured that fixing the ignition switch on a few hundred thousand cars would cost like 60 cents per car, and that it wasn't worth it.

Corporations have no moral obligation to the community. Their only obligation is to maximize profit. I'm not even saying that cynically. A lion exists to hunt and kill prey. If this shit bothers you, then make your government impose regulations that protect and empower individuals. That's the counterbalance.

But don't single out individual companies like LG and Apple as being profit-driven like they're uniquely sociopathic. Every company is.

>>58937045
You didn't capitalize your sentence or the word "I". You also didn't counter the actual argument in any way. Your opinion goes into the loo, Pajeet.

>>58937105
lol okay

>>58937087
There are plenty of companies that make a profit without screwing people. HTC makes fantastic phones and doesn't do this kind of shit. It's not even limited to big tech companies. There are restaurants, book stores, and independent computer repair shops like my own that make plenty of money while treating people fairly and providing quality goods and services. It's simple if you're not an evil cunt.

>>58937164
every company only has an obligation to its shareholders to turn a profit. companies adhere to the law because they figure that the cost of violating the law, paying the fine, and dealing with the negative publicity isn't worth the payoff from the corner they cut.

HTC and other companies figure (maybe rightly) that it's cheaper for them to cultivate a reputation of making good products, or avoiding legal action, whereas Apple figures (again, maybe rightly in their particular situation) that the most lucrative path is to just steamroll and pay the fines later. Uber does the same thing. Airbnb tried to do the same thing in NYC and SF (and they're paying for it now).

Stop sensationalizing Apple. They're a typical company. That's not a good thing, but to cast them as particularly sinister is delusional.

>>58937203
Apple, Samsung, Microsoft, Facebook, etc. are all evil. They've buttfucked their customers every chance they got. Google is getting pretty damn evil too. At least they still treat their employees well and are invested in some open source stuff like Linux. Apple is one of the worst offenders though. Their factories have suicide nets. I'm not a hippie but I take issue with slavery. I believe that all men are created equal. If Apple simply allowed their Chinese works to quit and leave (as it's their right to do so), then they wouldn't need suicide nets. You're the delusional one here if you think Apple is no worse than other companies.

>>58937299
>Google is getting pretty damn evil too.
lol. they've been pretty much the same for years. their entire business model is predicated on advertisements and data mining, and pretty much nothing has changed. that they treat their employees well is such a side point and such a hilariously inconsequential factor that it's not clear why you care.

apple contracts with foxconn and the economic circumstances at foxconn and in tons of chinese factories are largely the same. foxconn is just more noticeable because they're bigger. but if you think china is generally a good place to work with foxconn as the exception, you're dangerously naive.

>>58937299
What's the reference on Foxconn being slavers? Is it the HuffPo article? That's the only article that describes it as such, that I can find*. And even their characterization of it is just that they pay the workers next to nothing and work them to the bone in abysmal conditions. It's gruesome and horrible, but it's not slavery. It needs to be changed, but it's not slavery. Don't conflate two awful things just to grab attention.

People on Amazon Mechanical Turk are in similar situations (inasmuch as the pay is pennies an hour, but they have basically no choice because they have no alternatives). And those people live and work in the US, for the most part.

*The NYT and some other sites characterize the way people work in Foxconn but they never call it slavery. They describe the facts of the case and it's pretty much straight up sweatshop labor.

>>58937337
I have a guy I work with who's Chinese. He told me that Apple is known in China for being one of the worst companies to work for. Foxconn only owns the factories and pays the employees. Apple directly oversees the manufacturing. You seriously need to read up on this stuff. Your precious fruit company is directly responsible for modern day slavery. It's unacceptable.

>>58937412
>I have a guy
lol i can't argue with your impeccable sources

>>58937398
So why are the suicide nets present? Why don't the employees simply walk out if it's so horrible? I'm ready to hear the excuses. Who cares if they have nowhere to go. Wouldn't simply wandering out into the wilderness or starting over in a nearby town be preferable to staying in a hellish factory that drives you to kill yourself? Something tells me that people are not there on their own free will.

>>58937422
I have a Chinese coworker who has heard firsthand from workers and their families how shit the factory conditions are. But that doesn't matter. There are plenty of resources out there talking about this type of thing if you simply search for them.

>>58937474
>So why are the suicide nets present?
Because people are miserable and suicidal. Do you not understand that people can not be slaves but still be stuck in a situation where their only option is to work in grueling working conditions?

>>58937474
>There are plenty of resources out there talking about this type of thing if you simply search for them.
lol so the onus is on me to find sources for your argument? okay i'll get right on that

>>58937518
>not slaves
>only option is to work in grueling working conditions
Hmmmm.......


>>58937526
My bad, I though you were intelligent enough to use a search engine and a keyboard. Totally my fault. I shouldn't have assumed you had an IQ over 65.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carl-gibson/how-the-iphone_b_5800262.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/21/this-is-what-we-die-for-child-slaves-made-your-phone-battery.html

http://uproxx.com/technology/ny-times-investigation-confirms-that-apples-factories-in-china-are-basically-slave-labor-camps/

http://www.theverge.com/2015/2/12/8024895/apple-slave-labor-working-conditions-2015

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2014/12/20/apple-blamed-for-slave-labor-again/

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/07/apple_iphone_workers_imprisoned_in_virtual_slavery_report/

>>58937580
>>not slaves
>>only option is to work in grueling working conditions
>Hmmmm.......
If you can't be bothered to use English carefully enough to differentiate these situations, then I don't see the point in talking to you further. Clearly you have a shaky handle on English and I don't want to chase you around as you move the goalpost.

File: 1479690344352.jpg (292KB, 1000x710px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 1000x710px

>>58937580
>IQ over 65.
>appletard

Never make that mistake.

>>58937593
My English is fine, though your interpretation of it is incorrect. Slavery is being forced to work against your will, and you're basically the property of someone else. These employees have no other options (your words there), so that makes them slaves. How are you not able to grasp such a simple concept?

>>58937203
>company
>shareholders
Shareholders are for cooperations and not all companies are built on this premise of profit over all else. Yes profit is a goal as it is necessary to operate on any scale but companies can have other goals such as customer satisfaction and wellbeing. It can be hard, these days, to please everyone since most people take advantage of a companies well doing such as flexible return policies. It would be almost impossible for a company to grow without hitting a few bumps/unpleasable customers putting a tarnish on thier name without any real cause. Thier are plenty of great examples such as Vapor Chef and many more coming about in growing industries.

>>58937616
By your interpretation, a pretty large minority of America is working under slavery conditions. More even than migrant farmworkers and whatnot, but lots of blue collar workers in general. If that's the definition you want to operate with, fine, but again I'm not interested in nailing down every key word we use if you're going to be obnoxious about every single one.

>>58937748
corporations rationalize customer satisfaction and other moral acts as a means of retaining customers over time. studies have been done about when public sentiment tops off in response to corporate charitable contributions (as in, if starbucks donates 10 cents for every dollar to starving children, will people buy a scone that they otherwise wouldn't have? what about 15 cents? would they buy a scone and a bigger coffee? etc...), and they act on that research to optimize their tax write-off, the qualitative public sentiment, and of course the promise of this up-sell.

corporations are not good people. some good people work in corporations, but even those people have to go back to a shareholder meeting and explain why they missed predicted profits for the quarter. if they miss it significantly and/or for several terms, they might get kicked out in favor of someone who can make those projections.

and that optimizes for people who care more about profit than ethics or morals.

>>58937891
I cant really speak for a company on a corporation level. Maybe if it was closely managed but i doubt any single person could pay enough attention to keep track of a corporation to have every aspect ran the way they want. Im pretty sure to get to and maintain that level of business the company mostly runs itself in sections and the only way to manage it is to look at graphs and numbers of the sections performance which doesn't give any real depth and insight into what is really going on inside the company and eventually whoever is in charge realises that the company is too large to truly control and the sections begin to stray towards profit over quality because of the increased pressure of keeping numbers up and eventually the entire company falls into this slump and the original intentions of the company are probably lost.
In conclusion i dont really know, but i think a corporation is too large to control and even if the companies intentions were well to begin with i am sure they are lost and construed when so many people and factors are introduced. I don't think corporations are ever made with the initial intent of customer degradation, just as a consequence of human incompetence.

>>58938059
organizational behavior isn't some new or mysterious thing. a single person couldn't have their eye on every aspect of the company, but they can send a directive down the org chart to keep an eye on a thing (e.g. opportunities for philanthropic investment) and forward them to some division to look into. or whatever.

>the company mostly runs itself in sections
i don't even — who gave you this impression? where did you work that you got that impression? certainly a CEO of a company like microsoft will delegate down the org chart, but there's still a chain of command and accountability right down to individual developers with nobody else under them. the question is whether the CEO is aware of the individual bits in his company, and obviously in satya nutella's case (and in others) that's not the case.

i'm not sure where we're going with this conversation, so to attempt to steer it back on topic: the CEO has the power to direct high level initiatives and spin up a philanthropy arm of the company and do other things that affect corporate culture in predictable ways. similarly, he can instill in his leadership (and trickle down to lower managers) that cutting corners is ultimately not profitable.

in apple's case, it's pretty well–documented that jobs pushed the designers' agendas over the engineers' (which is why magsafe adapters come apart at the ends). he could have instilled in them the perspective that designing it to last forever would retain more loyal customers, but he probably figured (evidently correctly) that he'd get plenty loyal customers his way. maybe a different group of people, but just as zealous (if not more so) than nerds who love to nitpick about everything.

>>58937833
You're wrong. American workers can quit their jobs at any time they like and walk away. That's one of the best things about this country, you retard.

>>58938344
A lot of American workers don't have other viable options. They're marginally employable and couldn't survive a month without a paycheck. I'm not saying most are in this situation; just that many are.

>>58938216
Thanks, as i said i really don't know but I've learned a lot here. I think that if that is truly what happened then it isn't necessarily a bad thing if he was specific in his advertising what and who the product was designed for. If someone didn't do thier research and found out that the product isn't fit for thier needs then it isn't really the company at fault. I think with so many people in the world today it would be impossible to do something like what jobs did without having people that construe it as trying to screw over the consumer rather then it just being you trying to make a niche product. I am mostly trying to argue the point that companies are just out to screw everyone over for money.

>>58938423
That companies are *not* just out to screw consumers over, even if it does not specifically match up to this case and maybe jobs wasn't specific and did advertise it as a "long lasting" product or something of the sort i am saying that it can be done the right way.

>>58933597
so apple products literally are designed for retards?

File: 1474644464510.jpg (49KB, 394x389px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 394x389px

>>58938457

>>58932683
This nigga gets it. This was probably the dumbest decision Tim Cock has ever made.

>>58937010
Why would absent shielding be a planned obsolescence? Surely you want something that you know will degrade and can plan around that? Just sounds like shitty cost-saving measures that fail to account for reputational damage.

>>58934077
>Why would you want a monitor for a laptop anyway.
Because people buy the monitor for the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro. This may all be part of a long-term plan to let their desktop lines whither and fade. Then silently drop them from the mac store citing "lack of sales".

>>58938474

>innovation

>>58937087
>GM
This is a great analogy, as Rick Wagoner, CEO of GM, worked his way to the top as an accountant in the company. He wasn't a car guy. He lost 10 billion dollars in cash every year for 3 years, refusing to make any changes, refusing to make cars that people wanted, and blamed the customers for not supporting the company. Rick was not a "car guy."

Tim Cook. Apple. Numbers guy. Not a "computer guy." Uh oh.

>>58933091
the box it comes in is one tiny apple and everything LG

>>58932654
But Apple sold it, therefore it's all Apple's fault.
That's how /g/ rolls.

This article reads like a kid wrote it.

>>58938366
They're still free to leave. And I don't see any US factories with suicide nets. Your argument is stupid.

File: 1468787280417.jpg (35KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x480px

>>58933597
>>58933611
>>58933851
LOVING
EVERY
LAUGH