"Oh, and jobs is right The average consumer ISN'T insightful, creative, intelligent, or knowledgeable enough to come up with the next step in technology- and the next step has never been dictated by consumer demands, but by a small amount of people like Steve Jobs taking huge risks on new ideas and implementations."
I am insightful enough to know that for an example the Finder is one of the worst examples of file navigation I have ever seen and yet all through out Jobs reign we still rely on that crappy program still to this very day. This is an example of a area where Apple's ideas have terribly failed. I have seen many people provide much better file navigation solutions then Apple has been able to come up with.
It's sad but it's just paper wealth. Apple's real wealth is their engineering/management talent, intellectual property, products and brand and these things mostly stay the same even as the stock price fluctuates.
Later on he would always give that annoying Henry Ford quote about people not knowing that they wanted cars if you were to ask them about it. There is one problem with that analogy Steve, everyone has switched from horses to cars but hardly anyone has switched from PCs to Macs.
First: The quote was not if people wanted cars it was about innovation. People would never thought of cars and would want faster horses.
Second: previous quarters Apple stated 50% of new buyers switched from windows. That's why they have and are outpacing the PC industry.
"
I am insightful enough to know that for an example the Finder is one of the worst examples of file navigation I have ever seen and yet all through out Jobs reign we still rely on that crappy program still to this very day. This is an example of a area where Apple's ideas have terribly failed. I have seen many people provide much better file navigation solutions then Apple has been able to come up with.
Fine. Quit your bitching and buy one of those computers.
Second: previous quarters Apple stated 50% of new buyers switched from windows. That's why they have and are outpacing the PC industry.
Speaking of, I don't recall that being stated and I can't find it in the quarterly reports. Is this a first since they started noting it? Is the absent of evidence something to be concerned with? It's one thing that the iPad is eating away at the PC market but I'd still think Apple's Mac market would still be pulling switchers from the WinPC market, especially after a nearly complete update to their Mac lineup that on WinPC vendor can compete with.
I am insightful enough to know that for an example the Finder is one of the worst examples of file navigation I have ever seen and yet all through out Jobs reign we still rely on that crappy program still to this very day. This is an example of a area where Apple's ideas have terribly failed. I have seen many people provide much better file navigation solutions then Apple has been able to come up with.
If you think there is a better option — which you undoubtedly decided because it has more knobs and whistles — then what is the problem? I personally try to use the Finder as little as possible. If I need the file system I tend to use Terminal but at this point most of my navigation is through apps doing what they were brilliantly designed to do. Finder is no different but it's use is being obsolesced in favour of more efficient ways of computers; ways that I'm sure you've complained about with the iOS.
People would never thought of cars and would want faster horses.
Second: previous quarters Apple stated 50% of new buyers switched from windows. That's why they have and are outpacing the PC industry.
I understand what Henry Ford was talking about and it is not true. Sometimes Steve came up with ok ideas and sometimes he came up with some of the worst ideas in the world. Remember Ping? The one button mouse that was supposed to make computing easier but actually made it harder? The circle mouse? The iPod shuffle that didn't have any buttons on it? Making iTunes a bloated mess rather then splitting it off into about five separate apps? The original macs heavy dependance on the mouse where Steve did not understand the concept that you work more efficiently if you can keep your hands on the keyboard more often? I can go on and on and on and on.
"previous quarters Apple stated 50% of new buyers switched from windows. That's why they have and are outpacing the PC industry."
Doesn't matter much, the market share is still around 2%.
If you think there is a better option — which you undoubtedly decided because it has more knobs and whistles — then what is the problem? I personally try to use the Finder as little as possible. If I need the file system I tend to use Terminal but at this point most of my navigation is through apps doing what they were brilliantly designed to do. Finder is no different but it's use is being obsolesced in favour of more efficient ways of computers; ways that I'm sure you've complained about with the iOS.
Unfortunately not all apps have built in file navigation so you still have to rely on the Finder. I use 3rd party navigation apps as much as but they can't completely replace the finder for reasons I have discussed elsewhere. Yes, iOS has a lot wrong about it's file navigation as well.
There's being super-critical of Apple, which is fine and breeds a lot of discussion, and then there's just making up fricking LIES when you've already been told the truth.
Unfortunately not all apps have built in file navigation so you still have to rely on the Finder. I use 3rd party navigation apps as much as but they can't completely replace the finder for reasons I have discussed elsewhere. Yes, iOS has a lot wrong about it's file navigation as well.
You clearly didn't understand what I meant by apps handling the placement of files in the system. This should be invisible to the user. I don't want to use iPhoto and have to manage where I place the original image and where I place the edited image, then another folder with symlinks to the revised images for my albums. If you want to have such granular control that's your prerogative but I don't. People that care about efficiency don' and you're just sounding like the elitist you've already admitted to being when you make such claims. iOS doesn't need this. In fact, it's success as both a smartphone and tablet are because it didn't follow in the footsteps of those before it. Same goes for the iPod's PixoOS which used an intelligent and intuitive interface instead of simply reading files dumped to an external flash or HDD.
It depends - it will be an all or nothing thing. They are going to see how subsidy-free phones sell on T-Mobile. I wouldn't bet on it happening either, at least until each of the carriers has higher smartphone penetration. I could see them cutting subsidies and then lowering the monthly bills somewhat. If one does it, they'll get hammered. If they all do it, then Apple's the one that's screwed.
It happened here in Romania this year. Until now the price of an iPhone with contract was 200 Euro on all three major networks. This year all three networks stopped the subsidies at the same time. Now an iPhone 5 with contract sells for 370 Euro. And nothing bad happened to the networks. They are happily selling a lot of Samsung Galaxy S3 for 150 Euro now. Look at China. The biggest network, China Mobile, has like 80% market share and they don't sell the iPhone. I don't think China Mobile will ever subsidy the iPhone. They don't need to. If Apple wants to sell the iPhone through China Mobile they have to give up that huge margin.
There's being super-critical of Apple, which is fine and breeds a lot of discussion, and then there's just making up fricking LIES when you've already been told the truth.
You can't abide even slight criticism. Your more recent habit of late - which others have commented on - of removing posts at whim, is rather disturbing. Keep it up, you'll end up with a lovely walled garden that mirrors Apple's, where all thoughts and opinions are fluffy and nice.
You are a troll and a fanatic. You will be the death of AI.
I understand what Henry Ford was talking about and it is not true. Sometimes Steve came up with ok ideas and sometimes he came up with some of the worst ideas in the world. Remember Ping? The one button mouse that was supposed to make computing easier but actually made it harder? The circle mouse? The iPod shuffle that didn't have any buttons on it? Making iTunes a bloated mess rather then splitting it off into about five separate apps? The original macs heavy dependance on the mouse where Steve did not understand the concept that you work more efficiently if you can keep your hands on the keyboard more often? I can go on and on and on and on.
"previous quarters Apple stated 50% of new buyers switched from windows. That's why they have and are outpacing the PC industry."
Doesn't matter much, the market share is still around 2%.
Wow. Source where Jobs didn't understand efficiency with keyboard. Stop making sh!t up. Consumers don't know all the keyboard shortcuts.
It does matter when Apple is making 35% of the PC profits. When HP thought about selling its PC business. When Dell is thinking about going private.
As posted elsewhere today...Of late I've come to the sad conclusion that Tim Cook is utterly incompetent without Steve Jobs' vision and paint by number directives. Been holding AAPL since it was $119 and re-upped at $514 so save the troll comments. The ugly truth is Tim Cook seriously screwed up!
1) The uncharacteristic smorgasbord product launch in Sept
2) The Maps fiasco
3) The Forestall food fight
4) Massive product constraints
5) Broken supply chain
No Spotify, no Waze, no_?
6) Openheimer changing AAPL's guidance MO at the worst possible juncture.
It has become apparent to me that with Steve gone and Cook at the helm APPL is a broken company.
Wrong. Steve was there when:
1) NeXT flops
2) PowerMac G4 Cube flops
3) MobileMe launch fiasco
4) Antennagate
5) Ping flops
6) iAd flops
That's easy for you to say, if you don't have any skin in the game. I don't have any skin in the game right now at the moment either, but this is not good for Apple or for those people who invest their hard earned money in that company. Most people aren't Al Gore, who gets to buy their shares at around $7.
I suspect that most "investors" are in fact nothing more than speculators and gamblers. For example I think the vast majority of corporate investors are interested in nothing more than their expectation that the paper will bring high returns. The name of the company on the paper is not important. That would also be a reasonable explanation for the current phenomenon: The corporate investors (pension funds, insurance companies, hedge funds) are now sceptical that the paper will increase that much in value, or worse, will fluctuate wildly, and are therefore re-investing elsewhere. My impression is that there is no emotional connection to apple whatsoever and not even any particular interest in the products, but that they are solely in with the expectation of high profits.
And for the small speculators: Its nothing more than gambling. I have NO sympathy for those that lose heavily.
Looking at things a different way. Taking Market Cap as the sole yardstick of "value" is only another way of saying that the ONLY thing that matters is profit. I reject that point of view on ethical and moral grounds. But if you do regard other aspects as important in the "value" calculation, then it is absurd to talk about apple as being the most valuable company in history. Even in the limited context of the mobile phone/computing sector it is absurd to value Apple above all the other enterprises that make mobile computing possible at all. Apple doesn't even feature in the list of those companies, without who'se contribution Apple would have no market at all. They are really just at the end of the food chain.
In talking about value, I suggest it's important to recognize that any given player is just one link in a long chain of interdependencies. Similarly, when talking about "intellectual property" it does good to recognize that each incremental improvement, innovation or "invention" is nothing more than a small step on a journey that commenced many many decades ago. Certainly there are important milestones ... newton, einstein come to mind, but even these build upon the sum of what went before. Taking this view creates a completely different view of the world, and one that is more humane.
So, don't whine when your "investment" gets you burned. You deserve it.
Comments
"Oh, and jobs is right The average consumer ISN'T insightful, creative, intelligent, or knowledgeable enough to come up with the next step in technology- and the next step has never been dictated by consumer demands, but by a small amount of people like Steve Jobs taking huge risks on new ideas and implementations."
I am insightful enough to know that for an example the Finder is one of the worst examples of file navigation I have ever seen and yet all through out Jobs reign we still rely on that crappy program still to this very day. This is an example of a area where Apple's ideas have terribly failed. I have seen many people provide much better file navigation solutions then Apple has been able to come up with.
I just came across an article discussing the last quarter. I usually look at cash flow and didn't do so this time, but they did. It turns out that in this "horrible" quarter, Apple's cash flow increased by 33% over the previous year. And that's with one fewer week.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1133281-mr-market-should-be-looking-at-apple-s-cash-flow-rather-than-its-profits
It's sad but it's just paper wealth. Apple's real wealth is their engineering/management talent, intellectual property, products and brand and these things mostly stay the same even as the stock price fluctuates.
First: The quote was not if people wanted cars it was about innovation. People would never thought of cars and would want faster horses.
Second: previous quarters Apple stated 50% of new buyers switched from windows. That's why they have and are outpacing the PC industry.
Fine. Quit your bitching and buy one of those computers.
Speaking of, I don't recall that being stated and I can't find it in the quarterly reports. Is this a first since they started noting it? Is the absent of evidence something to be concerned with? It's one thing that the iPad is eating away at the PC market but I'd still think Apple's Mac market would still be pulling switchers from the WinPC market, especially after a nearly complete update to their Mac lineup that on WinPC vendor can compete with.
If you think there is a better option — which you undoubtedly decided because it has more knobs and whistles — then what is the problem? I personally try to use the Finder as little as possible. If I need the file system I tend to use Terminal but at this point most of my navigation is through apps doing what they were brilliantly designed to do. Finder is no different but it's use is being obsolesced in favour of more efficient ways of computers; ways that I'm sure you've complained about with the iOS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
People would never thought of cars and would want faster horses.
Second: previous quarters Apple stated 50% of new buyers switched from windows. That's why they have and are outpacing the PC industry.
I understand what Henry Ford was talking about and it is not true. Sometimes Steve came up with ok ideas and sometimes he came up with some of the worst ideas in the world. Remember Ping? The one button mouse that was supposed to make computing easier but actually made it harder? The circle mouse? The iPod shuffle that didn't have any buttons on it? Making iTunes a bloated mess rather then splitting it off into about five separate apps? The original macs heavy dependance on the mouse where Steve did not understand the concept that you work more efficiently if you can keep your hands on the keyboard more often? I can go on and on and on and on.
"previous quarters Apple stated 50% of new buyers switched from windows. That's why they have and are outpacing the PC industry."
Doesn't matter much, the market share is still around 2%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
Fine. Quit your bitching and buy one of those computers.
Which computers? What are talking about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
If you think there is a better option — which you undoubtedly decided because it has more knobs and whistles — then what is the problem? I personally try to use the Finder as little as possible. If I need the file system I tend to use Terminal but at this point most of my navigation is through apps doing what they were brilliantly designed to do. Finder is no different but it's use is being obsolesced in favour of more efficient ways of computers; ways that I'm sure you've complained about with the iOS.
Unfortunately not all apps have built in file navigation so you still have to rely on the Finder. I use 3rd party navigation apps as much as but they can't completely replace the finder for reasons I have discussed elsewhere. Yes, iOS has a lot wrong about it's file navigation as well.
That's e-fricking-nough of that.
There's being super-critical of Apple, which is fine and breeds a lot of discussion, and then there's just making up fricking LIES when you've already been told the truth.
You clearly didn't understand what I meant by apps handling the placement of files in the system. This should be invisible to the user. I don't want to use iPhoto and have to manage where I place the original image and where I place the edited image, then another folder with symlinks to the revised images for my albums. If you want to have such granular control that's your prerogative but I don't. People that care about efficiency don' and you're just sounding like the elitist you've already admitted to being when you make such claims. iOS doesn't need this. In fact, it's success as both a smartphone and tablet are because it didn't follow in the footsteps of those before it. Same goes for the iPod's PixoOS which used an intelligent and intuitive interface instead of simply reading files dumped to an external flash or HDD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freshmaker
It depends - it will be an all or nothing thing. They are going to see how subsidy-free phones sell on T-Mobile. I wouldn't bet on it happening either, at least until each of the carriers has higher smartphone penetration. I could see them cutting subsidies and then lowering the monthly bills somewhat. If one does it, they'll get hammered. If they all do it, then Apple's the one that's screwed.
It happened here in Romania this year. Until now the price of an iPhone with contract was 200 Euro on all three major networks. This year all three networks stopped the subsidies at the same time. Now an iPhone 5 with contract sells for 370 Euro. And nothing bad happened to the networks. They are happily selling a lot of Samsung Galaxy S3 for 150 Euro now. Look at China. The biggest network, China Mobile, has like 80% market share and they don't sell the iPhone. I don't think China Mobile will ever subsidy the iPhone. They don't need to. If Apple wants to sell the iPhone through China Mobile they have to give up that huge margin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
That's e-fricking-nough of that.
There's being super-critical of Apple, which is fine and breeds a lot of discussion, and then there's just making up fricking LIES when you've already been told the truth.
You can't abide even slight criticism. Your more recent habit of late - which others have commented on - of removing posts at whim, is rather disturbing. Keep it up, you'll end up with a lovely walled garden that mirrors Apple's, where all thoughts and opinions are fluffy and nice.
You are a troll and a fanatic. You will be the death of AI.
Really? Which apps don't have file navigation? Please name them.
Wow. Source where Jobs didn't understand efficiency with keyboard. Stop making sh!t up. Consumers don't know all the keyboard shortcuts.
It does matter when Apple is making 35% of the PC profits. When HP thought about selling its PC business. When Dell is thinking about going private.
Wrong. Steve was there when:
1) NeXT flops
2) PowerMac G4 Cube flops
3) MobileMe launch fiasco
4) Antennagate
5) Ping flops
6) iAd flops
It's called "observational bias."
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins
It's just a game, no big deal.
That's easy for you to say, if you don't have any skin in the game. I don't have any skin in the game right now at the moment either, but this is not good for Apple or for those people who invest their hard earned money in that company. Most people aren't Al Gore, who gets to buy their shares at around $7.
I suspect that most "investors" are in fact nothing more than speculators and gamblers. For example I think the vast majority of corporate investors are interested in nothing more than their expectation that the paper will bring high returns. The name of the company on the paper is not important. That would also be a reasonable explanation for the current phenomenon: The corporate investors (pension funds, insurance companies, hedge funds) are now sceptical that the paper will increase that much in value, or worse, will fluctuate wildly, and are therefore re-investing elsewhere. My impression is that there is no emotional connection to apple whatsoever and not even any particular interest in the products, but that they are solely in with the expectation of high profits.
And for the small speculators: Its nothing more than gambling. I have NO sympathy for those that lose heavily.
Looking at things a different way. Taking Market Cap as the sole yardstick of "value" is only another way of saying that the ONLY thing that matters is profit. I reject that point of view on ethical and moral grounds. But if you do regard other aspects as important in the "value" calculation, then it is absurd to talk about apple as being the most valuable company in history. Even in the limited context of the mobile phone/computing sector it is absurd to value Apple above all the other enterprises that make mobile computing possible at all. Apple doesn't even feature in the list of those companies, without who'se contribution Apple would have no market at all. They are really just at the end of the food chain.
In talking about value, I suggest it's important to recognize that any given player is just one link in a long chain of interdependencies. Similarly, when talking about "intellectual property" it does good to recognize that each incremental improvement, innovation or "invention" is nothing more than a small step on a journey that commenced many many decades ago. Certainly there are important milestones ... newton, einstein come to mind, but even these build upon the sum of what went before. Taking this view creates a completely different view of the world, and one that is more humane.
So, don't whine when your "investment" gets you burned. You deserve it.