or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by tundraboy

How I wish that this would be true. Maybe the CEO of Swatch Group was engaging in classic misdirection when he said those dismissive things about Apple. Maybe this is why Eddy Cue said "most exciting product rollout in the last 25 years". Maybe this is why Deneve and Ahrendts were hired. A major new branch in Apple's line of business, high fashion/high tech.
Beats commands prices and margins that Timex only dreams about.
Though I can't imagine spending so much money on a Rolex or Omega, I understand the allure of a finely crafted old world mechanical movement. I've always worn automatic watches, but only Seikos, because I don't like replacing batteries. Imagine, though, a mechanical Omega that is 100% accurate because its movement incorporates an Apple micro motherboard that periodically syncs the time with the official NOAA time. You get the best of both worlds: an old world...
Excuse me but Timex and Swatch are too low brow for Apple. They will not be able to command the prices and margins that would interest Apple. I mean Timex is like the Kia of watches, you really think Apple would associate their brand with that? And that's not snobbery that's going on, it's a cold pragmatic business decision to protect the value, prestige and profitability of the Apple brand.
Because Apple is run by stupid people who are incapable of change and will force its business model on everything it does no matter how impractical?I wouldn't be surprised if this rumour is even partially true. I've always contended that an iWatch, or whatever they call it, has to be as much a fashion accessory as a tech device. A phone is something people keep in their pockets. A watch, for most people, is part of their outfit. A whole lot of people are very picky...
 I would think the point of the e-wallet in your iPhone is to eliminate the need for a specialized merchant device, just software and an internet connection.
The fundamental flaw in the Android pitch to mobile device manufacturers: You don't have to pay us but your device has to be basically indistinguishable from your competitors' Android devices. Oh, and yes you don't pay us but you pay Microsoft. Says Dell from the background: Take it! That common OS strategy did wonders for our margins.
 Okay, there.  Well, at least we know now that it's some deep seated personal animus against IBM that's driving your side of the discussion.  Can't argue against deep seated personal animus.  Here doth endeth the debate.
And you really think that IBM and Apple are too stupid to figure out solutions to the tablet's shortcomings that you pointed out? Or come up with new uses that you would never have thought of in your wildest imaginings? What do you call that syndrome wherein people assume just because they can't envision or imagine something then no one else can? Oh yes, analystitis or colloquially, Munster's disease?Why would someone with a nice desktop prefer to work on a tablet? ...
When Apple announces 250 new features in the new iOS or OSX, we all know most of these are trivial. I always assumed that the same goes for "98% of Fortune 500 have iPads".If you think a significant opening to the heretofore trivially addressed enterprise market is not a big thing for Apple, I don't know what is. Tim Cook is putting his stamp on this company and he is doing so by looking into opportunities that Steve Jobs probably never gave more than 5 minutes thought....
New Posts  All Forums: