or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by ahmlco

Sure, but only if Apple takes the difference and uses it to build manufacturing plants and facilities here in the US. They're having problems building enough phones and pads and airs anyway. Why not make them here in modern, highly automated facilities? Why is it Apple can make a billion dollar commitment to Sharp to build a plant, but does nothing here? If Hyundai and Honda and Toyota can build cars here in the US -- and make a profit doing so -- then Apple could...
Okay, here's another thing: People, including business people, are buying iPads. They're carrying around iPhones and iPads stuffed to the gills with ebooks, textbooks, manuals, and reams of PDF documents. They're walking around with constant 3G access to the Internet and to corporate intranets. There have apps specifically designed for accessing corporate dashboards and information systems (Roambi). There are Wyse and Citrix apps. So -- it may just be me -- but does...
Since you put it that way, no, since iOS consists of the iPhone, the iPod Touch, and the iPad. Last time I looked, there were still more iOS devices out there than Android devices.
They "might" do anything, but at least I used real numbers, and not, "Hey, if they double next year, and then double after that, it MIGHT really add up to something!" And iPhone 5 and WP7 "might" dig into those numbers significantly. Never said they did, I merely replied to the "strategy" comment, and noted that Google could have made quite a bit of money simply selling ads without the expense of Android.A bit of revisionist history there? Google acquired the team and was...
Umm... as I understand the numbers, they're collecting not quite ONE billion a year selling ads viewed on Android phones. And I'm not sure how much of that money comes from mobile AdWords that could be seen on ANY phone, not just Android. (In other words, if every single Android phone changed into an iPhone, they could STILL be picking up a half-billion in advertising.) At any rate, and at that rate, it's going to take thirteen years JUST to pay back the $12.5 billion...
No, it's not that simple. You've seen the following, of course... "Asustek Computer is hoping to release two Ultrabook models, an 11.6-inch UX21 and 13.3-inch UX31, later this year. While the UX21 will reportedly retail for $1000, the UX31 will cost $1600, a $300 premium on Apple's $1,299 13.3-inch MacBook Air." This is in line with Intel's Ultrabook initiative, and it shows that Apple's competitor's can't build an Apple-class product at a price less than Apple's. Why?...
Begun, the patent wars have....
That may be the case, but they still need to get the cableco's to sign up for the deal. Besides, the article was about how the Motorola STB business impacts Google TV... That is to say, not at all.
Motorola's set top box (STB) business will do nothing to stem Google's failure to launch Google TV, nor help against Apple TV. Why? People don't buy STBs, corporations do. Corporations like Cox Cable and Comcast, who have their own content to peddle, and above all they don't need Google coming in trying to skim money (and viewers) off the top with Google TV bundled into their private-label STBs.
Apple wants to sell devices, sure. But they've also done more to modernize the industry that anyone else. Look at the recording industry. Apple did everything possible to drag the labels into the 21st century, and they've kicked, screamed, and fought every step of the way. If Apple hadn't gotten the labels into iTunes, I'm willing to bet that we STILL wouldn't have a DRM-free sales channel with a pricing structure that makes sense. Just look at the mess that's Hulu. They...
New Posts  All Forums: