In addition to giving Intel a presence in the iPhone, the Infineon deal will also place the company, through its newly acquired products, inside the 3G-capable iPad. Years ago it was rumored that the chipmaker's low-power Atom processor could eventually make its way into the iPad, though that never came to be.
Instead, Apple decided it would make its own moves in the chipmaking business, through key acquisitions of PA Semi for $278 million in 2008, and Intrinsity this year for $121 million. Those purchases set the stage for Apple to build the custom A4 processor, based on the ARM architecture, found in the iPad and iPhone
Hopefully Intel will be willing to license the technology to Apple so they can put it in their systems-on-a-chip. Otherwise Apple will need to develop their own version from scratch if they want to get it on their custom chips.
That's so weird. I didn't see the smiley face when I read your post.
As for Murdoch, what's with the fan dance for Steve? Just set up whatever business unit you want, and make your gawddammned iPhone and iPad apps, Apple will obviously approve them if the basic rules are followed. Heck, I'm sure Apple would love to start running iAds in Murdoch's apps.
Can someone explain to me why Murdoch needs to "win favour"? I know it's been reported as such in the media. It is absolutely baffling.
Obviously from Murdoch's perspective - he doesn't. Folks sometimes read into news stuff they carry themselves as they replicate or comment on it. Murdoch is a media magnate, not someone who needs to "win favor". Magnates like Jobs, Gates, Otellini and Murdoch - who are truly captains of industry (and not merely inheritors riding the work of their predecessors) do not need to engage in obsequious behaviors. They do lunch, meet casually, talk on the phone like everyone else. It's just in their case the effect is much deeper and wider than that of the average person. But reporters apparently have self-esteem issues that have to be transferred to the subjects they discuss.
Most of these acquisitions by large companies seem to be a monumental waste. Most of these companies pay way too much for, IMO. If the purchase doesn?t pay out then it?s obviously a net loss. And it really irks me when I read and hear people stating that companies should buy something simply because they can. I don?t know of any financially sound individual that pushes their pocketbook to the brink with the assumption that they?ll just get more.
BTW, I sold my Intel stock years ago.
I've a theory that all companies have a natural lifecycle of innovation, growth, profitability and decline and I think shareholders would be better off if companies accepted that. I'm sure for most companies if during e profitability phase they just paid out as much as they could back to the shareholders, then wound it down at the end of it's life, less money would be wasted.
There are obviously exceptions that do manage to diversify (Apple being one) but most companies just seem to try to move into adjacent markets and waste money.
I've a theory that all companies have a natural lifecycle of innovation, growth, profitability and decline and I think shareholders would be better off if companies accepted that. I'm sure for most companies if during e profitability phase they just paid out as much as they could back to the shareholders, then wound it down at the end of it's life, less money would be wasted.
There are obviously exceptions that do manage to diversify (Apple being one) but most companies just seem to try to move into adjacent markets and waste money.
That's why I'm not a big fan of the share market. I feel I need to know what kinds of dividends I'd be getting up front when I sign on to buy shares of a company. All of which are not guaranteed of course, the way they're structured. Looks like it's back to looking at term deposit [CD] rates on thar intarwebs. Luckily where I am they're at least 3% (Australia/ Malaysia)
On compounded interest though, 5% average returns gives almost double 3% average returns after say, 20 years! Crazy!
Really? that's your beef? AI is doing a great job and I find they have great original material.
It's so easy to criticize in the internet age... Just go out and create your own website.
It's also not that difficult to take the time to proofread what has been written and edit the article to adhere to normal journalism standards. It's a shame that almost NOBODY does it these days. I see mistakes like this all the time on blogs, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, etc. and they're getting worse.
It's gotten to the point where I notice more when somebody has actually taken the time to proofread and write a high-quality article.
But these days, in the effort to be "first" to break news people are so lazy that they don't even bother to verify before publishing.
Yes, AI has good material, but they could be SO much better if they took the extra five to ten minutes to proofread and edit before posting.
It's also not that difficult to take the time to proofread what has been written and edit the article to adhere to normal journalism standards. It's a shame that almost NOBODY does it these days. I see mistakes like this all the time on blogs, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, etc. and they're getting worse.
It's gotten to the point where I notice more when somebody has actually taken the time to proofread and write a high-quality article.
But these days, in the effort to be "first" to break news people are so lazy that they don't even bother to verify before publishing.
Yes, AI has good material, but they could be SO much better if they took the extra five to ten minutes to proofread and edit before posting.
And dont get me startd on artikles weeth bad speeling!
Comments
Kneel Before Jobs!
Zod! it's Zod, people!...
In addition to giving Intel a presence in the iPhone, the Infineon deal will also place the company, through its newly acquired products, inside the 3G-capable iPad. Years ago it was rumored that the chipmaker's low-power Atom processor could eventually make its way into the iPad, though that never came to be.
Instead, Apple decided it would make its own moves in the chipmaking business, through key acquisitions of PA Semi for $278 million in 2008, and Intrinsity this year for $121 million. Those purchases set the stage for Apple to build the custom A4 processor, based on the ARM architecture, found in the iPad and iPhone
Hopefully Intel will be willing to license the technology to Apple so they can put it in their systems-on-a-chip. Otherwise Apple will need to develop their own version from scratch if they want to get it on their custom chips.
That's so weird. I didn't see the smiley face when I read your post.
As for Murdoch, what's with the fan dance for Steve? Just set up whatever business unit you want, and make your gawddammned iPhone and iPad apps, Apple will obviously approve them if the basic rules are followed. Heck, I'm sure Apple would love to start running iAds in Murdoch's apps.
Can someone explain to me why Murdoch needs to "win favour"? I know it's been reported as such in the media. It is absolutely baffling.
Obviously from Murdoch's perspective - he doesn't. Folks sometimes read into news stuff they carry themselves as they replicate or comment on it. Murdoch is a media magnate, not someone who needs to "win favor". Magnates like Jobs, Gates, Otellini and Murdoch - who are truly captains of industry (and not merely inheritors riding the work of their predecessors) do not need to engage in obsequious behaviors. They do lunch, meet casually, talk on the phone like everyone else. It's just in their case the effect is much deeper and wider than that of the average person. But reporters apparently have self-esteem issues that have to be transferred to the subjects they discuss.
Most of these acquisitions by large companies seem to be a monumental waste. Most of these companies pay way too much for, IMO. If the purchase doesn?t pay out then it?s obviously a net loss. And it really irks me when I read and hear people stating that companies should buy something simply because they can. I don?t know of any financially sound individual that pushes their pocketbook to the brink with the assumption that they?ll just get more.
BTW, I sold my Intel stock years ago.
I've a theory that all companies have a natural lifecycle of innovation, growth, profitability and decline and I think shareholders would be better off if companies accepted that. I'm sure for most companies if during e profitability phase they just paid out as much as they could back to the shareholders, then wound it down at the end of it's life, less money would be wasted.
There are obviously exceptions that do manage to diversify (Apple being one) but most companies just seem to try to move into adjacent markets and waste money.
I've a theory that all companies have a natural lifecycle of innovation, growth, profitability and decline and I think shareholders would be better off if companies accepted that. I'm sure for most companies if during e profitability phase they just paid out as much as they could back to the shareholders, then wound it down at the end of it's life, less money would be wasted.
There are obviously exceptions that do manage to diversify (Apple being one) but most companies just seem to try to move into adjacent markets and waste money.
That's why I'm not a big fan of the share market. I feel I need to know what kinds of dividends I'd be getting up front when I sign on to buy shares of a company. All of which are not guaranteed of course, the way they're structured. Looks like it's back to looking at term deposit [CD] rates on thar intarwebs. Luckily where I am they're at least 3% (Australia/ Malaysia)
On compounded interest though, 5% average returns gives almost double 3% average returns after say, 20 years! Crazy!
Really? that's your beef? AI is doing a great job and I find they have great original material.
It's so easy to criticize in the internet age... Just go out and create your own website.
It's also not that difficult to take the time to proofread what has been written and edit the article to adhere to normal journalism standards. It's a shame that almost NOBODY does it these days. I see mistakes like this all the time on blogs, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, etc. and they're getting worse.
It's gotten to the point where I notice more when somebody has actually taken the time to proofread and write a high-quality article.
But these days, in the effort to be "first" to break news people are so lazy that they don't even bother to verify before publishing.
Yes, AI has good material, but they could be SO much better if they took the extra five to ten minutes to proofread and edit before posting.
It's also not that difficult to take the time to proofread what has been written and edit the article to adhere to normal journalism standards. It's a shame that almost NOBODY does it these days. I see mistakes like this all the time on blogs, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, etc. and they're getting worse.
It's gotten to the point where I notice more when somebody has actually taken the time to proofread and write a high-quality article.
But these days, in the effort to be "first" to break news people are so lazy that they don't even bother to verify before publishing.
Yes, AI has good material, but they could be SO much better if they took the extra five to ten minutes to proofread and edit before posting.
And dont get me startd on artikles weeth bad speeling!