Apple tried the 'vs' ads with their Mac vs Windows, and as popular as those ads were, they didn't help Apple much in sales.
Huh? When Apple started those ads they were a barely profitable niche player. After running those for 5 years (and making improvements) they owned about 80% of the profits from the PC market leaving everyone else fending for who gets to produce boxes for cost. And they are still growing, creating more users willing to pay them hundreds more for their perceived value.
Good point about Android manufacturers. That's part of the downside of a fragmented marketplace. RIM and Apple just have to sell you on their platform while Android people have to sell you on their particular models, and that's frankly hard when they are so generic. Which is precisely the problem PC manufacturers have had, they are selling a commodity.
The other thing is that Android does well selling to a lot of niches. Android feature phones don't do all the stuff the expensive HTC do either.
What Apple adds work on "There's an ap for that" = advantage of the app marketplace. Which is a real difference with Android. "Digital assistant" = advantage of Siri i-Cloud = advantage of integration Camera = actual about the technicals an area where the hardware is generally better.
Even the if you look at the earliest commercials they were about the intuitive nature of the apps.
The theme that Apple sells is: It does what you want, easily. And that goes with Apple's brand identity. Does what you want, easily.
Android's brand identity is "does lots of stuff". Which of course leads the average customer to think "hmmm that Android probably does more stuff than that Apple but does it do the right stuff?" Android marketing plays into this theme. Where Apple has problems is price perception. Android, even Smartphone Androids could advertise the cost and how your monthly bill is a huge subsidy to pay for a $700 phone.
You're right those are great commercials. HTC also does a wonderful job of keeping their phones up to data and has a great reputation. Had Verizon not signed Apple I would have gotten an HTC.
I have Siri and have always hated voice control for the last decade. Siri is about 70% successful in practice when you can't use the full interface (mainly, while driving). That ain't bad.
And I think issues are being confused:
1) feature phone vs. smart phone 2) android smart phone vs. Apple smart phone
You can make a good argument for whether $25-30 / mo (I don't know where $60 / mo is coming from) diff between feature and smart phone is worth the jump from EVDO data to 3G data with another $10 / mo going to additional subsidy, but that isn't exclusive to Apple that is equally an issue with a Feature phone vs. RIM/Blackberry or low end Android vs. high end.
I like the idea of centralized authorities better. Banks for example have doing essentially this sort of work for centuries and unlike peers can put their money behind getting it right.
But I'm not sure I buy that a decentralized system can't work. Say for example my browser looks at 3 authorities that I hand picked (possible defaults). Those 3 authorities are in a group of 100 authorities that they all query and require 5 to agree before passing it on. Each authority to register a business has to register physically with at least 5 of those authorities (i.e. going someplace and showing ID). How does that fall apart?
there is simply no way to rely on any number of "individuals" to issue correct information.
Sure there is, tie it to something like botnets don't have. Like a real telephone number, or cell phone number. Tie to a physical address and have verification information delivered by snail mail.
Actually slashdot people do have the ability to influence change. A huge percentage of e-commerce sites are written, managed or heavily influenced by people with at least one slashdot regular reader.
In the early 1990s it was absolutely the case that the Apples were more expensive. Apple likes to price gouging but their market share was falling so you could do well on the used market. By the 2000s it just wasn't the case anymore. And their markups are a little higher today but it is not gouging. It turns out to be in the 10-20% range if you are careful.
Is it really that bad? Nokia still sells about 2/3rds as much as they used to in raw numbers. I would think there is still plenty of work. Nokia, has hit a rough patch but...?
Actually Blackberry is still one of the best texting phones around. Used Blackberry feature phones are very popular in Europe among kids that text heavily because they are so good at texting.
As for game systems like XBOX, Apple doesn't make a game system.
And as for business workstations, Apple doesn't sell enterprise equipment.
Not really. A Porsche has to compete Mercedes sports car, they aren't competing with the $20k sports in any meaningful sense and they don't have to compete with a 4 door sedan.
He may not need vision for a while. Apple has because of rapid expansion ignored a lots of fundamentals where good engineering and good practice will take them far with their product lines. Doing nothing visionary but just focusing on moderate improvements will allow for tremendous growth and quality improvements.
It is possible. First off it did them a while to tank the first time. And arguably of all the manufacturers of non-PC hardware Apple lasted the longest and did the best. Where are Osborne, Commodore, Tandy, Digital at the time Apple had problems?
Ultimately Steve Jobs deserves incredibly credit for bringing the company back. But their coming back is not a gimmick, they have a real 2nd life.
Lets use an example 32gb iPad 2 WiFi + 3g costs Apple at point of assembly in China about $330 and sells for $729. That gross margin of 54% isn't their net shipping, handling, warranty, support,... so lets say $400 for purpose of argument. Even if the iPad 2 were worse, do you really think Apple couldn't move a ton $400? Lets say I'm wrong and they had to drop the price to $300, on about 10m units. That means they lose $100 per x 10m units or $1b.
I would argue that Netbooks were the fad, NOT tablets.
I would disagree I don't think they started as a fad.
The first wave of netbooks were mini computers for people who owned several. They played a role similar to smart phones do today. Clearly that demand was genuine.
The second wave was people who wanted portability. I have to tell you there are tens of millions for whom under 3 lbs is a huge huge plus. That is not a fad. I think that's the same group buying tablets.
The third wave was people who wanted ultra cheap and didn't realize how low they were going on durability. That group perhaps was a fad.
A dropbox hash is about 256 bits. There are ballpark about as many dropbox hashes as their atoms in the universe. You are unlikely to hit one by chance.
I think it did a lot damage for over a year or two during a crucial period of time when companies were seriously about possibly switching it created legal doubt as to Linux's standing. The legal issues were 2nd to the failure (with a few exceptions) of all but Unix shops transitioning in having killed corporate desktop Linux.
A writes code and gives it to B under the GPLv2. B has a GPLv2 license. B gives the code to C under the GPLv2 license. C gives the code to D under the GPLv3 license. C has a GPLv2 license and a GPLv3 license. D has a GPLv3 license only.
Now D can try and get a copy of the original from A or B, but the code he got from C is GPLv3 only for him.
Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Smartphone Customer Satisfaction Survey The only area where customers didn't like Apple was lack of 4G.
Huh? When Apple started those ads they were a barely profitable niche player. After running those for 5 years (and making improvements) they owned about 80% of the profits from the PC market leaving everyone else fending for who gets to produce boxes for cost. And they are still growing, creating more users willing to pay them hundreds more for their perceived value.
Good point about Android manufacturers. That's part of the downside of a fragmented marketplace. RIM and Apple just have to sell you on their platform while Android people have to sell you on their particular models, and that's frankly hard when they are so generic. Which is precisely the problem PC manufacturers have had, they are selling a commodity.
The other thing is that Android does well selling to a lot of niches. Android feature phones don't do all the stuff the expensive HTC do either.
What Apple adds work on
"There's an ap for that" = advantage of the app marketplace. Which is a real difference with Android.
"Digital assistant" = advantage of Siri
i-Cloud = advantage of integration
Camera = actual about the technicals an area where the hardware is generally better.
Even the if you look at the earliest commercials they were about the intuitive nature of the apps.
The theme that Apple sells is: It does what you want, easily.
And that goes with Apple's brand identity. Does what you want, easily.
Android's brand identity is "does lots of stuff". Which of course leads the average customer to think "hmmm that Android probably does more stuff than that Apple but does it do the right stuff?" Android marketing plays into this theme. Where Apple has problems is price perception. Android, even Smartphone Androids could advertise the cost and how your monthly bill is a huge subsidy to pay for a $700 phone.
You're right those are great commercials. HTC also does a wonderful job of keeping their phones up to data and has a great reputation. Had Verizon not signed Apple I would have gotten an HTC.
I just wish they did battery life.
For me
1) Not having to worry about how many apps I have
2) Music.
Where are you getting $60/mo? With most carriers the spread between feature phone and smart phone is $25-30/mo.
I have Siri and have always hated voice control for the last decade. Siri is about 70% successful in practice when you can't use the full interface (mainly, while driving). That ain't bad.
And I think issues are being confused:
1) feature phone vs. smart phone
2) android smart phone vs. Apple smart phone
You can make a good argument for whether $25-30 / mo (I don't know where $60 / mo is coming from) diff between feature and smart phone is worth the jump from EVDO data to 3G data with another $10 / mo going to additional subsidy, but that isn't exclusive to Apple that is equally an issue with a Feature phone vs. RIM/Blackberry or low end Android vs. high end.
The point of the authority is to verify you are who you claim to be. For example if you set up a website and called yourself IBM
I agree that's what I would like to do. Pick authorities that hate each other.
I like the idea of centralized authorities better. Banks for example have doing essentially this sort of work for centuries and unlike peers can put their money behind getting it right.
But I'm not sure I buy that a decentralized system can't work. Say for example my browser looks at 3 authorities that I hand picked (possible defaults). Those 3 authorities are in a group of 100 authorities that they all query and require 5 to agree before passing it on. Each authority to register a business has to register physically with at least 5 of those authorities (i.e. going someplace and showing ID). How does that fall apart?
Sure there is, tie it to something like botnets don't have. Like a real telephone number, or cell phone number. Tie to a physical address and have verification information delivered by snail mail.
Hmmm so Nokia is focused short term rather than longer term partnerships. I guess that's how they run their business from the outside so...
Actually slashdot people do have the ability to influence change. A huge percentage of e-commerce sites are written, managed or heavily influenced by people with at least one slashdot regular reader.
In the early 1990s it was absolutely the case that the Apples were more expensive. Apple likes to price gouging but their market share was falling so you could do well on the used market. By the 2000s it just wasn't the case anymore. And their markups are a little higher today but it is not gouging. It turns out to be in the 10-20% range if you are careful.
Is it really that bad? Nokia still sells about 2/3rds as much as they used to in raw numbers. I would think there is still plenty of work. Nokia, has hit a rough patch but ...?
Actually Blackberry is still one of the best texting phones around. Used Blackberry feature phones are very popular in Europe among kids that text heavily because they are so good at texting.
As for game systems like XBOX, Apple doesn't make a game system.
And as for business workstations, Apple doesn't sell enterprise equipment.
Not really. A Porsche has to compete Mercedes sports car, they aren't competing with the $20k sports in any meaningful sense and they don't have to compete with a 4 door sedan.
He may not need vision for a while. Apple has because of rapid expansion ignored a lots of fundamentals where good engineering and good practice will take them far with their product lines. Doing nothing visionary but just focusing on moderate improvements will allow for tremendous growth and quality improvements.
It is possible. First off it did them a while to tank the first time. And arguably of all the manufacturers of non-PC hardware Apple lasted the longest and did the best. Where are Osborne, Commodore, Tandy, Digital at the time Apple had problems?
Ultimately Steve Jobs deserves incredibly credit for bringing the company back. But their coming back is not a gimmick, they have a real 2nd life.
Lets use an example 32gb iPad 2 WiFi + 3g costs Apple at point of assembly in China about $330 and sells for $729. That gross margin of 54% isn't their net shipping, handling, warranty, support, ... so lets say $400 for purpose of argument. Even if the iPad 2 were worse, do you really think Apple couldn't move a ton $400? Lets say I'm wrong and they had to drop the price to $300, on about 10m units. That means they lose $100 per x 10m units or $1b.
Apple would be fine.
I would disagree I don't think they started as a fad.
The first wave of netbooks were mini computers for people who owned several. They played a role similar to smart phones do today. Clearly that demand was genuine.
The second wave was people who wanted portability. I have to tell you there are tens of millions for whom under 3 lbs is a huge huge plus. That is not a fad. I think that's the same group buying tablets.
The third wave was people who wanted ultra cheap and didn't realize how low they were going on durability. That group perhaps was a fad.
They aren't meaningfully competing against handbuilt. Compare them against a major name brand: Dell , Toshiba, Acer....
A dropbox hash is about 256 bits. There are ballpark about as many dropbox hashes as their atoms in the universe. You are unlikely to hit one by chance.
I think it did a lot damage for over a year or two during a crucial period of time when companies were seriously about possibly switching it created legal doubt as to Linux's standing. The legal issues were 2nd to the failure (with a few exceptions) of all but Unix shops transitioning in having killed corporate desktop Linux.
No its not tricky.
A writes code and gives it to B under the GPLv2.
B has a GPLv2 license.
B gives the code to C under the GPLv2 license.
C gives the code to D under the GPLv3 license.
C has a GPLv2 license and a GPLv3 license.
D has a GPLv3 license only.
Now D can try and get a copy of the original from A or B, but the code he got from C is GPLv3 only for him.