or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by anantksundaram

The Wall Street Journal's reporting on Al Gore isn't worth the paper it's printed on.You're welcome to wallow in your ignorance (as I expected you would).
Al Gore, may have not invented the internet (in any event, for those interested in actual facts, he was misquoted on that), but as a member of the US Congress, he pioneered some of the enabling legislation that helped advance the internet as we know it today. I am not making this up: you're welcome to educate yourself by checking it out on the internet (no less!), if you wish. All major corporate boards have political/regulatory types on them. Apple is by no means unique...
Probably more expertise than you do. I might agree with your suggestion, but your politics aside, why do you want to get rid of Gore?
At least four times a year, in companies like Apple. The average Fortune 500 board member spends about one month worth of company-related work. Post-SOx, boards have a major say in what goes on in companies.
Good news if true. Many of the board members are bit long in the tooth. I've been saying this for about a year now. That said, I would also vote for some stability and continuity, and moving slowly. Many of them have grown up with the modern Apple, and they know today's company pretty well. They have, for better or worse, been a part of shaping it.
These 'market share' numbers amount to a hill of beans.
Spot on. Apple is the ONLY company to provide honest mobile sales data. Not Amazon; not Google; not Motorola; not Samsung.I've never understood why journalists have never pursued this aspect of the vaunted Android 'market stare' story. What's so problematic about getting these guys to report actual sales if the market share is so high!? Wouldn't they want to validate it, indeed, shout about it from the rooftops? The fact that they stop at telling us about 'shipments' says...
Oh boy, do I. Pathetic beyond belief. I see your point. I concede.
We know how many Apple sold -- that's the only true piece of data here. The rest is a bunch of crappy consultant estimates since we have no real data from any of the others (probably because they don't want us to know the truth).
I think that's putting too fine a point on it. I saw no such interpretation. I was simply pointing out that Samsung's ads -- regardless of truth, decency, fairness etc, on all of which the Mac/PC ad series was unimpeachable and Samsung is not -- are in the vein of boldly taking on the market leader hoping to sow doubt in the user's minds.
New Posts  All Forums: