I laughed the entire time that I read this article.
First off, let me just say that I know I am on an "apple" forum and that everything here will be completely slanted and biased towards that end, but never did I expect to read an article so completely devoid of meaningful insight as this one. Quantitative data is so easy to slant one way or the other. Anyone who has watched an election primary is aware of that glaring fact.
I also find it cute the way the author started out by saying Google has hit its ceiling. Hmm, that seems vaguely familiar to me, like something we've heard oh I dunno, Every Single Year from the apple cronies. Lets look at numbers that do not need to be slanted and compared against quarterly earnings from 2001 and market share estimates from 1892 to make sense. Around this time 5 years ago, Apple commanded the market in every single category of small sized tech. Now, Apple has been systemically wiped nearly off the face of the playing field. Today, Android accounts for 81% of the global market for smart phones, compared to less than 13% for iOS. Today, Android accounts for 67% (yes, that's two thirds ladies and gentlemen) of all tablet sales while Apple has once again been demolished down to a measly 28%. Considering last year they commanded almost 50%, and the year before nearly 80%...its a telling sign of things to come.
Every single year Apple loses ground. They lose ground in virtually every single market they play in. Laptops, Phones, Tablets, you name it. Congrats, you have the market on portable music players cornered. A market that Google knows better than to play in, as smartphones equipped with the play store are quickly diminishing the number of music players sold. They won't do it, because they don't want to completely eat your soul, however if they were to offer something like 100$ of free music downloads to your new android phone, ipods and zunes would cease to exist altogether.
Now lets talk about how all you did was compare the past, instead of accurately talking about the next five years. Google's backbone is heuristic algorithms and the core services that support those programs that run off of them. Great job with Apple maps by the way, brilliant. The fact is Google is mobile, flexible and tactical, whereas Apple remains in 3 distinct silo's with no ingenuity or creativity outside of those areas. Face it, you don't need security on Apple labs, nobody cares anymore. You want to mention driverless cars and Google Glass and use that as a basis for your ill advised mockery. The problem is you just don't get what Google is, and what Google represents. Driverless cars are not a huge cash cow, neither is Google Glass, and they were not intended to be. You WILL see a large rush on Google Glass several years down the line, expect to see police officers, military firefighter, reporters and more wearing them as it will add unparalleled POV to scenes otherwise not possible. Think of the great boon it would have been for the officers on scene to have Google Glass on the next time someone accuses them of excessive force. Yes sir, you tried to stab them, see its here on video. Oh, and here's a hint, Tier 1 operatives and the Special Activities Division have been wearing eerily similar equipment for several years already.
What you don't get is that its not about just making money. Its about making the world a genuinely better place and if a company cannot do that, it will ultimately fail. Google is able to do that and remain scarily profitable, doubling in size every few years. When you have the very best and brightest in the world clamoring to work for you, you tend to make quite a few good decisions. Driverless cars are about enabling the disabled, the elderly, the blind, the handicapped and more, self sufficient. Ultimately that can save a ton of money for your family as well. Nobody lives in Oregon anymore, all the children are away in other states, there is no time to take mom to the store, and dentist and doctor etc anymore, but we can't afford to pay 5,000$ a month for assisted living. Well, now you have a vehicle that will get them where they need to go, help them be independent in their old age and alleviate the financial burden for some or many. Project Loon, its about bringing connectivity to everyone in the world, so the Prince of a tribe in Papua New Guinea can Skype with a stockbroker in NYC, or just say howdy to a rancher in San Ramon. Its about technology bettering people's lives. Its about bringing the world together. And yes, when you have 3 billion more people online using your core services, your ad revenue increases, and more importantly, your core services become unrivaled. Whats going on in the amazon today? Lets take a look, here's 5000 new pictures.
Google Fiber? Talk about another project that will not only bolster Google's ownership of the globe, but will make things better for everyone along the way. Free 5MB up/down for life or 1GB plus full cable television services for 99$ a month? Ummmm, yes please. How many of you pay 100-150-200 or more each month for internet and cable tv, plus movie channels etc? Not only will Google save you money if you elect to use their services, but it will force competitors to lower THEIR prices and save you money if you elect to use a different service. Win-win for everyone, except of course, apple nut-jobs that just cannot seem to grasp the painfully obvious or unclench their tight greedy little fists on their laughable apple stock.
Apple has no ingenuity or creativity, there is no branching out of its core products. Apple does not change with the times, they are the tired old hat company that just keeps trying to reinvent the wheel. Maybe by the time the Iphone 8GS hits the stores you'll finally realize that this is the same thing over and over and over. Meanwhile while apple shrinks, Google continues to grow, continues to double its employee base, continues to branch out to new markets and show great results each time, continues to make moonshot ideas, and continues to make the world a better place as often as it is able. If Google ever decides to really come at you in the laptop game besides chromebooks, it might just be the death blow we all have been waiting for.
Get over it Apple, you're dying. Everybody else knows it, guess you're just stubborn. Oh, and for you Apple employees, I hear the food is better over at Google anyway
That would be an invalid argument. Samsung alone sold more phones than Apple last year based mainly on sales of their S3, S4 and Note3 sales. All of these phones are high-end and in the same price range as iPhones.
That would be an invalid argument. Samsung alone sold more phones than Apple last year based mainly on sales of their S3, S4 and Note3 sales. All of these phones are high-end and in the same price range as iPhones.
A little of topic but commenting on the things getting better part considering Apple. Well things have certainly changed in many ways in the past few years, not always for the better.
-features missing (mac os X)
-support time for OS shortened for macs
-new features are not useable (eg ios "Airdrop")
-system backups possibilities have decreased
-fresh OS installation cant be done easily without the internet and takes hours if you don't have a fast connection
-no fysical media available for local installation
-user interface changes for the worse (some os X apps eg itunes11)
-Apple tying users possibilities to do the things that were possible before eg. upgrading memory, discs on macs.
And these are just the ones I came up with in 1 minute....
Can anyone give me the patent number of this Google patent that expires in 2020?
I think the posters are referring to Pagerank, #6285999. (named after Larry Page presumably).
Google was the exclusive licensee of the Stanford-owned patent since the beginning. I say was because that exclusivity ended a couple years ago in 2011. Stanford could now license it to anyone else willing to pay the price, and perhaps they have, dunno. In any event it will be expiring altogether relatively soon but seeing as it's only the original PageRank and a lot of patenting has taken place since I doubt it will have much if any effect on Google when it does.
I doubt it will have much if any effect on Google when it does.
Nothing that Google does seem to have any effect. From crap products like the Google Wave to partnering with HW manufacturers. Same can be said for their stock, though I see no relation to its price and what Google does.
How does that article show that samesung's high line phones are selling more. It just shows that they are being actively traded in. And it's only for the UK!?
That would be an invalid argument. Samsung alone sold more phones than Apple last year based mainly on sales of their S3, S4 and Note3 sales. All of these phones are high-end and in the same price range as iPhones.
That is kind of hard to believe when every sales ranking of US carriers has the iPhone as the #1 and #3 best selling phone, the Samsung SGS usually occupies the #2 spot.
The similarities were removed at Steve Jobs' insistence. According to author Fred Vogelstein, Jobs demanded that Google remove UI elements that mimicked the UI of the iPhone from the initial version of Android, such as pinch-to-zoom and swipe-to-unlock. This reportedly angered Rubin, who felt Google had caved to Jobs. The story indicates that the Android that Andy Rubin wanted to ship (post iPhone) was very much a recreation of the iPhone, rather than something original that Rubin was trying to come up with himself.
The fact that the early Android versions (like the one that shipped on the G1) didn't look much like iPhone can't be taken as proof that copying didn't occur--we know anecdotally that it did--it just didn't ship that way.
The G1 actually did have an element of 'slide to unlock' so the only thing listed seems to be pinch to zoom. I really don't think that's sufficient enough to accuse them of copying. You need more than just a single user gesture.
That sounds more to me like sour grapes than a valid point. ~80% is ~80%, you can justify it to yourself however you want, but it's a fact. Apple can be happy marketing only to the elite class, but Google's operating system is being marketed to the masses and they're buying it. Dunno what else to say about it.
First I will teach you a little some about Stats, in the world there are three kinds of liars, there is your ordinary every day liar who just makes stuff up and everyone know he is lying, Then there is the Damn Liar, this person is so good that he'll be go to hell for this lies. Then there is statistician this guy hides his lies behind numbers which everyone take as gospel and never question and accept if on faith.
So unless you understand the number behind those % sign they are really meaningless and are just another marketing tool to convince people of something they want you to believe.
To your point, Android or the code behind in maybe placed on any number of devices, however, the question, is the code being used as intended, the answer here is no, why because as it has been pointed on in a number of source android is being put on USB device you plug in to your TV to watch pirated content in third world counties these are being counted as cell phones with android on them. To your other point google is not selling android so they make no profit on it, also people are not buying most android phones they are getting a free device so service provider can over change them for a contract.
To your point, Android or the code behind in maybe placed on any number of devices, however, the question is the code being used as intended, the answer here is no, why because as it has been pointed on in a number of source android is being put on USB device you plug in to you TV to watch pirated connect in third world counties how it is being counted as cell phones with android on them. You other point google is not selling android so make no profit on it, also people are not buying most android phones they are getting a free device so service provider can over change them for a contract.
Can you cite these please? I must have missed out on them. The numbers do seem pretty dubious but I find it hard to believe that Android based media players make much of an impact on them.
Even though I agree with facts in this article, I must say Tim Cook is responsible for AAPL stock performance. Many big institute investors lost confidence when Cook failed to defend the stock while it was falling like penny stock due to false rumors and perceptions. Cook said in the conference call that he doesn't feel like spending energy defending false rumors. Well, Mr. Cook, that's what your PR department is for. When you are running the largest company in the world, you can't have your PR department going on vacation while the stock was falling like penny stock. Cook can learn a lot from Elon Musk who goes online to defend every negative article or news. Perception matter. That's how you get high multiple PE. Financial institutes don't like their investments swing like penny stock. I don't think Jobs would allow that to happen. Can you blame the big investors to put low PE on Cook? Cook can't talk and articulate vision for Apple. And he doesn't know how to defend Apple stock, so the stock suffered. That's all there is.
I am still waiting for your constructive counter arguments. Otherwise, you should take own advice and change your username to "nonsense poster"
How is Tim responsible for the stock? That's not what Apple is about; they create products they love to use and the world loves to use. There really is no reason for him or his PR department to 'defend false rumours.
Perception isn't 'all that matters'. The company marches on their own merits, innovations or implementations of tech done in a way that are useful, unlike previous attempts from the competition.
If you think a CEO is responsible for a high PE, what has Jeff or Larry ever done?
I must say Tim Cook is responsible for AAPL stock performance.
Not entirely, no.
Many big institute investors lost confidence when Cook failed to defend the stock while it was falling like penny stock due to false rumors and perceptions.
They’re idiots. Steve did the same thing. They should do their jobs. Apple will keep doing its.
Cook said in the conference call that he doesn't feel like spending energy defending false rumors.
Just like Steve Jobs.
Cook can learn a lot from Elon Musk who goes online to defend every negative article or news.
Yeah: he has learned that is exactly what you SHOULD NOT BE DOING.
Perception matter.
The perception of idiots, however, doesn’t. Wall Street are those idiots.
Can you blame the big investors to put low PE on Cook?
Rather low than Amazon.
Cook can't talk and articulate vision for Apple. And he doesn't know how to defend Apple stock, so the stock suffered. That's all there is.
So you know this… how, exactly?
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
You should take the 'Non' part out of your username
He’s not completely wrong. Cook ispartially responsible for the stock. In that his direction makes the products that are fully responsible for it.
Comments
I laughed the entire time that I read this article.
First off, let me just say that I know I am on an "apple" forum and that everything here will be completely slanted and biased towards that end, but never did I expect to read an article so completely devoid of meaningful insight as this one. Quantitative data is so easy to slant one way or the other. Anyone who has watched an election primary is aware of that glaring fact.
I also find it cute the way the author started out by saying Google has hit its ceiling. Hmm, that seems vaguely familiar to me, like something we've heard oh I dunno, Every Single Year from the apple cronies. Lets look at numbers that do not need to be slanted and compared against quarterly earnings from 2001 and market share estimates from 1892 to make sense. Around this time 5 years ago, Apple commanded the market in every single category of small sized tech. Now, Apple has been systemically wiped nearly off the face of the playing field. Today, Android accounts for 81% of the global market for smart phones, compared to less than 13% for iOS. Today, Android accounts for 67% (yes, that's two thirds ladies and gentlemen) of all tablet sales while Apple has once again been demolished down to a measly 28%. Considering last year they commanded almost 50%, and the year before nearly 80%...its a telling sign of things to come.
Every single year Apple loses ground. They lose ground in virtually every single market they play in. Laptops, Phones, Tablets, you name it. Congrats, you have the market on portable music players cornered. A market that Google knows better than to play in, as smartphones equipped with the play store are quickly diminishing the number of music players sold. They won't do it, because they don't want to completely eat your soul, however if they were to offer something like 100$ of free music downloads to your new android phone, ipods and zunes would cease to exist altogether.
Now lets talk about how all you did was compare the past, instead of accurately talking about the next five years. Google's backbone is heuristic algorithms and the core services that support those programs that run off of them. Great job with Apple maps by the way, brilliant.
The fact is Google is mobile, flexible and tactical, whereas Apple remains in 3 distinct silo's with no ingenuity or creativity outside of those areas. Face it, you don't need security on Apple labs, nobody cares anymore. You want to mention driverless cars and Google Glass and use that as a basis for your ill advised mockery. The problem is you just don't get what Google is, and what Google represents. Driverless cars are not a huge cash cow, neither is Google Glass, and they were not intended to be. You WILL see a large rush on Google Glass several years down the line, expect to see police officers, military firefighter, reporters and more wearing them as it will add unparalleled POV to scenes otherwise not possible. Think of the great boon it would have been for the officers on scene to have Google Glass on the next time someone accuses them of excessive force. Yes sir, you tried to stab them, see its here on video. Oh, and here's a hint, Tier 1 operatives and the Special Activities Division have been wearing eerily similar equipment for several years already.
What you don't get is that its not about just making money. Its about making the world a genuinely better place and if a company cannot do that, it will ultimately fail. Google is able to do that and remain scarily profitable, doubling in size every few years. When you have the very best and brightest in the world clamoring to work for you, you tend to make quite a few good decisions. Driverless cars are about enabling the disabled, the elderly, the blind, the handicapped and more, self sufficient. Ultimately that can save a ton of money for your family as well. Nobody lives in Oregon anymore, all the children are away in other states, there is no time to take mom to the store, and dentist and doctor etc anymore, but we can't afford to pay 5,000$ a month for assisted living. Well, now you have a vehicle that will get them where they need to go, help them be independent in their old age and alleviate the financial burden for some or many. Project Loon, its about bringing connectivity to everyone in the world, so the Prince of a tribe in Papua New Guinea can Skype with a stockbroker in NYC, or just say howdy to a rancher in San Ramon. Its about technology bettering people's lives. Its about bringing the world together. And yes, when you have 3 billion more people online using your core services, your ad revenue increases, and more importantly, your core services become unrivaled. Whats going on in the amazon today? Lets take a look, here's 5000 new pictures.
Google Fiber? Talk about another project that will not only bolster Google's ownership of the globe, but will make things better for everyone along the way. Free 5MB up/down for life or 1GB plus full cable television services for 99$ a month? Ummmm, yes please. How many of you pay 100-150-200 or more each month for internet and cable tv, plus movie channels etc? Not only will Google save you money if you elect to use their services, but it will force competitors to lower THEIR prices and save you money if you elect to use a different service. Win-win for everyone, except of course, apple nut-jobs that just cannot seem to grasp the painfully obvious or unclench their tight greedy little fists on their laughable apple stock.
Apple has no ingenuity or creativity, there is no branching out of its core products. Apple does not change with the times, they are the tired old hat company that just keeps trying to reinvent the wheel. Maybe by the time the Iphone 8GS hits the stores you'll finally realize that this is the same thing over and over and over. Meanwhile while apple shrinks, Google continues to grow, continues to double its employee base, continues to branch out to new markets and show great results each time, continues to make moonshot ideas, and continues to make the world a better place as often as it is able. If Google ever decides to really come at you in the laptop game besides chromebooks, it might just be the death blow we all have been waiting for.
Get over it Apple, you're dying. Everybody else knows it, guess you're just stubborn. Oh, and for you Apple employees, I hear the food is better over at Google anyway
@iSteelers
That would be an invalid argument. Samsung alone sold more phones than Apple last year based mainly on sales of their S3, S4 and Note3 sales. All of these phones are high-end and in the same price range as iPhones.
That would be an invalid argument. Samsung alone sold more phones than Apple last year based mainly on sales of their S3, S4 and Note3 sales. All of these phones are high-end and in the same price range as iPhones.
numbers please
numbers please
@hill60 Another time when google is helpful...
http://www.t3.com/news/samsung-beats-apple-to-become-top-trade-in-brand
A little of topic but commenting on the things getting better part considering Apple. Well things have certainly changed in many ways in the past few years, not always for the better.
-features missing (mac os X)
-support time for OS shortened for macs
-new features are not useable (eg ios "Airdrop")
-system backups possibilities have decreased
-fresh OS installation cant be done easily without the internet and takes hours if you don't have a fast connection
-no fysical media available for local installation
-user interface changes for the worse (some os X apps eg itunes11)
-Apple tying users possibilities to do the things that were possible before eg. upgrading memory, discs on macs.
And these are just the ones I came up with in 1 minute....
Trolls. So poor they can't afford paragraphing. They're also so broke they can't even pay attention.
I think the posters are referring to Pagerank, #6285999. (named after Larry Page presumably).
Google was the exclusive licensee of the Stanford-owned patent since the beginning. I say was because that exclusivity ended a couple years ago in 2011. Stanford could now license it to anyone else willing to pay the price, and perhaps they have, dunno. In any event it will be expiring altogether relatively soon but seeing as it's only the original PageRank and a lot of patenting has taken place since I doubt it will have much if any effect on Google when it does.
Nothing that Google does seem to have any effect. From crap products like the Google Wave to partnering with HW manufacturers. Same can be said for their stock, though I see no relation to its price and what Google does.
Nota bene: Pagerank < Larry Page. Narcist.
Thanks for explaining the patent!
@hill60 Another time when google is helpful...
http://www.t3.com/news/samsung-beats-apple-to-become-top-trade-in-brand
How does that article show that samesung's high line phones are selling more. It just shows that they are being actively traded in. And it's only for the UK!?
That is kind of hard to believe when every sales ranking of US carriers has the iPhone as the #1 and #3 best selling phone, the Samsung SGS usually occupies the #2 spot.
The similarities were removed at Steve Jobs' insistence. According to author Fred Vogelstein, Jobs demanded that Google remove UI elements that mimicked the UI of the iPhone from the initial version of Android, such as pinch-to-zoom and swipe-to-unlock. This reportedly angered Rubin, who felt Google had caved to Jobs. The story indicates that the Android that Andy Rubin wanted to ship (post iPhone) was very much a recreation of the iPhone, rather than something original that Rubin was trying to come up with himself.
The fact that the early Android versions (like the one that shipped on the G1) didn't look much like iPhone can't be taken as proof that copying didn't occur--we know anecdotally that it did--it just didn't ship that way.
The G1 actually did have an element of 'slide to unlock' so the only thing listed seems to be pinch to zoom. I really don't think that's sufficient enough to accuse them of copying. You need more than just a single user gesture.
That sounds more to me like sour grapes than a valid point. ~80% is ~80%, you can justify it to yourself however you want, but it's a fact. Apple can be happy marketing only to the elite class, but Google's operating system is being marketed to the masses and they're buying it. Dunno what else to say about it.
First I will teach you a little some about Stats, in the world there are three kinds of liars, there is your ordinary every day liar who just makes stuff up and everyone know he is lying, Then there is the Damn Liar, this person is so good that he'll be go to hell for this lies. Then there is statistician this guy hides his lies behind numbers which everyone take as gospel and never question and accept if on faith.
So unless you understand the number behind those % sign they are really meaningless and are just another marketing tool to convince people of something they want you to believe.
To your point, Android or the code behind in maybe placed on any number of devices, however, the question, is the code being used as intended, the answer here is no, why because as it has been pointed on in a number of source android is being put on USB device you plug in to your TV to watch pirated content in third world counties these are being counted as cell phones with android on them. To your other point google is not selling android so they make no profit on it, also people are not buying most android phones they are getting a free device so service provider can over change them for a contract.
To your point, Android or the code behind in maybe placed on any number of devices, however, the question is the code being used as intended, the answer here is no, why because as it has been pointed on in a number of source android is being put on USB device you plug in to you TV to watch pirated connect in third world counties how it is being counted as cell phones with android on them. You other point google is not selling android so make no profit on it, also people are not buying most android phones they are getting a free device so service provider can over change them for a contract.
Can you cite these please? I must have missed out on them. The numbers do seem pretty dubious but I find it hard to believe that Android based media players make much of an impact on them.
You should take the 'Non' part out of your username
How is Tim responsible for the stock? That's not what Apple is about; they create products they love to use and the world loves to use. There really is no reason for him or his PR department to 'defend false rumours.
Perception isn't 'all that matters'. The company marches on their own merits, innovations or implementations of tech done in a way that are useful, unlike previous attempts from the competition.
If you think a CEO is responsible for a high PE, what has Jeff or Larry ever done?
Shut up and go away. Seek psychiatric help.
Not entirely, no.
They’re idiots. Steve did the same thing. They should do their jobs. Apple will keep doing its.
Just like Steve Jobs.
Yeah: he has learned that is exactly what you SHOULD NOT BE DOING.
The perception of idiots, however, doesn’t. Wall Street are those idiots.
Rather low than Amazon.
So you know this… how, exactly?
He’s not completely wrong. Cook is partially responsible for the stock. In that his direction makes the products that are fully responsible for it.