WE know the limitations of the Surface on ARM, but believe me there are many people who don't. And the product is not targeted at IT professionals at all - it's targeted firmly at consumers, many of who aren't seeing Windows RT as a separate product just a different version of Windows 8 with some limitations, and not really a grasp of what limitations they are. There are plenty of tech sites with discussions going on, people constantly being corrected as to what they can and cannot do on their surface (the surface that's on sale now, not the one that's coming out a few months from now).
Microsoft simply hasn't seemed to spend any effort educating its customers and potential customers about the critical differences between RT and 8. And just because we know what they are after researching the product since announcement does not mean that the vast majority of Microsofts customers have figured out those differences. That's the failure. I guess we can only sit back and see how it plays out... maybe i'm wrong and the Surface with RT takes off, I doubt it thought...
Apple Dumping Intel In The MacBook? Don't Believe This Bogus Rumor [View article]
Why?
Lower power consumption? The processor at this point uses only a fraction of the total power of a portable device - its the screen that sucks up more power than anything else. So it's not like switching from low power intel core chips over to ARM is going to double battery life or anything.
Meanwhile, yes, Apple has succeeded in transitioning its processor line twice now (first Motorolla 680x0 to PowerPC, then PowerPC to Intel). So, they could build an emulator into Mac OS X to continue running Intel apps. But, in each transition, users were promised faster performance, and an move ARM wouldn't have that promise. And for the Pro line (as well as the iMac, which stays plugged in), what is the benefit of lower power consumption? I suppose for the plugged in Macs, Apple could fit 8 or 16 ARM cores in place of each Intel socket, but would they end up in the place were they were when they moved from PowerPC, discovering that their computer line is too small to drive enough volume for real advances to be made? In that, would they scoot to ARM and claim a temporary advantage, only to see Intel erase that advantage a couple of years out?
ARM is a decent chip, I'll give it that. But Apple went through all all sorts of travails in finally moving their line over to Intel chips (to much fan applause), and reaped (continues to reap) the benefits immediately. I don't see such benefits coming from a move to ARM, just headaches and then slipping in the performance battle versus intel.
And for users who use virtualization solutions (myself included), a move to ARM will definetly cause a hit in our emulated Windows performance (and no, Windows RT in a virtual environment on ARM is not a drop in replacement for Windows XP, 7 or 8 in a virtualized Intel environment.
In short, the author is absolutely correct in his assessment.
The built in camera does a servicable job at reading barcodes and qr codes. And i believe I've seen ticketmaster employees with iPhones mounted in cases that include a better, dedicated scanner.
1) Apple isn't a search provider, so no point in comparing them to google or microsoft in that regard;
As for Maps, the thing that is never brought up by detractors is that Google's Maps on iOS was not what you see on other platforms - no turn by turn, for instance. They had to switch out that hobbled Maps app, though they would have done better getting a better source or doing more testing before deploying their new maps app in a non-beta form.
Yes, the pulling Youtube was a stupid move, but other companies do stupid things. Take Microsoft - the Surface Pro will support all flash websites, whereas the Surface (RT/ARM version) will only support flash sites on MSFT's preapproved list.
2) OK, iWork isn't included on iPad. Each app is $10 dollars. Maybe Surface users would rather save a few dollars and not have to pay for Office if they don't intend to use it. Moreover, Apple isn't targeting the iPad for heavy lifting productivity wise, so I dont' think it's such a big issue that they don't include a productivity suite with iOS. Just as Microsoft doesn't include one with Windows (RT not withstanding)
3) How about Adobe, Macromedia and Avid Technologies, for starters? Apple basically was the basis for desktop publishing years back, and "supported" that whole ecosystem, from Adobe to Quark (privately held) to font houses to the thousands of design firms out there. To say that Apple is the only one that makes money or has industry around its products omits that experience. But other fields, education for instance, there isn't a huge industry there. You sell computers to schools and students, that's it.
4) Of course more money is made from the Windows ecosystem - 90+% marketshare will do that.
5) Counting every PC ever shipped versus every iPhone or iPad shipped in the last few years is hardly comparable
6) The cell phone market (and the tablet market) are both big enough that it's not likely that there'll be a dominant player. Moreso, it's too all of our benefits that there isn't a single dominant player. We all benefit when we've got Apple and Google and Microsoft duking it out with one another, be it for features, price or anything else. I can't think of any benefit long term by there being a single vendor with 100% market share.
7) I don't think suns downfall was lack of licensing. It was that linux matured and Intels chips caught up and surpassed what was being offered in the RISC world. Likewise, Apple's foray into licensing its plafform is what nearly killed the company all those year ago. It was pulling back from that that saved the day and let them live long enough to produce the iPod, iTunes Store, iPhone and iPad.... And again, Apple has plenty of experience supporting industries, as I mentioned in point 3.
printers... wireless printing storage... got drop box, live drive, or retrieving files backed up by carbonite, the first two being far preferable since you're always working on the latest file, no need to copy files back in place or anything. scanners... scan via email.
What other USB devices are we looking for? yes, there are cameras, but nowadays everyones phone is their camera. At least in most cases.
I know there are more devices that use USB out there, but those seem to be the biggest to me.
MF Global commingled but it had nothing to do with ETF's, save for allowing traders to buy and sell gold futures contracts... not seeing the connnection.
The market for tablets is not 7 billion deep. Over a billion people in the world exist on less than $1 per day, and more than 2 billion others exist on $1 to $2 per day. Not exactly lining up to buy tablets, not even the cheapest versions.
Likewise, again there are inherent limits in what the Surface on ARM can do compared to where you expect it to go. Enterprise computing is off the table for instance. The same lack of enterprise software for Apple and Google affects Windows RT to a great extent. Yes, Surface has Office 2013 home/student edition, so it's got a check mark in that column. But it can't join Windows domains, doesn't include Outlook, can't run existing .net applications unless the developers had the forethought to avoid API calls that WinRT doesn't support, and it can't run any productivity apps unless or until they're rewritten for the Windows store.
For home use and productivity, the limited version of Office might be enough for students and average users, so long as they don't need access to any other programs (again, I'm pointing to Quicken, but look at your Start menu - every program (in there aside from Microsofts own that are included in RT) won't run on RT.
Windows 8 tablets (the intel versions) will one-up iPads with full support for Flash and ability to run all existing productivity applications, but Win RT tablets, in addition to lacking application support, are also limited in the Flash sites they can support - some will work without issue, but others (those not on Microsofts white list) won't be operable.
Androids are fully compatible with Flash, so in that event, what does WinRT offer than can't be accomplished on a Droid? The android has full flash support and can run Google Apps, replicating many functions one would find in Office 13. RT doesn't integrate into enterprise networks any better than Android, for instance.
Expect Apple To Surge In Coming Months [View article]
I am much more puzzled by contributors who write glowing articles about companies and who DON'T own shares in those companies. I come away wondering why the company would be a good addition to our portfolios but not the authors own portfolio.
The house has 240 Republicans and 190 Democrats currently; 100% of the Democrats can't do anything, and the Republicans don't break ranks. The tea party refused to bargain, and the moderate republicans were all so scared that there was a tea party resurgence that they ran to the right instead of trying to meet somewhere near the center.
Can't put the blame on Obama not being able to deliver the democratic vote - even if all turned out to vote, they still would need Republican votes. And the Republicans refused to negotiate or budge an inch until after theyed caused our credit rating to get pinged down a notch.
Rather than make a rash movement, you have to think about all of the issues.
Income investors, for instance, might consider that the tax rate on their dividends is likely going up; do they want to pair that with further reducing their invested capital by realizing gains just to lock in a lower rate for their capital gains. That would be especially harmful if they wouldn't make the sale if not for reacting to the tax.
For instance:
Very successful investor has a portfolio worth $1mm with a cost of $125,000. The portfolio yield 3%. Their after tax income currently is $25,500.
If they sell into year-end to lock in a low rate on their LT gain and invest in securities with a similar yield, they will only have $868,750 to invest after taxes are due. And their after tax dividend income will fall to $15,116.25 in the worst case (this is for income above $250,000 - the effects are less for people in lower brackets).
Worse would be if they intended to sell but didn't for one reason or another and sold after Jan 1 - after tax, their $1MM would have turned into $791,750 and their after tax dividend income would be $13,776.45.
There is another option - not selling at all. You get no long term gain to have taxed, which leaves more invested and earning - in that scenario, your after tax dividend income would be $17,400.
A couple thousand might not seem like much, but forcing sales unnecessarily just to lock in a low LT tax will translate into an additional 15% decline in your dividend income compared to what you would have earned without the sales.
Of course, those examples show what happens to someone with HUGE unrealized gains (1000% appreciation). To people with much smaller unrealized gains (10%), the differences are much smaller - $17,400 income for somone who didn't sell, $17,139 for someone who sold in 2012, and $16,985 for a seller in 2013.
Of course, if your investment strategy places more emphasis on realized gains, rather than investment income then it would make sense to sell sooner since you're going to take that hit anyhow.
The Cloud isn't necessarily a good thing for Microsoft; mainly, Cloud applications are browser based, and therefore can be client-agnostic.If developers of cloud based applications stick to open standards, users will have a large choice of which clients to use to connect to them. Even Microsoft Office 365 does this - it runs on Windows (XP, Vista, 7 as well as Server 2003 and 2008), Mac OS X (10.5, 10.6, 10.7), and clients can connect use IE, Firefox and Chrome.
Other vendors are taking the same route with their cloud applications, and often times supporting wider ranges of clients. So the cloud has plusses and minuses for Microsoft. Intel should certainly benefit - anything that increases the load on servers in data centers is good for them, as companies will add capacity, which means more Intel chips get deployed.
Browser based Office is a win for Microsoft, as they can collect monthly subscription fees month and month out, rather than selling a single license that may not be upgraded for 4 or 5 years.
The problem I see, again, is that Windows RT/ARM cannot run legacy applications, of which there are too many in use to attempt to count. As a result, the ARM based Surface is horribly hobbled - Surface Pro with its Intel chip and full version of Windows 8 is an entirely different story. And should OEM's produce an Atom based Windows 8 tablet that comes close in price to the ARM surface, then there'll be even less reason to buy the ARM version. That'll depend on what Microsoft charges for each of the versions of Windows, of course. But i meant no ill will to ARM chips, just their use in Windows machines.
I should have been clearer, when I mentioned iDevices, I meant iPad, iPhone, and iPod (Touch). Yes, the Mac still a big player in the actual content creation markets. And, some programs have been made for the iPad/iPhone - i've seen guitar effects pedal simulators, drum machines and even some limited movie editing apps - but most the heavy lifting for content creation at the professional and even prosumer levels continues to be with desktops (and laptops) that have more horsepower (and will alway retain the horsepower advantage), along with having more robust input options (firewire, thunderbolt, usb, etc)
Well there's the Surface and the Surface Pro, i guess I didn't differentiate them enough. I just referred to the RT/ARM version as Surface and the 8/Intel version as Surface Pro. My biggest criticisms relate solely to the RT/ARM version of the Surface.
The Upcoming Microsoft Train Wreck [View article]
Microsoft simply hasn't seemed to spend any effort educating its customers and potential customers about the critical differences between RT and 8. And just because we know what they are after researching the product since announcement does not mean that the vast majority of Microsofts customers have figured out those differences. That's the failure. I guess we can only sit back and see how it plays out... maybe i'm wrong and the Surface with RT takes off, I doubt it thought...
Apple Dumping Intel In The MacBook? Don't Believe This Bogus Rumor [View article]
Lower power consumption? The processor at this point uses only a fraction of the total power of a portable device - its the screen that sucks up more power than anything else. So it's not like switching from low power intel core chips over to ARM is going to double battery life or anything.
Meanwhile, yes, Apple has succeeded in transitioning its processor line twice now (first Motorolla 680x0 to PowerPC, then PowerPC to Intel). So, they could build an emulator into Mac OS X to continue running Intel apps. But, in each transition, users were promised faster performance, and an move ARM wouldn't have that promise. And for the Pro line (as well as the iMac, which stays plugged in), what is the benefit of lower power consumption? I suppose for the plugged in Macs, Apple could fit 8 or 16 ARM cores in place of each Intel socket, but would they end up in the place were they were when they moved from PowerPC, discovering that their computer line is too small to drive enough volume for real advances to be made? In that, would they scoot to ARM and claim a temporary advantage, only to see Intel erase that advantage a couple of years out?
ARM is a decent chip, I'll give it that. But Apple went through all all sorts of travails in finally moving their line over to Intel chips (to much fan applause), and reaped (continues to reap) the benefits immediately. I don't see such benefits coming from a move to ARM, just headaches and then slipping in the performance battle versus intel.
And for users who use virtualization solutions (myself included), a move to ARM will definetly cause a hit in our emulated Windows performance (and no, Windows RT in a virtual environment on ARM is not a drop in replacement for Windows XP, 7 or 8 in a virtualized Intel environment.
In short, the author is absolutely correct in his assessment.
The Upcoming Microsoft Train Wreck [View article]
The Upcoming Microsoft Train Wreck [View article]
As for Maps, the thing that is never brought up by detractors is that Google's Maps on iOS was not what you see on other platforms - no turn by turn, for instance. They had to switch out that hobbled Maps app, though they would have done better getting a better source or doing more testing before deploying their new maps app in a non-beta form.
Yes, the pulling Youtube was a stupid move, but other companies do stupid things. Take Microsoft - the Surface Pro will support all flash websites, whereas the Surface (RT/ARM version) will only support flash sites on MSFT's preapproved list.
2) OK, iWork isn't included on iPad. Each app is $10 dollars. Maybe Surface users would rather save a few dollars and not have to pay for Office if they don't intend to use it. Moreover, Apple isn't targeting the iPad for heavy lifting productivity wise, so I dont' think it's such a big issue that they don't include a productivity suite with iOS. Just as Microsoft doesn't include one with Windows (RT not withstanding)
3) How about Adobe, Macromedia and Avid Technologies, for starters? Apple basically was the basis for desktop publishing years back, and "supported" that whole ecosystem, from Adobe to Quark (privately held) to font houses to the thousands of design firms out there. To say that Apple is the only one that makes money or has industry around its products omits that experience. But other fields, education for instance, there isn't a huge industry there. You sell computers to schools and students, that's it.
4) Of course more money is made from the Windows ecosystem - 90+% marketshare will do that.
5) Counting every PC ever shipped versus every iPhone or iPad shipped in the last few years is hardly comparable
6) The cell phone market (and the tablet market) are both big enough that it's not likely that there'll be a dominant player. Moreso, it's too all of our benefits that there isn't a single dominant player. We all benefit when we've got Apple and Google and Microsoft duking it out with one another, be it for features, price or anything else. I can't think of any benefit long term by there being a single vendor with 100% market share.
7) I don't think suns downfall was lack of licensing. It was that linux matured and Intels chips caught up and surpassed what was being offered in the RISC world. Likewise, Apple's foray into licensing its plafform is what nearly killed the company all those year ago. It was pulling back from that that saved the day and let them live long enough to produce the iPod, iTunes Store, iPhone and iPad.... And again, Apple has plenty of experience supporting industries, as I mentioned in point 3.
The Upcoming Microsoft Train Wreck [View article]
storage... got drop box, live drive, or retrieving files backed up by carbonite, the first two being far preferable since you're always working on the latest file, no need to copy files back in place or anything.
scanners... scan via email.
What other USB devices are we looking for? yes, there are cameras, but nowadays everyones phone is their camera. At least in most cases.
I know there are more devices that use USB out there, but those seem to be the biggest to me.
Gold Can Correct By Another 10-15% [View article]
The Upcoming Microsoft Train Wreck [View article]
The market for tablets is not 7 billion deep. Over a billion people in the world exist on less than $1 per day, and more than 2 billion others exist on $1 to $2 per day. Not exactly lining up to buy tablets, not even the cheapest versions.
Likewise, again there are inherent limits in what the Surface on ARM can do compared to where you expect it to go. Enterprise computing is off the table for instance. The same lack of enterprise software for Apple and Google affects Windows RT to a great extent. Yes, Surface has Office 2013 home/student edition, so it's got a check mark in that column. But it can't join Windows domains, doesn't include Outlook, can't run existing .net applications unless the developers had the forethought to avoid API calls that WinRT doesn't support, and it can't run any productivity apps unless or until they're rewritten for the Windows store.
For home use and productivity, the limited version of Office might be enough for students and average users, so long as they don't need access to any other programs (again, I'm pointing to Quicken, but look at your Start menu - every program (in there aside from Microsofts own that are included in RT) won't run on RT.
Windows 8 tablets (the intel versions) will one-up iPads with full support for Flash and ability to run all existing productivity applications, but Win RT tablets, in addition to lacking application support, are also limited in the Flash sites they can support - some will work without issue, but others (those not on Microsofts white list) won't be operable.
Androids are fully compatible with Flash, so in that event, what does WinRT offer than can't be accomplished on a Droid? The android has full flash support and can run Google Apps, replicating many functions one would find in Office 13. RT doesn't integrate into enterprise networks any better than Android, for instance.
Expect Apple To Surge In Coming Months [View article]
Expect Apple To Surge In Coming Months [View article]
If Obama Wins, Sell Your Winners [View article]
Can't put the blame on Obama not being able to deliver the democratic vote - even if all turned out to vote, they still would need Republican votes. And the Republicans refused to negotiate or budge an inch until after theyed caused our credit rating to get pinged down a notch.
If Obama Wins, Sell Your Winners [View article]
Income investors, for instance, might consider that the tax rate on their dividends is likely going up; do they want to pair that with further reducing their invested capital by realizing gains just to lock in a lower rate for their capital gains. That would be especially harmful if they wouldn't make the sale if not for reacting to the tax.
For instance:
Very successful investor has a portfolio worth $1mm with a cost of $125,000. The portfolio yield 3%. Their after tax income currently is $25,500.
If they sell into year-end to lock in a low rate on their LT gain and invest in securities with a similar yield, they will only have $868,750 to invest after taxes are due. And their after tax dividend income will fall to $15,116.25 in the worst case (this is for income above $250,000 - the effects are less for people in lower brackets).
Worse would be if they intended to sell but didn't for one reason or another and sold after Jan 1 - after tax, their $1MM would have turned into $791,750 and their after tax dividend income would be $13,776.45.
There is another option - not selling at all. You get no long term gain to have taxed, which leaves more invested and earning - in that scenario, your after tax dividend income would be $17,400.
A couple thousand might not seem like much, but forcing sales unnecessarily just to lock in a low LT tax will translate into an additional 15% decline in your dividend income compared to what you would have earned without the sales.
Of course, those examples show what happens to someone with HUGE unrealized gains (1000% appreciation). To people with much smaller unrealized gains (10%), the differences are much smaller - $17,400 income for somone who didn't sell, $17,139 for someone who sold in 2012, and $16,985 for a seller in 2013.
Of course, if your investment strategy places more emphasis on realized gains, rather than investment income then it would make sense to sell sooner since you're going to take that hit anyhow.
The Upcoming Microsoft Train Wreck [View article]
Other vendors are taking the same route with their cloud applications, and often times supporting wider ranges of clients. So the cloud has plusses and minuses for Microsoft. Intel should certainly benefit - anything that increases the load on servers in data centers is good for them, as companies will add capacity, which means more Intel chips get deployed.
Browser based Office is a win for Microsoft, as they can collect monthly subscription fees month and month out, rather than selling a single license that may not be upgraded for 4 or 5 years.
The Upcoming Microsoft Train Wreck [View article]
The problem I see, again, is that Windows RT/ARM cannot run legacy applications, of which there are too many in use to attempt to count. As a result, the ARM based Surface is horribly hobbled - Surface Pro with its Intel chip and full version of Windows 8 is an entirely different story. And should OEM's produce an Atom based Windows 8 tablet that comes close in price to the ARM surface, then there'll be even less reason to buy the ARM version. That'll depend on what Microsoft charges for each of the versions of Windows, of course. But i meant no ill will to ARM chips, just their use in Windows machines.
The Upcoming Microsoft Train Wreck [View article]
The Upcoming Microsoft Train Wreck [View article]