or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by TheOtherGeoff

Ever read FireFox (better than the movie)? The premise of the book was the Soviets built a fighter/interceptor that was controlled by the pilot's thoughts... but only if you thought in russian;-).  Supposedly that saved tenths of seconds in dogfights (and when your arms are pinned down by centripetal force it allows you to engage your landing gear to stop a flat spin).    What I'm saying is that mind reading hardware is 'prior art'.   So it's not special;-)
my view is that with a $499 device and a decent set of headphones, you got your TV with you all the time. So people will forgo the 'TV in every room' model, to 1 'Theater' TV and hand me down iPads. TVs refresh every 7-15 years. mobile every 3. The cost about the same ($400-$800) for the great majority of the phone and TV market (32-55 in). simple math tells me that this is for real (why it took till now is that for the past 8 years, the conversion to HD TVs has...
Fraud detection is a totally different beast when you need a finger print to make a payment.   Processing?   I would argue at .99 per sale Apple is probably 'processing' as many or more transactions as Paypal.  looking at the numbers Paypal is probably passing 150B a year between buyers and sellers in 2013, I don't think the number of transactions are nearly the number that Apple is processing.
Prempt doesn't mean PREVENT.   Google built Glass... Apple didn't necessarily feel pre-empted. or even needing to enter in the market. Lots of Tablets existed before the iPad...  the iPhone... everyone said Apple couldn't catch up with the market 'leaders,'  because 'it's hard' to design a smartphone. just about everyone built an MP3 player before iPod, pre-emption didn't affect Apple much.   In the end, for a secure payment system, everything from the device to the...
 And piling on... Remember all the analysts predicting the M7 chip?   Yeah, they're clued into what Apple is or isn't doing.
You're arguing a nit of the argument.   my argument really is that Amazon will drive the margins down, because they can.   and Apple will respond, because they can.  And everyone else will die or compete differently, because we will evolve away from a device driven market, to an ecosystem driven market. and those without ecosystems couldn't survive.   Refactor for that and recompute.
Your analysis is counter to mine.  Apple and Amazon  are much closer than Samsung in terms of business model.   Different companies, but playing the same end game. and I think Apple sees quite plainly there isn't room for Apple as an ecosystem in Amazon's model.   Amazon quite simply want's all sales receipts to come through them.  And I think in the end, you're looking at 2 different approaches coming from two different markets to the same end- Amazon almost gives away...
 I do think Samsung out sells Apple in phones... pads... not so much.And I think the old school argument of what is 'hot selling' (you better buy what others are buying) is the reason for fudging the numbers on sales.   But in the end, (after about 3 phones or 5 years), people will buy the right phone for them.    I also think people who know WHY they want to buy a smartphone or tablet  buy the right one for them People who use the internet mobilely, buy the phone that is...
"Say you will, say you won't, make up your mind tonight Say you will, say you won't be my guiding light Say you will, say you won't, make up your mind this time Say you do, say you do, you wanna be mine" - Foreigner (Britsh American band, which by my alchemy is pretty much Canadian....;-) )
that was a marketing exec.   when all you do is make marketing claims, then everything you hear from competitors is marketing claims.
New Posts  All Forums: