muthuk_vanalingam

9secondkox2 said:

Old twitter: didn't do much and still couldn't implement any changes over the course of forever.

New Twitter: Pivots multiple times in a week from day 1 to verify what works and what doesn't.

I'll take New Twitter every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Strange article though. Making official statements on things that have not been communicated is odd. Twitter was a mess and needs a LOT of overhaul. These feature tests aren't going away anytime soon. Twitter is coming up with great ideas and then reading the room.

Instead of acting like an old, crusty telecom or Microsoft, it has trimmed the fat and acting like a startup - a lean, mean freedom of speech machine. Just because it made a decision doesn't mean it has to stick with it if it was the wrong one, no matter how right it seemed in the boardroom. They are reading the room and responding quickly - something universally recognized as a good thing. Some people are just mad because they wanted to bash the decision forever. and then get upset that their little target for hate has been removed. It's hilarious.

Twitter is finally in the hands of someone who is not only a very capable and hugely successful businessman, but someone with vision, enthusiasm, and a drive to be a unifying factor for freedom over the draconian political hitmen of yesterday. 

Looking forward to what is next.

JP234 said:

Since this is an Apple Insider forum, an appropriate example of historic trends seems appropriate.

On January 26th, 1996, Sun Microsystems was in talks to buy up Apple, then worth $3.89 billion. Sun's market cap was over $10.6 billion.
Today, Apple's market cap is $2.18 trillion. Sun was sold to Oracle Corporation in 2009 for $5.6 billion, and no longer exists.

It remains to be seen how social media providers' competition for revenue shakes out, but the previous example speaks to the unpredicatbility of long term trends in customers' and clients' loyalties to tech providers. And with both customers and advertising clients abandoning existing social media platforms in large numbers, it's possible (even likely) the arc of their dominance will echo AOL's. No telling if a new social media platform will emerge to take their place, but it's also possible that global consumers have had enough of the toxic atmosphere generated by the lack of accountability or consequence. When I insult you in person, I risk violent retaliation, and thus am more likely to be civil. The anonymity and lack of physical proximity encourage the worst human instincts, as proven on ALL social media platforms. I've had enough. This is now the only forum in which I engage, and have been saddened by the increasing incivility I've been seeing here.

eriamjh said:

Apple will select the target price range and do their best to provide the best phone at the best margin.   Bigger phone with lower specs or smaller phone with better specs? 

That is how I see them “deciding”.  Which one will sell more and make the most money is what they are trying to figure out.  

beowulfschmidt said:

I suppose if you can get away with telling them "no", then tell them "no".

Two questions I wonder about (and have no idea of the answers):

1.  Who else can supply the type and volume of chips Apple needs without a major retooling effort?  Intel?

2.  Who does TSMC have queuing up for chip fab to use up any capacity left unfulfilled by a departure or reduction by Apple?

I would suspect the answers to at least one of those would give a clue as to who cries "uncle" first.