From 1997? Did you read the part where Apple might try a merger with Sun to avoid Oracle? Did you also happen to google search who owns Sun in the present?
"Still, after the Citicorp deal, Prince Alwaleed went from strength to strength. He made investments in sectors as diverse as hotels and property, to media, retail, health and education. Most of the companies he has targeted are household names: Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts, Fairmont Raffles International, Walt Disney Company, PepsiCo and Motorola. At one time he owned a large stake in Apple, the bulk of which he sold in 2005, just prior to the company?s share price rally on the back of the iPod and iPhone frenzy."
Would just like to clear up some misinformation...
Hey I just thought of a new smartphone app.....it tells suicide bombers how many virgins they'll get and allows them to browse through photos of said virgins. Allah Akbar!
Hey I just thought of a new smartphone app.....it tells suicide bombers how many virgins they'll get and allows them to browse through photos of said virgins. Allah Akbar!
It's Allahu Akbar and it must really suck being you.
I doubt that they are looking at user data, but the fact that they probably could do it if they really wanted to doesn't sit well with governments. The fact that they control both the transport and security architecture makes this possible. Normally those two things are under separate authorities on the net. I think the more serious concern would be hacking or infiltration of RIM services.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando
I don't believe the governments involved are worried about RiM spying on their citizen's data. Rather the opposite - these governments want to spy on their own citizens and RiM is preventing them.
I think that is exactly right. They want to spy on their own citizens and they believe that RIM could give them access if they wanted to. RIM doesn't want to because once they open the door, the integrity of the security will be diminished. And they know that the security of the email is the one last thing that every Blackberry honk clings to as why the BB is better than the iPhone.
I think you're misunderstanding the governments there. They keep control specifically because of their control of religious mores. It ultimately becomes a matter of efficiency.
If you want to be a secular dictatorial government, you have to watch everyone. That's impossible. With these religious-fascist states, they create a religion which does their job for them. You convince the public that the leaders are acting in some god-given role and their word is law. You convince them that doing what the leaders want them to do is not just required by law, but required by god. Then, you let the entire population police the country for you - at no charge.
The ban on illicit relationships is as much a part of their control as a ban on large secret meetings was under Stalin.
I reread what I wrote and I am not sure how we disagree. I.E., using religious pretense to spy on/control population and maintain power. As for the entire population policing the country, every regime has its share of "citizens" willing to spy for the government be it for religious reasons, nationalism, etc. Hell, the Nazis did a bang up job with that approach. And in my opinion, half the people in the US would be happy to shoot another American just because they heard he was a commie. All that remains is the power authority's say-so. My point, people all over the world are not much different in that respect.
Al-Waleed bin Talal is the Saudi prince in question, but the conspiracy theorists will be disappointed to know that he's made huge investments in a large number of companies throughout the world. He is well known for taking big risks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquia33
PS: In '97 APPL was at around $3.50 and there has been 2 splits since this $115M investment.
FWIW, the share price you cite is the post-split adjustment. In any case, if he'd held on, his return on investment would be over 6,000% or about $7b if my calculations are correct. It must be nice to be a prince.
Surprising that no one so far has drawn a parallel between these Middle East assaults on Blackberry and Google's problems in China. All of these authoritarian governments are acting to suppress any communications that they deem potential threats to their control and stability.
Define backwards. Would you consider it backwards because they do not think like Westerners? When was a the last time you lived there let alone visited there? Maybe you are getting your crusade ready huh?
Oh please, spare me the "crusade" bullshit.
Define backwards? Saudia Arabia.
Sorry, but, any country that sends suicide terrorists over here to attack our country, and condones the stoning and killing of women and gay people, are worse than backwards. I was just being kind. Saudi Arabia does not deserve the respect of any American, unless you're the Bush family.
All governments want to control the dissemination and interpretation of information, and have access to user's personal and private information. It's all about controlling wealth and power. In dictatorships and oligarchies Blackberry is cause for panic and desperation. In the mid-east the thought of women being able to communicate ideas to each other in encripted form must scare the crap out of them. Theocracies would just love to either stifle such technology or control it. Knowledge is power. Blackberry hides knowledge from those who would use it against us.
So Saudi Arabia likes the iPhone only because it's less secure than Blackberry?
How did this wind up on AppleInsider?
AI is no more than an extension of Apple's publicity dept.
The 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' principle seemed pertinent and so they thought that the news was 'anti' BB, and therefore 'pro' iPhone. The argument turned around so that people realised the BB platform was commendable for it's unrivaled security and showed up all the rivals, including the iPhone.
So what they thought would be a BB put-down failed to transpire and turned around and bit them.
Remember how US soldiers had Bible verses inscribed on their rifle barrels, or handing out Bibles, or Christians masquerading as Muslims to try and underhandedly convert them? I guess these attempts at forcing a set of beliefs don't matter as long as Christianity is involved. I will agree and say that there are certain elements that want to enforce their beliefs on EVERYONE be it Jew, Christian, Muslim, etc... You paint with too broad a brush.
Well to be fair the bibles were never handed out, they were confiscated right on base.
Comments
From a 2010 question:
Where is the link to back up your assertion?
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13727_7-10340517-263.html
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13727_7-10340517-263.html
From 1997? Did you read the part where Apple might try a merger with Sun to avoid Oracle? Did you also happen to google search who owns Sun in the present?
"Still, after the Citicorp deal, Prince Alwaleed went from strength to strength. He made investments in sectors as diverse as hotels and property, to media, retail, health and education. Most of the companies he has targeted are household names: Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts, Fairmont Raffles International, Walt Disney Company, PepsiCo and Motorola. At one time he owned a large stake in Apple, the bulk of which he sold in 2005, just prior to the company?s share price rally on the back of the iPod and iPhone frenzy."
Would just like to clear up some misinformation...
Hey I just thought of a new smartphone app.....it tells suicide bombers how many virgins they'll get and allows them to browse through photos of said virgins. Allah Akbar!
It's Allahu Akbar and it must really suck being you.
I doubt that they are looking at user data, but the fact that they probably could do it if they really wanted to doesn't sit well with governments. The fact that they control both the transport and security architecture makes this possible. Normally those two things are under separate authorities on the net. I think the more serious concern would be hacking or infiltration of RIM services.
I don't believe the governments involved are worried about RiM spying on their citizen's data. Rather the opposite - these governments want to spy on their own citizens and RiM is preventing them.
I think that is exactly right. They want to spy on their own citizens and they believe that RIM could give them access if they wanted to. RIM doesn't want to because once they open the door, the integrity of the security will be diminished. And they know that the security of the email is the one last thing that every Blackberry honk clings to as why the BB is better than the iPhone.
I think you're misunderstanding the governments there. They keep control specifically because of their control of religious mores. It ultimately becomes a matter of efficiency.
If you want to be a secular dictatorial government, you have to watch everyone. That's impossible. With these religious-fascist states, they create a religion which does their job for them. You convince the public that the leaders are acting in some god-given role and their word is law. You convince them that doing what the leaders want them to do is not just required by law, but required by god. Then, you let the entire population police the country for you - at no charge.
The ban on illicit relationships is as much a part of their control as a ban on large secret meetings was under Stalin.
I reread what I wrote and I am not sure how we disagree. I.E., using religious pretense to spy on/control population and maintain power. As for the entire population policing the country, every regime has its share of "citizens" willing to spy for the government be it for religious reasons, nationalism, etc. Hell, the Nazis did a bang up job with that approach. And in my opinion, half the people in the US would be happy to shoot another American just because they heard he was a commie. All that remains is the power authority's say-so. My point, people all over the world are not much different in that respect.
From a 2010 question:
Where is the link to back up your assertion?
Al-Waleed bin Talal is the Saudi prince in question, but the conspiracy theorists will be disappointed to know that he's made huge investments in a large number of companies throughout the world. He is well known for taking big risks.
PS: In '97 APPL was at around $3.50 and there has been 2 splits since this $115M investment.
FWIW, the share price you cite is the post-split adjustment. In any case, if he'd held on, his return on investment would be over 6,000% or about $7b if my calculations are correct. It must be nice to be a prince.
The first mobile phone I owned in the early 90s was a motorola. Apple has been in the game 3'ish years.
You used your first post for this?
Sorry, can you let me know what would have been an appropriate first post? Am I supposed to gush about the iPhone? I wasn't aware of First Post Rules.
Sorry, can you let me know what would have been an appropriate first post? Am I supposed to gush about the iPhone? I wasn't aware of First Post Rules.
If you're going to call yourself fredsnodgrass, you're going to have to expect this sort of thing.
How did this wind up on AppleInsider?
Too much? Move along. :-|
Define backwards. Would you consider it backwards because they do not think like Westerners? When was a the last time you lived there let alone visited there? Maybe you are getting your crusade ready huh?
Oh please, spare me the "crusade" bullshit.
Define backwards? Saudia Arabia.
Sorry, but, any country that sends suicide terrorists over here to attack our country, and condones the stoning and killing of women and gay people, are worse than backwards. I was just being kind. Saudi Arabia does not deserve the respect of any American, unless you're the Bush family.
So Saudi Arabia likes the iPhone only because it's less secure than Blackberry?
How did this wind up on AppleInsider?
AI is no more than an extension of Apple's publicity dept.
The 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' principle seemed pertinent and so they thought that the news was 'anti' BB, and therefore 'pro' iPhone. The argument turned around so that people realised the BB platform was commendable for it's unrivaled security and showed up all the rivals, including the iPhone.
So what they thought would be a BB put-down failed to transpire and turned around and bit them.
A. Not your pal.
B. The article focuses on Saudi and their security concerns.
C. The article states that this block doesn't apply to smart phones like the iPhone which does not inherently use encryption for comms.
D. I'm dubious of anyone saying they want to presume guilt so they can better protect.
YOUR POST WAS SPOT ON
these dictator kingship's want to retrict free speech and spy on all its innocent people .
the bad guys find ways around black buddy anyway
your my pal !!
YOUR POST WAS SPOT ON
these dictator kingship's want to retrict free speech and spy on all its innocent people .
the bad guys find ways around black buddy anyway
your my pal !!
Dictators that the US loves and loves.....
Remember how US soldiers had Bible verses inscribed on their rifle barrels, or handing out Bibles, or Christians masquerading as Muslims to try and underhandedly convert them? I guess these attempts at forcing a set of beliefs don't matter as long as Christianity is involved. I will agree and say that there are certain elements that want to enforce their beliefs on EVERYONE be it Jew, Christian, Muslim, etc... You paint with too broad a brush.
Well to be fair the bibles were never handed out, they were confiscated right on base.