It's not an argument, it's a friendly discussion. Why get so upset? Can't you take anyone else's opinion but your own? Are you that insecure in yourself? Or are you just a fanboy who can't tolerate anything negative about your heros?
I was expecting you to tell me that you email videos from your iPhone 4 all the time with no problem whatsoever. Don't you?
I think Sol, as would any sane, thinking person, has a problem with *uninformed* opinion (which at this point seems like deliberate trolling, in your case) being passed off as fact or a credible viewpoint.
Your arguments have no actual basis in reality. Why do you make them?
There are other, better ways to get attention rather than trolling an Apple fansite.
I think Sol, as would any sane, thinking person, has a problem with *uninformed* opinion.
I see. And the totality of the four pages of postings on this thread are informed opinion? Informed by who? This thread is about whether Verizon will get an iPhone. Who among us has information?
No, this thread is pure speculation. You don't know any more than I do. So by that reasoning, there is every chance I am completely right and you all are completely wrong. Which you are.
I'm tired of reading all the AT&T bashing and the Verizon-is-greater-than-God talk. It's gotten so annoying. Verizon has its own problems save for the lack of a truly high profile device to expose them. Anyone who thinks life with VZ is going to be all sugar and rainbows really needs to get checked.
Verizon is certainly not a panacea of American wireless service. They have been known in the past to artificially cripple device features, restrict software usage, remove factory features from devices (like free GPS apps) whiles adding their own inferior (and insanely expensive) versions. With the introduction of Android devices, they appear to have reformed these anti-consumer practices, and have become far better from that point of view.
All that said, there is no really no comparison to be made between their network and the one AT&T has. The problem with (the current) AT&T is the history of their network. They have had multiple mergers and acquisitions of differing quality and network resources, and compared to the CDMA2000 technology family of Verizon/Sprint which proved easy to upgrade from 2G to 3G, they had to do a major transition from GSM to the completely different UMTS/HSPA network equipment. All of this has led to a far-from-perfect network build-out. Coupe this with a lower network re-investment than Verizon, and it is easy to see why Verizon is able to provide a far greater 3G network footprint, and better capacity.
I'm sure there are some areas in the country where AT&T has superior coverage and/or capacity/quality than Verizon, but overall it is hard to ignore both the anecdotal evidence of Verizon coverage/capacity superiority and the fact of their far more extensive 3G coverage footprint.
Here is a composite coverage map I decided to make of my local area from the coverage viewers available on both AT&T and Verizon's website. I spent a lot of time cleaning up the coverage areas, removing things like lakes, roads, and map symbols to give the clearest picture possible. I also removed the non-3G coverage areas that were shaded in a different color. It is not perfect, and it will also quickly become out-of-date, so do not rely on it to make a purchasing decision. It is simply my good-faith effort at an objective comparison:
The image switches between AT&T and Verizon every 5 seconds. You may need to wait for it to load first, however.
Here's the thing with Apple products. You use them and you don't have to worry about them. I open up by Macbook and it just springs to life. I don't have to worry about whether it will slow to a crawl because I haven't restarted it in the last 20 minutes like I do on my Windows machine at work.
But with the iPhone, that is not the case. Will I get a signal or will I have to hunt for one? Will I drop this call? Who knows. I don't really care why AT&T's network sucks in my area. I just want it to work. And if they can't get it up to snuff then to hell with them.
BTW - nice map and information. AT&T is as crappy in my area as it is in yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by winterspan
Verizon is certainly not a panacea of American wireless service. They have been known in the past to artificially cripple device features, restrict software usage, remove factory features from devices (like free GPS apps) whiles adding their own inferior (and insanely expensive) versions. With the introduction of Android devices, they appear to have reformed these anti-consumer practices, and have become far better from that point of view.
All that said, there is no really no comparison to be made between their network and the one AT&T has. The problem with (the current) AT&T is the history of their network. They have had multiple mergers and acquisitions of differing quality and network resources, and compared to the CDMA2000 technology family of Verizon/Sprint which proved easy to upgrade from 2G to 3G, they had to do a major transition from GSM to the completely different UMTS/HSPA network equipment. All of this has led to a far-from-perfect network build-out. Coupe this with a lower network re-investment than Verizon, and it is easy to see why Verizon is able to provide a far greater 3G network footprint, and better capacity.
I'm sure there are some areas in the country where AT&T has superior coverage and/or capacity/quality than Verizon, but overall it is hard to ignore both the anecdotal evidence of Verizon coverage/capacity superiority and the fact of their far more extensive 3G coverage footprint.
Here is a composite coverage map I decided to make of my local area from the coverage viewers available on both AT&T and Verizon's website. I spent a lot of time cleaning up the coverage areas, removing things like lakes, roads, and map symbols to give the clearest picture possible. I also removed the non-3G coverage areas that were shaded in a different color. It is not perfect, and it will also quickly become out-of-date, so do not rely on it to make a purchasing decision. It is simply my good-faith effort at an objective comparison:
The image switches between AT&T and Verizon every 5 seconds. You may need to wait for it to load first, however.
... no one will want to have anything to do with him and Apple will wither and die on the vine.
It's happening a little bit more every day. Sad really. But a great test of how far people will go under the influence of the RDF.
There seems to be an endless supply of Apple bashers across the decades. Back in 1981 when IBM launched its PC there was the Business Week cover declaring Apple was done. This continued through the 80's since it was claimed that Windows was "good enough". It reached an infamous peak of sorts in 1997 with: "What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders," Michael Dell said. Then there were executives from Palm and Nokia who chuckled out loud about a computer company trying to compete in the cellphone business.
How much empirical evidence is needed before even the slow learners manage to get a clue? Apple is doomed is simply not a phrase that makes any sense in the current context. What stupid RDF is involved? The one that shows Apple's iPad is the fastest adoption of any electronic device ever? Completely owning the personal media device market (iPods at 70% and iTMS selling more music than any retailer). Generating almost half of the profits in the cellphone market? Higher growth rates in computers than the rest of the companies for 18 straight quarters? Retail stores that generate more revenue per square foot than essentially any other stores (including Tiffany)?
The only RDF I can see at this point is the one generated by Apple haters who simply can't stand the reality that has taken root and refuses to go away. It may change some day far in the future but the reality is that Apple is solidly based in several markets and evil though he may be, Steve Jobs has a rather powerful grip on actual reality. I know that feeding the trolls is a hopeless and thankless activity and I will try to restrain myself in the future (by more careful use of the Ignore List).
How much empirical evidence is needed before even the slow learners manage to get a clue? Apple is doomed is simply not a phrase that makes any sense in the current context. What stupid RDF is involved? The one that shows Apple's iPad is the fastest adoption of any electronic device ever? Completely owning the personal media device market (iPods at 70% and iTMS selling more music than any retailer). Generating almost half of the profits in the cellphone market? Higher growth rates in computers than the rest of the companies for 18 straight quarters? Retail stores that generate more revenue per square foot than essentially any other stores (including Tiffany)?
Apple also has ⅓ of the PC profits in the world but they?ll be cutting out the Mac because they 1) don?t have the greatest marketshare of PCs, and 2) because they only care about iDevices despite the Mac being ⅓ of their revenue.
Don?t forget that Apple has close to 100% of the tablet market they couldn?t possibly have competed in because the iPad used an obsolete aspect ratio, that didn?t have a real O that used a cellphone processor.
It really doesn?t matter what you say to these guys they?ll be objective and look at the pros and cons.
It's Apple that needs no one, aside from an ocean of developers and consumers ready to line up to buy...it's seems Microsoft is desperate to "get along" with Apple these days. EVERYBODY in the industry need Apple, make no mistake...Consumers decide where the players will move. They've voted with their wallets for Apple...Apple doesn't need anyone to work with them, actually.
There is a difference between being a leader (which Apple is) and not needing (which Apple does). News has Apple and Facebook in talks so that FB will work with Ping, which Apple needs. Apple needs open standards on the web, developed in collaboration with other interested parties. Apple needs MS Office and CS5 on their platform. The Mac would not go away if these programs were taken away, but the platform would be hurt and Apple would be forced to develop alternatives. Apple needs Intel (or AMD), as their computer sales did not truly take off until the adoption of Intel chips. As you point out, Apple needs the developers who write the 300,000 apps on iOS. Apple needs manufacturing partners - including companies like Samsung, who also compete with Apple, for components. While Apple is leading in the markets in which it participates, that does not mean Apple does not need other companies in the tech industry.
There is a difference between being a leader (which Apple is) and not needing (which Apple does). News has Apple and Facebook in talks so that FB will work with Ping, which Apple needs. Apple needs open standards on the web, developed in collaboration with other interested parties. Apple needs MS Office and CS5 on their platform. The Mac would not go away if these programs were taken away, but the platform would be hurt and Apple would be forced to develop alternatives. Apple needs Intel (or AMD), as their computer sales did not truly take off until the adoption of Intel chips. As you point out, Apple needs the developers who write the 300,000 apps on iOS. Apple needs manufacturing partners - including companies like Samsung, who also compete with Apple, for components. While Apple is leading in the markets in which it participates, that does not mean Apple does not need other companies in the tech industry.
There is a difference between being a leader (which Apple is) and not needing (which Apple does). News has Apple and Facebook in talks so that FB will work with Ping, which Apple needs. Apple needs open standards on the web, developed in collaboration with other interested parties. Apple needs MS Office and CS5 on their platform. The Mac would not go away if these programs were taken away, but the platform would be hurt and Apple would be forced to develop alternatives. Apple needs Intel (or AMD), as their computer sales did not truly take off until the adoption of Intel chips. As you point out, Apple needs the developers who write the 300,000 apps on iOS. Apple needs manufacturing partners - including companies like Samsung, who also compete with Apple, for components. While Apple is leading in the markets in which it participates, that does not mean Apple does not need other companies in the tech industry.
Fair enough. Put that way, I have to agree with you. I don't, however, see the alleged closed-minded unwillingness to work with others that some people here describe. It just doesn't exist. But that wasn't the point of your post anyway.
$20 billion, a $280 billion + market cap (look out, Exxon Mobil), $51 billion in cash, with Microsoft in their rearview mirror, and the resources to do so many things in-house (or make some key acquisitions) says otherwise.
It's Apple that needs no one, aside from an ocean of developers and consumers ready to line up to buy. That won't change anytime soon. In fact, it's everyone else that either wants to be a part of what Apple is doing, or wants to emulate some key aspect of their business.
it's seems Microsoft is desperate to "get along" with Apple these days. EVERYBODY in the industry need Apple, make no mistake.
Consumers decide where the players will move. They've voted with their wallets for Apple.
Record iPhone sales. Over 14.1 million this past quarter alone, easily surpassing RIM. Record Mac sales. 7 million iPads sold since April. Apple can do very little wrong at this point. iOS is a massive success, and integrating it with OS X is the final move in making the most usable tech across the board in the entire industry. In fact, I can't recall a quarter in recent years that didn't set a new record for the company. Recall that Apple had blowout sales . . . in a recession!
Seems consumers are not just happy with Apple, they're ecstatic with the company's decisions.
- CFO Peter Oppenheimer with summary: New all-time records for Mac, iPhone and iPad sales.
- New Mac sales record by over 400,000 - double overall market growth. Double-digit growth in both desktop and portables, led by iMac, MacBook Pro, and MacBook.
- Nearly 9.1 million iPods sold. Market share remains over 70% per NPD.
- iTunes Store revenue over $1 billion for the quarter.
- "Extremely pleased" with 14.1 million iPhones sold. iPhone revenue reached $8.82 billion, up 92 percent. Average selling price of $610.
- iPhone has 166 carriers in 89 countries. Very pleased with response in China since recent launch.
- Enterprise adoption of iPhone 4 continues to grow. 80% of Fortune 500 companies, up from 60% before iPhone 4 launch.
- iPhone sales very strong, but could have sold more if supply had been available.
- iPad sales strong. 65% of Fortune 100 companies using iPad. Expanding retail distribution and filling sales channels, but still below desired levels.
- Have now passed 125 million total iOS devices sold.
- iOS 4.2 coming in November with AirPrint and other features.
- App Store: Over 200,000 registered developers. "Very happy" with iAd performance.
- Retail store revenue at $3.75 billion. 874,000 Macs sold, up 30% year-over-year. 50% of sales to customers new to Mac.
- First-day sales at new Beijing and Shanghai stores set new records.
- Average revenue per store $11.8 million, up 52% year-over-year.
- 74.5 million visitors during the quarter, up 62% year-over-year.
- Fiscal 2011 will see focus on international expansion. 40-50 new stores, with over 50% outside U.S. Also replacing several U.S. stores.
- Cash plus marketable securities at $51 billion, up $5.2 billion.
- Fiscal 2010 saw over 13.6 million Macs sold, 40 million iPhones, nearly 7.5 million iPads, record revenue of over $65 billion. Earnings of $14 billion. 5x the revenue and 10x the earnings of five years ago.
- Guidance: Revenue at $23 billion, gross margin at 36%, earnings of $4.80 per share.
Apple doesn't need anyone to work with them, actually. They have $51 billion in cash on-hand, they're debt-free, they're the hottest company in tech, and in due course, will surpass Exxon Mobil as the most valuable company on the planet. They're the master of their own fate. Microsoft is now in their rear-view mirror. They can do so many things in-house if they like already, or simply make a few acquisitions. All Apple needs are developers to be on board and consumers to continue lining up for their products. And they are. That won't change in the foreseeable future. All Apple needs to do is stick to their vision.
The new low-end for Apple stock is around $300. Did you forget that? Investors seem to think SJ is doing a fine job. In fact, SJ's performance as CEO is widely regarded as unmatched in the industry today. But why would no one want to work with them when Apple gear is flying off the shelves? you can bet there will be no shortage of potential partners for Apple at this rate. Just ask AT&T and Foxconn. See how Apple turned their back on Adobe and Flash? The result: Adobe stock ended up tanking. And Apple ended up selling a record number of iPhones and iPads. No Flash. No consequences. Just a lot of bluster and hot air from wrong-headed analysts and geeks on tech sites. Apple has this habit of proving them wrong every damn time.
You seem to be living in some other world that has no basis in reality. Look at the what the market is saying, not what geeks on tech sites are saying. AppleInsider and Macrumors and other tech sites are not the place to gauge opinion. They are a barometer of nothing. This crowd doesn't know sweet f all about the market. LOL they're still pining away for some kind of desktop headless Mac you can take apart and play with. It would be comical if it weren't so sad.
It seems every year for the past 5-7 years we have this sort of conversation. This nonsense from folks who don't "get" Apple really needs to stop.
You should have added some facts and detail to your post, it's a bit thin.
So, this is my very first post on AI, after reading this website for going on 8 years now. So about VZ and the iphone like a has said in the past, the iphone was offered to vz first, but either vz declined, or vz put too many stipulations on the contract between them and apple. I mean after all they have to have their vcast bull crap on everything. *grin* which all of the time cripples the device in some way, but thats done in the name of making the device easier for the end user. yada yada yada. I don't think thats going to happen this time around. apple isn't taking any crap from anyone, they know what they want, and they'll get it if vz really wants the iphone. because not having the iphone, and soon the ipad will really hurt them. but one thing, I really hope, that these new people that they are highering are really good CS, because VZ CS gets a -10 rating in my book. I'd rather use two tin cups and a wire to talk to someone than vz then deal with their customer service. but one that AT&t has for the iphone, is that for tech you can be connected to apple tech support, insted of dealing with the wireless company people. and those people are much much better, and I think VZ will have that sort of access, hopefully.
here in socal, att blows in the worst way. so much so in my area, they actually sent me a free microcell (which also doesn't work at very well) to keep my loyalty. loved the spirit of it but i pay for a working phone, not a free microcell.
here's my beef with it all...
vz = cdma < travel outside the us. no way to sim swap, lame. plus cdma is antiquated. where is vz 4g+? now that would be news!
mass exodous to vz from existing att iphone users. can you hear me now? well, right now i can but i doubt i'll be able to if vz gets the iphone.
possible silver lining? --> everyone is so sick of att dropping their calls around here, almost everyone i know would migrate to vz... meaning, att bandwidth might actually free up a little. could this be possible? hmmm, i might just stick around and find out!
frankly at this point... i think i'd be happier if sprint got the iphone. in my area and given data rates they've got, i think that would be the best result. who knows though, maybe sprint will nab the iphone shortly after vz?
Rumor? I'm a verizon cell customer & a couple of weeks ago I received an email from Verizon that the iPad is coming. They included a subscription price as well. Hope I saved email...
I just read the email again (was in Europe when I rec'd it) It's an offer to buy the iPad wifi version and use their mifi service to connect (which is what I do for my iTouch and iPad.
I just read the email again (was in Europe when I rec'd it) It's an offer to buy the iPad wifi version and use their mifi service to connect (which is what I do for my iTouch and iPad.
Comments
It's not an argument, it's a friendly discussion. Why get so upset? Can't you take anyone else's opinion but your own? Are you that insecure in yourself? Or are you just a fanboy who can't tolerate anything negative about your heros?
I was expecting you to tell me that you email videos from your iPhone 4 all the time with no problem whatsoever. Don't you?
I think Sol, as would any sane, thinking person, has a problem with *uninformed* opinion (which at this point seems like deliberate trolling, in your case) being passed off as fact or a credible viewpoint.
Your arguments have no actual basis in reality. Why do you make them?
There are other, better ways to get attention rather than trolling an Apple fansite.
I can see you?re pushing to be banned, but I recommend on your next account that you try to act a little more objective.
Thanks for the advice.
I think Sol, as would any sane, thinking person, has a problem with *uninformed* opinion.
I see. And the totality of the four pages of postings on this thread are informed opinion? Informed by who? This thread is about whether Verizon will get an iPhone. Who among us has information?
No, this thread is pure speculation. You don't know any more than I do. So by that reasoning, there is every chance I am completely right and you all are completely wrong. Which you are.
I'm tired of reading all the AT&T bashing and the Verizon-is-greater-than-God talk. It's gotten so annoying. Verizon has its own problems save for the lack of a truly high profile device to expose them. Anyone who thinks life with VZ is going to be all sugar and rainbows really needs to get checked.
Verizon is certainly not a panacea of American wireless service. They have been known in the past to artificially cripple device features, restrict software usage, remove factory features from devices (like free GPS apps) whiles adding their own inferior (and insanely expensive) versions. With the introduction of Android devices, they appear to have reformed these anti-consumer practices, and have become far better from that point of view.
All that said, there is no really no comparison to be made between their network and the one AT&T has. The problem with (the current) AT&T is the history of their network. They have had multiple mergers and acquisitions of differing quality and network resources, and compared to the CDMA2000 technology family of Verizon/Sprint which proved easy to upgrade from 2G to 3G, they had to do a major transition from GSM to the completely different UMTS/HSPA network equipment. All of this has led to a far-from-perfect network build-out. Coupe this with a lower network re-investment than Verizon, and it is easy to see why Verizon is able to provide a far greater 3G network footprint, and better capacity.
I'm sure there are some areas in the country where AT&T has superior coverage and/or capacity/quality than Verizon, but overall it is hard to ignore both the anecdotal evidence of Verizon coverage/capacity superiority and the fact of their far more extensive 3G coverage footprint.
Here is a composite coverage map I decided to make of my local area from the coverage viewers available on both AT&T and Verizon's website. I spent a lot of time cleaning up the coverage areas, removing things like lakes, roads, and map symbols to give the clearest picture possible. I also removed the non-3G coverage areas that were shaded in a different color. It is not perfect, and it will also quickly become out-of-date, so do not rely on it to make a purchasing decision. It is simply my good-faith effort at an objective comparison:
The image switches between AT&T and Verizon every 5 seconds. You may need to wait for it to load first, however.
But with the iPhone, that is not the case. Will I get a signal or will I have to hunt for one? Will I drop this call? Who knows. I don't really care why AT&T's network sucks in my area. I just want it to work. And if they can't get it up to snuff then to hell with them.
BTW - nice map and information. AT&T is as crappy in my area as it is in yours.
Verizon is certainly not a panacea of American wireless service. They have been known in the past to artificially cripple device features, restrict software usage, remove factory features from devices (like free GPS apps) whiles adding their own inferior (and insanely expensive) versions. With the introduction of Android devices, they appear to have reformed these anti-consumer practices, and have become far better from that point of view.
All that said, there is no really no comparison to be made between their network and the one AT&T has. The problem with (the current) AT&T is the history of their network. They have had multiple mergers and acquisitions of differing quality and network resources, and compared to the CDMA2000 technology family of Verizon/Sprint which proved easy to upgrade from 2G to 3G, they had to do a major transition from GSM to the completely different UMTS/HSPA network equipment. All of this has led to a far-from-perfect network build-out. Coupe this with a lower network re-investment than Verizon, and it is easy to see why Verizon is able to provide a far greater 3G network footprint, and better capacity.
I'm sure there are some areas in the country where AT&T has superior coverage and/or capacity/quality than Verizon, but overall it is hard to ignore both the anecdotal evidence of Verizon coverage/capacity superiority and the fact of their far more extensive 3G coverage footprint.
Here is a composite coverage map I decided to make of my local area from the coverage viewers available on both AT&T and Verizon's website. I spent a lot of time cleaning up the coverage areas, removing things like lakes, roads, and map symbols to give the clearest picture possible. I also removed the non-3G coverage areas that were shaded in a different color. It is not perfect, and it will also quickly become out-of-date, so do not rely on it to make a purchasing decision. It is simply my good-faith effort at an objective comparison:
The image switches between AT&T and Verizon every 5 seconds. You may need to wait for it to load first, however.
... no one will want to have anything to do with him and Apple will wither and die on the vine.
It's happening a little bit more every day. Sad really. But a great test of how far people will go under the influence of the RDF.
There seems to be an endless supply of Apple bashers across the decades. Back in 1981 when IBM launched its PC there was the Business Week cover declaring Apple was done. This continued through the 80's since it was claimed that Windows was "good enough". It reached an infamous peak of sorts in 1997 with: "What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders," Michael Dell said. Then there were executives from Palm and Nokia who chuckled out loud about a computer company trying to compete in the cellphone business.
How much empirical evidence is needed before even the slow learners manage to get a clue? Apple is doomed is simply not a phrase that makes any sense in the current context. What stupid RDF is involved? The one that shows Apple's iPad is the fastest adoption of any electronic device ever? Completely owning the personal media device market (iPods at 70% and iTMS selling more music than any retailer). Generating almost half of the profits in the cellphone market? Higher growth rates in computers than the rest of the companies for 18 straight quarters? Retail stores that generate more revenue per square foot than essentially any other stores (including Tiffany)?
The only RDF I can see at this point is the one generated by Apple haters who simply can't stand the reality that has taken root and refuses to go away. It may change some day far in the future but the reality is that Apple is solidly based in several markets and evil though he may be, Steve Jobs has a rather powerful grip on actual reality. I know that feeding the trolls is a hopeless and thankless activity and I will try to restrain myself in the future (by more careful use of the Ignore List).
How much empirical evidence is needed before even the slow learners manage to get a clue? Apple is doomed is simply not a phrase that makes any sense in the current context. What stupid RDF is involved? The one that shows Apple's iPad is the fastest adoption of any electronic device ever? Completely owning the personal media device market (iPods at 70% and iTMS selling more music than any retailer). Generating almost half of the profits in the cellphone market? Higher growth rates in computers than the rest of the companies for 18 straight quarters? Retail stores that generate more revenue per square foot than essentially any other stores (including Tiffany)?
Apple also has ⅓ of the PC profits in the world but they?ll be cutting out the Mac because they 1) don?t have the greatest marketshare of PCs, and 2) because they only care about iDevices despite the Mac being ⅓ of their revenue.
Don?t forget that Apple has close to 100% of the tablet market they couldn?t possibly have competed in because the iPad used an obsolete aspect ratio, that didn?t have a real O that used a cellphone processor.
It really doesn?t matter what you say to these guys they?ll be objective and look at the pros and cons.
It's Apple that needs no one, aside from an ocean of developers and consumers ready to line up to buy...it's seems Microsoft is desperate to "get along" with Apple these days. EVERYBODY in the industry need Apple, make no mistake...Consumers decide where the players will move. They've voted with their wallets for Apple...Apple doesn't need anyone to work with them, actually.
There is a difference between being a leader (which Apple is) and not needing (which Apple does). News has Apple and Facebook in talks so that FB will work with Ping, which Apple needs. Apple needs open standards on the web, developed in collaboration with other interested parties. Apple needs MS Office and CS5 on their platform. The Mac would not go away if these programs were taken away, but the platform would be hurt and Apple would be forced to develop alternatives. Apple needs Intel (or AMD), as their computer sales did not truly take off until the adoption of Intel chips. As you point out, Apple needs the developers who write the 300,000 apps on iOS. Apple needs manufacturing partners - including companies like Samsung, who also compete with Apple, for components. While Apple is leading in the markets in which it participates, that does not mean Apple does not need other companies in the tech industry.
There is a difference between being a leader (which Apple is) and not needing (which Apple does). News has Apple and Facebook in talks so that FB will work with Ping, which Apple needs. Apple needs open standards on the web, developed in collaboration with other interested parties. Apple needs MS Office and CS5 on their platform. The Mac would not go away if these programs were taken away, but the platform would be hurt and Apple would be forced to develop alternatives. Apple needs Intel (or AMD), as their computer sales did not truly take off until the adoption of Intel chips. As you point out, Apple needs the developers who write the 300,000 apps on iOS. Apple needs manufacturing partners - including companies like Samsung, who also compete with Apple, for components. While Apple is leading in the markets in which it participates, that does not mean Apple does not need other companies in the tech industry.
Excellent points.
There is a difference between being a leader (which Apple is) and not needing (which Apple does). News has Apple and Facebook in talks so that FB will work with Ping, which Apple needs. Apple needs open standards on the web, developed in collaboration with other interested parties. Apple needs MS Office and CS5 on their platform. The Mac would not go away if these programs were taken away, but the platform would be hurt and Apple would be forced to develop alternatives. Apple needs Intel (or AMD), as their computer sales did not truly take off until the adoption of Intel chips. As you point out, Apple needs the developers who write the 300,000 apps on iOS. Apple needs manufacturing partners - including companies like Samsung, who also compete with Apple, for components. While Apple is leading in the markets in which it participates, that does not mean Apple does not need other companies in the tech industry.
Fair enough. Put that way, I have to agree with you. I don't, however, see the alleged closed-minded unwillingness to work with others that some people here describe. It just doesn't exist. But that wasn't the point of your post anyway.
In any case you're exactly right. Good post.
$20 billion, a $280 billion + market cap (look out, Exxon Mobil), $51 billion in cash, with Microsoft in their rearview mirror, and the resources to do so many things in-house (or make some key acquisitions) says otherwise.
It's Apple that needs no one, aside from an ocean of developers and consumers ready to line up to buy. That won't change anytime soon. In fact, it's everyone else that either wants to be a part of what Apple is doing, or wants to emulate some key aspect of their business.
it's seems Microsoft is desperate to "get along" with Apple these days. EVERYBODY in the industry need Apple, make no mistake.
Consumers decide where the players will move. They've voted with their wallets for Apple.
Record iPhone sales. Over 14.1 million this past quarter alone, easily surpassing RIM. Record Mac sales. 7 million iPads sold since April. Apple can do very little wrong at this point. iOS is a massive success, and integrating it with OS X is the final move in making the most usable tech across the board in the entire industry. In fact, I can't recall a quarter in recent years that didn't set a new record for the company. Recall that Apple had blowout sales . . . in a recession!
Seems consumers are not just happy with Apple, they're ecstatic with the company's decisions.
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/18/...-quarter-ever/
Take-away from the numbers:
Conference Call Highlights:
- CFO Peter Oppenheimer with summary: New all-time records for Mac, iPhone and iPad sales.
- New Mac sales record by over 400,000 - double overall market growth. Double-digit growth in both desktop and portables, led by iMac, MacBook Pro, and MacBook.
- Nearly 9.1 million iPods sold. Market share remains over 70% per NPD.
- iTunes Store revenue over $1 billion for the quarter.
- "Extremely pleased" with 14.1 million iPhones sold. iPhone revenue reached $8.82 billion, up 92 percent. Average selling price of $610.
- iPhone has 166 carriers in 89 countries. Very pleased with response in China since recent launch.
- Enterprise adoption of iPhone 4 continues to grow. 80% of Fortune 500 companies, up from 60% before iPhone 4 launch.
- iPhone sales very strong, but could have sold more if supply had been available.
- iPad sales strong. 65% of Fortune 100 companies using iPad. Expanding retail distribution and filling sales channels, but still below desired levels.
- Have now passed 125 million total iOS devices sold.
- iOS 4.2 coming in November with AirPrint and other features.
- App Store: Over 200,000 registered developers. "Very happy" with iAd performance.
- Retail store revenue at $3.75 billion. 874,000 Macs sold, up 30% year-over-year. 50% of sales to customers new to Mac.
- First-day sales at new Beijing and Shanghai stores set new records.
- Average revenue per store $11.8 million, up 52% year-over-year.
- 74.5 million visitors during the quarter, up 62% year-over-year.
- Fiscal 2011 will see focus on international expansion. 40-50 new stores, with over 50% outside U.S. Also replacing several U.S. stores.
- Cash plus marketable securities at $51 billion, up $5.2 billion.
- Fiscal 2010 saw over 13.6 million Macs sold, 40 million iPhones, nearly 7.5 million iPads, record revenue of over $65 billion. Earnings of $14 billion. 5x the revenue and 10x the earnings of five years ago.
- Guidance: Revenue at $23 billion, gross margin at 36%, earnings of $4.80 per share.
Apple doesn't need anyone to work with them, actually. They have $51 billion in cash on-hand, they're debt-free, they're the hottest company in tech, and in due course, will surpass Exxon Mobil as the most valuable company on the planet. They're the master of their own fate. Microsoft is now in their rear-view mirror. They can do so many things in-house if they like already, or simply make a few acquisitions. All Apple needs are developers to be on board and consumers to continue lining up for their products. And they are. That won't change in the foreseeable future. All Apple needs to do is stick to their vision.
The new low-end for Apple stock is around $300. Did you forget that? Investors seem to think SJ is doing a fine job. In fact, SJ's performance as CEO is widely regarded as unmatched in the industry today. But why would no one want to work with them when Apple gear is flying off the shelves? you can bet there will be no shortage of potential partners for Apple at this rate. Just ask AT&T and Foxconn. See how Apple turned their back on Adobe and Flash? The result: Adobe stock ended up tanking. And Apple ended up selling a record number of iPhones and iPads. No Flash. No consequences. Just a lot of bluster and hot air from wrong-headed analysts and geeks on tech sites. Apple has this habit of proving them wrong every damn time.
You seem to be living in some other world that has no basis in reality. Look at the what the market is saying, not what geeks on tech sites are saying. AppleInsider and Macrumors and other tech sites are not the place to gauge opinion. They are a barometer of nothing. This crowd doesn't know sweet f all about the market. LOL they're still pining away for some kind of desktop headless Mac you can take apart and play with. It would be comical if it weren't so sad.
It seems every year for the past 5-7 years we have this sort of conversation. This nonsense from folks who don't "get" Apple really needs to stop.
You should have added some facts and detail to your post, it's a bit thin.
Maybe they are hiring for the holidays just like everyone else.
I guess that would be too obvious and not as fun though
Not likely with those kinds of numbers. We have several call centers here, and they hire around 150 - 250 for the Holidays - Collectively.
Skip
My thoughts have always been, if it happens, it will be the later, otherwise it won't happen..again.
Cheers
here's my beef with it all...
vz = cdma < travel outside the us. no way to sim swap, lame. plus cdma is antiquated. where is vz 4g+? now that would be news!
mass exodous to vz from existing att iphone users. can you hear me now? well, right now i can but i doubt i'll be able to if vz gets the iphone.
possible silver lining? --> everyone is so sick of att dropping their calls around here, almost everyone i know would migrate to vz... meaning, att bandwidth might actually free up a little. could this be possible? hmmm, i might just stick around and find out!
frankly at this point... i think i'd be happier if sprint got the iphone. in my area and given data rates they've got, i think that would be the best result. who knows though, maybe sprint will nab the iphone shortly after vz?
I wonder if the Verizon iPhone would carry the Verizon logo on it or require a VCast app preinstalled.
What's in it for Verizon?
12 million new subscribers within a year?
Sorry for the confusion.
I just read the email again (was in Europe when I rec'd it) It's an offer to buy the iPad wifi version and use their mifi service to connect (which is what I do for my iTouch and iPad.
Sorry for the confusion.
Not at all. We knew about that weeks ago, anyway.
Next time just edit your posts, too.
AT&T had a record 5.2 million new iPhone customers in the 3rd quarter. To celebrate, they had a big party but no reception.