gregg thurman

About

Username
gregg thurman
Joined
Visits
55
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
985
Badges
1
Posts
456
  • Apple sold about 600,000 HomePods in the first quarter

    claire1 said:
    Not sure why HomePod is constantly being compared to Echo when this is a bluetooth speaker competitor like Beats Pill and those popular JBLs.
    I agree, but that's the way it is.

    Looking at revenues (as an investor I'm far more interested in revenue than I am units sold) I find that Amazon's Echo generated about $196 Million with gross margins of approximately 14%. ($27.4 million) in a THREE month period.

    If the 600,000 units sold reported by Strategy Analytics is accurate, then HomePod generated $209.4 million in revenue with gross margins of about 44% ($92.1 million) in a TWO month period.

    IOW, on 15% of Echo unit volume, HomePod generated 3.3X gross margin dollars.

    It's obvious that Amazon's intent with the Echo is not to make a profit, rather Amazon wants a device (no matter how cheaply made) to drive more Amazon online sales.  I don't see it.  When I buy something online I want to see what it is that I'm buying and maybe do some comparison shopping.

    Will Apple ever sell as many HomePods as do Amazon or Google?  No.  The focus of the former is low-cost volume with profits driven from other aspects of their respective businesses.  Apple focus is producing the best quality products that appeal to a more affluent and discerning geographic.  Criticisms of SIRI are overblown in my opinion.  True, SIRI can't respond with as much info as does Alexa and Google Home, but I think it is important to understand that Alexa and Google Home rely on cloud ML to improve, while SIRI's ML is device limited.  Over time SIRI's response to the user will become more and more accurate without giving up privacy.
    retrogustothth2paxcoatlRonnnieOjmey267watto_cobra
  • Apple Music rival Tidal accused of late royalty payments, inflating listener numbers

    Except that Tidal is the best music streaming service available.  It's the only service that will stream its entire catalogue in lossless data formats, making it the best format for serious audiophiles.  It also has an amazing host of extras -- music videos, advance rights to certain concert tickets, etc.
    "Serious audiophiles"  Not to denigrate their appreciation of high-quality sound reproduction, "serious" audiophiles amount to a very, very small segment (dare I say less than 1%?) of the streaming music market.  As a marketing point to the masses, lossless isn't an issue (especially those that buy Amazon or Google smart speakers).

    Apple Music's target market is much, much larger than the "serious" audiophile market.  That's probably why it doesn't provide lossless reproduction.  That shouldn't be construed as a weakness on the part of anybody not offering lossless.
    tmaytechconckiltedgreenjony0watto_cobra
  • Solar-powered iPhone X 'Tesla' by Caviar goes on sale for $4,500

    supadav03 said:
    What a ridiculous waste of money 
    I agree.  I carry a 40,000ma battery extender that cost under $80.  I get about 5 recharges from it and it doesn't change the iPhone's appearance.

    Now if I knew I was going to be off the grid and in the middle of the Antartic for more than a week the Tesla might be a good idea.  But then cell signals in the middle of the Antartic don't exist, so it is a moot point.
    watto_cobra
  • How Steve Jobs changed the face of retail with the Apple Store

    Many think the iMac, iPod or iPhone saved Apple and started its trek to where it is today. I disagree. Without the Stores (that predate the iPod) people would have remained unaware that there was something other than Windows.  There was also OSX, followed by iOS. They were each easier to use and far more stable, but you had to experience them to see the difference. 

    And so began the journey. 

    The the same thing is now happening in the enterprise. Before Apple’s partnership with IBM the enterprise was blind to anything not Windows. That is changing today.  By 2030 I can see MacOS as the dominant platform in the enterprise. 
    lolliverradarthekatchasmdoozydozenwatto_cobraHarriganronnjas99danox
  • Latest iPhone X ad 'studio in your pocket' touts Portrait Lighting

    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    nunzy said:
    Professional photographers use iPhone for their shoots.
    As a challenge or proof of concept but not for a living AFAIK. An iPhone or any other current smartphone would be far too limiting for professional portraiture on a regular basis. But yeah it can obviously be done, where there's a will there's a way. 
    Man, you are tedious, aren’t you?
    Man you aren't particular about accuracy? Nah, I don't see it as tedious. Continuously misleading would be tedious... Continuously cheerleading would be tedious...
    Tedious not tedious?  Who cares?  Overwhelmingly, the majority of iPhone owners ARE NOT professionals with a truck load of gear, and hopefully the eye to use it. 

    “The best best camera is the one you have.”

    the iPhone’s Portrait mode takes superior pictures when compared to anything short of a professional studio. Even then, I’m sure Portrait mode can take better photos than many I’ve seen from “professionals”. 

    For the critics, get over it. For the cheerleaders, take a deep breath. 
    watto_cobra