or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by foad

While similar there are a few differences, including a critical one. Apple doesn't know what you are purchasing whereas Google does.  Pay is only providing authentication.
Being an employee prohibits you from taking material information about your company and selling shares it in anticipation of a massive depreciation in the stock. It is the basis of insider trading.
The reason some folks are calling them frauds is not because of production issues, but because of selling large amounts of stock without being forthcoming to shareholders about those production issues. If they couldn't disclose material information due to NDAs, they should have withheld their stock sales. It is all speculation but from the looks of things, they knew things weren't going as planned and yet they still cashed out when the stock was riding high. If they took...
Same with Flash and any number of other initiatives that Apple has pushed forward that benefit their customers. Eventually, it will be a tidal shift. Apple's approach has the full backing and support of credit card issuers and banks. Their customers typically fall into the demographics that spend money and they'll push the market to adopt it, as they have with other technologies.
 I understood what you said and expanded to state merchants do benefit even when you factor in the costs of upgrading equipment. Right now merchants and restaurants aren't typically liable for fraud. In October 2015 of next year they will be potentially liable for fraud if they don't support the more secure standards. These vendors not publicly supporting  Pay from the outset is a non-starter. There are other behind the scenes things going on.  Pay is just the...
Merchants benefit from increased security. The reason most merchants haven't been onboard is due to the cost of swapping out their terminals with those that support NFC. This has been the primary reason for the slow adoption even though the EU has been on chip and pin for a decade. As of next October, if their security isn't up to snuff, they will be completely liable for fraudulent charges. In the Target breach, Target was responsible. Same with Home Depot.
Part of the Beats acquisition was just that. The labels are a bit hesitant to go full on streaming with iTunes but with Beats being at arms length, it should cover them for the time being. Apple has been heavily promoting Beats Music and I don't see that slowing down one bit. While downloaded music is less profitable than it was, it's still profitable. On the flip side of that, I haven't heard of any streaming service being highly profitable, if at all. The music industry...
I actually think that is what these stories are showing. The depth of what the platform actually is. So many cross sections of life and they are all enhanced in some way using Apple's products. For you Dreams and Parenthood resonated. For others, a whole different set of stories will hit close to home. It is actually quite remarkable. I think that this fall/winter will be a blow out.
I've talked to some of friends who still are in the recording industry and they are actually stoked about the deal. Regardless of what a lot of folks think about the quality of Beats, they are very profitable company and I think with the right resources in production, they can even do better. Plus they have a music service that I personally like. It's library isn't as big as Spotify's, but its curation is great. Plus, focusing just on the now instead of the long game is a...
There seems to be a lot of underestimating of how complicated solving the TV problem really is. Just having an app store isn't the only thing that having a future platform really entails. Long term and expensive agreements with rights holders determine the level of access we get. Google tried with their original approaches with Google TV to go past certain aspects of what is holding TV back and they failed because cable and satellite companies weren't having any of that....
New Posts  All Forums: