Apple reportedly bought Color's talent, but not the company

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 38


    Originally Posted by George Howard View Post

    Then do you agree with the origi8nal poster that the low amount of traffic here is due to the poor editorial content?


     


    I see people complaining far more about site design and forum learning curve (from our old one on vBulletin) than editorial content. We'll get people signing up just to correct the content if it's wrong, even, so they care about the content enough to be here more, not less.

  • Reply 22 of 38

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GuyR View Post


    As a side note, I am surprised that no one from the British Royal Air Force hasn't sued the company for use of their roundel which they put on their planes, as this company's logo.



     


    I was wondering the same... but (being in France) about the French Air Force which used a tri-colour roundel some years before the RAF; although the colours were reversed with the center being blue.

  • Reply 23 of 38

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    lol.


     



     


    Apple's down too, but not $68 a share!



     


    Apple is 3X larger, so the difference is smaller than you think.


     


    Apple down 2%  (12Billion)  


    GOOG down 9% (20Billion)


     


    Or in other words... the 2 are down almost 4 Alcoa's

  • Reply 24 of 38
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    Then do you agree with the origi8nal poster that the low amount of traffic here is due to the poor editorial content?

    I don't know what the traffic is, much less relative to other sites with an Apple focus, so I have no comment on that.
  • Reply 25 of 38

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post





    I don't know what the traffic is, much less relative to other sites with an Apple focus, so I have no comment on that.


     


    Generally, MacRumors gets several times the comments on their news stories compared with this site. Often by a factor of 5.  And seemingly, they allow all sorts of opinions to be posted, but have fewer nasty putdown by regular posters.

  • Reply 26 of 38


    Originally Posted by George Howard View Post

    Generally, MacRumors gets several times the comments on their news stories compared with this site. Often by a factor of 5.  And seemingly, they allow all sorts of opinions to be posted, but have fewer nasty putdown by regular posters.


     


    MacRumors also ignores their own rules and yes, lets any lie, FUD, or troll post whatever they want anywhere they want without fact checking or reprisal. Good on us for not doing that.

  • Reply 27 of 38
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,609member
    harbinger wrote: »
    ]
    If you have not worked at a high tech company before (or law firm, a consultancy or investment firm), you might find this offensive or foreign. But it's not a novel concept.

    Correct. Sounds like a simple plan to wind down the company. You do good (hopefully) by your employees, you get some extra cash, you close loose ends with employment, and you don't have to deal with any of the associated HR issues. It also provides a way to separate expiring assets (when people find out the company is in trouble they start to flee) from ones that should hold value despite company circumstances.

    To get 20 people in a fixed development team that you can get moving with a project scope for a premium of 1-2 years salary isn't that bad. Headhunters charge as much as 50% of a year's salary, without the benefit of getting a team.
  • Reply 28 of 38
    desuserigndesuserign Posts: 1,316member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GuyR View Post


    As a side note, I am surprised that no one from the British Royal Air Force hasn't sued the company for use of their roundel which they put on their planes, as this company's logo.



    The RAF roundel is similar, but different design (the "C" bit,) colors, and proportions.


     


     


       

  • Reply 29 of 38

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    MacRumors also ignores their own rules and yes, lets any lie, FUD, or troll post whatever they want anywhere they want without fact checking or reprisal. Good on us for not doing that.





    I haven't seen lies there.  But I have indeed seen dissenting opinions here being shouted down with nasty replies by certrain of the regular posters.

  • Reply 30 of 38
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,609member
    Come on report on Google's devastating profit drop AI!

    Yeah... wow... that was a major screw up! Printer sent earnings out early... !

    Good time to buy either GOOG or AAPL, if you believe in the underlying companies. With Verizon's numbers it seems like Apple should have sold at least 30MM iPhones.
  • Reply 31 of 38

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post


     


    Apple is 3X larger, so the difference is smaller than you think.


     


    Apple down 2%  (12Billion)  


    GOOG down 9% (20Billion)


     


    Or in other words... the 2 are down almost 4 Alcoa's





    No matter what one's feelings are about these two companies, this is not good news for investors in general.

  • Reply 32 of 38
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    philboogie wrote: »
    Hmm, 'kay. But they did buy Particle, yes?

    The company or just the team?

    I didn't put any stock in Apple buying the Color company or service, it failed in the market. I thought maybe they had some good backend service, but if they had great talent but were saddled with a poor business plan, then just buy the rights to hire the talent and Apple is good.
  • Reply 33 of 38
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,778member
    MacRumors also ignores their own rules and yes, lets any lie, FUD, or troll post whatever they want anywhere they want without fact checking or reprisal. Good on us for not doing that.

    Agreed.
  • Reply 34 of 38
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member


    Quote:


    Originally Posted by George Howard View Post





    I think that your right about the  quality of the writing and editing here.  But I don't think that is the whole story to explain why this site has so few readers.  There seem to be a relatively small group of troublemakers who shout down any dissenting viewpoints (it should be obvious who they are) and that discourages new and repeat readers.  They take extreme postions, and if anybody disagrees with them, they get lambasted.  I think that is the main problem here.



    Different viewpoints should be encouraged, but if anybody fails to tow the party line, they get the shaft!


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by George Howard View Post


     


    Then do you agree with the origi8nal poster that the low amount of traffic here is due to the poor editorial content?



     


    I can't believe you're complaining about the writing and editing - look within, brother. "Your right"? extra spaces? "origi8nal"? Are you serious?

  • Reply 35 of 38
    Apple may be offering long term contracts to the employees, as well as paying color to break any contracts the employees are already in. I'm not a lawyer, but things such as non-competes and fixed-term contracts come to mind.

    Color now has to spend money and effort to replace the team if they want to continue moving forward.
  • Reply 36 of 38
    jeffdm wrote: »
    philboogie wrote: »
    Hmm, 'kay. But they did buy Particle, yes?

    The company or just the team?

    I didn't put any stock in Apple buying the Color company or service, it failed in the market. I thought maybe they had some good backend service, but if they had great talent but were saddled with a poor business plan, then just buy the rights to hire the talent and Apple is good.

    The company, although it looks like it doesn't really matter: the employees move over to Apple and there doesn't seem to be any IP in the company. Well, obviously I thing, when it comes to HTML.

    Their website is now altered (and useless):

    1000
  • Reply 37 of 38
    guyrguyr Posts: 50member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post


    The RAF roundel is similar, but different design (the "C" bit,) colors, and proportions.


     


     


       



     


    There are different versions of the Rondel depending on the 'age' and the type of plane.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Air_Force_roundels  It's closer to Type D or original 1915 version.  


     


    Or maybe they are a fan of the Who, French military or other corps http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundel


     


    But the RAF one came to my mind first.

  • Reply 38 of 38
    guyr wrote: »
    There are different versions of the Rondel depending on the 'age' and the type of plane.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Air_Force_roundels  It's closer to Type D or original 1915 version.  

    Or maybe they are a fan of the Who, French military or other corps http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundel

    But the RAF one came to my mind first.

    You mean the type A (the one I posted is the type D.) The company logo does look more like the old type A. [having trouble linking but the image is in your link.]
Sign In or Register to comment.