or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by addicted44

Didn't Beats recently release a Spotify like service? It has gotten some pretty good reviews.   However, more importantly, from Apple's perspective, it has a license from the record companies to deliver music on demand, unlike iRadio. And there have been rumors that the record companies do not want to give Apple the license to offer a Spotify like service.   Keeping that in mind, this is most likely an acquisition for the licenses to create a Spotify competitor, than...
Id imagine it is more likely because of older IT staff which is carrying over a justified (at the time) hatred of Apple to today. I find it very hard to see how business could justify buying Android over iOS. Hecjk, Apple's consumer update policies are better than Android's enterprise ones. And seamless updates to the latest (or at least most secure) OS is pretty much THE most important thing for businesses.
This. I am using an iPhone 4 I bought nearly 4 years ago. On ios 7 and works brilliantly. That's a lot more than I can say for the Galaxy S3 I used for a month a few mońhs after it was released.When I go back to India and hae a choice between the S3 and the original iPhone, I always pick the latter (though it isn't on the lates OS) because despite a slower processor, it was actually faster.
What a killer article by DED.   I usually enjoy your "no holds barred" writing style, but I gotta say, this far more reserved article, which let the images and story do the talking was pretty awesome.
Google is absolutely crushing everybody in the Maps arena. Is there anyone who can even compete with them here? The amount of information and data they have is unparalleled.
Hah! I can't wait for another DED Before/After graphic. His one on Samsung phones before/after the iPhone is a classic.
Please go read the reviews of their "health" products. They are extremely poor quality, with the sensors giving results which are widely off the mark, and the apps being pieces of junk (e.g. The watch won't upload pedometer data to the smartphone's health app because it has its own app).
No one's ownership was changed. However, outside investors' influence was halved and insiders' influence was doubled. It was a very dirty move, IMO. Surprised there wasn't much of an uproar (OTOH, I am not. The people suffering the most were probably the smaller guys, since the institutional investors were probably aware of this, and most likely also ended up on the beneficiaries side).
I think 1 aspect of this split a lot of people are ignoring is that this makes the Apple stock available to the vanity "investor".   This may be someone who isn't really into investing, but is an Apple fan, and would like to "own" a piece of Apple. It's far easier to do that if you have to pay only $70 instead of $500.   Now, this may not affect AAPL's price at all, but what it does is strengthens the loyalty of the customer. Such purchases won't help Apple on the...
This move also makes Apple a shoo-in for the Dow.   The DJIA values companies based simply on share price, and Apple's high per share price meant including it in the Dow would give way too much weight to Apple.   With the lower share price, Apple will almost certainly be the next company included in the Dow, and therefore see its share price rise even further as index funds have to buy AAPL (although the share price may not change since this expectation may already...
New Posts  All Forums: