or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by melgross

Not as much as it used to be. At one time, there was a big fight over whether the S40 series from Nokia were smartphones or feature phones, for example. The iPhone, when it came out that first year, was never described, by Apple, as a smartphone, and going by the standards these days, it would have been right between a featurephone and a smartphone.But yes, there are a number of AOSP phones that could be described as feature phones, in the practical sense.
You're right. I have several watches, some are expensive, and several are moderately priced. But they are all different. I don't buy the same model that been slightly modified over the years, as watchmakers often do, as fashion dictates. Upgrading to a higher model? Well maybe. I don't, but I suppose others might as they're financial situation rises over the years. But I normally only keep one smartwatch.I was thinking or a worst case situation for Apple.Had to fix this...
Watches, even smart watches, are more of a fashion thing than they are a practical thing. Yes, there are people who buy watches more for practicality than fashion, but these are mostly low end buyers.What most people don't seem to know, as I read that "nobody buys a watch these days", is that while there were about 1.3 billion smartphones sold last year worldwide, there were also around 1.2 billion watches sold. That's hardly nobody.It's true that most of these watches...
I wonder what their definition of smartwatch is? We had this definitional problem early in the era of smartphones.
As far as I know, last year was the first year in which they went to a second supplier, and they still use Samsung for SoCs. It's risky moving to a new supplier.
Except that this will be pretty obvious. If Apple uses Samsung, as is expected, you won't be able to claim that you're right. I don't see why you're making something out of "admitting" you're wrong about something everyone knows you're wrong about. What would you do, claim TSMC is making the chips even though everyone knows it's samsung! Why even bring that up?And then there's this, which I suppose you'll also...
For whatever reason you have for not wanting to believe that Samsung will be the major supplier, it's not good enough to pretend that all the other reports say differently. If Samsung meant that they were the major customer, they would have said so. We know that they will be using their own chip in the S6, because they said so. But the sales of the S6 will be again dwarfed by Apple's sales. It is not the major customer they're talking about, and no one else would believe...
In reality, it is a valid reason. They have made it almost impossible to improve public transportation in this country. Where do enough busses come from? They don't appear on the road magically. They need to be paid for. And how does that happen? Taxes, and fees. Like it or not, it's better for the country to cut down on car use, but we won't see that happen because the money allowed for public transportation is limited by shortsighted groups.
In a way, he's right, you know. Buffet doesn't just buy stock, in addition to that, he buys entire companies, then runs them. That's quite a bit different than investing, what amounts to, a tiny amount of money.He's also made major mistakes, by his own statements. And he stays away from technology. He could have bought Apple years ago, but he's never done so, even though he consistently states that he admires Apple above most others.
I just read that the mobile payments industry in the USA is expected to reach $800 billion in 2018. What happens with Apple depends on how much of the payment marketshare they can hold onto. If they keep 50%, then at about a 1% fee per sale, that's about $4 billion that year. That would mostly be profit for Apple. That's very important, because if it's say, 80% profit, then that would be $3.2 billion. With Apple net profit being about 21%, that would be the equivalent of...
New Posts  All Forums: