bulldogs
About
- Banned
- Username
- bulldogs
- Joined
- Visits
- 18
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- -37
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 37
Reactions
-
Apple patents hover-sensing multitouch display
jkichline said:The Android trolls are out in full force today, parading around in their little furry Android outfits, trumpeting the victory of the almighty Google and their overlords, Alphabet. One such participant announced "that it's a fact that Google innovates more then Apple". I beg to differ. I'd like to see them match this technology.
Personally, I think Apple is in a lull on purpose as they ramp up the next round of releases this year. They also don't care if their stock "sinks" a little because we all know they are not going to play Wall Streets little game. They will wait until the time is right and prove once again that Google is just an advertising company with little side projects to keep smart people interested in them. -
Apple's iPad Pro outsold Microsoft's entire Surface lineup over the holidays
The iPad Pro outselling the Surface is not surprising or notable in any way. Instead, the story is that Surface sales were dramatically higher this quarter than they were in previous holiday periods, making this the first Microsoft success story in hardware since, well, ever. And the increased revenue from their Surface sales were more than enough to offset yet another decline in their traditional software business (not to be confused with their newer cloud and "Office Anywhere" business which continued to increase). In other words, comparing Surface sales to iPad Pro sales contrives to turn success into failure. The real story is that the Surface took Microsoft from practically nothing - and indeed losing billions of dollars - in this space to actually making money and being a factor. Sure, a factor with a niche product, but a factor nonetheless that they can build on, which they are going to try to do by releasing Surface-branded phones targeting enterprise/business customers this year. Claiming otherwise is akin to claiming that Huawei, Asus and Oppo failed this year because they didn't move as many smartphones as Samsung and Apple. Instead, the Surface can be akin to the Chromebook. It was a bad product - a money losing failure - for years when they had their initial strategy of trying to compete directly with Microsoft and steal Windows laptop owners. But instead when they found a niche - the education market as well as promoting the devices as being part of an ecosystem for devoted Android fans by offering Google Play store credits for whoever bought them and pushing their ability to cast Chrome OS tabs to Chromecast and Android TV devices - their market share went from nothing to being 2.8% of all computers sold this year. A threat to Microsoft or Apple on profits? No. But their own niche that they can continue to cultivate and grow? Of course, especially if they can somehow get kids who use them in schools and also have budget Android phones to adopt them for home use. (Google doesn't seem smart enough to promote this angle right now, choosing to instead use the same millennial-driven advertising campaigns that practically everyone else in the tech industry does, but they still could in theory.) And it is a good development. Mac OS X and iOS does not meet everyone's needs or preferences. Having choices - and good ones - is healthy for the marketplace. And since it is impossible for anyone to claim that Microsoft was copying Apple with the Surface line, there is no reason to begrudge Microsoft's being successful at offering an alternative to Apple products for those who want - and especially those who legitimately need - them. -
Production already underway for Apple's new 4-inch 'iPhone 6c' - report
Huh? 1. Apple does not enjoy the brand name power in emerging markets that they do in developed ones. In those areas, Apple is not an aspirational brand. 2. Emerging markets prefer bigger screen devices. In fact, in many of them the 4.7' iPhone 6 is considered small. That is because - see #1 - the iPhone 2, 3, 4, 5 did not set the expectations and reference frames for mobile devices to where anything over 4' was considered big. In those markets, 4' inch phones are now seen as very cheap budget phones like the LG Destiny or Blu Advance. 3. As a result, when these folks see the iPhone 6 Plus as a "normal" phone, an iPhone 6 as a "small phone", they are going to see the iPhone 6c - as it will cost $200 less than an iPhone 6 and $350 less than a 6 Plus - as a cheap, bad phone that Apple is for some reason charging way more than everyone else charges for their low end models. (And it doesn't help matters that Samsung has been charging way too much for their own cheap models in emerging markets for years. That is the main reason why Samsung has lost so much business to the likes of Xiaomi, Oppo, Intex, Yu and Huawei in those markets ... they charge much less for much better phones.) In other words, this shows that Apple really does not get the emerging markets. They are thinking that everyone is like China. The problem is that while China does have a huge "emerging market" of hundreds of millions of people, they also have a sizable middle and upper class of hundreds of millions of people! So even the hundreds of millions of lower income people know about Apple products in China because the middle and upper class people in China have them. (And also because emulating western fashions and trends and buying western products is fashionable among the Chinese upper class.) That makes Apple an aspirational brand. But in places where the middle and upper classes are nowhere near as large - and are less likely to emulate the rich and famous in America - paying $400 for a 4 inch phone when you can get a 6.3" phone from LeTV (that is right, phones in emerging markets get really big, up to 7" because in those areas they are primary computing devices, replacing the tablet and the laptop) for $250. Now I don't think that Apple is as badly misplaying the Indian and other emerging markets as Google did with their failed Android One program (and Microsoft did trying to blanket the market with budget Windows phones over there and wound up taking an even bigger loss). I think that the real reason is Apple is paving the way to offer a mid-tier line. The first dip in the water will be 4' phones that they claim will be for developing countries, but they will follow it up with 5' phones for the same price that they market everywhere after the precedent is set. This is the first step in having an iPhone equivalent of the iPod Shuffle ($30), MacBook Air (currently can be had for $720 new on eBay) or Mac Mini ($499) and of course the iPad Mini ($250, which is the same price as a small Android tablet like the Nexus 7 or an Asus MemoPad 7). Bottom line: the maturation of the smartphone market means that Apple is going to have to start coming down on prices just like everybody else. This is just a face-saving way to do it. -
Twitter close to hiring former Apple PR executive Natalie Kerris, report says
Simple. A change, a challenge, something different, which gives her incentive to delay retirement for a couple of years. If the new management team is successful in saving Twitter, they are heroes, and yes that stuff does drive people like her once they reach that level and have made their money. And this isn't a long term gig. Two years from now, Twitter will either be making money or will be owned by Google, to whom Twitter had an offer on the table to sell last year but declined it in order to make one last shot at surviving independently. Either way, Kerris will retire (either to academia, philanthropy or the golf course/private yacht) for good around that time. -
Apple requests another $179 million in supplemental damages from Samsung
tallest skil said:bulldogs said:How much would it have changed, really?
Yep.
Because you say so, of course. Never mind that 90% of tablets in use are iPads and the iPhone makes up 75% of mobile traffic.
Huh. Just like the iPhone, where no one is capable of coming up with a true competitor to the hardware or iOS.
You’ll notice they sell three years worth of iPhones down to and including free ($499).
Only because Microsoft paid to license Apple’s patents to make it viable. Android is not a “second OS”.
…guile, dishonor, reproach, soullessness, and lack of creativity…
…at copying iOS…
…copying Apple…
Hey, we agree… now.Except NONE OF THAT HAS HELPED THEM because their garbage STILL DOESN’T SELL.
So your “argument” is “They don’t matter anymore–because I say so–so Apple should just not care at all about laws being broken, intellectual property being stolen, and revenue being illegally funneled–because I say so–and should move on–because I say so–and not have Samsung pay anything at all.”
But I suppose that you will dispute the source, even though multiple outlets began reporting that Android web usage surpassed that of iOS in second quarter 2014. Now iOS devices are more heavily, intently used than their Android counterpart and generate far more revenue per device, but in terms of raw usage, Android achieved parity with iOS years ago and surpassed it over 18 months ago, just as Google Play store downloads surpassed App Store downloads in 2014 (App Store revenues remain higher, though nearly all of the difference is due to Google Play being absent in the massive China market ... exclude China and the gap between App Store and Google Play revenues is very small, and some analysts claim that the aggregate total revenue from Google Play, Amazon, and the main Chinese stores actually exceeds the App Store revenue).
Google copied iOS? Of course they did. It was a good product. It would have been ridiculous for Google to continue with their outdated Blackberry-influenced design after Apple introduced the iPhone. If your position is that Google should not have introduced a touchscreen UI and other elements ... funny Apple doesn't feel the same way as Apple has never formally charged Google with infringement, let alone sued them. Samsung stated that much of their design came from Google and Android during the infringement trial, remember? Apple's response was not to then sue Google, but instead to show where Samsung DEVIATED from the Google Android design language to copy Apple. In short, it can be said that Google only copied Apple inasmuch as Apple has proven to be very willing and capable of appropriating innovations from everyone else into their own products. Case in point: did Apple invent the web browser? Or is there any feature in Safari that did not exist in Netscape, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Chrome first?
If you are going to compare forcing someone in India, China, Indonesia or Kenya making $8000 a year to pay $499 upfront (because carriers don't subsidize devices in those markets) for a 5 year old iPhone 4 when that person could pay less than $200 for a very good Android alternative, then yeah, you are choosing to miss my point. And if your position is that people making $8000 a year in developing countries do not matter because no one can make a profit selling devices that cost so little, then you are further choosing to miss my point, especially when an iPod Shuffle costs $40.
Also, if Android phones are such bad devices, why do so many people keep buying them? Despite many rumors of its impending demise, premium Android device sales continue. They experienced a slowdown in their rate of growth in 2014 but appeared to pick back up again in 2015. With so many people in so many areas of the world buying Android phones that cost $500 or more - and some that cost nearly $1000 - I suppose people haven't caught on to how bad they are? Or maybe the notion that they are bad devices is an opinion of yours that they do not share?