Lately they've been on a buying spree that only rivals Cisco. They bought Wyse in order to play in the thin client space for enterprise. They bought Quest Software in order to get identity management and software two-factor security solutions. They bought Credant Technologies for a software disk encryption suite that supports key escrow and central policy management. Etc.
They are trying to purchase their way further into the enterprise market.
So for years, everyone bitches that Apple doesn't give dividends and doesn't do stock buybacks because they are putting the money back into the business.
Then Apple declares a dividend and a stock buyback initiative, and now people bitch that they should be putting that money back into the business.
Because Apple has never sold things that use colored polycarbonate plastic before. Or differentiated a product line with cheaper alternatives while maintaining the same base functionality (Mac Mini, iPod Mini, iPod Shuffle, iPod Nano).
And none of those things ever occurred while Mr. Jobs was in the CEO's office.
Except that one or two of the investments made after the founder was forced out, saved Apple at their darkest hour, and continues to pay dividends today - their share of ARM Holdings, and their perpetual license to ARM CPU designs.
Apple got $1.1B from the sale of pre-IPO ARM stock in 1998 that helped turn "loss" quarters into "profit" quarters, right when Jobs was writing the new Apple narrative of being a profitable company making new products that people want.
If Microsoft promised them that, then it was a complete lie. There are many basic things that big business requires for security and management that Android and iOS do (and have done for some time) which Windows Phone still doesn't.
Because the company or individual that owns the patent agreed to it's use in a standard, for a Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) cost. Meaning, they are not allowed to discriminate between licensees, and all licensees pay a fair and reasonable cost.
To charge one company a pittance, but demand 2.5% of total device sale from another is a violation of FRAND terms, which is a violation of the agreement made with the standards body.
Don't want to license it for FRAND? Don't petition to have it included in an industry standard.
If you bought a company that did something prior to your buying it, are you evil?
If they decided to continue the suit rather than settle / drop it, yes. Google could have settled with Microsoft after taking control, and didn't. Why? Because this is why they bought Motorola Mobility - to have a bulldog in the patent wars.
And before you say anything about 1366x768 and down-scaling the N10 at least has a higher resolution than 1080P.
So instead we're talking about upscaling any video you might be trying to play, since nobody publishes video in anything higher than 1080p for wide distribution.
The reason for HDMI 2.0: The HDMI Forum likes money. The HDMI Forum doesn't get money from VESA DisplayPort 1.2, which does all of this and more. Without royalty. And supports multiple video channels multiplexed. And 4K.
It also exists for having a VESA standard. You know, those guys that have been making video standards for like 30 years now? Oh, and it supports 4K video and multiplexed signals, allowing display chaining and breakout hubs; which HDMI 2.0 still doesn't.
Even that wouldn't work, because businesses everywhere are busy ripping out the BES servers in favor of ActiveSync reverse proxies and MDM solutions, which universally work better with iOS and Android than Windows Phone does.
Nobody at Microsoft understands the concept of "sunk costs." They are acting like the idiot lawmakers who think they should build a $3B bridge because they already spent $100M in planning and whatnot.
"That $100M will be completely wasted unless we spend another $2.9B!!"
But, at least they are paying for it with money stuck overseas, since they would get taxed to hell and back to repatriate it...
Well, except that Windows Phone 8 is completely terrible for large business at this time, as they don't support very common functions that business is looking for that iOS and Android do.
If they wanted to become the phone for business, they should start by listening to what business is trying to accomplish with a phone, and then making a platform actually capable of doing that.
They're thinking "Hey, we get to get rid of Elop for the low price of our phone business that is failing anyway; plus we get a mountain of cash to keep the infrastructure, mapping, and R&D departments alive."
Slashdot Mirror
You don't understand the use of 64-bit processing if you only think it is about memory limitations.
Lately they've been on a buying spree that only rivals Cisco. They bought Wyse in order to play in the thin client space for enterprise. They bought Quest Software in order to get identity management and software two-factor security solutions. They bought Credant Technologies for a software disk encryption suite that supports key escrow and central policy management. Etc.
They are trying to purchase their way further into the enterprise market.
So for years, everyone bitches that Apple doesn't give dividends and doesn't do stock buybacks because they are putting the money back into the business.
Then Apple declares a dividend and a stock buyback initiative, and now people bitch that they should be putting that money back into the business.
It seems to me that people just want to bitch.
Because Apple has never sold things that use colored polycarbonate plastic before. Or differentiated a product line with cheaper alternatives while maintaining the same base functionality (Mac Mini, iPod Mini, iPod Shuffle, iPod Nano).
And none of those things ever occurred while Mr. Jobs was in the CEO's office.
Just like everyone else, everywhere.
Except that one or two of the investments made after the founder was forced out, saved Apple at their darkest hour, and continues to pay dividends today - their share of ARM Holdings, and their perpetual license to ARM CPU designs.
Apple got $1.1B from the sale of pre-IPO ARM stock in 1998 that helped turn "loss" quarters into "profit" quarters, right when Jobs was writing the new Apple narrative of being a profitable company making new products that people want.
If Microsoft promised them that, then it was a complete lie. There are many basic things that big business requires for security and management that Android and iOS do (and have done for some time) which Windows Phone still doesn't.
But apparently Samsung doesn't know that being a thrice-conviced price fixer is bad PR.
Yeah, they're the good guys! Yay Samsung!
The legal precedent is far more valuable.
Because the company or individual that owns the patent agreed to it's use in a standard, for a Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) cost. Meaning, they are not allowed to discriminate between licensees, and all licensees pay a fair and reasonable cost.
To charge one company a pittance, but demand 2.5% of total device sale from another is a violation of FRAND terms, which is a violation of the agreement made with the standards body.
Don't want to license it for FRAND? Don't petition to have it included in an industry standard.
Because SD cards can't be formatted with any other file system?
FAT was used for convenience, as a choice; not because it's essential.
Motorola.
If you bought a company that did something prior to your buying it, are you evil?
If they decided to continue the suit rather than settle / drop it, yes. Google could have settled with Microsoft after taking control, and didn't. Why? Because this is why they bought Motorola Mobility - to have a bulldog in the patent wars.
I guess they've never heard of "if at first you don't succeed, quit."
Well, the only other manufacturer at this point who's said anything about RT (other than discontinuing the products) is... Nokia.
So I guess no other manufacturers besides Microsoft are.
Well shit, we better just stop the advance of all video tech, because nobody is going to ever upgrade anything, ever again.
People said the same thing about H.264 once - "Why use that when we already have MPEG-1 and Sorenson?!"
Who uses MPEG-1 now?
Signed, someone with a view of a horizon that is farther than 6 months ahead.
And before you say anything about 1366x768 and down-scaling the N10 at least has a higher resolution than 1080P.
So instead we're talking about upscaling any video you might be trying to play, since nobody publishes video in anything higher than 1080p for wide distribution.
Still CPU intensive.
Maybe because it is funny?
It is possible to be correct and humorous at the same time, you know.
For the same reason that 280+ DPI phones and tablets are better?
One word: Antialiasing.
One more place where DisplayPort is better. Physical locking in the connector, with push button release.
Well, the full-size DisplayPort, at least.
The reason for HDMI 2.0: The HDMI Forum likes money. The HDMI Forum doesn't get money from VESA DisplayPort 1.2, which does all of this and more. Without royalty. And supports multiple video channels multiplexed. And 4K.
HDMI - the RAMBus of Display Interconnects.
It also exists for having a VESA standard. You know, those guys that have been making video standards for like 30 years now? Oh, and it supports 4K video and multiplexed signals, allowing display chaining and breakout hubs; which HDMI 2.0 still doesn't.
Even that wouldn't work, because businesses everywhere are busy ripping out the BES servers in favor of ActiveSync reverse proxies and MDM solutions, which universally work better with iOS and Android than Windows Phone does.
Nobody at Microsoft understands the concept of "sunk costs." They are acting like the idiot lawmakers who think they should build a $3B bridge because they already spent $100M in planning and whatnot.
"That $100M will be completely wasted unless we spend another $2.9B!!"
But, at least they are paying for it with money stuck overseas, since they would get taxed to hell and back to repatriate it...
Well, except that Windows Phone 8 is completely terrible for large business at this time, as they don't support very common functions that business is looking for that iOS and Android do.
If they wanted to become the phone for business, they should start by listening to what business is trying to accomplish with a phone, and then making a platform actually capable of doing that.
They're thinking "Hey, we get to get rid of Elop for the low price of our phone business that is failing anyway; plus we get a mountain of cash to keep the infrastructure, mapping, and R&D departments alive."