1876 They started with telegraphs. 1877 Showed of the telephone. 1878 Started repairing telephones. 1881 Started making telephone equipment. 1882 Made a wall-mounted telephone. 1896 They produced over 25 000 telephones. 1907 They started to produce telephones in New York. 1909 Set up telephone station in Mexico. 1918 Merged with SAT. 1923 Televerket pick their 500 switch. 1932 Kreuger buys a controlling stake of Ericsson and sell it to biggest competitor ITT. 1946 They start some funds. 1950 They start going international. 1956 They make their first mobile phone!! And a phone where everything is in the handle. 1970 Ericsson and Televerket join each other in developing switching equipment. 1976 AXE station. 1977 Computer controlled AXE. 1978 Ericsson and Philips receives a large order from Saudi Arabia. 1982 Ericsson Information Systems was launched and their PC. 1992 World leader in mobile phones with over 100 000 employees. 1996 Radio communication large share of their business area, mobile system and telephones grow by 50 percent. 2000 Ericsson response - Emergency assistance. 2001 Cell division merge with Sony. 2003 Returns to profits. 2006 "Ericsson received the Best Access Technology recognition for its VDSL2 solution for fixed broadband access at the Broad World Forum."
Guess it's unmannerly to call you stupid. So I'll call you yellow instead.
No yellow.
Ericsson has a business where they make money. Some of the money will reach to the owners of the company.
As such people are interested in owning the company to get hold of that money. And because of that to get ownership of a part of the company cost money.
P/E for for Ericsson was 23.25. For Apple 17.67. For Google 27.16. For Nokia 59.84. For Facebook 74.47.
Facebook purchased WhatApp for 16 billion USD. I don't know what people thought it was work but 16 billion isn't something I would sneeze at.
As for Facebook valuation you can say what you want. But the reality is that they ARE making money. And they are increasing the amounts they make quickly.
I don't know how much you've actually looked into it. Guess you may make your statement out of the IPO relative what the stock traded at later.
IPO price of Facebook was $38 18 May 2012. In August 2012 it traded at around $18. Mid July 2013 at $26. And then it lifted to $54 in mid October 2013 and to $70 early march 2014.
Currently (15 min delay?) valued at $78.45 with a recent peak just above $80.
It was priced very high relative profits and yeah it did fall from $38 to $18. But it's up at $78 now at a better price relative their currents profits. So profits will have risen a lot over these 2.5 years.
You're free to argue it should be worth nothing. But considering they make billions that would be pretty stupid and I for sure would take a chunk of Facebook if it was given to me for free. (Currently valued at 216.79 billion.)
Ericsson value: 40 billion USD Nokia value: 30 billion USD Sony: 23.6 billion USD Motorola Solutions (sold network part to Nokia): 15.6 billion USD. (All stocks counted using Google finance?)
Ericsson P/E: 23.18 Nokia P/E: 60.30 Motorola Solutions P/E: 26.80
It's true Nokia was the biggest of them all in phones. It's true Ericsson started to make phones with Sony and later let them take over all of it.
And as for Nokias phone business I guess we all kinda know where they are now and how much wealth that generated lately..
I assume Ericsson or Huawei are the largest players in the Network field.
Ericsson may have lost its phone business to Sony: 31 Oct 2014: "PlayStation profits up but Sony on course for £1.2 billion loss", metro.co.uk Ericsson seem to be the more healthy company..
31 Juli wsj.com: "But Sony's mobile-phone unit, which a year ago had been the company's most profitable electronics division, posted an operating loss amid sagging sales."
Not that I've looked into it a lot. But I'm not sure you're giving Ericsson enough credit.
Since space exist, it's harmful, he haven't and we need space vehicles to get there I guess we can say intelligent design is bullshit.
(Also he obviously made us evil and didn't taught us his message from birth, or everything there is to know about the world in general. Which seem like a huge flaw. Especially if we're design to be as he.)
Beta tapes cost more than VHS: VHS, though inferior, won. Early Apple computers cost more than early PCs. PCs won.
Now your claim is only that price is important.
But one point one could make is that: * IBM sold it's desktop and server business. * Apple has grown a lot.
It's also visible in the smartphone market where Apple is successful in actually making money from it.
Also there's examples there the statement isn't true.
For instance HD-DVD was cheaper than Blu-ray. It didn't win.
And price is like you say important but doesn't tell what will win in the end. For instance TN displays have been waaay more popular than IPS but in the end maybe IPS will win anyway. Flatscreens of course was less popular than CRT when they cost a lot more but by today they lead. And so on.
Though I appreciated my time in the first game for some reason. Guess it's because it was the first Zelda game I actually experienced & played through (I had played Zelda on NES but wasn't good enough on it to have any clue where I was going, also tried Link but had even less of a clue there.)
Half of the game is spent transporting yourself from some point to another point with repetitive game play, many of the puzzles are similar and repetitive too and the flute playing part in the second one was frustrating because it was hard to get it to play as intended and I didn't knew what sort of "errors" it accepted which made it easier to get a pass.
Anyway, to me it's played part for the story and mostly for interesting puzzles but the transportation just seem like a filler.
It's not much of an open world either, some "quests" may be unlocked as you go in older places but it all bring you further in the story and I guess you may have to do it all to get there (or maybe some is of collecting swag to be able to upgrade your train in the later case.)
So it give you this world where you can move to any place you want in it (well, after they are opened up) but there's no reason to because only one or some points will allow you to travel further in the game. So you're just wasting time in dull game-play for the sake of it.
With a half-life of 87.7 years depending on what "years and years" mean chances are there wouldn't be much change whatever for 5 months (+ 10 years go get there?) or for say 5+10 or 10+10 years, or even 20+10 years.
Slashdot Mirror
Meanwhile the history of Xiaomi:
2010 Founded, make custom Android ROM.
2011 Launches a phone.
Sell phones, smart TVs, routers and is looking to launch a tablet.
So.. Chances are Ericsson have innovated more over the years and spent more on R&D and made more money and ..
Ericsson is 138 years old.
1876 They started with telegraphs.
1877 Showed of the telephone.
1878 Started repairing telephones.
1881 Started making telephone equipment.
1882 Made a wall-mounted telephone.
1896 They produced over 25 000 telephones.
1907 They started to produce telephones in New York.
1909 Set up telephone station in Mexico.
1918 Merged with SAT.
1923 Televerket pick their 500 switch.
1932 Kreuger buys a controlling stake of Ericsson and sell it to biggest competitor ITT.
1946 They start some funds.
1950 They start going international.
1956 They make their first mobile phone!! And a phone where everything is in the handle.
1970 Ericsson and Televerket join each other in developing switching equipment.
1976 AXE station.
1977 Computer controlled AXE.
1978 Ericsson and Philips receives a large order from Saudi Arabia.
1982 Ericsson Information Systems was launched and their PC.
1992 World leader in mobile phones with over 100 000 employees.
1996 Radio communication large share of their business area, mobile system and telephones grow by 50 percent.
2000 Ericsson response - Emergency assistance.
2001 Cell division merge with Sony.
2003 Returns to profits.
2006 "Ericsson received the Best Access Technology recognition for its VDSL2 solution for fixed broadband access at the Broad World Forum."
Why should the company be free?
Guess it's unmannerly to call you stupid.
So I'll call you yellow instead.
No yellow.
Ericsson has a business where they make money.
Some of the money will reach to the owners of the company.
As such people are interested in owning the company to get hold of that money. And because of that to get ownership of a part of the company cost money.
P/E for for Ericsson was 23.25.
For Apple 17.67.
For Google 27.16.
For Nokia 59.84.
For Facebook 74.47.
Facebook purchased WhatApp for 16 billion USD. I don't know what people thought it was work but 16 billion isn't something I would sneeze at.
As for Facebook valuation you can say what you want.
But the reality is that they ARE making money. And they are increasing the amounts they make quickly.
I don't know how much you've actually looked into it. Guess you may make your statement out of the IPO relative what the stock traded at later.
IPO price of Facebook was $38 18 May 2012.
In August 2012 it traded at around $18.
Mid July 2013 at $26.
And then it lifted to $54 in mid October 2013 and to $70 early march 2014.
Currently (15 min delay?) valued at $78.45 with a recent peak just above $80.
It was priced very high relative profits and yeah it did fall from $38 to $18. But it's up at $78 now at a better price relative their currents profits. So profits will have risen a lot over these 2.5 years.
You're free to argue it should be worth nothing. But considering they make billions that would be pretty stupid and I for sure would take a chunk of Facebook if it was given to me for free. (Currently valued at 216.79 billion.)
*Ehum*
Ericsson value: 40 billion USD
Nokia value: 30 billion USD
Sony: 23.6 billion USD
Motorola Solutions (sold network part to Nokia): 15.6 billion USD.
(All stocks counted using Google finance?)
Ericsson P/E: 23.18
Nokia P/E: 60.30
Motorola Solutions P/E: 26.80
It's true Nokia was the biggest of them all in phones. It's true Ericsson started to make phones with Sony and later let them take over all of it.
And as for Nokias phone business I guess we all kinda know where they are now and how much wealth that generated lately ..
I assume Ericsson or Huawei are the largest players in the Network field.
Ericsson may have lost its phone business to Sony: ..
31 Oct 2014:
"PlayStation profits up but Sony on course for £1.2 billion loss", metro.co.uk
Ericsson seem to be the more healthy company
31 Juli wsj.com:
"But Sony's mobile-phone unit, which a year ago had been the company's most profitable electronics division, posted an operating loss amid sagging sales."
Not that I've looked into it a lot. But I'm not sure you're giving Ericsson enough credit.
https://www.google.com/finance...
Says 3.7 billion for Huawei but I don't know whatever it's all the stocks and if it's of any use.
Likely not:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...
Says $3.46 billion in profit 2013.
I don't think I've ever seen that.
And it's definitely not the regular scenario of Mantle vs DirectX.
Heck. With a good processor (evil minds would say not an AMD one) I've seen Mantle benchmark LOWER.
Lame to post as AC.
More relevant though is that similar development are being done in DirectX 12 and new version(s?) of OpenGL.
So it's in the future for both. But Mantle isn't necessarily the future for either.
Interesting. I would just had assumed the ice left them behind :) (and more water/sea and fish.)
For me, 'classic' would be the Apple II or the early 8088 XT clones
I guess the GP meant a/the good classic ;D
Wasn't the idea that Sony would release some Movie about the leadership or whatever in North Korea?
And these "Peace" guardians likely want to preserve the leadership of NK.
I was just fooling around. There is no god. We can make imagine they are anything.
Since we're/has been Earth bound that's likely the reason we're suited for it.
Two western movies / year and 1/4 a hair cut (half that of the leader)?
Since space exist, it's harmful, he haven't and we need space vehicles to get there I guess we can say intelligent design is bullshit.
(Also he obviously made us evil and didn't taught us his message from birth, or everything there is to know about the world in general. Which seem like a huge flaw. Especially if we're design to be as he.)
Beta tapes cost more than VHS: VHS, though inferior, won.
Early Apple computers cost more than early PCs. PCs won.
Now your claim is only that price is important.
But one point one could make is that:
* IBM sold it's desktop and server business.
* Apple has grown a lot.
It's also visible in the smartphone market where Apple is successful in actually making money from it.
Also there's examples there the statement isn't true.
For instance HD-DVD was cheaper than Blu-ray. It didn't win.
And price is like you say important but doesn't tell what will win in the end.
For instance TN displays have been waaay more popular than IPS but in the end maybe IPS will win anyway.
Flatscreens of course was less popular than CRT when they cost a lot more but by today they lead. And so on.
Yeah, add all renewable to each other but separate all the non-renewables.
More fair to say "All renewable energy sources generate more energy than any single .." or something.
Or just say it has surpassed nuclear (and coal I guess one can say without confusing people if one state the amounts of each.)
That's a nice idea.
A non-censored distributed forum ran for coin transactions I could have some interest in. Even better if it somehow could provide perfect anonymity.
Fuck the freedom haters.
But what does it REALLY mean?
WTF is a prime sextuplet?
A number made of six factored prime numbers?
What is it used for?
That would be way more interesting than "Random virtual coin network used to calculate some shit."
What about letting your browser lie about its data when you're doing something nasty and showing real data when you're not? ... and then?
If only they paid $600 for OnePlus One.. Invites..
The first American computer.
So what you mean is the BIGGER computer? :D
Can you play Crysis on it?
Sure. Bring a laptop.
I assume that maybe I would get a cheaper graphics card (Sweden.)
I think when I watched the video it seemed like you could get another four times the processor power just by stopping the blinking LEDs though? ;)
I don't get it for Zelda on the DS either really.
Though I appreciated my time in the first game for some reason. Guess it's because it was the first Zelda game I actually experienced & played through (I had played Zelda on NES but wasn't good enough on it to have any clue where I was going, also tried Link but had even less of a clue there.)
Half of the game is spent transporting yourself from some point to another point with repetitive game play, many of the puzzles are similar and repetitive too and the flute playing part in the second one was frustrating because it was hard to get it to play as intended and I didn't knew what sort of "errors" it accepted which made it easier to get a pass.
Anyway, to me it's played part for the story and mostly for interesting puzzles but the transportation just seem like a filler.
It's not much of an open world either, some "quests" may be unlocked as you go in older places but it all bring you further in the story and I guess you may have to do it all to get there (or maybe some is of collecting swag to be able to upgrade your train in the later case.)
So it give you this world where you can move to any place you want in it (well, after they are opened up) but there's no reason to because only one or some points will allow you to travel further in the game. So you're just wasting time in dull game-play for the sake of it.
I think the Atari Lynx is my favourite.
I played it in stores a few times and it was massive, good looking, back-lit color screen!
The games may have been bad what do I know and it was big but .. It's such a cute device.
Such beauty:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi...
Not this one:
http://www.studio42.info/Lynx/...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi...
The Sega game gear I never felt the attraction for:
http://www.studio42.info/GameG...
With a half-life of 87.7 years depending on what "years and years" mean chances are there wouldn't be much change whatever for 5 months (+ 10 years go get there?) or for say 5+10 or 10+10 years, or even 20+10 years.
Oh, your signature proves beta _IS_ better:
http://validator.w3.org/check?...