Keeping it in context also means that $3.5 billion is approx. 1/4 of the operating income of AT&T's wireless division.
It's more in context but you should really stick with comparing revenue. Verizon has a solid win so any hyperbole will just lessen any argument in their defense.
It's more in context but you should really stick with comparing revenue. Verizon has a solid win so any hyperbole will just lessen any argument in their defense.
It's even more in context that Verizon Wireless has a $63.4 billion in revenue and AT&T Wireless has $58.5 billion in revenue last year. VZW has $4.9 billion more in revenue than ATTW, yet VZW has $3.5 billion more in operating income than ATTW.
This is all true at the moment. Its possible for MS to get its act together and actually pull Windows Phone into a viable platform. In some ways Windows Phone is in a pretty good position to learn from what both Apple and Android are doing right and cut their own path.
I agree with MS requiring stringent controls over the phone. This is proving a real problem for Android.
All that microsofts control has done so far is hurt their business model.
-They control Hardware but still can't get updates to roll out on time. So they're getting less enthusiastic manufacturers and carriers without the benefit of having easy OS upgrades. (Which also hurts customer perception)
-They Control software, but (see above). Also, Even while controlling the software, it's not providing a more inviting environment than Android/iOS. In fact, in a lot of ways, it's less.
Quote:
It depends on what the pressure is and what action the company takes. Apple takes its money upfront, while Google is depending on getting paid on the backend. Essentially Google needs Android users to access more of its ads. Is that good pressure?
No, it needs it's customers to access the web more. If they do that, they will see ads, and google can sell those spaces to advertisers. All Google needs to do is get their content infront of as many people as possible, which Android is helping them do.
Again, Google's working on increasing Marketplace revenue, and working to improve mobile advertisements. So I'm thinking the pressure works. Remember, Google is an advertising company. Getting eyeballs is their market just as much as designing tight software/hardware integration is apple's. If a pressure is moving a company to improve on a core competency, it's good pressure.
And, if Google can make Ads/Marketplace more profitable, it gives them a bigger bargaining ship with carriers, which could lead to less bloat. (remember, Android is open sourced, but Google Apps arn't. Google could start requiring certain standards for market access)
Comments
Keeping it in context also means that $3.5 billion is approx. 1/4 of the operating income of AT&T's wireless division.
It's more in context but you should really stick with comparing revenue. Verizon has a solid win so any hyperbole will just lessen any argument in their defense.
PS: No defense for comparing it to Job's worth?
It's more in context but you should really stick with comparing revenue. Verizon has a solid win so any hyperbole will just lessen any argument in their defense.
It's even more in context that Verizon Wireless has a $63.4 billion in revenue and AT&T Wireless has $58.5 billion in revenue last year. VZW has $4.9 billion more in revenue than ATTW, yet VZW has $3.5 billion more in operating income than ATTW.
This is all true at the moment. Its possible for MS to get its act together and actually pull Windows Phone into a viable platform. In some ways Windows Phone is in a pretty good position to learn from what both Apple and Android are doing right and cut their own path.
I agree with MS requiring stringent controls over the phone. This is proving a real problem for Android.
All that microsofts control has done so far is hurt their business model.
-They control Hardware but still can't get updates to roll out on time. So they're getting less enthusiastic manufacturers and carriers without the benefit of having easy OS upgrades. (Which also hurts customer perception)
-They Control software, but (see above). Also, Even while controlling the software, it's not providing a more inviting environment than Android/iOS. In fact, in a lot of ways, it's less.
It depends on what the pressure is and what action the company takes. Apple takes its money upfront, while Google is depending on getting paid on the backend. Essentially Google needs Android users to access more of its ads. Is that good pressure?
No, it needs it's customers to access the web more. If they do that, they will see ads, and google can sell those spaces to advertisers. All Google needs to do is get their content infront of as many people as possible, which Android is helping them do.
Again, Google's working on increasing Marketplace revenue, and working to improve mobile advertisements. So I'm thinking the pressure works. Remember, Google is an advertising company. Getting eyeballs is their market just as much as designing tight software/hardware integration is apple's. If a pressure is moving a company to improve on a core competency, it's good pressure.
And, if Google can make Ads/Marketplace more profitable, it gives them a bigger bargaining ship with carriers, which could lead to less bloat. (remember, Android is open sourced, but Google Apps arn't. Google could start requiring certain standards for market access)