or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by addicted44

I don't think anyone's touched on the obvious implication... iAds for Apple TV.
That's stupid, because Verizon turned Apple down. There was no "if Apple signed with Verizon".
That basically is just an indication of how popular the iPhone was compared to the rest of the crap (also, Verizon is a lot bigger than ATT outside of mobile). To explain, ATT pays Apple the unsubsidized iPhone amount upfront. So if you buy an iPhone in June for $200, ATT pays Apple $600 (or whatever) in June itself. In June, ATT makes a loss of $400 on that iPhone. However, you are bound by a contract to stick with ATT for the next 24 months. That means you pay about...
You do realize Verizon subsidizes the Droids, right? Or do you really think the manufacturers are only getting $200 for each? Additionally, you also do realize the subsidy is probably a lot higher than what ATT pays for the iPhone because Verizon also gives 2 devices for the price of one. The only reason ATT hasn't done that to increase the number of data plan customers is because Apple does not allow them to.
Hmm....Your claims.... 1) In business, you need good partnerships to be successful. (I am assuming this is what you mean by "business is about partnerships") 2) Apple is not good at making partnerships. Therefore, if that is true, Apple should be an extremely unsuccessful business. Yet, Apple is one of the most successful businesses in the entire world (is there a single business success measure which they are not extremely high in?) So your statements clearly contradict...
I actually strongly agree with this. I also believe this is what Apple is aiming for. One of the critical reasons I believe this is the case is because of the following Steve Jobs statement from an interview with Steven Levy :http://web.archive.org/web/200402012...d=4052227&p1=0 (via http://daringfireball.net/2010/08/n92)Apple did this with the iPod, slashing prices when competition increased (anyone else remember how a couple of weeks before the Zune was supposed to be...
Hey, nice strawman there....Where did I say that Apple (or Steve Jobs) is always right because they are large or successful? I said that your statement of them having "Delusions of Godhood" which you changed to "Delusions of Grandeur" were simply delusions, because: a) They obviously DONT have problems partnering with people, unless you think its possible to build a $50Bn company without having good partnerships. b You provide no evidence whatsoever for your claim
I am not saying people weren't blown away. I am saying that before the iPhone, an all touchscreen device like the iPhone was still pretty much part of science fantasy. However, what was most shocking was Apple went to Cingular, and essentially told them they were going to create the iPhone, but Cingular would not be updated with what it was, how it looked, etc. As admitted by the Cingular CEO, they found out about the iPhone only a few weeks before the Keynote.
I'm sorry Blackintosh, without ATT, there would be no iPhone. You do remember that the iPhone was originally pitched to Verizon, who shot them down... It was only Cingular (and a month or so later, ATT) that agreed to the terms Jobs asked for (including unlimited data). Additionally, while the ATT networks have had problems, at least originally, with the earlier iOS'es, the iPhone was also at fault. Finally, no one in the industry expect the iPhone to be as successful as...
Yeah, just like what happened with the iPod. Oh wait.... I will wait till a device running Android does not need to be heavily subsidized by a telephone carrier, and have no iOS competition on that carrier to be successful before I will chalk Android as the death knell of Apple.
New Posts  All Forums: