or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by TBell

    Yes, except Apple with a decent margin beat the consensus on earnings per share. It was slightly lower than then previous year's quarter, but that was attributed to there being more shares outstanding. 
    I too was sad to see the Cube go, but I think it was a victim of two things, 1) Apple had too many products that competed with the Cube (e.g. like the Power Mac G4 you mention) often that did more for less, and 2) the economy had a hick up around then. Apple took a 200 million dollar right off on canceling components that quarter. It was trying to clear out inventory. At my University at the end of the quarter I was able to buy a new dual 500 mhz Power Mac for less...
    Good luck timing that. It was up about 6 at one point today. 
I think the the cheaper iPhone for developing markets rumor is probably true. Apple wants on the biggest carrier in China, but according to published reports, the carrier isn't willing to pay such a high price for the phone. Apple can't charge different prices for different carriers. So, it makes sense to develop a cheaper version of the phone. Companies like Samsung have different devices in different Countries. It is one of the reason Samsung is selling a lot of phones.
    I thought that when I bought at 455 yesterday. Yet it is still sinking while the rest of the market raises. 
    Samsung undoubtedly had a good quarter, but the numbers are slightly misleading. Every company other than Apple reports units shipped as opposed to units sold. Apple reports units sold. Inevitably Samsung has millions of units sitting in stores or in transit that are counted towards its sales figures. If Apple used the same counting method, it would undoubtedly have millions more units as well (at least in transit).    Samsung is beating up Apple mostly in emerging...
  We have lots of fanciful terms for the bottom feeders. For instance, "slum lords, ambulance chasers, and pill pusher."  "Patent Troll" refers to a very specific type of patent holder. Namely, one who mimics the actions of a troll. The mythical trolls waits under a bridge, waits for a party to cross, then jumps out and threatens death if a toll isn't paid for crossing his bridge. Patent trolls do the same. They quietly wait for a company to launch a successful product,...
    But we don't have the details on the alleged agreement. Jobs clearly is concerned only with the active targeting of Apple employees by former Apple executives. If that is the scope of the agreement, I do not see that as over broad. Moreover, I don't see how it significantly hurts employees if they still can go out an actively look for new employment on their own volition. Letting companies with inside information freely go after a competitor's employees is disruptive...
    The problem I have though is people aren't making a distinction between preventing an employee from on the employee's own volition going out an looking for a new job, and preventing a major competitor with inside information from actively targeting specific employees. Jobs appeared to be concerned about the later, which I am  unsure is even illegal. If it is, I am unsure why it should be. If it were, Apple through paying executives like Rubinstein would be essentially...
    It depends on the nature of the anti-poaching agreement. If the agreement prohibits all hiring of each other employees, then I agree with you. However, if the agreement only covers another company actively pursuing another's employees, I disagree with you. Palm had a huge advantage over other technology companies when it came to knowing who did what within Apple. That advantage was paid for by Apple when it employed it's former executives that left for Palm. Why...
New Posts  All Forums: