h'biki
Apr 16, 03:21 AM
when marketshare is almost 0 % you are close to dying, look a 1 % of all new machines built is not giving me any confidence in the platform. sure we have 10 % in a installed platform but are loosing everywhere( thank you motorola for holding up the ass end. Fact is Pcs are running away from Mac and when a 500 dollar machine kicks a new $2000 Imac its time to say so long to Jobs and his croonies. Supported you guys way to long at my expense.
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
peakchua
Jun 23, 10:12 AM
i hope that apple will not implement touch screen **** due to other companies pressure. i would make 2 series. imac touch which has ok specs and a touch screen and imac pro which is HIGH SPECS, BEAUTIFUL DISPLAY, and cheaper. personally, i would like touch to be INTEGRATED not with ibitchos layer. (sorry kinda pissed apple is all IPHONE!!) if a touchscreen must be used, do not implement ios since its such a smartphone based os.
dmcgann
Sep 8, 03:58 PM
i think apple will announce a hard drive specifically for these downloads approx the size of a dvd player! you put it on top of your dvd player and you can download the movie to the hard drive through airport! you can then wirelessly control the hard drive with your computer! this would make high def a possibility! just a thought!
Small White Car
Apr 12, 09:34 PM
People detection or NSA spoofer code. People should have the right to turn this stuff off. Hope FCP doesn't impose it without an option to disable.
I like that you're paranoid enough to think the NSA has inserted spyware into Final Cut Pro but not paranoid enough to think that they'd just ignore an 'off switch' in the program. ;)
I like that you're paranoid enough to think the NSA has inserted spyware into Final Cut Pro but not paranoid enough to think that they'd just ignore an 'off switch' in the program. ;)
deputy_doofy
Jul 19, 04:42 PM
This is actually the general trend in the computer market since the rise of
portables against desktop machines. Portables are becoming increasingly
powerful (computational-wise) up to the point that the line between them
and Desktops is blurred.
Agreed. I love my dual-proc G5, but a little more than a year later, I still find myself using my PB G4 more simply because it's with me almost all the time. That said, I'll be buying a nice, little portable monster (MPB w/C2D) to rival my G5. :D
portables against desktop machines. Portables are becoming increasingly
powerful (computational-wise) up to the point that the line between them
and Desktops is blurred.
Agreed. I love my dual-proc G5, but a little more than a year later, I still find myself using my PB G4 more simply because it's with me almost all the time. That said, I'll be buying a nice, little portable monster (MPB w/C2D) to rival my G5. :D
regtamac
May 2, 07:27 PM
Hello,
As was already mentioned this feature just deletes (and only apps from the Mac App Store it seems) not uninstalls an app along with its related files. To find out more or to ask any questions just visit my site below. All the best!
Reggie Ashworth
AppDelete Developer
www.reggieashworth.com (http://www.reggieashworth.com)
As was already mentioned this feature just deletes (and only apps from the Mac App Store it seems) not uninstalls an app along with its related files. To find out more or to ask any questions just visit my site below. All the best!
Reggie Ashworth
AppDelete Developer
www.reggieashworth.com (http://www.reggieashworth.com)
siurpeeman
Jan 12, 12:45 AM
i think you guys are all missing the big picture. "smell in the air"? obviously, mac os x is bringing smell-o-vision (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smell-o-vision)! that's right, you heard it here first. :)
theBigD23
Apr 2, 12:35 PM
One item that bothers me is that Apple removed deleting crop from preview in SL and this continues in LIon. You can still crop a PDF but it won't delete the info, only hide it.
hulugu
Nov 29, 09:09 PM
My thoughts exactly.
I'm all for the iPod, I'm happy with my 8GB red nano, but come on people, give the Zune a chance. Many of you are being petty, and I think that this is a stupid comparison.
There is only one Zune model anyway, are they comparing it to the countless models of the iPod?
Is that fair?
Are iPod Shuffles included? Is that fair, considering the price?
I can't access the link for some reason.
First, the Zune reviews have been nearly universally bad, so I think the Zune got a chance and failed.
Secondly, the Zune is number six on Amazon's Bestseller list when compared to hard-drive based players, following three models of the iPod and the Creative Zen Vision. However, the Zune is 17 when compared to all Mp3-players. What does this tell us? Is the Zune a good product, or has the Mp3-player market abandoned the hard-drive based market for flash?
Should other iPods been included, yes and here's why, the Zune has to compete with all the iPods, because it uses a different DRM-scheme and thus is in competition with the entire iPod market. That's the Zune's real problem, it's competing with the whole ecosystem now.
I'm all for the iPod, I'm happy with my 8GB red nano, but come on people, give the Zune a chance. Many of you are being petty, and I think that this is a stupid comparison.
There is only one Zune model anyway, are they comparing it to the countless models of the iPod?
Is that fair?
Are iPod Shuffles included? Is that fair, considering the price?
I can't access the link for some reason.
First, the Zune reviews have been nearly universally bad, so I think the Zune got a chance and failed.
Secondly, the Zune is number six on Amazon's Bestseller list when compared to hard-drive based players, following three models of the iPod and the Creative Zen Vision. However, the Zune is 17 when compared to all Mp3-players. What does this tell us? Is the Zune a good product, or has the Mp3-player market abandoned the hard-drive based market for flash?
Should other iPods been included, yes and here's why, the Zune has to compete with all the iPods, because it uses a different DRM-scheme and thus is in competition with the entire iPod market. That's the Zune's real problem, it's competing with the whole ecosystem now.
Edge100
Jan 2, 09:42 AM
Sorry if someone else has mentioned this already, but I also expect Apple to announce (if not release) a new version of Logic, either at MWSF or at NAMM, which starts about a week later.
The latter is more likely, since its a music industry event, but one way or another, Logic is due for an upgrade. Seriously!
Perhaps not of interest to everyone, but important for the musicians here...
The latter is more likely, since its a music industry event, but one way or another, Logic is due for an upgrade. Seriously!
Perhaps not of interest to everyone, but important for the musicians here...
diogowerner
Aug 7, 05:29 AM
Mac OS X Leopard for Mac+PC :eek:
While MS is thinking about an "iPod killer", Apple releases a "Windows killer" :p
While MS is thinking about an "iPod killer", Apple releases a "Windows killer" :p
alec
Oct 23, 10:11 AM
New MacBook Pro's and video iPods for some, abortions and miniature American flags for others
Stella
Jul 19, 04:51 PM
The figures seem OKish.
'
However, Apple are still slacking on markets outside the u.s
"International sales accounted for 39 percent of the quarter�s revenue."
Apple really need to sort themselves out.
'
However, Apple are still slacking on markets outside the u.s
"International sales accounted for 39 percent of the quarter�s revenue."
Apple really need to sort themselves out.
Stella
Jun 22, 10:41 PM
Actually maybe.
That would be a gigantic step backwards. Only being able to run Applications deemed worthy by Apple? It maybe fine for your very average PC user who writes email, iWorks, and browses internet - but anyone else - crippling.
I suppose they could have two flavours of the OS - the locked down version called "Th iOS desktop Disney Edition"! :)
That would be a gigantic step backwards. Only being able to run Applications deemed worthy by Apple? It maybe fine for your very average PC user who writes email, iWorks, and browses internet - but anyone else - crippling.
I suppose they could have two flavours of the OS - the locked down version called "Th iOS desktop Disney Edition"! :)
Project
Jan 11, 06:04 PM
i highly highly doubt they are calling it the "macbook air." that's borderline laughable.
I said the same thing about the rumours of the Powerbook becoming the "MacBook Pro"
I said the same thing about the rumours of the Powerbook becoming the "MacBook Pro"
karlfranz
Aug 24, 07:44 PM
I went to buy a Mac Mini (single core) at my local Apple Dealer Wednesday and was told that they didn't have any in stock and that Apple has told them not to place any further orders on the current model. This rumor seems to fall in line with what I experienced.
brianfast
Sep 14, 02:49 PM
I got the Belkin Grip Vue in the blue color at bestbuy. Really a toss up between the three colors IMO.
ozreth
Nov 25, 12:31 AM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C0o2GAJGL._SS500_.jpg
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
No clue but could you please tell me where to purchase it? Its exactly what Im looking for!
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
No clue but could you please tell me where to purchase it? Its exactly what Im looking for!
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
0815
May 2, 04:59 PM
MAS? The Muslim American Society? The Municipal Art Society of NY? Malaysia Airlines? Monetary Authority of Singapore?
Confused :confused::confused::confused:
Try MacAppStore (you know, the generic name with Mac in front of it)
Confused :confused::confused::confused:
Try MacAppStore (you know, the generic name with Mac in front of it)
gkarris
Nov 29, 09:26 AM
I think that 17" is great - they've got'em already with the iMac. Prices to need to drop with the market. They'll still be more as the monitors are of better quality. IMHO:
17" - $399
20" - $599
23" - $899
30" - $1899
Bring back a $499 Mac Mini and a basic mouse and you have an inexpensive system!
(Maybe Apple could make a special "bundle" for $899?)
17" - $399
20" - $599
23" - $899
30" - $1899
Bring back a $499 Mac Mini and a basic mouse and you have an inexpensive system!
(Maybe Apple could make a special "bundle" for $899?)
HecubusPro
Sep 6, 06:06 PM
Personally, I wouldn't want to DL a large movie file without the option of being able to burn it to DVD so I can have that tangible hard copy that makes me feel safe and warm. Then I wouldn't have a problem deleting it off of my hard drive.
I could be wrong, but I don't see them dealing with rentals. Most people still don't have fast enough connections to warrant downloading a big movie file when they can just have it delivered to their door via Netflix or they can head down to their local Blockbuster and have it right away. Same goes for purchases. I like having the retail box. It just makes me a little bit happier. :) Now, if they offered HD downloads, I'd definitely be interested in that, even if it is a super big file.
I could be wrong, but I don't see them dealing with rentals. Most people still don't have fast enough connections to warrant downloading a big movie file when they can just have it delivered to their door via Netflix or they can head down to their local Blockbuster and have it right away. Same goes for purchases. I like having the retail box. It just makes me a little bit happier. :) Now, if they offered HD downloads, I'd definitely be interested in that, even if it is a super big file.
Stella
Mar 19, 04:31 PM
All about the oil... "protect the citizens" is a perfect excuse. Sadly, because this is what it should be about.
idunn
Apr 21, 05:47 PM
;) Of the nine specific questions Senator Al Franken posed to Mr. Jobs, the ninth may prove the most revealing:
'To whom, if anyone, including Apple, has this data been disclosed? When and why were these disclosures made?'
'To whom, if anyone, including Apple, has this data been disclosed? When and why were these disclosures made?'
No comments:
Post a Comment