cnocbui
About
- Banned
- Username
- cnocbui
- Joined
- Visits
- 15
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- -280
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 3,613
Reactions
-
First video of functional Lightning EarPods hits the web
mac_128 said:cnocbui said:I think it is all about making more money. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple have a new wireless audio streaming protocol that will be lossless, which they will do the usual spin with on why it's better than lossy Bluetooth. Then they won't have to pay aptX to use their lossless BT codec. That way they will get royalties from every headphone manufacturer who want to make a lightning compatible wired headphone and from those that want to make wireless earbuds and headphones that use the new protocol - ka-ching. They will also sell the 3.5mm adapter for everyone else who want's to use anything legacy - ka-ching.
This is the Gionee Eliife S5.1. It is 5.2mm thick - 1.9mm thinner than an 6S. It still manages to have a 3.5mm headphone jack. It came out in 2014.
I don't think phones need to be even this thin. There would have to be structural strength issues and I would suspect such phones probably have to rely on the inherent strength of the screen glass.
So it's quite clear the 3.5mm jack is not an impediment to making a phone thin. Oppo make an even thinner phone, the R5, which doesn't have a 3.5mm jack and comes with a micro USB dongle, much like Apple's equally inelegant 'solution'.
Phone manufacturers keep doing this thin thing but in a survey of phone users the most important feature is battery life.
By the way, are you saying that Elife otherwise competes with the flagship iPhone with 1:1 parity in performance, hardware and function? If so, you should dump your Apple stock and invest in them, because according to you Apple is removing the 3.5mm Jack that is so widely used worldwide, in order to gouge its customers, so it would be hard to imagine anyone staying with Apple when they can get everything the Apple flagship offers, Even thinner, and with a headphone jack.
-
First video of functional Lightning EarPods hits the web
alexmac said:For me the point is that we had a standard with rather good quality, specs, size, etc and what's the deal for changing it? Water resistant, really? Thickness, really? (With the horrible camera hump)
This is the Gionee Eliife S5.1. It is 5.2mm thick - 1.9mm thinner than an 6S. It still manages to have a 3.5mm headphone jack. It came out in 2014.
I don't think phones need to be even this thin. There would have to be structural strength issues and I would suspect such phones probably have to rely on the inherent strength of the screen glass.
So it's quite clear the 3.5mm jack is not an impediment to making a phone thin. Oppo make an even thinner phone, the R5, which doesn't have a 3.5mm jack and comes with a micro USB dongle, much like Apple's equally inelegant 'solution'.
Phone manufacturers keep doing this thin thing but in a survey of phone users the most important feature is battery life.However if there is one particular area in which many users chose to focus on, it would be battery life. Compared to the other features, many felt that battery life was the most important feature to them, with 56% of Android users choosing battery, 49% for iOS, and 53% for Windows Phone. These are some pretty interesting statistics and perhaps one that smartphone OEMs should take into consideration.
...
This is according to a recent survey conducted by the IDC of 50,000 participants in 25 countries.
-
Microsoft lays off 2,850 more people in continued retreat from phones
I don't understand Nadella at all. He talks multi-platform then deliberately destroys their capability in terms of phones, an entire platform, the ones where future developments and growth are most likely to be and arguable the most important platform. I can't see how he isn't actually worse than Ballmer.
How can you talk multi-platform and then get rid of one?
Hey world, remember that upgrade path from 8.1 to 10 we promised you several times, well that isn't going to happen because I just fired everyone who works for us who worked on phones so you won't have to worry about future OS upgrades anymore because there won't be any; clever, non? Now I have more good news for you - before I got rid of the phone guys, I had them run up a bunch of new phone models I think are really exciting..... hey! Where are you all going? Why are you leaving? These are really good, and you won't have to bother with an OS upgrade ever again... Come back.... please... I don't understand...
-
Australian banks say Apple Pay is anticompetitive, appeal to anti-trust regulators
laytech said:Surprise, surprise. This is utter disgusting behaviour by the Australian bank cartel. Whilst they may be a tiny argument it stinks of protectivism of their own interests and profits.
Apples offering is all about safer and more secure payments, and one that offers consumers a better choice.
If other banks around the world particular in the UK and US have embraced this technology then clearly the banks argument in Australia is all about them and not in the interests of anyone else.
i am shocked, disappointed and alarmed at this. Quite honestly, the Government should be holding the banks to account for stifling innovation and choice.
The banks should feel disgusted with themselves for trying to keep Australia in the dark ages of technology.
I hear you have a house to rent. I'll tell you what, I don't want to pay you rent, I want you you to pay me $100 a week to live in your house. That ok with you? When can can I move in?
-
Apple reaps $7 billion after finalizing latest bond sale
radarthekat said:cnocbui said:Not engaging in these ridiculous buybacks in the first place.I’ve heard a lot of analysts as well as retail investors suggest that share repurchases are nothing more than financial engineering, implying that they do nothing to add value to a company or its stock.But there's an additional, and I think significant, value of share repurchases and dividend payments that comes from removing unproductive excess cash from the balance sheet. Lets look at Apple, with a $570 billion market cap and about $160 billon of cash and equivalents on the books, net of debt. Therefore, a dollar invested in Apple represents about 78 cents invested in the actual operating business, which is where the profits come from, and about 22 cents invested to buy a bit of that cash pile, earning about 1%. Arguably a less-than-ideal allocation of each invested dollar.So a smart investor wants that cash removed from the books, which would either reduce the market cap of the company or, if the cash isn't being valued at even 1x its value, which could be argued is the case with Apple, removing that cash would leave the market cap where it is, which would then imply a higher earnings multiple against the productive operating side of the business, while also taking shares off the market, which would increase earnings per share going forward.And a higher earnings multiple means that as earnings grow in the future, the stock will climb faster. Carl Icahn must have had all of these effects in mind - more efficient allocation of investor's dollars, increase in earnings multiple against operating business, and reduction in shares netting an increase in earnings per remaining share - when he approached Tim Cook years ago. Pity he didn't articulate his case better.
Obviously it's impossible to prove, but I think if Apple had told Icahn to go fly a kite and had spent half as much on increasing dividends as they have on buybacks, the share price would be at least 80% higher than it is.