What you said in previous posts is completely irrelevant. On the day of the post in question you said the stock was going much farther down, I said it was going much farther up.
You were wrong.
I put a large amount of money on my belief in AAPL and was rewarded, I can only hope that you shorted the stock on your beliefs and were burned.
And you still haven't come up with a mobile voice/data plan that is cheaper than AT&T's. Which makes your assertions about Apple's pricing of the iPhone completely wrong.
Oh, and AT&T and Apple announced that the revenue sharing pricing model was no longer in effect. So you're wrong on that also.
the iPhone has sold less than 10 million units per year so far. The overall market for cellphones is 1 billion. Defining "hit" is relative.
How does an expensive, proprietary, closed-source OS deal a blow to another expensive, proprietary, closed-source OS from Microsoft? It doesn't. Get your head out of the sand.
Read up on Apple history please. Remember the introduction of the iPhone? iPod? iTunes? Huh? Yeah, all those things had nothing to do with their previous product map.
I'm not sure who the first cellphone manufacturer was, but it wasn't Apple.
Or maybe it's pancreatic cancer...? You know, the one he was diagnosed and treated for previously?
I always love a good logical discussion. Thank you.
Yes, the iPhone is not a hit because it hasn't yet reached some status of whatever. OK. If you say so.
How does an expensive, proprietary, closed-source OS deal a blow to another expensive, proprietary, closed-source OS from Microsoft? I don't know, by one outdoing the other? Oh wait, I see what you are saying, if it's proprietary it's automatically no good. Yea, OK. Open-source rules!
Yes, the iPhone, iPod, iTunes have no correlation with Apple's product sector. Non of these products are electronic hardware related, and yes Apple is not in the software design business. I see what you are saying.
Yes, Apple wasn't the first cellphone manufacturer. There you go, Mr. Eric Schmidt is hereby excused from any wrongdoing. There's nothing wrong with Mr. Eric Schmidt making a product that competes directly with a product of another company that he just happens to be a member of the board of. What was I thinking? That's perfectly acceptable.
Physical illness. Yes, my bad, I keep forgetting that the authoritative heads have brainwashed... er... excuse me, "proven" that physical illness have nothing to do with spiritual unrest.
I don't know, maybe you? You're the one that made the bizarre statement that Google has no business being in a particular industry. I didn't know that you were one of the arbiters of which business can operate in which industry.
I don't know, maybe you? You're the one that made the bizarre statement that Google has no business being in a particular industry. I didn't know that you were one of the arbiters of which business can operate in which industry.
I think Google, or anyone for that matter, should get into any industry they want. I doubt you are interested in seeing what I'm saying but I will try again.
If Eric Schmidt was planning on going into the cell phone market, he should have resigned from being an Apple board member the minute he found out Apple had plans to enter that market as well. It's not that complicated Jeff.
I think Google, or anyone for that matter, should get into any industry they want. I doubt you are interested in seeing what I'm saying but I will try again.
If Eric Schmidt was planning on going into the cell phone market, he should have resigned from being an Apple board member the minute he found out Apple had plans to enter that market as well. It's not that complicated Jeff.
If this is really what you meant, then my motion would be to suggest that you didn't know how to say what you meant in the first place. What you say here is completely unrelated to or even contradictory to what you said in post #8, and even more, how you said it.
Comments
You were wrong.
I put a large amount of money on my belief in AAPL and was rewarded, I can only hope that you shorted the stock on your beliefs and were burned.
And you still haven't come up with a mobile voice/data plan that is cheaper than AT&T's. Which makes your assertions about Apple's pricing of the iPhone completely wrong.
Oh, and AT&T and Apple announced that the revenue sharing pricing model was no longer in effect. So you're wrong on that also.
A hat trick of wrongs!
the iPhone has sold less than 10 million units per year so far. The overall market for cellphones is 1 billion. Defining "hit" is relative.
How does an expensive, proprietary, closed-source OS deal a blow to another expensive, proprietary, closed-source OS from Microsoft? It doesn't. Get your head out of the sand.
Read up on Apple history please. Remember the introduction of the iPhone? iPod? iTunes? Huh? Yeah, all those things had nothing to do with their previous product map.
I'm not sure who the first cellphone manufacturer was, but it wasn't Apple.
Or maybe it's pancreatic cancer...? You know, the one he was diagnosed and treated for previously?
I always love a good logical discussion. Thank you.
Yes, the iPhone is not a hit because it hasn't yet reached some status of whatever. OK. If you say so.
How does an expensive, proprietary, closed-source OS deal a blow to another expensive, proprietary, closed-source OS from Microsoft? I don't know, by one outdoing the other? Oh wait, I see what you are saying, if it's proprietary it's automatically no good. Yea, OK. Open-source rules!
Yes, the iPhone, iPod, iTunes have no correlation with Apple's product sector. Non of these products are electronic hardware related, and yes Apple is not in the software design business. I see what you are saying.
Yes, Apple wasn't the first cellphone manufacturer. There you go, Mr. Eric Schmidt is hereby excused from any wrongdoing. There's nothing wrong with Mr. Eric Schmidt making a product that competes directly with a product of another company that he just happens to be a member of the board of. What was I thinking? That's perfectly acceptable.
Physical illness. Yes, my bad, I keep forgetting that the authoritative heads have brainwashed... er... excuse me, "proven" that physical illness have nothing to do with spiritual unrest.
I see what you are saying. My bad!
Why? I know whining about it won't cause them to pack up and quit.
Who's whining?
Who's whining?
I don't know, maybe you? You're the one that made the bizarre statement that Google has no business being in a particular industry. I didn't know that you were one of the arbiters of which business can operate in which industry.
Oh, baloney. The phone OS benefits Google by enabling a standardized platform for Google products and advertising.
Nice one.
I don't know, maybe you? You're the one that made the bizarre statement that Google has no business being in a particular industry. I didn't know that you were one of the arbiters of which business can operate in which industry.
I think Google, or anyone for that matter, should get into any industry they want. I doubt you are interested in seeing what I'm saying but I will try again.
If Eric Schmidt was planning on going into the cell phone market, he should have resigned from being an Apple board member the minute he found out Apple had plans to enter that market as well. It's not that complicated Jeff.
I think Google, or anyone for that matter, should get into any industry they want. I doubt you are interested in seeing what I'm saying but I will try again.
If Eric Schmidt was planning on going into the cell phone market, he should have resigned from being an Apple board member the minute he found out Apple had plans to enter that market as well. It's not that complicated Jeff.
If this is really what you meant, then my motion would be to suggest that you didn't know how to say what you meant in the first place. What you say here is completely unrelated to or even contradictory to what you said in post #8, and even more, how you said it.