Last Active
  • Phil Schiller again defends Touch Bar MacBook Pro's 16GB RAM limitation

    It is getting very difficult for Apple to innovate in their physical products because unlike other brands they need to produce hundreds of thousands up to tens of millions of the devices at launch.

    Bleeding or even leading edge technology is never going to be able to be produced in such numbers.

    That is the price of success. Sure I want an OLED screen in my iPhone 3 years ago but I will probably still be waiting for delivery of that iPhone 5S because no one can make enough OLED screens to meet the number of iPhone 5S sold to date. Same with new memory tech...
  • Samsung says US Galaxy S7 phones safe despite scattered incidents

    Didn't they say pretty much the same thing about the Note 7?
  • Lyft attempted sale to Apple, Didi Chuxing, Uber, GM, others

    designr said:
    shard said:
    Just look at Friendster, MySpace etc they had super valuations but they pretty much died when the next thing came along ending with Facebook. You are correct that it is all about business execution, but these companies are too easily replicated.

    Lets use a very simplistic example, you need an army, a moat and a wall to protect your castle. With these companies, you are defending with just an army because the moat and the wall can be bypassed with almost no effort.

    On the topic of Facebook, in the early days it was as vulnerable as everyone of those before it but it has now grown to be something more than software and a business plan and it is constantly evolving.

    As for the likes of Uber/Lyft, Uber got beaten in China and had to leave with some face saving deal, they are losing money in other markets where there are local competition. Local competition that only showed up because of Uber.

    I realize all businesses (except those protected by the government) are subject to the creative destruction forces of market competition (in your examples Friendster and MySpace vs. Facebook). But this still does not rise to support your previous claim that they "are fundamentally worthless because it is just software and a business plan."

    If you wish to change your argument (for example to the claim they are fundamentally worthless because they are operating illegally or going up against government protected businesses), please do. But that claim is ridiculous.

    "Local competition that only showed up because of Uber."

    Wow. Great. Thanks Uber! The market works. You seem to be implying that I think they (Uber, Lyft, etc.) are immune from competitive forces. Not at all. The only ones that are really immune are those with government protection from competition (e.g., taxi drivers in many cities).
    You are arguing against 2 different people like we are one and hence putting words in our mouths... I am the one that posted about Lyft being just software and a business plan, someone else posted about them being illegal or something.

    I mentioned Friendster and MySpace and local competition for Uber not because the market works. It is because what Friendster/MySpace and Lyft/Uber does can be so easily replicated by being "just software and a business plan" and when done by others either more familiar with local markets or with better execution they fail to compete even though they are earlier to market.

    This is my personal opinion and it's pointless to further the discussion as you seem intent to disagree for the sake of disagreeing to the point that you can't tell separate posters apart.
  • Lyft attempted sale to Apple, Didi Chuxing, Uber, GM, others

    These companies are fundamentally worthless because it is just software and a business plan. It can be replicated very easily. The only thing they have going for them is the branding and that is worth pennies to the dollar.
    tallest skilronnlordjohnwhorfin
  • FBR is latest firm to cut iPhone 6s estimates, but expects 'mega product cycle' for 'iPhone 7'

    Ok I'm confused. IF iPhone growth is slowing according to these clowns why do they think iPhone 7 is going to be some "mega product cycle"? Just because it's going to look different than the 6 aesthetically? We've heard next to no rumors about the 7, certainly nothing that would suggest it's going to be a major upgrade over the 6S. This all sounds like nonsense to me.
    Traditionally if past releases are a guide, the change in number is always a major release and not just cosmetically.