or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by muppetry

Actually it isn't. It is only your assertion (and a pretty stupid one) that his disagreement arises from his employment by the U.S. Government.
I can't tell whether you are just being argumentative or you really don't understand the overriding goals of a publicly traded company, but I'll make one last observation. Maximizing long-term performance does not preclude trying to make the best possible products, within certain constraints, but it obviously does not include reducing profits just because one can afford to. You are taking Cook and Ive way too literally in those statements. I think you know that, though.
Fair enough - but now you just appear to be saying that you and Gruber know better than Apple management how to make their business work. On the face of it, that would appear to be an extraordinarily arrogant assumption in a market where Apple has, to put it mildly, demonstrated substantial success. And, to be clear, I'm sure that their goal is not to stop at "making more money than any publicly traded company in the world", but rather to continue to make as much as they can.
Whatever the reason for not charging for software, it will not have been simply because they had lots of cash. Most likely they'd estimated that it would attract more users and thus increase both revenue and profits. Obviously they did not conclude that, on this occasion, with regard to iPhone memory.The issue of component pricing is also completely unrelated to your original comment, which was, to paraphrase, that they should give more for the same price because they have...
Try something a little more comprehensive and up to date, and then perhaps rethink your comments.http://wallethub.com/edu/2013-corporate-tax-report/6768/
Indeed. They are crooks for doing everything better. It's just not cricket¡
The point is that the product configuration should not be determined by cash reserves, or even past profitability. Apple is not a charity, and has a duty to its shareholders to maximize its profits, not subsidize its customers.
If you think that only "techies" own smart watches then you are sadly ignorant. And a nice little ad hominem to make up for your inability to think of any sensible or civil response on finding that others have different opinions to yours. Goodnight.
Having been using a watch for that purpose for the past year, I can tell you that from my perspective, yes, the watch is much better in many situations. You are reading those opinions here - are they less valid than the many people you have spoken to on this issue, or all the articles that you have read on the subject? And I think you will find that the asking price for the iWatch buys you a lot more than just notifications from your phone.
I think you summed it up well - though not ideal, for those who are accustomed to charging devices every night it will not be a big deal, while for others who are not, it will require adjustment and probably will feel like a significant negative. How many fall into those two categories remains to be seen.
New Posts  All Forums: