No way. It is still headed by Steve, and he's still the same new-age guy he always was. He doesn't even take a salary! I think that proves that he is not in it for the money, but because he wants to help make the world a better place.
Do you actually believe Steve isn't in this for the money?
Did anybody?ANYBODY?have an "App Store" or "Appstore" or "AppStore" before App le? Apparently Marc Benioff of Apple came up with the term in 2006 and that argues strongly that Apple owns it lock, stock and barrel.
Anyhow, it is worth noting that while selecting that box does allow you to install apps from any store, Apple would have to argue that it's the Amazon App Store that supplies the malware apps. Just because that box allows other malware-heavy app stores, doesn't mean Amazon's is. If the Amazon App Store is clean they have nothing to argue imo.
Apple are trying to demonstrate a possibility of future harm. It's complicated for them by the fact that the two services clearly serve different markets. Sort of like two companies, one selling weight loss pills and another selling weight gain pills.
The point is that if Amazon has any future problems then that would rebound on Apple, much like a problem with our hypothetical weight gain corp could impact a weight loss firm of the same name.
They don't necessarily need to demonstrate that Amazon have had problems, or will have problems - though it certainlly won't hurt if they can make a plausible case. This won't be an open/shut case though - it will likely go all the way to the Supreme Court in the US.
False. People have used "app" as short form for application forms (i.e. job app) and software years before NeXT ever existed.
I suppose if the Amazon Android AppStore were selling job application forms for androids that would be fair. Obviously Apple/NeXT has been the pioneer of the term in respect to software.
I actually believe that Steve was in it for the money back in '76... but now I believe that money is in second place or maybe even thrid.
Apple is a company so their primary motivation needs to be money because they would cease to exist without it. Steve's motivation however is most likely just the continuation of Apple as a company. Although Steve holds a lot of stock, I doubt he holds it for the investment potential (even if it is a good one).
Apple is a company so their primary motivation needs to be money because they would cease to exist without it. Steve's motivation however is most likely just the continuation of Apple as a company. Although Steve holds a lot of stock, I doubt he holds it for the investment potential (even if it is a good one).
Actually he doesn't hold all that much stock, his biggest stock holdings are in Disney from the merger with Pixar. It's precisely because he doesn't own all that much of Apple that he's not all that rich by SIlicon Valley Billionaire standards.
Comments
No way. It is still headed by Steve, and he's still the same new-age guy he always was. He doesn't even take a salary! I think that proves that he is not in it for the money, but because he wants to help make the world a better place.
Do you actually believe Steve isn't in this for the money?
I have to side with Apple on this.
Do you actually believe Steve isn't in this for the money?
I actually believe that Steve was in it for the money back in '76... but now I believe that money is in second place or maybe even thrid.
Do you actually believe Steve isn't in this for the money?
I think he is acting, nobody can have such opinions
Did anybody?ANYBODY?have an "App Store" or "Appstore" or "AppStore" before App le?
Yes, at least two companies filled trademark for them before Apple
Anyhow, it is worth noting that while selecting that box does allow you to install apps from any store, Apple would have to argue that it's the Amazon App Store that supplies the malware apps. Just because that box allows other malware-heavy app stores, doesn't mean Amazon's is. If the Amazon App Store is clean they have nothing to argue imo.
Apple are trying to demonstrate a possibility of future harm. It's complicated for them by the fact that the two services clearly serve different markets. Sort of like two companies, one selling weight loss pills and another selling weight gain pills.
The point is that if Amazon has any future problems then that would rebound on Apple, much like a problem with our hypothetical weight gain corp could impact a weight loss firm of the same name.
They don't necessarily need to demonstrate that Amazon have had problems, or will have problems - though it certainlly won't hurt if they can make a plausible case. This won't be an open/shut case though - it will likely go all the way to the Supreme Court in the US.
False. People have used "app" as short form for application forms (i.e. job app) and software years before NeXT ever existed.
I suppose if the Amazon Android AppStore were selling job application forms for androids that would be fair. Obviously Apple/NeXT has been the pioneer of the term in respect to software.
I actually believe that Steve was in it for the money back in '76... but now I believe that money is in second place or maybe even thrid.
Apple is a company so their primary motivation needs to be money because they would cease to exist without it. Steve's motivation however is most likely just the continuation of Apple as a company. Although Steve holds a lot of stock, I doubt he holds it for the investment potential (even if it is a good one).
Apple is a company so their primary motivation needs to be money because they would cease to exist without it. Steve's motivation however is most likely just the continuation of Apple as a company. Although Steve holds a lot of stock, I doubt he holds it for the investment potential (even if it is a good one).
Actually he doesn't hold all that much stock, his biggest stock holdings are in Disney from the merger with Pixar. It's precisely because he doesn't own all that much of Apple that he's not all that rich by SIlicon Valley Billionaire standards.