or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Rogifan

Hmm...9to5Mac claims Apple admitted they did this but it was for security reasons.http://tinyurl.com/p852ulbThis quote was in the WSJ story;
The way Wall Street deals with Apple cracks me up. At one point on Monday the stock was down almost 6% because Pacific Crest downgraded the stock. Now today it was up over 1% (when most of its tech peers were down) becauas other firms raised their price targets. At what point does Wall Street heed Jim Cramer's advice to OWN the stock NOT trade it.
All I'm saying is I think Apple could easily make 32GB the base storage for their iOS devices. They had no problem making software free or spending a huge chunk of change giving iOS device owner a free U2 album. One of the reasons upgrades iOS 8 have been slow is because a lot of 16GB owners didn't have enough space on their files to install it. And since Apple offers OTA updates people shouldn't have to use iTunes to install software updates just because Apple is miserly...
I'm not. I'm criticizing them for not doing the same at the low end.
OK Jimmy since you're spouting your mouth off I assume we're going to see new or revamped music offerings from Apple next year?
So is this the data Andy Harsgrave (sp) at Pacific Crest used to make his downgrade of AAPL?
Whether you want to call it an evil plan or not clearly there's a reason Apple went from 16 > 32 to 16 > 64 instead of 32 > 64. If it has nothing to do with margins or raising ASPs then why not make 32GB base storage (except maybe in certain B2B cases where 16GB is sufficient). Apple can say you get 4x the storage for only $100 more when a lot of consumers would say how about double the storage for the same price? Or do the prices of memory never come down?
Upselling people to 64GB by removing the 32GB option is another way to increase margins, no? Ben Bajarin says the puck is moving towards services. In a way I think this benefits Apple as I think they're less likely to be disrupted by services than commodity hardware OEMs. For example HP is now selling a $200 Windows laptop to compete with Chromebooks. But what if Microsoft decides to throw in a cheap laptop with a 2-year subscription to Office 365? Then you get OEMs like...
Interesting you say that as Ben Thompson wrote a piece on Apple the other day and one of the things he advocated was Apple disbanding their first party software teams (or spinning them off) and just focusing on OS and making the best platform for 3rd party developers.http://stratechery.com/2014/best/
Isn't Eddy responsible for TV? Maybe he's been too busy with Pay?
New Posts  All Forums: