or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by delreyjones

 Who says Apple has to re-prove anything?  Any investors who don't like what they see can sell.  Consumers all over the world are voting with their wallets.  Apple gets to continue to be Apple and the commentariat's going to continue to be emotional about it.  The world is as it should be and it's a great time to hold AAPL. Impatience?  Yeah, it's all over the place.  My opinion is that if you buy AAPL and you're impatient, that makes you a trader as opposed to an...
 I heartily agree; I admire and share your long-term attitude. On a related subject, there's a good article I read today about how we're not going to see Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) in the iWatch.  At first I disagreed, because for the first 3/4ths of the article the author makes his arguments and it sounds like he's saying the iWatch will never see CGM.  Then in the end, he clarifies and tells us that it's very unlikely we'll see CGM in iWatch V1, but that today...
 Sorry, but I disagree.  We can't have it both ways.  Either Apple caters to Wall Street or it follows its own schedule.  Apple would no longer be Apple if it released a product prematurely.  Wall Street can F$%!! itself, and I'm speaking as a guy who holds his fair share of AAPL.
 On the one hand I think you're correct.  We can split hairs and go either way, cite different dictionaries to support one side or the other.  But I'm with you, their wording is slightly on the inaccurate side and could easily be improved. On the other hand, I think it's a minor flaw in today's headline.  "Thousands" is almost OK.  Sometimes, AI's headlines have words that aren't even close to OK and they seem like major flaws to me.  I think I'll speak up the next time I...
 With due respect, I suggest you wait until you see Apple's marketing statement about the iWatch before you jump to the conclusion that its focus constitutes a "narrow move".  Even if the iWatch does include significant health-monitoring, we have no idea if the bio-feedback is 10% of the iWatch's reason for existence, 50% of the reason, or 90% of the reason.  As the smart guys over on Asymco say, what's the "Job to be done" by the iWatch?  Don't be foolish and rely on...
It's OK if you want to limit your population to those who do spreadsheet and word processor work.  But the original study this article is about, plus most of the people discussing it, don't impose that limitation.  We're interested in the entire community of computer users, including gamers and web surfers and anybody else who spends time doing stuff on their computer (be it handheld or desktop). I myself used to do a lot of spreadsheet and word processing.  I thought it...
 OK.  But would you argue with the assertion that IOS is kind of on par with Windows, and 80's calculators are kind of not on par with Windows?
 I think I'll nit-pick this 'delreyjones' guy ...   Who cares if the internals are Unix or not?  (It's especially unimportant whether or not it's Certified Unix or Linux or QNX or whatever ...)  Microsoft's devices are definitely not *nix.  M$ grew their own with David Cutler, so it's all some kind of VMS progeny, but Windows is still completely usable  What's important is whether or not it's a viable, modern platform.  IOS, Android and Windows are all viable.  Maybe...
Does your calculator from the 80s run Unix?
And if I read this article correctly, it has nothing to do with market share and everything to do with intellectual property.  You're commenting on the wrong article.
New Posts  All Forums: