or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by vvswarup

Page can preach all he wants about how he wants to do right by the consumer, but at the end of the day, they're a business just like Apple. They're in this to make money. No one should ever believe that.   To those who claim that Google has given us great free services like Maps and Gmail and have made the world a better place with these services, let's not forget that Google gets tons of advertising revenue from them. They're comfortable in the strength of their...
It's too early to say that there was no response to this article compared to the furor over labor violations relating to Apple. This article was released on Labor Day, when most people are on vacation.   With that said, no one roots for Goliath. In every situation, Apple is Goliath against a bunch of Davids. 
If there were a rule against apps doing the same thing 1st party apps do, Apple would have kicked out every stock market app, every texting app, and most important, every mapping app among others. There are tons of 3rd party mapping apps.    If Google puts together an app for the app store, I see no reason why Apple wouldn't allow it.
There's no question of Apple "allowing" Google Maps as an alternative app. It's up to Google to develop one and put it in the app store.
People who think that Apple should license patents and make money are not seeing the point here. Apple's strategy revolves around putting a unique product in the hands of the consumer. Apple tries to set itself apart from competitors products. Licensing out the patents and making a mint off of licensing fees might sound nice on paper. But in the long range, it's contrary to Apple's strategy of building a unique device.
I think people are confusing tax evasion with tax avoidance. If Apple were moving earned profits overseas out of the US, that would be tax evasion, which is illegal. What Apple is doing is refusing to repatriate profits that were earned overseas to avoid paying repatriation taxes. That is tax avoidance, which is not illegal.   I get the argument that Apple should pay tax because it is using infrastructure, but who's infrastructure is it using? If the profits were...
The decision to increase retail workers' pay wasn't made in a day either. And increasing retail workers' pay is simply smart business. In Apple's higher ups' mind, the retail employees were too valuable to lose to another company. The higher ups decided to bump up pay so that they would not feel an incentive to move somewhere else.   The whole premise of the NYT article is that Apple is very rich so they should share their wealth by increasing salaries. In any job,...
So if you choose to buy someone's product, that person now owes you something? If someone in Spain choose to buy a song/app from Apple, that individual chose to buy an Apple product of their own free will. Apple doesn't owe the whole of Spain one damn thing! Now it's a different matter if Apple does business in Spain, e.g. having stores in Spain. But even then, I don't blame Apple for working with the system in place. I blame the government for putting the system in place. 
Steve would have paid a dividend. He wouldn't have had a choice. In terms of shareholder value, Apple's cash hoard was being a drag. Apple was probably earning less than 1% on their cash hoard. If Apple paid a dividend, a shareholder could buy stock in another company and generate a much greater return on it.    There's also the issue of share creep. A lot of people at Apple have received options grants. When they exercise these options, those are new shares on the...
Apple's fundamentals haven't changed at all. It's just that stocks as a whole aren't an attractive asset class to be parking money in.    All the arguments I've been hearing about how Apple's growth isn't sustainable sound like saying, "Eventually everything that is born has to die." Don't tell me that Apple's growth will level off. Tell me HOW Apple will level off. Will Apple die of cancer or natural causes?
New Posts  All Forums: