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"
NeuralControl
Apr 2, 07:17 PM
I think this is an exceptional ad. Nicely done.
Burstl
May 3, 04:11 AM
I have a question. If u delete an App that way does it mean its completely gone, i mean under windows if you delete something you still find lots of folders related to the deleted program somewhere in the WINDOWS folder. I am not a Mac specialist so I am wondering, and is this the same when moving an app to the trash ...
DeSnousa
Aug 6, 08:47 PM
I'm sorry I'm really slow, I don't get the slogan :(
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0"
Do they mean that Leopard is years ahead of Vista, like if it were to be like Windows next version OS :confused:
:o
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0"
Do they mean that Leopard is years ahead of Vista, like if it were to be like Windows next version OS :confused:
:o
SciFrog
Nov 19, 06:16 AM
5 here at home, although the mac pro must use as much power as the four other combined...
Spoony
Apr 26, 02:31 PM
Yes you can... to a certain extent.
Two stores can be named the same if the name is generic in nature.
Apple didn't create the word "App Store". This has been proven in many threads about this very topic.
They popularized it and then went so far as to even give it generic meaning.
Steve did that himself. Now he's trying to lay claim to it after the fact.
Will he win... who knows.
But nothing is as black and white as many claim to believe it is.
Trademark law is complicated.
I've read through everone's comments and thought about it more and now I'm undecided. I see both sides and both points.
I get it "Pet Store" "Computer Store" etc.. "App Store"
Yes app is an old word, yes it is generic.
That being said no one outside computer people used that word. "App" won word of the year for 2010 b/c of apple.
So not sure but... If apple loses this that would be very frustrating for them. They created something, poured millions of dollars into advertising it "there's an app for that" and everyone else just gets to rise with their tide.
I'd say let microsoft and Amazon use the name if they both go on a month long ad blitz saying "we are going to copy apples app store name, although generic they made it famous and we are going to mooch off their success."
Two stores can be named the same if the name is generic in nature.
Apple didn't create the word "App Store". This has been proven in many threads about this very topic.
They popularized it and then went so far as to even give it generic meaning.
Steve did that himself. Now he's trying to lay claim to it after the fact.
Will he win... who knows.
But nothing is as black and white as many claim to believe it is.
Trademark law is complicated.
I've read through everone's comments and thought about it more and now I'm undecided. I see both sides and both points.
I get it "Pet Store" "Computer Store" etc.. "App Store"
Yes app is an old word, yes it is generic.
That being said no one outside computer people used that word. "App" won word of the year for 2010 b/c of apple.
So not sure but... If apple loses this that would be very frustrating for them. They created something, poured millions of dollars into advertising it "there's an app for that" and everyone else just gets to rise with their tide.
I'd say let microsoft and Amazon use the name if they both go on a month long ad blitz saying "we are going to copy apples app store name, although generic they made it famous and we are going to mooch off their success."
Doraemon
Apr 2, 07:24 AM
Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, [...]
What are you talking about? iTMS not generating profit? Geez, check your facts!
So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
Yeah, right. A $2500 "low-cost" computer. :rolleyes:
Again, check the facts.
What are you talking about? iTMS not generating profit? Geez, check your facts!
So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
Yeah, right. A $2500 "low-cost" computer. :rolleyes:
Again, check the facts.
jav6454
Mar 24, 08:12 PM
Okay, so it's more power hungry. Not an issue on a Mac Pro workstation, though. Anything else?
Yes, it's an issue. Mac Pros don't carry heavy duty PSUs.
Yes, it's an issue. Mac Pros don't carry heavy duty PSUs.
chutch15
Sep 13, 09:05 AM
There is certainly space.
MrCrowbar
Aug 24, 06:29 PM
One day I'll buy a mini - they look so sweet. And with a C2D they'll go sweet too!
Maybe dual optical drives like the Mac pro. This is getting standard on Macs obviously.
:p
Maybe dual optical drives like the Mac pro. This is getting standard on Macs obviously.
:p
mingspace
Oct 23, 09:10 PM
yes on the 31 we shall have a trick and a treat... ...MACBOO
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/macboo2-1.jpg
Anyone have a hunch on the price the new macbooks and MBPs?
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j248/jonathaniliff/macboo2-1.jpg
Anyone have a hunch on the price the new macbooks and MBPs?
rezenclowd3
Jan 10, 03:53 PM
Pretty fly zmmer with nice rims! Not tempted to squeeze 17/18s on? (Assuming it won't **** up the running gear/handling)
Nope, I will only go with 16's max if I do. I do not want to add more unsprung/rotating weight. Besides, it would not look period correct. I like the look of some sidewall. DD comfort would also be too negatively impacted with less sidewall due to the M3 springs and Biltstein dampers. It also has a 2.93 Diff mated to a ZF M3 tranny, so it doesn't have the pickup and go for Auto X, so heavier wheels would just be terrible. A 3.4x-3.7x lsd will be on its way for racing duty.
Nope, I will only go with 16's max if I do. I do not want to add more unsprung/rotating weight. Besides, it would not look period correct. I like the look of some sidewall. DD comfort would also be too negatively impacted with less sidewall due to the M3 springs and Biltstein dampers. It also has a 2.93 Diff mated to a ZF M3 tranny, so it doesn't have the pickup and go for Auto X, so heavier wheels would just be terrible. A 3.4x-3.7x lsd will be on its way for racing duty.
AppleIntelRock
Dec 30, 12:05 AM
It's possible to both be quite right here. HD is underestimated, but having greater demand than expected is a separate issue to overall market size.
Anyway, as you say... there are 2 separate markets - the 2 evolutions of PayTV are "on demand", and HD (or both together). People who have invested in a top notch TV will easily pay for HD players (like an iTV-HD). Others may just want to watch what they want, when they want it.
If Apple only releases a HD system, and it costs a premium, I won't end up buying it. I'd be paying for a premium that I couldn't take advantage of. And besides, at the moment the iTS sells 640x480 anyway.
Really, is that what you're doing in the US?
We've got Digital 576i in Australia as our standard definition, but it's in the 16:9 aspect ratio. Apple can choose whatever combination they want, I'm sure.
At least our TV's aren't upside down :D :cool: ;)
Anyway, as you say... there are 2 separate markets - the 2 evolutions of PayTV are "on demand", and HD (or both together). People who have invested in a top notch TV will easily pay for HD players (like an iTV-HD). Others may just want to watch what they want, when they want it.
If Apple only releases a HD system, and it costs a premium, I won't end up buying it. I'd be paying for a premium that I couldn't take advantage of. And besides, at the moment the iTS sells 640x480 anyway.
Really, is that what you're doing in the US?
We've got Digital 576i in Australia as our standard definition, but it's in the 16:9 aspect ratio. Apple can choose whatever combination they want, I'm sure.
At least our TV's aren't upside down :D :cool: ;)
Azathoth
May 3, 03:38 AM
This concept might seem alien to a lot of MacRumours users, but being a 'switcher', the method of deleting any app on OS X currently seems very ad hoc. I've been a mac user now for about 4 years and yet the idea of having to delete an app by dragging it to the trash seems very... strange. You never know if you've deleted ALL of that program.
Since trying Mac the past 12 months, the biggest problem I have is that the "drag to trash" is inconsistent, just like the install process!
Half the apps require me to drag to Applications (and drag to trash to uninstall), the other half require me to run the installer, and find the custom uninstaller to remove them.
This is hard to explain to my mother (though thankfully she seldom really needs to install / uninstall apps).
Since trying Mac the past 12 months, the biggest problem I have is that the "drag to trash" is inconsistent, just like the install process!
Half the apps require me to drag to Applications (and drag to trash to uninstall), the other half require me to run the installer, and find the custom uninstaller to remove them.
This is hard to explain to my mother (though thankfully she seldom really needs to install / uninstall apps).
Lord Blackadder
Mar 2, 04:21 PM
Nope, the new Jetta is built in Mexico. Off the top of my head, I'd say that the only German-built Volkswagens you can buy in the USA are the GTI and Tiguan. The Phaeton and R32 are (or were) also German-made. The Touareg is built in Slovakia, the Routan is built by Chrysler, and the Jetta, non-GTI Golf (except the R32) and New Beetles are all made in Mexico. Not sure about the Eos.
My father bought a 1988 Jetta brand new and it was a lemon. It had every issue under the sun, not the least of which is that it rusted terribly in five years (big holes in the floor and wheelwells!). I agree that the Mexican-built Volksawgens have struggled with build quality at times over the years, but that sweet Audi 1.8 turbo was a great motor.
As for the Cruze, I'm not sure how GM would manage a US-market diesel version. My best guess is that the diesel model would be built alongside the other US-market Cruzes at the Lordstown, OH assembly plant using complete VM Motori engines shipped from Italy.
My father bought a 1988 Jetta brand new and it was a lemon. It had every issue under the sun, not the least of which is that it rusted terribly in five years (big holes in the floor and wheelwells!). I agree that the Mexican-built Volksawgens have struggled with build quality at times over the years, but that sweet Audi 1.8 turbo was a great motor.
As for the Cruze, I'm not sure how GM would manage a US-market diesel version. My best guess is that the diesel model would be built alongside the other US-market Cruzes at the Lordstown, OH assembly plant using complete VM Motori engines shipped from Italy.
oracle_ab
Apr 27, 09:30 AM
Capitalization does not impact trademarks like you claim. "App Store" is the same as "app store".
Capitalization wasn't the point. It's the context in which a term or _name_ is used. Windows vs. windows, App Store vs. appstore/app store. "My house has windows," "My computer runs Windows." "I bought this on the App Store," "Modern smartphones have apps that can be purchased from their respective app store(s)." I don't believe Apple needs to include "Apple/iOS/The" before "App Store" to be granted a trademark patent on the term, its style (font, image/icon, etc.), or its brand. It's my understanding that a trademark must include these things and more, which is something that cannot be generalized. (And if I'm not mistaken, the capitalization would at least assist, from a visual cue when looking at the written language, in determining the context of the term in simple sentences like I've presented.)
Capitalization wasn't the point. It's the context in which a term or _name_ is used. Windows vs. windows, App Store vs. appstore/app store. "My house has windows," "My computer runs Windows." "I bought this on the App Store," "Modern smartphones have apps that can be purchased from their respective app store(s)." I don't believe Apple needs to include "Apple/iOS/The" before "App Store" to be granted a trademark patent on the term, its style (font, image/icon, etc.), or its brand. It's my understanding that a trademark must include these things and more, which is something that cannot be generalized. (And if I'm not mistaken, the capitalization would at least assist, from a visual cue when looking at the written language, in determining the context of the term in simple sentences like I've presented.)
Tmelon
Apr 1, 04:21 PM
So I guess we won’t see any new features… Apple is busy polishing what we’ve got now…:/
Basically. Now they just need to polish what they gave us. It's honestly a lot though. I wouldn't feel ripped off for them charging money for it.
Almost all of the Applications have been enhanced, autosave, Launchpad, Mission Control, Versions, resume, Multitouch gestures, full screen apps and the Mac App Store.
Basically. Now they just need to polish what they gave us. It's honestly a lot though. I wouldn't feel ripped off for them charging money for it.
Almost all of the Applications have been enhanced, autosave, Launchpad, Mission Control, Versions, resume, Multitouch gestures, full screen apps and the Mac App Store.
kobyh15
Apr 2, 09:39 PM
Just saw it on tv. Fantastic.
WeegieMac
Apr 1, 02:21 PM
Folders animation when opening/closing is a little improved, but still looks like a bottom range PC trying to run Half Life 2 on full settings. :D
iJohnHenry
Mar 19, 04:48 PM
It's totally 'legal', so if you don't like it, don't buy it, but don't stop others from doing so.
John Jacob
Jul 21, 08:00 AM
Here are historical Mac sales by quarter.
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
So we are still not back upto Q1 2000 numbers? :eek:
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
So we are still not back upto Q1 2000 numbers? :eek:
jholzner
Aug 24, 06:51 PM
As a previous poster pointed out, I don't think that conroe is compatible with the current Yonah procs. Only Merom is. Conroe requires a MB redesign.
Rt&Dzine
Mar 23, 01:52 PM
VERY disappointed in Apple, but hardly surprised.
Not saying its a "Good" app, as it is clearly ridiculous and ignorant, but hey, so is "Angry Birds" and half the other apps on the store. This one is simply politically incorrect, and Appl once again proved that they are at the beck and call of the PC special interest hootin n hollerin, just like porn-app-gate.
You don't like the idea that businesses can choose what they want to offer or not offer.
Not saying its a "Good" app, as it is clearly ridiculous and ignorant, but hey, so is "Angry Birds" and half the other apps on the store. This one is simply politically incorrect, and Appl once again proved that they are at the beck and call of the PC special interest hootin n hollerin, just like porn-app-gate.
You don't like the idea that businesses can choose what they want to offer or not offer.
sunfast
Aug 24, 06:23 PM
One day I'll buy a mini - they look so sweet. And with a C2D they'll go sweet too!
No comments:
Post a Comment