or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by macarena

Two of the 35 iPads must have been to the Samsung employee's house as well -- one for his use, and the other to crack open to start copying!
Maybe when you are in the US you don't realize the price increase from the 3GS to the 4 and 4S -because your carriers just absorb a slightly higher subsidy. But in the rest of the world, it is quite visible how much Apple has increased prices as the technology increased significantly from 3GS to the 4. Even in the US, the price of the iPod Touch went up from $199 to $229 when it moved to a retina display. Yes - generally Apple has kept prices same and has added...
Some of the details of the iPad announcement signify a shift in Apple's thinking. And I am not sure yet, but I think this could be a massive change in mentality for Apple. Whether it is better in the long run or not, only time will tell. The first change I see, is that under Steve Jobs, Apple would have likely priced the new iPad at $579 or $599 - claiming that this radical new screen never before seen in any mobile device and LTE with whole day battery life was a steal...
I hope the iPad 2 was not stretching your muscles to their limit :-)
In all likelihood, this sort of move could be one of the reasons for Apple to pile up so much cash. But fiber, or for that matter anything wired, is not the solution to solve last mile. It is way too expensive to lay last mile wire.The beauty is that you don't need last mile fiber. The speeds that we get in the US are already capable of handling any requirement - including 1080p streaming. The trouble is, our infrastructure is not capable of handling it, if everyone...
At the time of the Nokia settlement, Nokia had already announced that they were going to become a Windows Phone shop. At that point, it was in Apple's interest to license IP to Nokia. If they did not use cross licensing to reduce their lump sum payments to Nokia, Apple would have likely faced a scenario where Nokia would have used all this technology ANYWAY - because they would have been shielded by Microsoft.And there is really no way on earth Apple would want to take on...
This might be true - but that does take away from the fact that the existing business model is retarded. If a customer is willing to pay money, but there is no way to pay money and watch legally, there isn't much point in blaming the customer for resorting to other means. I have faced similar situations in the past. When I moved back to India, I had to give up watching pretty much all the shows I used to see earlier. Thankfully, now some of these shows are available in...
Here is where I think Steve and Apple are missing out. They want a success based or pay as you go style model. Quite obviously, that is not going to fly - because networks don't want to take a risk with disrupting revenues. Apple is willing to use its cash pile to pay in advance for components, etc. Why not pay a big chunk of money for global distribution rights with iTunes subscriptions, and then Apple takes the risk of whether they can make this model work. Say Apple...
The reason why Apple has higher margins has a lot to do with efficiency. They have large volumes that they can leverage to lower costs of their components. Almost 10-15% of the price of the competition products is lost to Retail - whereas most of it is retained by Apple as they sell at their own stores - brick and online. Apple sells pretty much all it can make - so they don't have blocked inventory and fire sales adding to costs. Apple's upfront focus on quality and...
For a moment forget about the fact that this article does not consider Assembly, Shipping, Warranty, Software Development and Support, retail margins, and so many other costs. There is a much bigger problem in this article. Based on $310 of component costs, Apple's margins should be calculated as: ($499 - $310) / $499. That way, the margins come to about 38%. Why? If Apple makes $10 Billion of Revenues, and has $3 Billion of Profits, what would you consider Apple's...
New Posts  All Forums: