Personally, I like AI, so I try to always click on their Google Flash Advertising, because without it, AI wouldn't be here. I thank Google for funding these types of stories on AI. But I use a proxy server so AI can't allow Google to track me. That way I can support Google and Support their vendor, AI, without becoming a mere product, bought by Google and sold to them by AI.
.
So which country proxy do you use, and do you like seeing ads that are not from your location. The only down side to using a proxy especially one outside the US or your home country is information google present is location specific so if really wanted to find something then google may not show it or bury it pages back.
Personally I use Saft with Safari and just block ads, and use littlesnitch to block google analytics from phoning home to them about my viewing habits
It doesn't occur to you that there is any possible motive for this stuff other than just money?
.
The line of reasoning I replied to suggested that AI was irresponsible for passing on, without sufficient qualification, this particular analyst's work. I disagree. I think that AI is acting responsibly. I'm sorry if that did not come through clearly.
Maestro is right (above) but that doesn't preclude additional motivations for AppleInsider.
Most of us have conflicts of interest inherent in our work (faster, better, cheaper, bigger, more innovative, tried and true...). The bottom dollar, I believe, is as Maestro describes, but I suspect that the AI editorial department strives for integrity, timeliness, and value for its audience, for salaciousness, alone, can drive away business.
As for what Apple bought, I think it's one of those... whaddaya call it... SONY.
Regardless of the veracity of the story ( it is generally in the ballpark with regards to what the $3.9B was spent). Here is an amuzing report on what happens when cheap manufacturers try and compete with the iPad on price.
They had to use a resistive display because Apple - one of the best financed companies in the world, one of the biggest - has the capacitive market sown up.
I think we all should file a FTC and SEC complaints about her.
I see nothing wrong with the original report. People here may have worked out that the $3.9B must be displays, she is making this known to a wider audience. It is a *very* important story. It means that small manufacturers cannot compete with Apple as they have to pay more for their screens ( maybe twice as much) and Apple can undercut the market with a cheap entry device, soaking up the lower end of the market while maintaining margin at the higher end. The iPod strategy.
This women has no clue about Apple, what do you think she is saying about companies which do not have people like this group following them and giving insight into what they are doing. This person is dangerous to the investment community. She making people think they should be investing in the Display companies, not that is not a bad idea, but the $4B is going to displays, memory, batteries and Camera since those are all very strategic to apples plans.
Actually my guess would be that it is all for displays. They are not competing to be the best in camera, and have already locked down some flash and RAM. ( This is extra). Batteries I dont know, seems that Apple gets more battery life using the OS, and doesnt have to concern itself with the best in class battery. Whats emphasised in their tech notes is not the charge on the battery but how the OS copes.
My guess is that Apple's "trajectory" is also "stronger" than Tiffany, Rolex and Rolls Royce.
Why does anybody care, unless they are choosing between investing in carmakers or investing in jewelry manufacturers or investing in gadget sellers?
Ok, look at the percentages of revenue which comes from China. I sincerely doubt that China will provide 100% of Apple's growth - that would mean that they would fall back in unit terms elsewhere.
however the Android market is huge in China - this is Apple's chance. With that, and an iPhone on multiple carriers in the US I would be certain of a market share reversal for Android in those markets. Apple just need to meet demand.
What a horrible, negative view of the world you portray here. If I believed this stuff, I'd probably have to go kill myself.
Well don't kill yourself, that would be stupid. However his view isn't all that extreme. One of the biggest reasons we don't have subscriptions on the iPad right now is that Apple does not want to give out personal information to the magazines. Information that isusedin conjunction with advertisers to target you.
Quote:
It doesn't occur to you that there is any possible motive for this stuff other than just money?
Money is the whole point of advertising. That should have been learned in the sixth grade.
Quote:
How terribly sad and empty your life must be.
It is not sad to face reality, rather it is rational and defensive. There is an incredible amount of money spent on trying to get you to part with your cash in this country. What is sad is that it is mostly lost money and does nothing for the economy.
Well don't kill yourself, that would be stupid. However his view isn't all that extreme. One of the biggest reasons we don't have subscriptions on the iPad right now is that Apple does not want to give out personal information to the magazines. Information that isusedin conjunction with advertisers to target you.
Money is the whole point of advertising. That should have been learned in the sixth grade.
It is not sad to face reality, rather it is rational and defensive. There is an incredible amount of money spent on trying to get you to part with your cash in this country. What is sad is that it is mostly lost money and does nothing for the economy.
So what has any of this to do with the actual report? What exactly do you have a problem with in the report besides the fact you think it may actually help bring viewers to this site and keep it alive. Whats the cost to you, if AI makes more money,
Actually my guess would be that it is all for displays.
A portion of it yes, all of it no way.
Quote:
They are not competing to be the best in camera, and have already locked down some flash and RAM. ( This is extra). Batteries I dont know, seems that Apple gets more battery life using the OS, and doesnt have to concern itself with the best in class battery.
This is also a mistake, Apples batteries are pretty much best in their class. That doesn't discount the value of energy management, just that Apple seems to have access to some of the best batteries going.
Quote:
Whats emphasised in their tech notes is not the charge on the battery but how the OS copes.
Well yeah tout your programming ability to the tech world. It is good copy. However the battery and the A4 play a huge role here.
As to the split of that 3.9 billion I suspect much is going Samsungs way. Apple already uses a good percentage of their foundry capacity tight now. Plus Samsung is expanding that capacity. If you read between the lines you will deduce that Apple is part of the reason for that expansion.
In the end we are not likely to ever find out all the details. I do believe however that Apple intends to move lots of product into the market place this year. It will be interesting just for the viewing pleasure.
Actually my guess would be that it is all for displays. They are not competing to be the best in camera, and have already locked down some flash and RAM. ( This is extra). Batteries I dont know, seems that Apple gets more battery life using the OS, and doesnt have to concern itself with the best in class battery. Whats emphasised in their tech notes is not the charge on the battery but how the OS copes.
My thought was that it also may be toward a goal to corner the market on dual CDMA/GSM chips so that they can make a world phone that works on Verizon and the other CDMA networks as well as GSM more cheaply and power efficiently than other manufacturers.
Actually my guess would be that it is all for displays. They are not competing to be the best in camera, and have already locked down some flash and RAM. ( This is extra). Batteries I dont know, seems that Apple gets more battery life using the OS, and doesnt have to concern itself with the best in class battery. Whats emphasised in their tech notes is not the charge on the battery but how the OS copes.
I see nothing wrong with the original report. People here may have worked out that the $3.9B must be displays, she is making this known to a wider audience. It is a *very* important story. It means that small manufacturers cannot compete with Apple as they have to pay more for their screens ( maybe twice as much) and Apple can undercut the market with a cheap entry device, soaking up the lower end of the market while maintaining margin at the higher end. The iPod strategy.
Actually, I know for a fact it is not all displays and it is cameras and memory Apple is securing capacity not actually buying physical parts. Not that they need to do this since they are second largest purchaser of electronic parts in the world. They are just making sure they are first in line for any parts, not that others customers will not get the parts.
It well known in the industry that Apple does not always pay the lowest price for their parts, with that said, with Apple willing to pay more to secure supply suppliers are more than willing to sell to Apple before another customer. Although this does not always work in Apples favor since they do not always treat their supplier well.
Obviously only apple knows exactly what the $3.9B is paying for, however, some of the money is ear marked for increase or dedicated factory capacity. Very few suppliers of the various technologies have made serious capital investments to increase production output in the last two years, because of this, Apple as well as every other electronic gadget manufacturer were not able to build and ship as much product as they could. Everyone was on allocations last year. Manufacturers are still caution going into 2011 and are not real willing to increase factory output without assurances and so the $3.9B is probably more of an insurance policy than anything less.
In reality if that is what is occurring this could help everyone since suppliers of parts maybe willing to do things they would not have done without the money Apple through on the table.
I am dubious about the Samsung link because some of the $3.9 billion is going towards capital investment and Samsun have revenues of $117.4 billion - do they need it?
Actually, I know for a fact it is not all displays and it is cameras and memory Apple is securing capacity not actually buying physical parts. Not that they need to do this since they are second largest purchaser of electronic parts in the world. They are just making sure they are first in line for any parts, not that others customers will not get the parts.
Clearly with capital investment it allows the supplier to create more parts - so if Apple ever does change supplier, I am guessing the capital equipment stays. This will benefit other buyers, but they will be back of the queue.
I see this as kind of a futures market in components. The suppliers, and Apple, are no doubt locked in for a few years.
So what has any of this to do with the actual report?
It is of no value to the readers and is simply there to generate cash for the site.
Quote:
What exactly do you have a problem with in the report besides the fact you think it may actually help bring viewers to this site and keep it alive. Whats the cost to you, if AI makes more money,
The cost to me is loosing a site that I use to like! One that concentrated on Apple gadgets and rumors.
I don't have a problem with AI making money, in fact I want them too, after all bills are there to be paid. What I don't want to see is a bunch of crap articles that aren't relevant. Let's face it the earnings report and the professional screw ups are old news now.
The problem is there is very good news out there that AI has failed to report on. For example Samsung is set to run at the 32/28nm node. That should be big news on any Apple related site. Instead we have two days of crap reporting.
I guess it is a question of why you come to this site. I'd like to see a good mix of rumors and facts. AI use to be pretty good at this but things have really taken a sharp turn for tge worst especially with respect to article quality. In the end if you turn away enough people paying the bills becomes a problem.
Comments
Personally, I like AI, so I try to always click on their Google Flash Advertising, because without it, AI wouldn't be here. I thank Google for funding these types of stories on AI. But I use a proxy server so AI can't allow Google to track me. That way I can support Google and Support their vendor, AI, without becoming a mere product, bought by Google and sold to them by AI.
.
So which country proxy do you use, and do you like seeing ads that are not from your location. The only down side to using a proxy especially one outside the US or your home country is information google present is location specific so if really wanted to find something then google may not show it or bury it pages back.
Personally I use Saft with Safari and just block ads, and use littlesnitch to block google analytics from phoning home to them about my viewing habits
... or a secret volcanic lair.
...or jetpacks...definitely jetpacks.
It doesn't occur to you that there is any possible motive for this stuff other than just money?
.
The line of reasoning I replied to suggested that AI was irresponsible for passing on, without sufficient qualification, this particular analyst's work. I disagree. I think that AI is acting responsibly. I'm sorry if that did not come through clearly.
Most of us have conflicts of interest inherent in our work (faster, better, cheaper, bigger, more innovative, tried and true...). The bottom dollar, I believe, is as Maestro describes, but I suspect that the AI editorial department strives for integrity, timeliness, and value for its audience, for salaciousness, alone, can drive away business.
As for what Apple bought, I think it's one of those... whaddaya call it... SONY.
[how's that for sensational?)
Success,
NotScott
The most likely use of Apple's secret $3.9 billion long-term supply investment .
ALL supply contracts are Business Confidential and Proprietary. That is the civilian equivalent of Secret.
Do you guys actual pay editors?? Or is that a secret?
http://seekingalpha.com/article/9680...s-price-target
AI should ban any information she publish as fictional
BTW she graduate in 2000 U of Wisconsin business school and holds a VP position at Morgan Stanley.
I am sorry if you going top follow tech company maybe you should have technology background.
I think this guy found her motivations, i am betting Morgan Stanley investors are shorting the stock every time she make any statement about apple
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28159562/Appl..._Stanley_Again
I think we all should file a FTC and SEC complaints about her.
http://www.electricpig.co.uk/2010/10...k-to-the-shop/
They had to use a resistive display because Apple - one of the best financed companies in the world, one of the biggest - has the capacitive market sown up.
okay this guy sums it up for us
http://seekingalpha.com/article/9680...s-price-target
AI should ban any information she publish as fictional
BTW she graduate in 2000 U of Wisconsin business school and holds a VP position at Morgan Stanley.
I am sorry if you going top follow tech company maybe you should have technology background.
I think this guy found her motivations, i am betting Morgan Stanley investors are shorting the stock every time she make any statement about apple
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28159562/Appl..._Stanley_Again
I think we all should file a FTC and SEC complaints about her.
I see nothing wrong with the original report. People here may have worked out that the $3.9B must be displays, she is making this known to a wider audience. It is a *very* important story. It means that small manufacturers cannot compete with Apple as they have to pay more for their screens ( maybe twice as much) and Apple can undercut the market with a cheap entry device, soaking up the lower end of the market while maintaining margin at the higher end. The iPod strategy.
This women has no clue about Apple, what do you think she is saying about companies which do not have people like this group following them and giving insight into what they are doing. This person is dangerous to the investment community. She making people think they should be investing in the Display companies, not that is not a bad idea, but the $4B is going to displays, memory, batteries and Camera since those are all very strategic to apples plans.
Actually my guess would be that it is all for displays. They are not competing to be the best in camera, and have already locked down some flash and RAM. ( This is extra). Batteries I dont know, seems that Apple gets more battery life using the OS, and doesnt have to concern itself with the best in class battery. Whats emphasised in their tech notes is not the charge on the battery but how the OS copes.
Built-in 25-watt-hour rechargeable lithium-polymer battery
Up to 10 hours of surfing the web on Wi-Fi, watching video, or listening to music
Up to 9 hours of surfing the web using 3G data network
Charging via power adapter or USB to computer system
[IMG]
My guess is that Apple's "trajectory" is also "stronger" than Tiffany, Rolex and Rolls Royce.
Why does anybody care, unless they are choosing between investing in carmakers or investing in jewelry manufacturers or investing in gadget sellers?
Ok, look at the percentages of revenue which comes from China. I sincerely doubt that China will provide 100% of Apple's growth - that would mean that they would fall back in unit terms elsewhere.
however the Android market is huge in China - this is Apple's chance. With that, and an iPhone on multiple carriers in the US I would be certain of a market share reversal for Android in those markets. Apple just need to meet demand.
What a horrible, negative view of the world you portray here. If I believed this stuff, I'd probably have to go kill myself.
Well don't kill yourself, that would be stupid. However his view isn't all that extreme. One of the biggest reasons we don't have subscriptions on the iPad right now is that Apple does not want to give out personal information to the magazines. Information that isusedin conjunction with advertisers to target you.
It doesn't occur to you that there is any possible motive for this stuff other than just money?
Money is the whole point of advertising. That should have been learned in the sixth grade.
How terribly sad and empty your life must be.
It is not sad to face reality, rather it is rational and defensive. There is an incredible amount of money spent on trying to get you to part with your cash in this country. What is sad is that it is mostly lost money and does nothing for the economy.
Well don't kill yourself, that would be stupid. However his view isn't all that extreme. One of the biggest reasons we don't have subscriptions on the iPad right now is that Apple does not want to give out personal information to the magazines. Information that isusedin conjunction with advertisers to target you.
Money is the whole point of advertising. That should have been learned in the sixth grade.
It is not sad to face reality, rather it is rational and defensive. There is an incredible amount of money spent on trying to get you to part with your cash in this country. What is sad is that it is mostly lost money and does nothing for the economy.
So what has any of this to do with the actual report? What exactly do you have a problem with in the report besides the fact you think it may actually help bring viewers to this site and keep it alive. Whats the cost to you, if AI makes more money,
Actually my guess would be that it is all for displays.
A portion of it yes, all of it no way.
They are not competing to be the best in camera, and have already locked down some flash and RAM. ( This is extra). Batteries I dont know, seems that Apple gets more battery life using the OS, and doesnt have to concern itself with the best in class battery.
This is also a mistake, Apples batteries are pretty much best in their class. That doesn't discount the value of energy management, just that Apple seems to have access to some of the best batteries going.
Whats emphasised in their tech notes is not the charge on the battery but how the OS copes.
Well yeah tout your programming ability to the tech world. It is good copy. However the battery and the A4 play a huge role here.
As to the split of that 3.9 billion I suspect much is going Samsungs way. Apple already uses a good percentage of their foundry capacity tight now. Plus Samsung is expanding that capacity. If you read between the lines you will deduce that Apple is part of the reason for that expansion.
In the end we are not likely to ever find out all the details. I do believe however that Apple intends to move lots of product into the market place this year. It will be interesting just for the viewing pleasure.
Actually my guess would be that it is all for displays. They are not competing to be the best in camera, and have already locked down some flash and RAM. ( This is extra). Batteries I dont know, seems that Apple gets more battery life using the OS, and doesnt have to concern itself with the best in class battery. Whats emphasised in their tech notes is not the charge on the battery but how the OS copes.
My thought was that it also may be toward a goal to corner the market on dual CDMA/GSM chips so that they can make a world phone that works on Verizon and the other CDMA networks as well as GSM more cheaply and power efficiently than other manufacturers.
Actually my guess would be that it is all for displays. They are not competing to be the best in camera, and have already locked down some flash and RAM. ( This is extra). Batteries I dont know, seems that Apple gets more battery life using the OS, and doesnt have to concern itself with the best in class battery. Whats emphasised in their tech notes is not the charge on the battery but how the OS copes.
I see nothing wrong with the original report. People here may have worked out that the $3.9B must be displays, she is making this known to a wider audience. It is a *very* important story. It means that small manufacturers cannot compete with Apple as they have to pay more for their screens ( maybe twice as much) and Apple can undercut the market with a cheap entry device, soaking up the lower end of the market while maintaining margin at the higher end. The iPod strategy.
Actually, I know for a fact it is not all displays and it is cameras and memory Apple is securing capacity not actually buying physical parts. Not that they need to do this since they are second largest purchaser of electronic parts in the world. They are just making sure they are first in line for any parts, not that others customers will not get the parts.
It well known in the industry that Apple does not always pay the lowest price for their parts, with that said, with Apple willing to pay more to secure supply suppliers are more than willing to sell to Apple before another customer. Although this does not always work in Apples favor since they do not always treat their supplier well.
Obviously only apple knows exactly what the $3.9B is paying for, however, some of the money is ear marked for increase or dedicated factory capacity. Very few suppliers of the various technologies have made serious capital investments to increase production output in the last two years, because of this, Apple as well as every other electronic gadget manufacturer were not able to build and ship as much product as they could. Everyone was on allocations last year. Manufacturers are still caution going into 2011 and are not real willing to increase factory output without assurances and so the $3.9B is probably more of an insurance policy than anything less.
In reality if that is what is occurring this could help everyone since suppliers of parts maybe willing to do things they would not have done without the money Apple through on the table.
Actually, I know for a fact it is not all displays and it is cameras and memory Apple is securing capacity not actually buying physical parts. Not that they need to do this since they are second largest purchaser of electronic parts in the world. They are just making sure they are first in line for any parts, not that others customers will not get the parts.
Clearly with capital investment it allows the supplier to create more parts - so if Apple ever does change supplier, I am guessing the capital equipment stays. This will benefit other buyers, but they will be back of the queue.
I see this as kind of a futures market in components. The suppliers, and Apple, are no doubt locked in for a few years.
So what has any of this to do with the actual report?
It is of no value to the readers and is simply there to generate cash for the site.
What exactly do you have a problem with in the report besides the fact you think it may actually help bring viewers to this site and keep it alive. Whats the cost to you, if AI makes more money,
The cost to me is loosing a site that I use to like! One that concentrated on Apple gadgets and rumors.
I don't have a problem with AI making money, in fact I want them too, after all bills are there to be paid. What I don't want to see is a bunch of crap articles that aren't relevant. Let's face it the earnings report and the professional screw ups are old news now.
The problem is there is very good news out there that AI has failed to report on. For example Samsung is set to run at the 32/28nm node. That should be big news on any Apple related site. Instead we have two days of crap reporting.
I guess it is a question of why you come to this site. I'd like to see a good mix of rumors and facts. AI use to be pretty good at this but things have really taken a sharp turn for tge worst especially with respect to article quality. In the end if you turn away enough people paying the bills becomes a problem.