It seems like everyone gets Verizon for one two year plan, then gets pissed off at them, and vows never to get Verizon again. So in an inverse manner, brand loyalty does exist.
As for taking a phone from one network to another, it can be done between Cingular and T-Mobile, and also from Europe to either of these networks.
to the verizon sentiment: that is me 100%. f**k verizon. lifelong ban.
To address your overtly deriding question, THT, I used the term "authority," because your word choice (tone, if you will) is very authoritative. It just struck me how odd it was for someone to throw so much cold water on a discussion that was very speculative and fanciful in nature. I figured that for someone to be so resolute, he must have some certainty over some details about the phone market. Otherwise, the semantics of your post don't fit the purpose.
To make an example, if there were a discussion regarding foolish banter on an RFID related topic, and I made a few assertive comments, it would be because I am deeply involved in that space: from technical to market to manufacturing. It's very possible that you have some inside connection to the mobile phone world, either directly or indirectly. In that case, the degree of certainty you voice would be extremely appropriate.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jaddie
Dear Splinemodel & Other Friends
THT is quite an authority.
I've been logging in here for about four years and searching specifically for THT's posts for their educational value.
See, that's what I'm wondering about. Are his posts truly educational, or are they mostly his opinions voiced in a very convincing, assertive way? I'm not doubting -- in fact I bet THT is indeed an authority -- I'm just curious about what he does to know these industries so well.
Quote:
Originally posted by THT
Yes of course. Do you happen to know what the unlock codes for the phones are? Don't you think that information is kind of hard to get?
Actually I have no idea how to do it. I just know plenty of people who have, and it didn't seem to be a big deal. Usually they are people who move from Europe or Hong Kong or whatnot, and they want to keep their phones.
To address your overtly deriding question, THT, I used the term "authority," because your word choice (tone, if you will) is very authoritative. It just struck me how odd it was for someone to throw so much cold water on a discussion that was very speculative and fanciful in nature. I figured that for someone to be so resolute, he must have some certainty over some details about the phone market. Otherwise, the semantics of your post don't fit the purpose.
Umm, one really doesn't have to have authority or insider knowledge to say that Apple has no reason to buy Palm.
They don't have anything that Apple wants.
Palm PDAs? The market is in decline with no killer uses for the devices. Niche uses yes, but no broad market, killer uses. Personally, I've tried very hard with a Palm III for 4 years and now a Verizon Treo 650. It is very difficult, and I'm beginning to think pen-and-paper would be better, except for few things: contacts, scheduler, calculator, and entertainment. But the problem with PDAs for those things is that a subsidized phone from a carrier can do all that.
PalmOS/BeOS/Palm-on-Linux? As been said before, Palm does not own an operating system. They license it and modify it for their purposes. They are doing the same thing with Windows Mobile. Buying Palm to get BeOS/Palm-on-Linux is a sqrt(-1) situation. It doesn't exist, but in our imaginations.
Treo Smartphones? This is where the question of why would Apple want to deal with the carriers comes in. Walt Mossberg paraphrases Steve Jobs last year:
"At last month's All Things Digital technology conference, which I co-produce for The Wall Street Journal, Apple CEO Steve Jobs said he was wary of producing an Apple cellphone because, instead of selling it directly to the public, he would have to offer it through what he called the "four orifices" -- the four big U.S. cellphone carriers."
I think everyone agrees that Apple views its hardware as a precious commodity. I'll leave it to you to wonder whether Apple and Jobs would let the carriers dictate features of Apple hardware. This is why rumors of Apple being a MVNO is attractive or persistent.
There is anorther question about smartphones, the candy bar with QWERTY thumboard variety. It's a market with a relatively dominant player: RIM. It's not an easy market where Apple can go in and make an impact like the DAP market. Going into a market with a dominant player isn't something Apple typically does.
As for brand loyalty and my response to Blackcat, read the included Mossberg article. It is my experience as well. It really really shouldn't be that hard to find a phone with 802.11b or even DUN. As for the locking/unlocking, why is it necessary? They subsidize the phone when getting a contract yes, but they also charge rather exorbitantly for cancelling a contract too. What's there to protect? These are the less ugly things about the carriers. The number one problem is billing.
I agree. I thought it was a good idea when SGI was worth 10 times a much as they are today. Apple could buy ten SGI's with its quarterly profit only.
I don't think SGI have that much know how left in the company. Most capable techies have probably left the company already (AMD, nVidia, ATI, Intel, HP, Microsoft?) but there most certainly are some great minds left. I would think/hope that some ended up at Apple already. They also have a great IP portfolio that could be put to good use inside Apple.
I am among those who do consider the likes of THT and Programmer authorites in their field, and I value their insight and knowledge enormously. What does THT have to say about Apple buying SGI at this point?
Apple has no reason to buy Palm. No reason at all.
Mobile phone hardware makers are mostly at the mercy of the carriers (Verizon, Cingular, etc) who have been retarding phone innovation for years. Really doubt Apple, Steve Jobs, would be willing to work with them on a piece of Apple hardware.
I'm not sure about that - Steve praised working with Cingular while developing the Moto itunes phone.
I think Lucy is right. SGI doesn't have much left, and what they do have, high performance computing Itanium servers, isn't really a market that Apple seems to be going towards.
If there has to be an acquisition, I really think it has to be company that helps them with the "consumer media" market. No idea of who or what...
Posted on Feb 14, 2006 at 7:15pm by Dennis Sellers
A new company called Acquicor will debut this week and include several Apple veterans among its founders, according to Fortune.
Its founders are Gil Amelio, briefly Apple?s CEO in the mid-1990s; Ellen Hancock, Amelio?s Apple lieutenant and later CEO of Exodus Communications; and Steve (?Woz?) Wozniak, Apple?s co-founder. What does Acquicor do? Well, it?s sort of hard to say. According to its offering document filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Acquicor is focused ?on businesses that develop or provide technology-based products and services in the software, semiconductor, wired and wireless networking, consumer multimedia and information technology-enabled services segments.?
Here?s how Fortune sums it up: ?Acquicor is an example of a new kind of gift from investment bankers to eager public shareholders called a SPAC, or special purpose acquisition company. Its less formal name is a ?blank check? company, a totally appropriate moniker because if you buy its shares you?re giving a blank check to its founders.
?In this case, those luminaries will be attempting to sprinkle a little Apple pixie dust in the public markets. Amelio and team have been criss-crossing the country on a strange mission. They?re asking institutional investors to give them $100 million so they can make an acquisition they can?t yet identify.
?According to the bizarre rules under which SPACs are created, the team can?t talk to buyout candidates until they?ve raised their cash. If all goes according to plan, however, Acquicor will complete its offering this week and its shares will trade publicly. Then it?s got two years to spend most of the money or be forced to give it back.?
Comments
Originally posted by Splinemodel
It seems like everyone gets Verizon for one two year plan, then gets pissed off at them, and vows never to get Verizon again. So in an inverse manner, brand loyalty does exist.
As for taking a phone from one network to another, it can be done between Cingular and T-Mobile, and also from Europe to either of these networks.
to the verizon sentiment: that is me 100%. f**k verizon. lifelong ban.
ps. t-mobile is the best.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
What makes you the authority here?
Dear Splinemodel & Other Friends
THT is quite an authority.
I've been logging in here for about four years and searching specifically for THT's posts for their educational value.
—Jaddie
To make an example, if there were a discussion regarding foolish banter on an RFID related topic, and I made a few assertive comments, it would be because I am deeply involved in that space: from technical to market to manufacturing. It's very possible that you have some inside connection to the mobile phone world, either directly or indirectly. In that case, the degree of certainty you voice would be extremely appropriate.
Originally posted by Jaddie
Dear Splinemodel & Other Friends
THT is quite an authority.
I've been logging in here for about four years and searching specifically for THT's posts for their educational value.
See, that's what I'm wondering about. Are his posts truly educational, or are they mostly his opinions voiced in a very convincing, assertive way? I'm not doubting -- in fact I bet THT is indeed an authority -- I'm just curious about what he does to know these industries so well.
Originally posted by THT
Yes of course. Do you happen to know what the unlock codes for the phones are? Don't you think that information is kind of hard to get?
Actually I have no idea how to do it. I just know plenty of people who have, and it didn't seem to be a big deal. Usually they are people who move from Europe or Hong Kong or whatnot, and they want to keep their phones.
Originally posted by THT
Yes of course. Do you happen to know what the unlock codes for the phones are? Don't you think that information is kind of hard to get?
It's a 5-minute, $5 dollar job for Sparky down at the local electronic/computer/cell phone store.
Unsubsidized and unlocked.
This way you can slip any gsm sim chip into it and achieve all functionality.
Originally posted by TednDi
you can also buy the phone unlocked.
Unsubsidized and unlocked.
This way you can slip any gsm sim chip into it and achieve all functionality.
But then you don't get it for free (or 1 $) like you do when you buy it with a contract.
Originally posted by Jaddie
Dear Splinemodel & Other Friends
THT is quite an authority.
I've been logging in here for about four years and searching specifically for THT's posts for their educational value.
—Jaddie
I do the same.
I always read posts by THT, Programmer and a few others. It's a great way to know which threads are worth your while.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
To address your overtly deriding question, THT, I used the term "authority," because your word choice (tone, if you will) is very authoritative. It just struck me how odd it was for someone to throw so much cold water on a discussion that was very speculative and fanciful in nature. I figured that for someone to be so resolute, he must have some certainty over some details about the phone market. Otherwise, the semantics of your post don't fit the purpose.
Umm, one really doesn't have to have authority or insider knowledge to say that Apple has no reason to buy Palm.
They don't have anything that Apple wants.
Palm PDAs? The market is in decline with no killer uses for the devices. Niche uses yes, but no broad market, killer uses. Personally, I've tried very hard with a Palm III for 4 years and now a Verizon Treo 650. It is very difficult, and I'm beginning to think pen-and-paper would be better, except for few things: contacts, scheduler, calculator, and entertainment. But the problem with PDAs for those things is that a subsidized phone from a carrier can do all that.
PalmOS/BeOS/Palm-on-Linux? As been said before, Palm does not own an operating system. They license it and modify it for their purposes. They are doing the same thing with Windows Mobile. Buying Palm to get BeOS/Palm-on-Linux is a sqrt(-1) situation. It doesn't exist, but in our imaginations.
Treo Smartphones? This is where the question of why would Apple want to deal with the carriers comes in. Walt Mossberg paraphrases Steve Jobs last year:
"At last month's
I think everyone agrees that Apple views its hardware as a precious commodity. I'll leave it to you to wonder whether Apple and Jobs would let the carriers dictate features of Apple hardware. This is why rumors of Apple being a MVNO is attractive or persistent.
There is anorther question about smartphones, the candy bar with QWERTY thumboard variety. It's a market with a relatively dominant player: RIM. It's not an easy market where Apple can go in and make an impact like the DAP market. Going into a market with a dominant player isn't something Apple typically does.
As for brand loyalty and my response to Blackcat, read the included Mossberg article. It is my experience as well. It really really shouldn't be that hard to find a phone with 802.11b or even DUN. As for the locking/unlocking, why is it necessary? They subsidize the phone when getting a contract yes, but they also charge rather exorbitantly for cancelling a contract too. What's there to protect? These are the less ugly things about the carriers. The number one problem is billing.
Originally posted by cesar
[B]I think it would be a better move to get SGI
I agree. I thought it was a good idea when SGI was worth 10 times a much as they are today. Apple could buy ten SGI's with its quarterly profit only.
I don't think SGI have that much know how left in the company. Most capable techies have probably left the company already (AMD, nVidia, ATI, Intel, HP, Microsoft?) but there most certainly are some great minds left. I would think/hope that some ended up at Apple already. They also have a great IP portfolio that could be put to good use inside Apple.
I am among those who do consider the likes of THT and Programmer authorites in their field, and I value their insight and knowledge enormously. What does THT have to say about Apple buying SGI at this point?
In 2001, they sold Microsoft much of their IP, so I don't think there is much left Apple would want.
Also their products don't mesh very well with Apple's. Apple is mostly consumer oriented, and I don't think they want to split their focus so much.
And as far as their personnel, I don't think there are very many that Apple would want and couldn't more easily poach directly.
Originally posted by THT
Apple has no reason to buy Palm. No reason at all.
Mobile phone hardware makers are mostly at the mercy of the carriers (Verizon, Cingular, etc) who have been retarding phone innovation for years. Really doubt Apple, Steve Jobs, would be willing to work with them on a piece of Apple hardware.
I'm not sure about that - Steve praised working with Cingular while developing the Moto itunes phone.
If there has to be an acquisition, I really think it has to be company that helps them with the "consumer media" market. No idea of who or what...
Originally posted by ghstmars
they should buy "ADOBE"
hell yeah. and stop windows development, like they did with logic.
Apple = Media. ( web and media content )
lets see microsoft pull office, although they are developing
a adobe suite competitor.
Originally posted by Gulliver
But then you don't get it for free (or 1 $) like you do when you buy it with a contract.
Buy being the operative word.
You buy the contract and get the phone for $1
You buy the phone and get your freedom for a price.....
Originally posted by ghstmars
they should buy "ADOBE"
Oh, I am down with that.
It grabs MS by the short hairs and then gives enough leverage to keep office for the mac and photoshop, etc for the pc...
Palm is only 1.8bn dollars that is only 18 investors at 100m each.
From: macsimumnews.com
http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.ph...ound_acquicor/
Apple veterans found Acquicor
Posted on Feb 14, 2006 at 7:15pm by Dennis Sellers
A new company called Acquicor will debut this week and include several Apple veterans among its founders, according to Fortune.
Its founders are Gil Amelio, briefly Apple?s CEO in the mid-1990s; Ellen Hancock, Amelio?s Apple lieutenant and later CEO of Exodus Communications; and Steve (?Woz?) Wozniak, Apple?s co-founder. What does Acquicor do? Well, it?s sort of hard to say. According to its offering document filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Acquicor is focused ?on businesses that develop or provide technology-based products and services in the software, semiconductor, wired and wireless networking, consumer multimedia and information technology-enabled services segments.?
Here?s how Fortune sums it up: ?Acquicor is an example of a new kind of gift from investment bankers to eager public shareholders called a SPAC, or special purpose acquisition company. Its less formal name is a ?blank check? company, a totally appropriate moniker because if you buy its shares you?re giving a blank check to its founders.
?In this case, those luminaries will be attempting to sprinkle a little Apple pixie dust in the public markets. Amelio and team have been criss-crossing the country on a strange mission. They?re asking institutional investors to give them $100 million so they can make an acquisition they can?t yet identify.
?According to the bizarre rules under which SPACs are created, the team can?t talk to buyout candidates until they?ve raised their cash. If all goes according to plan, however, Acquicor will complete its offering this week and its shares will trade publicly. Then it?s got two years to spend most of the money or be forced to give it back.?
Originally posted by Blackcat
It had a very nice file-system...
Which was created by a guy that works at Apple now.