I doubt anyone knows what he believes. He has been getting a very bad rap for being consistent in his "paid bias".I think the Foss guy has likely financially milked his past for all its worth and knows he needs to tame his bias.
For small players it is worthwhile to have Apple as an expensive pimp, but bigger players know that long term selling their body that way, content creation stalls through that major added cost.Platforms are simply the middleman, and as such the commission charged has to reflect the real world.I would not be surprised if the major studios are not working together to create their own cheap content delivery system. There is no reason why they cannot emulate that $15 Now TV...
If you transpose some of these comments to touchscreens you might observe that strategic Apple patents are surreptitiously owning the screen manufacturers.
Handcuffing those that makes the hardware is a dangerous tactic unless long term you are happy to use only bottom rung suppliers.
With the world looking on it does seem more than a bit strange that the FEDS 'an Overview for Jurors' included the main contention in their video.
So looking through the round world window Apple have them where they want them.
That is, right in a square corner.
What is slightly strange is that there is talk of iTunes sales falling big time.
I suppose it is because whilst manufacturing extra profits by avoiding tax, iTunes still somehow manages to be the expensive way to buy music.
Most quotes about Ireland lie. They are a convenience country with the goods being of 'no abode whatsoever'.Apple seldom participate in contributing taxes when they can avoid it 100%Who is the most evil, them or Google I'm unsure. A backdating law on tax for the big bad two would be quite a windfall.
It sounds like the coming 8GB iPhone 6 will be the one to go head to head with the Moto G.
Losing 8GB likely saves Apple a dollar or two in production costs, enough to produce a more competitive screen.
On that note it is worth noting that Samsung is suing Dyson for tarnishing their image.Seems they may be trying to stem the tide that came from those more clever court cases.In fact its so copycat Apple might have a claim against Dyson for prior art.Outside of the US the iPhone has often died a death so marketing is certainly all a perception thing.