or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Woochifer

Pump and dump. Most of the news over the past month has been about sales coming in stronger than "expected." And when the sales come in "as expected" then the stock will take a beating. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
 Until you have a device or a selection of services that address the 100+ million U.S. households that watch pay TV on set-top boxes provided by their service provider, fireTV does not move anything -- needles, markets, or whatever. Even if the device actually moves tens of millions of units, it does not change anything unless it also access the content that people actually watch, which is live TV.  Live TV though is the missing feature that none of the other set-top boxes...
As I've stated on other threads, it's the content, stupid.   This leak comes off as Microsoftesque FUD. But, the point here is that neither Amazon and Google (if this Android TV rumor is true) have truly moved the needle and disrupted the market if their new devices do not also come with new and expanded content deals. It's just more engineering solutions that address only a fragment of the overall picture.   Even with nearly four decades of TV time shifting devices...
Nobody knows because there isn't a true apples-to-apples comparison case out there.  All of the flagship Android phones use larger screens than the iPhone. Those Android phones that feature smaller screens are crippled with slower processors and missing features.  Someone who wants a top-of-the-line Android phone must also take the large screen. With both iOS and Android, consumers don't have true screen size choices, so nobody can authoritatively say what sales would be...
The counterpoint to this view is the parallel trend of consumers migrating over to contract-free plans with zero subsidies on AT&T and T-Mobile. With consumers paying the full cost of the phone up front (or financing it on an installment plan), I would think that creates a disincentive to frequent upgrades. Much of the analyst speculation is that any move away from subsidized two-year plans towards a contract-free BYOD market hurts high end smartphones, which in turn...
Content is king. The intuitiveness of the interface and the feature list length doesn't amount to squat without something to play. The whole reason why 90% of U.S. households put up with cable/satellite set-top boxes is because it plays what they actually want to view. Even with over three decades of time shifting devices (starting with the VCR), live broadcast content still makes up the vast majority of TV viewing. And putting paywalled moats around broadcast content and...
Quote:But, an additional point on the second point is "and compete with an OEM owned by the WP supplier." This is a very different situation from Google's ownership of Motorola, given that Motorola was only one among several other prominent Android OEMs. And even with Google owning Motorola, it did not seem like Motorola received preferential treatment. If anything, Google went out of their way to at least appear that they were playing fair with other Android OEMs. Before...
The fly in the ointment with this scenario is MS' acquisition of Nokia, which had already been the preferred Windows Phone OEM. While a free/cheap and indemnified OS seems like an appealing pitch, OEMs have seen how MS will abruptly shift platform strategies and leave their purported partners in the lurch. Their past behavior of undermining OEM partners has not earned them the benefit of the doubt. Given that Nokia will continue to have most favored nation status and...
As usual the "5c was a flop = FACT" brigade miss the fundamental point about the 5c. The ONLY relevant measure is how well the 5c sales compare with the prior year's mid tier model. And on that count, the 5c represents a year over year increase by all estimates. The other relevant angle that hardly anybody touches on (presumably because it's simple common sense) is how the supply chain factors into the 5c's introduction. It was well known that the aluminum shell used on...
And the pixels on DSLRs are larger than those used on point-and-shoot and smartphone cameras, so they don't have the same signal noise and low light issues that smaller sensors have. I guess the marketing people can point to 13MP as matching the pixel count on DSLRs (and therefore, it's just as good as a DSLR).  But, other than specs, I just don't see the point of going into that MP range for smartphones, considering the image quality tradeoffs.
New Posts  All Forums: