I should mod you but S-OFF can be gained on an HTC pretty easily using Revolutionary. Then you can gain root access of even change your ROM from there. I don't know if this method works on the newest of the new but it works on most HTC's out there.
iTunes on the PC is crap. They must have done a very poor port. It's about as bloated of a piece of software that does what it does that I have ever seen. Maybe they should have just wrote in something like JAVA that runs on all machines (supposedly).
Everyone knows that Facebook is the evil company now, with their new FaceBook OS, and new FB phones, and gadgets. They are everywhere now with even more spy data than Google has.
None of those companies had as many users and Yahoo is still around as are the other companies that you have just mentioned although Napster in name only. So you are saying FB is overvalued? Could be.
I doubt FB will be knocked off the roost by someone else including Twitter. The problem is, they were already making $1B a year before they IPO'd. I just don't see much growth in their stock unless they use all of that data to branch out into other areas besides "push" advertising. People have too many friends to jump.
Google has done so well by not having the add blockers stop them very often and only show items based on what someone is specifically looking for. Even without the add blockers, no one pays attention to FB adds at all.
If I'm a company I would rather have the people that want my product search for me instead of the other way around. Let's same I'm a company that makes log homes, then I would just advertise with Google using that keyword as there is no standout brand there. Maybe promoting your brand might work out on FaceBook if you don't already have people that know who you are.
To me FaceBook is a direct competitor to Google if advertising on their pages is the only way they have to make money and don't think they will do well taking them on. Maybe they could make some money in that app space, and with a few extra billions, start making gadgets. I just wonder what the plan is? When Google IPO'd, I had no doubt they would do well.
When you mix art and business, you have show business which is something Steve Jobs could do pretty well, but he must not have been a nerd, but shouldn't a nerd be smart enough to hire someone in sales that is good at it?
If so then I wonder what they are going to do as the click through rate is probably even worse for now but they do have a few more billions to improve some things. I think there is a big difference between a valuable company and valuable stock. No one is going to make much off of this in the long term IMO since the stock was already worth much more than Google when it had it's IPO, but FaceBook is the 800lb.gorilla of social media, but what does that mean as far as profiting from it? They do have a lot of data on a bunch of people. The adds that they have as of now clearly don't work with Chrome or FireFox as those are all blocked by add blockers anyhow. If advertising on their sites are their plan, then I don't see where they are going with that.
Google was no where as big of a company as FaceBook is now when they IPO'd. I just don't see where the money is to be made unless they branch out into Google's territory of search. FB adds are just harder to target than Google ones. They are half the price but without any click through. Branding would be about the only kind of advertising you do there unless FB gets into phones, gadgets, etc.
If there is a way to make money in social media FB IS the big player here.
Well if all he wants a toy for his wrist, I do believe they make those that fit up a little higher on your arm that will hold a smartphone. I'm sure Amazon sells them.
If he wants a watch, the get a real one made by the Swiss. Get the "Jamse Bond" model. I'm sure it does plenty of geeky things, but hey spy tech costs money.
I like you data, and I know this off subject but since FaceBook is valued so highly, you would think they would have a few more patents. They would have to earn $2 or $3 trillion in the next few years to even match the ROI of Google let alone Microsoft or Apple. "Big Bad" Microsoft comes to mind. If you would have invested in just a few shares in 1986 your increase would have been somewhere around 36,000% give or take 2,000% depending upon where you get you figures from. Apple may be overvalued because they are big but even so they have managed a 50% ROI for some time. So I wouldn't bet for Apple but I sure wouldn't bet against them either.
Slashdot Mirror
I should mod you but S-OFF can be gained on an HTC pretty easily using Revolutionary. Then you can gain root access of even change your ROM from there. I don't know if this method works on the newest of the new but it works on most HTC's out there.
iTunes on the PC is crap. They must have done a very poor port. It's about as bloated of a piece of software that does what it does that I have ever seen. Maybe they should have just wrote in something like JAVA that runs on all machines (supposedly).
They are only worth about $10 anyhow. Buy then.
Uh, just write us up one and we will use it. It's only 10 million lines of code.
Everyone knows that Facebook is the evil company now, with their new FaceBook OS, and new FB phones, and gadgets. They are everywhere now with even more spy data than Google has.
Yeah and their add blocking plug-in really works good for FaceBook.
I agree but it's not a totally foolproof method. Avoiding the most expensive form of prostitution in the world is. Just don't get married at all.
No you don't. Things change after that license goes into affect. It doesn't really matter. Hopefully it will work out for him.
THAT is NOT FUNNY. It should have been modded insightful though.
Twitter if anyone.
Yep /. has the right formula. Not everyone uses it but who cares? The ones that do know what it is.
None of those companies had as many users and Yahoo is still around as are the other companies that you have just mentioned although Napster in name only. So you are saying FB is overvalued? Could be.
I doubt FB will be knocked off the roost by someone else including Twitter. The problem is, they were already making $1B a year before they IPO'd. I just don't see much growth in their stock unless they use all of that data to branch out into other areas besides "push" advertising. People have too many friends to jump.
Google has done so well by not having the add blockers stop them very often and only show items based on what someone is specifically looking for. Even without the add blockers, no one pays attention to FB adds at all.
If I'm a company I would rather have the people that want my product search for me instead of the other way around. Let's same I'm a company that makes log homes, then I would just advertise with Google using that keyword as there is no standout brand there. Maybe promoting your brand might work out on FaceBook if you don't already have people that know who you are.
To me FaceBook is a direct competitor to Google if advertising on their pages is the only way they have to make money and don't think they will do well taking them on. Maybe they could make some money in that app space, and with a few extra billions, start making gadgets. I just wonder what the plan is? When Google IPO'd, I had no doubt they would do well.
When you mix art and business, you have show business which is something Steve Jobs could do pretty well, but he must not have been a nerd, but shouldn't a nerd be smart enough to hire someone in sales that is good at it?
If so then I wonder what they are going to do as the click through rate is probably even worse for now but they do have a few more billions to improve some things. I think there is a big difference between a valuable company and valuable stock. No one is going to make much off of this in the long term IMO since the stock was already worth much more than Google when it had it's IPO, but FaceBook is the 800lb.gorilla of social media, but what does that mean as far as profiting from it? They do have a lot of data on a bunch of people. The adds that they have as of now clearly don't work with Chrome or FireFox as those are all blocked by add blockers anyhow. If advertising on their sites are their plan, then I don't see where they are going with that.
Google was no where as big of a company as FaceBook is now when they IPO'd. I just don't see where the money is to be made unless they branch out into Google's territory of search. FB adds are just harder to target than Google ones. They are half the price but without any click through. Branding would be about the only kind of advertising you do there unless FB gets into phones, gadgets, etc.
If there is a way to make money in social media FB IS the big player here.
I'm only close to one tower. Triangulation plus GPS gives the best results on Google Maps.
Well if all he wants a toy for his wrist, I do believe they make those that fit up a little higher on your arm that will hold a smartphone. I'm sure Amazon sells them.
If he wants a watch, the get a real one made by the Swiss. Get the "Jamse Bond" model. I'm sure it does plenty of geeky things, but hey spy tech costs money.
http://www.omegawatches.com/
http://www.omegawatches.com/
I actually have a better answer than Sigma. Wear the watch that James Bond wears.....
http://www.sigmawatch.ch/catalog/frame_cat_en.html
There is the answer. Go Swiss if you have to have a watch.
Both statements are correct but thanks for the clarification.
I like you data, and I know this off subject but since FaceBook is valued so highly, you would think they would have a few more patents. They would have to earn $2 or $3 trillion in the next few years to even match the ROI of Google let alone Microsoft or Apple. "Big Bad" Microsoft comes to mind. If you would have invested in just a few shares in 1986 your increase would have been somewhere around 36,000% give or take 2,000% depending upon where you get you figures from. Apple may be overvalued because they are big but even so they have managed a 50% ROI for some time. So I wouldn't bet for Apple but I sure wouldn't bet against them either.
That's what I thought but apparently some stuff will always get through.
I thought the Iranians were complaining about Google not naming it the Arabian Gulf. Looks like I had it backwards.