``While pundits and analysts like to focus attention on how Apple is now appears incapable of growing at the same historical pace simply due to the laws of physics....''
Please just don't include subject matter you clearly don't grasp, especially when it's insulting to those that do: ``...due to the laws of physics...'' is obnoxious.
Money is a man-made construct, not a universal physics construct.
P.S. The rest of the Op-Ed is solid.
Yeah I was thinking the same thing, it's actually the law of economics. However having said that there could be a tenuous case for making it a physical law in the sense that ultimately and fundamentally, the economic laws are a construct of human consciousness which is manifested as electric and chemical neurotransmitters which themselves obey quantum laws, ergo physical laws.
"While its certainly not the end of what Apple's spending its money on, a third significant expenditure that the company is making as an investment in its future is its payments to software developers."
Paying developers is not any part of *spending cash* or investment. I fail to see how it can be lumped in the same discussion as capex. This inclusion spoils what is otherwise an interesting article.
It makes sense as Apple did not have to pay developers to develop Apps for their platform, developers came and were rewarded by making sales, contrast that with Microsoft and RIM who subsidised developers to make applications for them as they could not sustain incomes based on sales alone.
I need computers. Computers for 3D graphics, for software development, and for engineering. So I hope they invest on making computers, because the Mac is the best computer ever. I'm not interested in any other Apple product, what I need from them is computers, and just computers. If they continue to neglect this segment, I'll go away from Apple, simple as that (and with sadness, because, as I said, the Mac is the best computer ever).
I don't have to tell you why as my opinion is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. I find unjailbroken iOS to be stale and boring. So the **** what. I'll never harp on that or dislike you or others for feeling differently. It is a great OS and will only get better and I'm looking forward to WWDC. It is easily the best all around mobile experience and so far that isn't completely challenged and may never be completely challenged as far as quality and ecosystem go.
Why do you care so much that I find iOS stale? What does my opinion do to your life?
What life? He has 10k posts on an apple fanboy discussion forum for Christ's sake. :rolleyes:
Worse, he's apparently a dumbass as evidenced by commenting on a post about P/E ratios without any understanding of market dynamics. A year ago, AppleInsider published a prognostication that Apple stock was underpriced due to its P/E ratio and a key analyst was calling for >$1000/share price. What happened? AAPL stock collapsed by 40%. There are more things driving share price and market cap than P/E ratios and regardless of ones "time horizon" any long term stock price predictions are simply an analyst showing their ass.
Conclusion: he's likely an angry 15 year old with no friends. Don't be mad at him, pity him.
The Store Number in China are way too low, even with doubling that number. I am hoping there will be more in 2014. Or it may be the case they simply cant build them fast enough due to Apple's requirements.
The datacenter, are finally catching up, but they are still running way behind if they want to complete on the web, Compared to Microsoft, Amazon, and of coz Google. They will need at least a few more datacenter, in Europe and Asia.
Comparing to Google where they have their whole software on server stack build on severs with commodity parts, Apple are buying proper Enterprise kits with enterprise software. I don't know if that is a good thing, Not only it is hugely expensive, Apple could have learned a lot of web back-end engineering by doing it themselves.
I continue to think Apple are running themselves too thin in the software department. If they were against Microsoft they are more then fine. But they are against Google, which possibly hold all the best of the best engineers on the planet to work for them. And they out number Apple's software engineering by quite a large margin.
I don't have to tell you why as my opinion is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. I find unjailbroken iOS to be stale and boring. So the **** what. I'll never harp on that or dislike you or others for feeling differently. It is a great OS and will only get better and I'm looking forward to WWDC. It is easily the best all around mobile experience and so far that isn't completely challenged and may never be completely challenged as far as quality and ecosystem go.
Why do you care so much that I find iOS stale? What does my opinion do to your life?
We're all adults here (I think).
If you make an assertion like the one you did here, you should expect to get called out on it to back it up.
Let me translate then. An Apple television set would have to be more than a screen. Apple would need to completely redefine how we get full content. And I feel that apple is the ONLY company as of right now who could do so. And I think the world would benefit from such.
Jesus Christ.
When Apple introduced the iPod, it did not have the iTunes Store. When it introduced the iPhone, it did not have the App Store. The only real radical phone content-related feature the iPhone debuted with was visual voicemail. All of the real 'content' happened in due course.
Moreover, Apple makes little or nothing from its content, and makes most of its money in hardware. The content is only there to create an ecosystem as an exit barrier for the customer.
That is indeed an odd metaphor. Perhaps it should have been the laws of economics. Speaking of which, economies are considered by a growing number to be a force of nature.
More like the laws of Biology regarding the dynamics of population growth with limits on resources.
Or people need to be allowed to have opinions you don't like and you need to get over yourself.
Why can't I, as an individual being with individual opinions that have no power over anyone, feel that iOS is stale?
The "staleness" of iOS has become something of a meme among some vociferous defenders of all things Android.
It makes you come across as a paid blogger, following a script, surrounded by peers doing the same in a building somewhere in Mumbai or wherever it is Samsung hires these people from.
That's just the way it is, if you are not one of those people then you seem like someone who has been brainwashed by them.
I need computers. Computers for 3D graphics, for software development, and for engineering. So I hope they invest on making computers, because the Mac is the best computer ever. I'm not interested in any other Apple product, what I need from them is computers, and just computers. If they continue to neglect this segment, I'll go away from Apple, simple as that (and with sadness, because, as I said, the Mac is the best computer ever).
It's funny, because they have the best laptop money can buy, they have the best AIO money can buy and they also have the best ultrabook money can buy.
Most likely in 2 months they will also have the best workstation money can buy.
Based on this, I ask:
If Apple gives preferential treatment to iOS but still comes with those products that are the best, why complain and say that you will go elsewhere? That's just something that only a stupid person would say. Don't blame me for pointing the obvious, blame yourself.
If people want to nitpick, they'll always find a reason to do so. (agree) Apple shouldn't waste its time trying to please tabloid journalists who write trash to get hits. Let's go through the accusations leveled against Apple:
- Labor practices: We've been hearing iHaters criticize Apple for years about using "slave labor." On articles that raked Apple over the coals over labor practices at its contractors' facilities, commenters vehemently declared that they would never buy another Apple product until they moved all production to the US. The funny thing is there wasn't a murmur about dozens of other CE companies using those same slave labor factories. (agree) For that matter, the computer that they were using to post such nonsense was probably built in the same "slave labor" factories that they're vilifying Apple for using. (agree)
- Tax avoidance: Apple didn't write the book on tax avoidance. They're just following it. Surpisingly, though, the media has been pretty fair to Apple. As an Apple shareholder, while I don't take issue with Apple's tax avoidance practices, I applaud the media for refraining from the instinct of singling out Apple. (agree)
- Patents: Many love to call Apple a patent troll (huh??), conveniently ignoring what a patent troll actually is-an entity whose business revolves around buying up patents with no intent to create a product/service using them but instead, to sue other companies over said patents. Apple has not been in this business. And also, people refuse to acknowledge the fact that an impartial judge ruled in Apple's favor in the cases where Apple won (and also where they lost). And Apple has never sought an injunction over a standards-essential patent. Google bought Motorola and has used standards-essential patents to sue Apple, which has caught the ire of European antitrust regulators. For all the criticism of Apple's patent suits, Apple has yet to catch the attention of antitrust authorities.
You claim that greedy profiteering doesn't go well with the public. Do you know what Microsoft's gross margin is? According to Yahoo! Finance, it's 75% while Apple's gross margin is 40%. Whose doing greedy profiteering? Are you happy about padding Microsoft's enormous profits whenever you buy a PC or buy Microsoft Office?
Nice post that I agree with in many ways, but a bit off-target claiming that Google has used SEP's to sue Apple, a common misconception among some members here. In actual fact Google has never sued any company in the world over SEP's. The cases you've confused were all filed by an independent Motorola way before Google even made their initial offer to purchase Moto. Google's worst offense regarding those is letting them play out. I don't personally doubt for a moment that if Apple and Microsoft would agree to drop their Motorola counter-claims that Google would be willing to put those old lawsuits to rest.
I think it just makes some folks happier to imagine Google is just as aggressive in asserting IP claims as some of the "other techs", making their own favorite company's actions more acceptable. Fortunately for the entire industry Google shows a lot or restraint, with just one single IP infringement action in play (British Telecom) and the only one in the 15 year history of Google.
If you make an assertion like the one you did here, you should expect to get called out on it to back it up.
I notice that you didn't.
Because it is absolutely unimportant and rather superficial. I do not like the sharing mechanism. I do not like not being able to set defaults. But my feelings of it being stale have nothing to do with those.
No. My (very superficial and absolutely meaningless and not worthy of constant replies and incessant trolling by the forum moderator) reason for feeling iOS is stale is due to the way the home screen works.
That
Is
It
That static grid doesn't do it for me.
Other than that I have zero true problems with iOS. But that's not enough apparently. Apparently I need to discuss my feelings and peculiarities in detail or be labeled a troll for no fuckin reason.
Nice post that I agree with in many ways, but a bit off-target claiming that Google has used SEP's to sue Apple, a common misconception among some members here. In actual fact Google has never sued any company in the world over SEP's. The cases you've confused were all filed by an independent Motorola way before Google even made their initial offer to purchase Moto. Google's worst offense regarding those is letting them play out. I don't personally doubt for a moment that if Apple and Microsoft would agree to drop their Motorola counter-claims that Google would be willing to put those old lawsuits to rest.
I think it just makes some folks happier to imagine Google is just as aggressive in asserting IP claims as some of the "other techs", making their own favorite company's actions more acceptable. Fortunately for the entire industry Google shows a lot or restraint, with just one single IP infringement action in play (British Telecom) and the only one in the 15 year history of Google.
And I personally doubt that Google would have bought Motorola if they didn't believe they could use them to get past the infringement lawsuits.
Separating Google from Motorola is just wordplay as far as I'm concerned. Google owns the company, therefore Google can stop the lawsuits with a phone call. The cases continue and that is down to Google.
It's a fair tactic, but let's stop painting Google as whiter than white. It does you no credit.
Obviously, you can imagine this is exactly what Apple is trying to do right now. They keep having breakthroughs, they keep coming up with solutions for common problems and they keep refining whatever they are working on. Updated versions of iphone/ipad/ipod is simply a slow chess game they are playing with Samsung. The real goodies are in-house at Apple being perfected as we speak.
Now, before any major launch of new products/categories, you would imagine Apple being in hyperdrive in order to get every last piece right. This would eventually lead to a silence/quiet period. This is exactly where we are right now, we are on the brink of the release of a new major innovation / product category. This is exactly why development of software/hardware/product cycle releases are slowing to a halt. They are about to blow our minds yet again.
If you consider what major successes Apple has had, they are always linked to a human need or want. People have a desire to listen to music and Apple came up with the best way to not only have it portable but also to acquire it. Productive computers are also necessary and Apple makes the best hardware aesthetically and best operating system. Communication is necessary and they came up with the best way to interact with a mobile communications device.
For there to be a major development in the works, there similarly has to be a major human want or need for it to satisfy. It wasn't immediately obvious in the case of the iPad what it could be used for but once people started using iPads, the market was clearer.
Apple's biggest successes have been ventures into a new market because they tend to be large deviations from the status quo. So what existing human need is there that requires a large deviation from what currently satisfies it?
One important need is energy. Batteries are in loads of things but they aren't very good and they need to be sorted out before wearable computing is a reality. This goes beyond electronics too and is where the likes of Tesla is making an impact. Biological-electronic interaction is a big step but a necessary one if the human-computer interface is to be improved.
I don't think they are necessarily working on anything major just now. The business is however being run in a way that they plan to be around for a long time and I have no doubt they will play an important role in whatever major developments arise in their area of expertise. The world is a better place with Apple in it and their business operation allows them to stay here.
And I personally doubt that Google would have bought Motorola if they didn't believe they could use them to get past the infringement lawsuits.
Separating Google from Motorola is just wordplay as far as I'm concerned. Google owns the company, therefore Google can stop the lawsuits with a phone call. The cases continue and that is down to Google.
It's a fair tactic, but let's stop painting Google as whiter than white. It does you no credit.
I said generally the same thing didn't I? Of course Google could put an end to those old lawsuits. . . and Apple and Microsoft could offer to remove the counter-claim stumbling blocks that prevent just such a withdrawal.
Don't you find it telling that Google hasn't used Moto's IP to attack any of their competitors nor to file new IP claims in those old suits? In essence Google has stopped the lawsuits. IMO that tends to support the widely held belief that Google's purchase was for defensive and not offensive purposes. I doubt you disagree, but if you do then speak up..
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
``While pundits and analysts like to focus attention on how Apple is now appears incapable of growing at the same historical pace simply due to the laws of physics....''
Please just don't include subject matter you clearly don't grasp, especially when it's insulting to those that do: ``...due to the laws of physics...'' is obnoxious.
Money is a man-made construct, not a universal physics construct.
P.S. The rest of the Op-Ed is solid.
Yeah I was thinking the same thing, it's actually the law of economics. However having said that there could be a tenuous case for making it a physical law in the sense that ultimately and fundamentally, the economic laws are a construct of human consciousness which is manifested as electric and chemical neurotransmitters which themselves obey quantum laws, ergo physical laws.
Which can be read at his blog:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
"While its certainly not the end of what Apple's spending its money on, a third significant expenditure that the company is making as an investment in its future is its payments to software developers."
Paying developers is not any part of *spending cash* or investment. I fail to see how it can be lumped in the same discussion as capex. This inclusion spoils what is otherwise an interesting article.
It makes sense as Apple did not have to pay developers to develop Apps for their platform, developers came and were rewarded by making sales, contrast that with Microsoft and RIM who subsidised developers to make applications for them as they could not sustain incomes based on sales alone.
I need computers. Computers for 3D graphics, for software development, and for engineering. So I hope they invest on making computers, because the Mac is the best computer ever. I'm not interested in any other Apple product, what I need from them is computers, and just computers. If they continue to neglect this segment, I'll go away from Apple, simple as that (and with sadness, because, as I said, the Mac is the best computer ever).
What life? He has 10k posts on an apple fanboy discussion forum for Christ's sake. :rolleyes:
Worse, he's apparently a dumbass as evidenced by commenting on a post about P/E ratios without any understanding of market dynamics. A year ago, AppleInsider published a prognostication that Apple stock was underpriced due to its P/E ratio and a key analyst was calling for >$1000/share price. What happened? AAPL stock collapsed by 40%. There are more things driving share price and market cap than P/E ratios and regardless of ones "time horizon" any long term stock price predictions are simply an analyst showing their ass.
Conclusion: he's likely an angry 15 year old with no friends. Don't be mad at him, pity him.
The Store Number in China are way too low, even with doubling that number. I am hoping there will be more in 2014. Or it may be the case they simply cant build them fast enough due to Apple's requirements.
The datacenter, are finally catching up, but they are still running way behind if they want to complete on the web, Compared to Microsoft, Amazon, and of coz Google. They will need at least a few more datacenter, in Europe and Asia.
Comparing to Google where they have their whole software on server stack build on severs with commodity parts, Apple are buying proper Enterprise kits with enterprise software. I don't know if that is a good thing, Not only it is hugely expensive, Apple could have learned a lot of web back-end engineering by doing it themselves.
I continue to think Apple are running themselves too thin in the software department. If they were against Microsoft they are more then fine. But they are against Google, which possibly hold all the best of the best engineers on the planet to work for them. And they out number Apple's software engineering by quite a large margin.
And the article... nothing more then a Recap.
We're all adults here (I think).
If you make an assertion like the one you did here, you should expect to get called out on it to back it up.
I notice that you didn't.
When Apple introduced the iPod, it did not have the iTunes Store. When it introduced the iPhone, it did not have the App Store. The only real radical phone content-related feature the iPhone debuted with was visual voicemail. All of the real 'content' happened in due course.
Moreover, Apple makes little or nothing from its content, and makes most of its money in hardware. The content is only there to create an ecosystem as an exit barrier for the customer.
(No need to bring God into it.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
That is indeed an odd metaphor. Perhaps it should have been the laws of economics. Speaking of which, economies are considered by a growing number to be a force of nature.
More like the laws of Biology regarding the dynamics of population growth with limits on resources.
Quote:
Originally Posted by realitychecks
Or people need to be allowed to have opinions you don't like and you need to get over yourself.
Why can't I, as an individual being with individual opinions that have no power over anyone, feel that iOS is stale?
The "staleness" of iOS has become something of a meme among some vociferous defenders of all things Android.
It makes you come across as a paid blogger, following a script, surrounded by peers doing the same in a building somewhere in Mumbai or wherever it is Samsung hires these people from.
That's just the way it is, if you are not one of those people then you seem like someone who has been brainwashed by them.
So what is not "stale" about Jellybean?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecs
I need computers. Computers for 3D graphics, for software development, and for engineering. So I hope they invest on making computers, because the Mac is the best computer ever. I'm not interested in any other Apple product, what I need from them is computers, and just computers. If they continue to neglect this segment, I'll go away from Apple, simple as that (and with sadness, because, as I said, the Mac is the best computer ever).
It's funny, because they have the best laptop money can buy, they have the best AIO money can buy and they also have the best ultrabook money can buy.
Most likely in 2 months they will also have the best workstation money can buy.
Based on this, I ask:
If Apple gives preferential treatment to iOS but still comes with those products that are the best, why complain and say that you will go elsewhere? That's just something that only a stupid person would say. Don't blame me for pointing the obvious, blame yourself.
Originally Posted by realitychecks
In my opinion it is.
Your opinion is wrong. Oh well.
The fact that I think iOS is stale doesn't matter at all to me.
Absolutely hilarious, kiddo. Just keep making my point for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vvswarup
If people want to nitpick, they'll always find a reason to do so. (agree) Apple shouldn't waste its time trying to please tabloid journalists who write trash to get hits. Let's go through the accusations leveled against Apple:
- Labor practices: We've been hearing iHaters criticize Apple for years about using "slave labor." On articles that raked Apple over the coals over labor practices at its contractors' facilities, commenters vehemently declared that they would never buy another Apple product until they moved all production to the US. The funny thing is there wasn't a murmur about dozens of other CE companies using those same slave labor factories. (agree) For that matter, the computer that they were using to post such nonsense was probably built in the same "slave labor" factories that they're vilifying Apple for using. (agree)
- Tax avoidance: Apple didn't write the book on tax avoidance. They're just following it. Surpisingly, though, the media has been pretty fair to Apple. As an Apple shareholder, while I don't take issue with Apple's tax avoidance practices, I applaud the media for refraining from the instinct of singling out Apple. (agree)
- Patents: Many love to call Apple a patent troll (huh??), conveniently ignoring what a patent troll actually is-an entity whose business revolves around buying up patents with no intent to create a product/service using them but instead, to sue other companies over said patents. Apple has not been in this business. And also, people refuse to acknowledge the fact that an impartial judge ruled in Apple's favor in the cases where Apple won (and also where they lost). And Apple has never sought an injunction over a standards-essential patent. Google bought Motorola and has used standards-essential patents to sue Apple, which has caught the ire of European antitrust regulators. For all the criticism of Apple's patent suits, Apple has yet to catch the attention of antitrust authorities.
You claim that greedy profiteering doesn't go well with the public. Do you know what Microsoft's gross margin is? According to Yahoo! Finance, it's 75% while Apple's gross margin is 40%. Whose doing greedy profiteering? Are you happy about padding Microsoft's enormous profits whenever you buy a PC or buy Microsoft Office?
Nice post that I agree with in many ways, but a bit off-target claiming that Google has used SEP's to sue Apple, a common misconception among some members here. In actual fact Google has never sued any company in the world over SEP's. The cases you've confused were all filed by an independent Motorola way before Google even made their initial offer to purchase Moto. Google's worst offense regarding those is letting them play out. I don't personally doubt for a moment that if Apple and Microsoft would agree to drop their Motorola counter-claims that Google would be willing to put those old lawsuits to rest.
I think it just makes some folks happier to imagine Google is just as aggressive in asserting IP claims as some of the "other techs", making their own favorite company's actions more acceptable. Fortunately for the entire industry Google shows a lot or restraint, with just one single IP infringement action in play (British Telecom) and the only one in the 15 year history of Google.
Holy shit. The AI moderator is truly trolling me.
Because it is absolutely unimportant and rather superficial. I do not like the sharing mechanism. I do not like not being able to set defaults. But my feelings of it being stale have nothing to do with those.
No. My (very superficial and absolutely meaningless and not worthy of constant replies and incessant trolling by the forum moderator) reason for feeling iOS is stale is due to the way the home screen works.
That
Is
It
That static grid doesn't do it for me.
Other than that I have zero true problems with iOS. But that's not enough apparently. Apparently I need to discuss my feelings and peculiarities in detail or be labeled a troll for no fuckin reason.
Originally Posted by realitychecks
Holy shit. The AI moderator is truly trolling me.
Just stop lying. That's all I care about.
Find me a lie and I will not post the lie again.
I will, however, continue to have the opinion I have on iOS until iOS changes it. Being mean won't make me change it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Nice post that I agree with in many ways, but a bit off-target claiming that Google has used SEP's to sue Apple, a common misconception among some members here. In actual fact Google has never sued any company in the world over SEP's. The cases you've confused were all filed by an independent Motorola way before Google even made their initial offer to purchase Moto. Google's worst offense regarding those is letting them play out. I don't personally doubt for a moment that if Apple and Microsoft would agree to drop their Motorola counter-claims that Google would be willing to put those old lawsuits to rest.
I think it just makes some folks happier to imagine Google is just as aggressive in asserting IP claims as some of the "other techs", making their own favorite company's actions more acceptable. Fortunately for the entire industry Google shows a lot or restraint, with just one single IP infringement action in play (British Telecom) and the only one in the 15 year history of Google.
And I personally doubt that Google would have bought Motorola if they didn't believe they could use them to get past the infringement lawsuits.
Separating Google from Motorola is just wordplay as far as I'm concerned. Google owns the company, therefore Google can stop the lawsuits with a phone call. The cases continue and that is down to Google.
It's a fair tactic, but let's stop painting Google as whiter than white. It does you no credit.
If you consider what major successes Apple has had, they are always linked to a human need or want. People have a desire to listen to music and Apple came up with the best way to not only have it portable but also to acquire it. Productive computers are also necessary and Apple makes the best hardware aesthetically and best operating system. Communication is necessary and they came up with the best way to interact with a mobile communications device.
For there to be a major development in the works, there similarly has to be a major human want or need for it to satisfy. It wasn't immediately obvious in the case of the iPad what it could be used for but once people started using iPads, the market was clearer.
Apple's biggest successes have been ventures into a new market because they tend to be large deviations from the status quo. So what existing human need is there that requires a large deviation from what currently satisfies it?
One important need is energy. Batteries are in loads of things but they aren't very good and they need to be sorted out before wearable computing is a reality. This goes beyond electronics too and is where the likes of Tesla is making an impact. Biological-electronic interaction is a big step but a necessary one if the human-computer interface is to be improved.
I don't think they are necessarily working on anything major just now. The business is however being run in a way that they plan to be around for a long time and I have no doubt they will play an important role in whatever major developments arise in their area of expertise. The world is a better place with Apple in it and their business operation allows them to stay here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayz
And I personally doubt that Google would have bought Motorola if they didn't believe they could use them to get past the infringement lawsuits.
Separating Google from Motorola is just wordplay as far as I'm concerned. Google owns the company, therefore Google can stop the lawsuits with a phone call. The cases continue and that is down to Google.
It's a fair tactic, but let's stop painting Google as whiter than white. It does you no credit.
I said generally the same thing didn't I? Of course Google could put an end to those old lawsuits. . . and Apple and Microsoft could offer to remove the counter-claim stumbling blocks that prevent just such a withdrawal.
Don't you find it telling that Google hasn't used Moto's IP to attack any of their competitors nor to file new IP claims in those old suits? In essence Google has stopped the lawsuits. IMO that tends to support the widely held belief that Google's purchase was for defensive and not offensive purposes. I doubt you disagree, but if you do then speak up..