jbelkin's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/1306/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/170801-apples-to-apples-will-history-repeat-itself-as-android-gains-on-the-iphone?source=feed#comment-742666 742666 Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:40:02 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/167486-apple-earnings-show-unparalleled-pricing-power?source=feed#comment-722355 722355 Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:46:15 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/157553-apple-dropped-the-ball-on-an-nfl-deal?source=feed#comment-640649 640649 Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:55:14 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/157553-apple-dropped-the-ball-on-an-nfl-deal?source=feed#comment-640338 640338
Yes, I'm sure the NFL would love to be on the iPhone and I suspect they will not be renewing the Sprint exclusive deal but no one lse was willing to pohy up millions for it a few years agao other than Sprint.

But seriously, next time you consider jotting down rambling thoughts, search on the internet first before looking like an complete ***.]]> Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:43:05 -0400
Yes, I'm sure the NFL would love to be on the iPhone and I suspect they will not be renewing the Sprint exclusive deal but no one lse was willing to pohy up millions for it a few years agao other than Sprint.

But seriously, next time you consider jotting down rambling thoughts, search on the internet first before looking like an complete ***.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/153824-at-t-the-apple-brand-destroyer?source=feed#comment-616511 616511
As for the fire, you have ONE or even a few fires out of 200 MILLION ipods sold - do we know for a fact if the person was using an apple charger and not one they picked up for $4.99? Or is the car battery & voltage converter to blame? Was the car parked in the Sun - sometimes close to 150 degrees plus already and then the car battery goes nuts? But of course, blame Apple for 1 fire out of 200 million sold? There are more people who drown in their own bathtubs EVERY YEAR ... who do we blame or try to sue there?

As for the Google Voice thing - there is no law that says they have to approve every app for their products - when it's a competiting product - that's just a fact of life. Just as a bookstore can choose not to sell a book called THIS BOOK CHAIN IS A**, STEAL THIS BOOK (it's only censorship by gov't actions not private enterprise).

Unlike Dell's lackof quality & R&D ... Apple is disliked by open sourcers and hackers and programmers who think they know best on how to w5rite a UI ... they will TRADE useability, UI & ease of use just so they can write their own OS. For that, they have the Google phone (which it shoudl be noted, Google makes ZERO money off of providing the tools) while 98% of consumers do NOT want to program a phone - they want to use it so while 10% of the tech webloggers are loud haters (100,000?), 98% of 6 BILLION people want an iphone. That is the difference.]]> Wed, 05 Aug 2009 12:42:18 -0400
As for the fire, you have ONE or even a few fires out of 200 MILLION ipods sold - do we know for a fact if the person was using an apple charger and not one they picked up for $4.99? Or is the car battery & voltage converter to blame? Was the car parked in the Sun - sometimes close to 150 degrees plus already and then the car battery goes nuts? But of course, blame Apple for 1 fire out of 200 million sold? There are more people who drown in their own bathtubs EVERY YEAR ... who do we blame or try to sue there?

As for the Google Voice thing - there is no law that says they have to approve every app for their products - when it's a competiting product - that's just a fact of life. Just as a bookstore can choose not to sell a book called THIS BOOK CHAIN IS A**, STEAL THIS BOOK (it's only censorship by gov't actions not private enterprise).

Unlike Dell's lackof quality & R&D ... Apple is disliked by open sourcers and hackers and programmers who think they know best on how to w5rite a UI ... they will TRADE useability, UI & ease of use just so they can write their own OS. For that, they have the Google phone (which it shoudl be noted, Google makes ZERO money off of providing the tools) while 98% of consumers do NOT want to program a phone - they want to use it so while 10% of the tech webloggers are loud haters (100,000?), 98% of 6 BILLION people want an iphone. That is the difference.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/132943-how-soon-can-apple-s-market-cap-surpass-microsoft-s?source=feed#comment-476700 476700 Fri, 24 Apr 2009 22:38:01 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/131346-learning-from-apple-supplier-innovation-and-huge-margins?source=feed#comment-466761 466761 Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:36:12 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/92157-nokia-gets-no-respect-against-apple-rim?source=feed#comment-236587 236587 Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:31:59 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/65084-apple-s-at-t-deal-is-costly?source=feed#comment-117193 117193
Apple is selling an EXTRA 400,000 or 1+ million phones where other cell phone manufacturers might sell a few thousand more ... that's right - not on the network but still buying ...

This would be a problem if Apple was subsidizing each phone sale but it's NOT- every one at FULL PRICE 100% of the time.

As for people who can't/won't switch to AT&T ... how much does AT&T make for this customer? That's right - ZERO.

How much does Apple make? That's right $400 to $500 DOLLARS!

Versus ZERO.

It's ALL found money. Even better, Apple has to provider ZERO tech support - how much savings is that?

And with everyone that goes overseas that's not "legal," that just adds to the cachet of the product. How many products are considered FREE ADVERTISING & MARKETING for a company yet they made $450 TODAY?! Not to mention every Iphone sale is potential iTunes sales (even overseas ones either have stores or if they have a US credit card can buy tracks & movies) ...

By your math, since everyone on this planet doesn't have an iPhone, that's a trillion loss?

So you prefer possible future monthly revenue versus a $450 sale today? The future monthly stream is never guaranteed even if you sign up a carrier - people drop out, people don't pay ... but you don;'t factor that in because it's too hard?

The real world is more complex than just A+B-C ... or perhaps you should stick to analysing industries that aren't so complex.
]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:59:15 -0500
Apple is selling an EXTRA 400,000 or 1+ million phones where other cell phone manufacturers might sell a few thousand more ... that's right - not on the network but still buying ...

This would be a problem if Apple was subsidizing each phone sale but it's NOT- every one at FULL PRICE 100% of the time.

As for people who can't/won't switch to AT&T ... how much does AT&T make for this customer? That's right - ZERO.

How much does Apple make? That's right $400 to $500 DOLLARS!

Versus ZERO.

It's ALL found money. Even better, Apple has to provider ZERO tech support - how much savings is that?

And with everyone that goes overseas that's not "legal," that just adds to the cachet of the product. How many products are considered FREE ADVERTISING & MARKETING for a company yet they made $450 TODAY?! Not to mention every Iphone sale is potential iTunes sales (even overseas ones either have stores or if they have a US credit card can buy tracks & movies) ...

By your math, since everyone on this planet doesn't have an iPhone, that's a trillion loss?

So you prefer possible future monthly revenue versus a $450 sale today? The future monthly stream is never guaranteed even if you sign up a carrier - people drop out, people don't pay ... but you don;'t factor that in because it's too hard?

The real world is more complex than just A+B-C ... or perhaps you should stick to analysing industries that aren't so complex.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/40578-microsoft-scared-of-iphone-domination?source=feed#comment-90867 90867
A separate issue is this again proves how inept MS is now - along with the billion dollar XBox writeoff. MS shareholders are suckers and idiots for not caring that the XBox has cost them a minimal $18 BILLION dollars loss in revenue and at least that in equity - even presuming they invested it with zero returns versus massive losses.]]> Wed, 11 Jul 2007 02:42:33 -0400
A separate issue is this again proves how inept MS is now - along with the billion dollar XBox writeoff. MS shareholders are suckers and idiots for not caring that the XBox has cost them a minimal $18 BILLION dollars loss in revenue and at least that in equity - even presuming they invested it with zero returns versus massive losses.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/40355-was-verizon-really-wrong-to-pass-on-the-iphone?source=feed#comment-90730 90730 Mon, 09 Jul 2007 17:10:18 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/39860-iphone-mania-case-study-of-the-better-mousetrap-principle?source=feed#comment-90218 90218
2aday.wordpress.com/20.../]]> Mon, 02 Jul 2007 22:22:33 -0400
2aday.wordpress.com/20.../]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/35621-the-iphone-apple-s-first-flop?source=feed#comment-86199 86199 Tue, 15 May 2007 13:13:44 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/35491-free-video-downloads-will-overtake-itunes-soon-study?source=feed#comment-86198 86198 2aday.wordpress.com/20.../]]> Tue, 15 May 2007 13:04:21 -0400 2aday.wordpress.com/20.../]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/33397-five-reasons-why-apple-s-iphone-is-better-than-the-rest?source=feed#comment-85026 85026 Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:06:37 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/33231-apple-subscription-music-service-seems-inevitable?source=feed#comment-84852 84852
As for the cell companies, they've been touting a billion mp3 player phones sold for YEARS and where has it gotten them? Nowhere. It's their own doing a) GREED. The first track you buy from the Sprint store either costs you $2.59 or $15.99 (as a "advanced" services customer). People are not morons. I can get a higher quality of that song by buying a CD or just downloading it illegally - why would I want Sprint? Same with other coampnies and B) phones are disposable thanks to their selling processes so unlike the ipod where people tend to think of it as friend, a phone is a fair weathered friend until the next comes along - months or 7 months from now. Along with that is their intrinsic value of ZERO - there's no cachet to owning a phone - it'd be like waving junk mail around going, I got mail! Having an ipod proves you can afford the best so until the phone companies & manufacturers stop giving away their branding - a phone means nothing.]]> Tue, 24 Apr 2007 12:23:10 -0400
As for the cell companies, they've been touting a billion mp3 player phones sold for YEARS and where has it gotten them? Nowhere. It's their own doing a) GREED. The first track you buy from the Sprint store either costs you $2.59 or $15.99 (as a "advanced" services customer). People are not morons. I can get a higher quality of that song by buying a CD or just downloading it illegally - why would I want Sprint? Same with other coampnies and B) phones are disposable thanks to their selling processes so unlike the ipod where people tend to think of it as friend, a phone is a fair weathered friend until the next comes along - months or 7 months from now. Along with that is their intrinsic value of ZERO - there's no cachet to owning a phone - it'd be like waving junk mail around going, I got mail! Having an ipod proves you can afford the best so until the phone companies & manufacturers stop giving away their branding - a phone means nothing.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/32930-why-is-apple-restricting-third-party-iphone-apps?source=feed#comment-84666 84666
Then when you look at what people are adding - it's PRODUCTIVITY & UTILITY apps to replace the crappy productivity and utility apps - what's the point again? Touting that you can add a third SYNC software is really not saying much of anything.

Sure, there are apps for in-field inventory, prescription medication DB or forest logging but does Apple really compatbility with those apps to drive sales. Do any of those apps work with 99% of cellphones - no. Clearly the much, much bigger market is the "general" user - if you can read emails, look at phones, play music, video and snap a few pictures AND you can surf the web - what can't you do on the web now? What more do you need? Do you really need a 3rd party Adobe Reader when Preview works better? Do you need to a $39 Excel spreadsheet viewer when you can use a web page?

People sometimes only can see the 2 feet in front of them and parrot whatever they've always parroted but like the Mac or the ipod, be careful of sounding like Steve Ballmer who is clueless about anything not in the past.]]> Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:25:15 -0400
Then when you look at what people are adding - it's PRODUCTIVITY & UTILITY apps to replace the crappy productivity and utility apps - what's the point again? Touting that you can add a third SYNC software is really not saying much of anything.

Sure, there are apps for in-field inventory, prescription medication DB or forest logging but does Apple really compatbility with those apps to drive sales. Do any of those apps work with 99% of cellphones - no. Clearly the much, much bigger market is the "general" user - if you can read emails, look at phones, play music, video and snap a few pictures AND you can surf the web - what can't you do on the web now? What more do you need? Do you really need a 3rd party Adobe Reader when Preview works better? Do you need to a $39 Excel spreadsheet viewer when you can use a web page?

People sometimes only can see the 2 feet in front of them and parrot whatever they've always parroted but like the Mac or the ipod, be careful of sounding like Steve Ballmer who is clueless about anything not in the past.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/31350-steve-jobs-figures-dealmaking-dollars-have-killed-drm?source=feed#comment-83574 83574 Mon, 02 Apr 2007 13:48:54 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/31175-waiting-until-appletv-flops-to-buy-apple-stock?source=feed#comment-83544 83544
What exactly did the AppleTv require? It's essentially a Apple mac mini with less feature, HD outputs and a small hard drive - the essentially software is already up & running on all macs (front Row & itunes). The itunes storefront is already built. Essentially AppleTV is a big ipod for your TV running parts of OSX - not exactly new territory for Apple.

Apple sells everything (hardware wise) with about 27-35% margin and there's barely anything new on the AppleTV so you can presume the same here - Apple doesn't sell anything at a loss so what is Apple really out? AppleTv doesn't have to be ipod successful because Apple already spent most of the money to build the backend - AppleTv is essentially TIDE BLUE for activewear.

Remember people do not buy for features - they buy for convenience at the right price.]]> Mon, 02 Apr 2007 00:55:20 -0400
What exactly did the AppleTv require? It's essentially a Apple mac mini with less feature, HD outputs and a small hard drive - the essentially software is already up & running on all macs (front Row & itunes). The itunes storefront is already built. Essentially AppleTV is a big ipod for your TV running parts of OSX - not exactly new territory for Apple.

Apple sells everything (hardware wise) with about 27-35% margin and there's barely anything new on the AppleTV so you can presume the same here - Apple doesn't sell anything at a loss so what is Apple really out? AppleTv doesn't have to be ipod successful because Apple already spent most of the money to build the backend - AppleTv is essentially TIDE BLUE for activewear.

Remember people do not buy for features - they buy for convenience at the right price.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/30474-apple-for-enterprise-yes-change-does-happen?source=feed#comment-83042 83042
With that said, there is one philsophical/company culture difference - MS is built to sell in bulk and focused on decision makers in enterprise. They could care less about ease of use for end users - just like decision maker buyers don't care if Office is bloated - as long as it's within their price range and offers the 500 checkpoints they want - does anyone really need 150 starbursts in powerpoint with 100 of those choices dead horse ugly? It's the largest check on the checklist when compared to the competition. And virus and malware - of little consequence to the CAPITAL budget buyer - since maintanence or IT comes out of another budget - not his responsibility. And of MS is eager to please, they'll do whatever it takes to get the sale or in the 1990's buy up the competition and merge it into their app so it's another checklist item and/or more importantly - eliminating another incompatible choice - look at of MS' attempts at creating "standards" that are not standards or a couple weeks ago when they tried to come up with a new format that was "better" than jpeg - like anyone cares.

But in the case of enterprise, part of Apple's non-success is just a different company culture. MS is eager to please by incorporating anything anyone wants into anything as long as you're willing to pay for it and they'll be happy to talk about what's coming next because they want to sell you what you want. Apple is different in that they'll pretty decide what they consider useful or unimportant and if they say no, that's it. So, in one sense MS is better at customer service but the downside is MS will put in 105 things from 75 different requests because they only care about getting the sale so everything is stuffed to the gills and NOTHING is left out out of the code. That looks good on the checklist but to the user? - ugh. So Apple appears aloof or arrogant to enterprise because they say nothing and simply say, "when we're ready, we'll show you."

10 years ago, it was an MS world but now, it's an Apple world because consumers and small cadres drive technology forward - and that's where Apple shines - we love a good surprise and while we say we want things, we don't necessaeily mean it (otherwise we'd be eating sensibly and execercising) - that's why MS is totally confused. They ask people what they want or they come up things that have a longer checklist but people don't buy while Apple doesn't ask anyone - they just unveil things.

So, it's not likely to change much as Apple is not going to hire thousands of sales reps to pound the pavement nor will they offer much guidance beyond what you can guess what Intel is doing ... Apple will gain more shares but not massive shares but that's okay - when you can generate 60% of MS' revenue with 4-5% marketshare of PC's - imagine what 10-14% will deliver.

The 1990's were to MS what the 1950's were to GM.

They still haven't a clue as Steve Ballmer keeps talking about overtaking Google in months ...]]> Sun, 25 Mar 2007 00:42:15 -0400
With that said, there is one philsophical/company culture difference - MS is built to sell in bulk and focused on decision makers in enterprise. They could care less about ease of use for end users - just like decision maker buyers don't care if Office is bloated - as long as it's within their price range and offers the 500 checkpoints they want - does anyone really need 150 starbursts in powerpoint with 100 of those choices dead horse ugly? It's the largest check on the checklist when compared to the competition. And virus and malware - of little consequence to the CAPITAL budget buyer - since maintanence or IT comes out of another budget - not his responsibility. And of MS is eager to please, they'll do whatever it takes to get the sale or in the 1990's buy up the competition and merge it into their app so it's another checklist item and/or more importantly - eliminating another incompatible choice - look at of MS' attempts at creating "standards" that are not standards or a couple weeks ago when they tried to come up with a new format that was "better" than jpeg - like anyone cares.

But in the case of enterprise, part of Apple's non-success is just a different company culture. MS is eager to please by incorporating anything anyone wants into anything as long as you're willing to pay for it and they'll be happy to talk about what's coming next because they want to sell you what you want. Apple is different in that they'll pretty decide what they consider useful or unimportant and if they say no, that's it. So, in one sense MS is better at customer service but the downside is MS will put in 105 things from 75 different requests because they only care about getting the sale so everything is stuffed to the gills and NOTHING is left out out of the code. That looks good on the checklist but to the user? - ugh. So Apple appears aloof or arrogant to enterprise because they say nothing and simply say, "when we're ready, we'll show you."

10 years ago, it was an MS world but now, it's an Apple world because consumers and small cadres drive technology forward - and that's where Apple shines - we love a good surprise and while we say we want things, we don't necessaeily mean it (otherwise we'd be eating sensibly and execercising) - that's why MS is totally confused. They ask people what they want or they come up things that have a longer checklist but people don't buy while Apple doesn't ask anyone - they just unveil things.

So, it's not likely to change much as Apple is not going to hire thousands of sales reps to pound the pavement nor will they offer much guidance beyond what you can guess what Intel is doing ... Apple will gain more shares but not massive shares but that's okay - when you can generate 60% of MS' revenue with 4-5% marketshare of PC's - imagine what 10-14% will deliver.

The 1990's were to MS what the 1950's were to GM.

They still haven't a clue as Steve Ballmer keeps talking about overtaking Google in months ...]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/29688-could-a-dell-apple-partnership-work?source=feed#comment-82621 82621 Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:12:43 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/27890-how-apples-iphone-could-flop?source=feed#comment-81780 81780
The iphone is not a kidney dialysis machine (at least not yet :-) It is a buying choice like everything else from day old bread to a Bentley. You can choose to buy according to your needs but it's another choice - not sure why other than people who work at Apple' competitors, it "inspires/unleashes" such rage.

Cingular service - so, this guy really believes if Apple got no revenue from new iphone customers, Cingular/AT&T was/is going to plow that money towards customer service or would they simply get bigger shrimp at the executive retreat?

A two year cell phone contract - not exactly everyone's first choice but who here not in prison thinks 2 years doesn't fly by in a twink of an eye - how much free time does this guy have that 2 years seems intermable? Okay, if you feel that way, DON'T BUY AN IPHONE or ANY CONTRACT PHONE - you can buy pre paid. It's not like it's a trick contract where it's month to month but if you're late with a payment, it gets converted to two years. It says right there on the front of the webiste - TWO YEAR blah, blah, blah - it's plain right there. If you disagree, don't buy it.

Can't Install Apps - Smartphones have a 3% marketshare now and really, what apps are most people installing? My evidence is only limited to about 30 people but as far as I tell from my friends and colleagues, not only have they only installed at most a few apps at most but in virtually all the cases - it's simply BETTER versions of what's included so until we see Apple' apps, we don't know what else there is. It is like Apple's MAIL, it's not a perfect app but it's pretty nice. No real need for me to buy another MAIL app. Of course, Outlook support is important but you really think if MS offered an Outlook for the iphone, Apple wouldn't let them sell you one? I presume the web surfer is a mini Safari - do I really need to load another browser? As for the other necessary utilities like notes, calendar, address book, etc, I can't imagine Apple not providing a state of the art version - what else? Being able to read PDF's and Office formats? Beyond that, what else are you looking to load? Sure, it sounds like it's a feature we want but look at the ipod, without you being to load other apps, we have games, we have ebooks, we have transit maps, we have drink mixes and we the Constitution ... it's like choosing between a 6-speed and an 8-speed transmission for a 4-door sedan, why exactly do you need an 8-speed transmission? But AGAIN, NOT hidden from you - NOT a surprise. They announced right up front - if it's not for you, it's not for you.

And in closing, he's saying - only he is smart enough to read the giant typeface on the FRONT PAGE of the website and he's telling us that a 2 YEAR CONTRACT means a 2 year contract and no third party apps means no third party apps and he's saying that AT&T would've taken the millions they are giving to Apple to plow right back into customer service so by buying an iphone, that money will only go to Apple who is probably going to waste it on R&D or having Jonathan Ive devise a shrimp the size of the Cisco iphone.

So, remember, don't read what's plainly written when you can read his words.]]> Sat, 24 Feb 2007 16:56:38 -0500
The iphone is not a kidney dialysis machine (at least not yet :-) It is a buying choice like everything else from day old bread to a Bentley. You can choose to buy according to your needs but it's another choice - not sure why other than people who work at Apple' competitors, it "inspires/unleashes" such rage.

Cingular service - so, this guy really believes if Apple got no revenue from new iphone customers, Cingular/AT&T was/is going to plow that money towards customer service or would they simply get bigger shrimp at the executive retreat?

A two year cell phone contract - not exactly everyone's first choice but who here not in prison thinks 2 years doesn't fly by in a twink of an eye - how much free time does this guy have that 2 years seems intermable? Okay, if you feel that way, DON'T BUY AN IPHONE or ANY CONTRACT PHONE - you can buy pre paid. It's not like it's a trick contract where it's month to month but if you're late with a payment, it gets converted to two years. It says right there on the front of the webiste - TWO YEAR blah, blah, blah - it's plain right there. If you disagree, don't buy it.

Can't Install Apps - Smartphones have a 3% marketshare now and really, what apps are most people installing? My evidence is only limited to about 30 people but as far as I tell from my friends and colleagues, not only have they only installed at most a few apps at most but in virtually all the cases - it's simply BETTER versions of what's included so until we see Apple' apps, we don't know what else there is. It is like Apple's MAIL, it's not a perfect app but it's pretty nice. No real need for me to buy another MAIL app. Of course, Outlook support is important but you really think if MS offered an Outlook for the iphone, Apple wouldn't let them sell you one? I presume the web surfer is a mini Safari - do I really need to load another browser? As for the other necessary utilities like notes, calendar, address book, etc, I can't imagine Apple not providing a state of the art version - what else? Being able to read PDF's and Office formats? Beyond that, what else are you looking to load? Sure, it sounds like it's a feature we want but look at the ipod, without you being to load other apps, we have games, we have ebooks, we have transit maps, we have drink mixes and we the Constitution ... it's like choosing between a 6-speed and an 8-speed transmission for a 4-door sedan, why exactly do you need an 8-speed transmission? But AGAIN, NOT hidden from you - NOT a surprise. They announced right up front - if it's not for you, it's not for you.

And in closing, he's saying - only he is smart enough to read the giant typeface on the FRONT PAGE of the website and he's telling us that a 2 YEAR CONTRACT means a 2 year contract and no third party apps means no third party apps and he's saying that AT&T would've taken the millions they are giving to Apple to plow right back into customer service so by buying an iphone, that money will only go to Apple who is probably going to waste it on R&D or having Jonathan Ive devise a shrimp the size of the Cisco iphone.

So, remember, don't read what's plainly written when you can read his words.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/26556-warner-music-s-bronfman-takes-on-steve-jobs-over-drm?source=feed#comment-81302 81302
His argument is that every "digital format" is locked but as far as I can tell, it's a 3-foot fence with a latch - While I have not backed up or converted other formats, I cannot think of any format - DVD, PS2, Xbox, Nintendo where you cannot download an app and convert/rip or backup in minutes. The UI might be poor and it might take a long time but nothing is really locked - but again, music is the only format without any locks on it in CD format but why does that need to be protected?]]> Fri, 09 Feb 2007 14:48:27 -0500
His argument is that every "digital format" is locked but as far as I can tell, it's a 3-foot fence with a latch - While I have not backed up or converted other formats, I cannot think of any format - DVD, PS2, Xbox, Nintendo where you cannot download an app and convert/rip or backup in minutes. The UI might be poor and it might take a long time but nothing is really locked - but again, music is the only format without any locks on it in CD format but why does that need to be protected?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/22568-sony-to-challenge-apple-will-psp-video-downloads-bear-fruit?source=feed#comment-79253 79253
80% of PSP users are savvy enough to rip or convert all the video they want by themselves as evident by the slow sales of UMD (another dumb Sony format). These users wknow how to create DRM free video so why bother?

Sony also cannot design an interface and connectivity platform to save their life - just look at the CONNECT store for music. It will serve to annoy their savvy users who can see how easy itunes is.

But most important of all, until they get battery life up from around 2 hours-ish, very few gamers are going to waste their battery and meager storage on the PSP listening to a lot of music or watching video.

So, it's nice but it's not a game changer.]]> Mon, 18 Dec 2006 13:23:39 -0500
80% of PSP users are savvy enough to rip or convert all the video they want by themselves as evident by the slow sales of UMD (another dumb Sony format). These users wknow how to create DRM free video so why bother?

Sony also cannot design an interface and connectivity platform to save their life - just look at the CONNECT store for music. It will serve to annoy their savvy users who can see how easy itunes is.

But most important of all, until they get battery life up from around 2 hours-ish, very few gamers are going to waste their battery and meager storage on the PSP listening to a lot of music or watching video.

So, it's nice but it's not a game changer.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/17161-why-apple-s-itv-will-fail-with-or-without-google?source=feed#comment-64818 64818 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 13:12:57 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/15509-apple-s-ipod-video-conditioning-the-market-for-cellphone-video?source=feed#comment-58320 58320
The success of the ipod really stems from the right philosophy ... Apple basically said, wouldn't it be cool to be able to carry and listen to a couple thousand songs? (of course, susequent ipods built upon that idea ...) What would we need to do that?

The problem with the competitors is that they held a tiny HDD (or flash drive) and said, what can we build around this to sell to people? The ipod is a portable music device that happens to have a drive ... the others are drives that happen to play music ... that's subtle but in the ultimate test to consumes - it's HUGE.

Same with the cell phone companies - after selling a couple billion devices, has anyone designed anything as easy to use as an ipod OR even had someone said this is a great and simple to use (not exterior design?) ... no?

It is easier to change the date & time on my ipod than it is on my phone ... why did it take 2 software upgrades before it was easier to figure out on the Moto RAZR that you could include several phone numbers for one person instead of a separate listing?

Or that the MS Q phone requires three menu choices and a pull down to select SPEAKERPHONE?

Look at the reviews for CHOCOLATE. Everyone agrees it's a nice and perhaps even a great design but the software and OS portion of the review? I think 'crap' pretty much sums it up.

Until they stop bring a UTILTY and instead of thinking of each customer as a revenue stream (maximize profit, minimize cost), they will end up with the Chocolate ... a good start but then they start cutting corners ... that's why their 'advanced services' have yet to take off ...]]> Tue, 15 Aug 2006 13:16:53 -0400
The success of the ipod really stems from the right philosophy ... Apple basically said, wouldn't it be cool to be able to carry and listen to a couple thousand songs? (of course, susequent ipods built upon that idea ...) What would we need to do that?

The problem with the competitors is that they held a tiny HDD (or flash drive) and said, what can we build around this to sell to people? The ipod is a portable music device that happens to have a drive ... the others are drives that happen to play music ... that's subtle but in the ultimate test to consumes - it's HUGE.

Same with the cell phone companies - after selling a couple billion devices, has anyone designed anything as easy to use as an ipod OR even had someone said this is a great and simple to use (not exterior design?) ... no?

It is easier to change the date & time on my ipod than it is on my phone ... why did it take 2 software upgrades before it was easier to figure out on the Moto RAZR that you could include several phone numbers for one person instead of a separate listing?

Or that the MS Q phone requires three menu choices and a pull down to select SPEAKERPHONE?

Look at the reviews for CHOCOLATE. Everyone agrees it's a nice and perhaps even a great design but the software and OS portion of the review? I think 'crap' pretty much sums it up.

Until they stop bring a UTILTY and instead of thinking of each customer as a revenue stream (maximize profit, minimize cost), they will end up with the Chocolate ... a good start but then they start cutting corners ... that's why their 'advanced services' have yet to take off ...]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/15007-car-based-ipods-threaten-sirius-satellite-radio-xm?source=feed#comment-56713 56713
If you drive an hour each way for commute, there's part of your audience.

Long distance or working drivers (cabs/truck drivers) - the audience is there

But beyond that, who is there really willing to pay $15 a month for radio? Sports? Baseball is clearly the sport of radio but that audience tends to skew older and most of your older fans really live in the area - you always have free radio. Most of other people do not have free evenings to listen to baseball unless they are driving into another state. It's one of those things that sounds great but who has that much free time?

And while NASCAR & NFL are popular on TV, radio is not anyone's "other" choice if they can help it - again, unless you have to work, most of their games are usually when people are already watching the game or are too busy doing something else - and again, for the NFL, local fans have free local radio.

Music - it is great to get hundreds of commercial free stations but unless you drive to work, the ipod is much easier and you really only hear exactly what you want to hear.

That's not to say there no's business or that the ipod has to kill atellite radio but satellite radio has to look at the numbers realistically ... and there is technology that can match them coming soon so they should not get too carried with spending money ... if nationwide wifi max is launched - basically internet radio will be free (as part of your package) since anyone even YOURSELF can launch a stream and with wifi access your website or anyone as a "radio" station - we have thousands of internet radio stations already, it's just a matter of bandwidth now but soon?]]> Sun, 06 Aug 2006 20:43:47 -0400
If you drive an hour each way for commute, there's part of your audience.

Long distance or working drivers (cabs/truck drivers) - the audience is there

But beyond that, who is there really willing to pay $15 a month for radio? Sports? Baseball is clearly the sport of radio but that audience tends to skew older and most of your older fans really live in the area - you always have free radio. Most of other people do not have free evenings to listen to baseball unless they are driving into another state. It's one of those things that sounds great but who has that much free time?

And while NASCAR & NFL are popular on TV, radio is not anyone's "other" choice if they can help it - again, unless you have to work, most of their games are usually when people are already watching the game or are too busy doing something else - and again, for the NFL, local fans have free local radio.

Music - it is great to get hundreds of commercial free stations but unless you drive to work, the ipod is much easier and you really only hear exactly what you want to hear.

That's not to say there no's business or that the ipod has to kill atellite radio but satellite radio has to look at the numbers realistically ... and there is technology that can match them coming soon so they should not get too carried with spending money ... if nationwide wifi max is launched - basically internet radio will be free (as part of your package) since anyone even YOURSELF can launch a stream and with wifi access your website or anyone as a "radio" station - we have thousands of internet radio stations already, it's just a matter of bandwidth now but soon?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/14636-microsoft-s-r-d-far-outpaces-google-and-apple-is-that-a-good-thing?source=feed#comment-55583 55583
And presuming $8 to $8.5 billion was spent on Vista - so far, NOTHING to show for it and the last year, you'e spent time & more money madly ripping out main features ... and not to rub salt in the wound, Apple not only introduced a complete OS break from the past but managed to provide 3 substantial upgrades with a 4th to come out anyday now ... Apple's R&D in the past 5 years has provided the ipod, world class laptops, innovative designed desktops, the ability to switch processor lines and new and updated evolutionary & revolutionary software. All profitable.

And MS in the past 5 years? Spend $10 BILLION to launch xbox with a profit of ZERO. Spend $4 BILLION to fight AOL with MSN and again, zero profit. Spend a couple billion here and there to lose out in the battles with WebTV, home networking, cableTV, watches and cell phones.

And in the meanwhile, ignore companies like eBay, yahoo & Google ... oh, we'll spend $5 BILLION to catch up ... or another billion to try and catch Apple's ipod with Zune?

And now, they're going to spend $40 billion to prop up Steve Ballmer's stock holdings? Do shareholders really think this and the past efforts are in the best interest of shareholders?

MS seems to be the Halliburton/KBR of technology - money goes in but what's coming out?]]> Mon, 31 Jul 2006 15:53:27 -0400
And presuming $8 to $8.5 billion was spent on Vista - so far, NOTHING to show for it and the last year, you'e spent time & more money madly ripping out main features ... and not to rub salt in the wound, Apple not only introduced a complete OS break from the past but managed to provide 3 substantial upgrades with a 4th to come out anyday now ... Apple's R&D in the past 5 years has provided the ipod, world class laptops, innovative designed desktops, the ability to switch processor lines and new and updated evolutionary & revolutionary software. All profitable.

And MS in the past 5 years? Spend $10 BILLION to launch xbox with a profit of ZERO. Spend $4 BILLION to fight AOL with MSN and again, zero profit. Spend a couple billion here and there to lose out in the battles with WebTV, home networking, cableTV, watches and cell phones.

And in the meanwhile, ignore companies like eBay, yahoo & Google ... oh, we'll spend $5 BILLION to catch up ... or another billion to try and catch Apple's ipod with Zune?

And now, they're going to spend $40 billion to prop up Steve Ballmer's stock holdings? Do shareholders really think this and the past efforts are in the best interest of shareholders?

MS seems to be the Halliburton/KBR of technology - money goes in but what's coming out?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/13295-microsoft-s-ipod-killer-emerges-should-apple-be-scared-you-bet-aapl-msft?source=feed#comment-52752 52752
Legacy. Yes, MS was a succesful consumer company until 1998 and they're still living on that legacy.

Intuit is a good point. As I implied, when they actually have to compete and consumers have a real choice - they lose.

Inuit is a tiny spec of a company compared to Ms with basically a niche product but MS could not defeat them.

Ms could ONLY win during the pre-internet era because they were fierce competitors and later illegal competitors in the m,arketplace. When Ms could leverage (illegally) their monopoly in the OS market, they could defeat those companies by trading prodits from the OS to make Office 3x chaeaper tahn their competoitors and//or force manufacturers not to bundle any app they didn't want (like Netscape) but in the post internet & broadband era, it matters little (firefox or Google) - MS like an old general only knows one strategy - surround and buy up everything (outright or in exclusive licensing) but on the internet, that no longer works (ipod & itunes). The consumers choose and they seldom choose MS.

MS has never really competed against PS because they don't really see the market.

It's not 1995 anymore. The old rules do not apply anymore.

If you want a detailed reason, here ya go:

metroxing.blogspot.com...]]> Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:08:15 -0400
Legacy. Yes, MS was a succesful consumer company until 1998 and they're still living on that legacy.

Intuit is a good point. As I implied, when they actually have to compete and consumers have a real choice - they lose.

Inuit is a tiny spec of a company compared to Ms with basically a niche product but MS could not defeat them.

Ms could ONLY win during the pre-internet era because they were fierce competitors and later illegal competitors in the m,arketplace. When Ms could leverage (illegally) their monopoly in the OS market, they could defeat those companies by trading prodits from the OS to make Office 3x chaeaper tahn their competoitors and//or force manufacturers not to bundle any app they didn't want (like Netscape) but in the post internet & broadband era, it matters little (firefox or Google) - MS like an old general only knows one strategy - surround and buy up everything (outright or in exclusive licensing) but on the internet, that no longer works (ipod & itunes). The consumers choose and they seldom choose MS.

MS has never really competed against PS because they don't really see the market.

It's not 1995 anymore. The old rules do not apply anymore.

If you want a detailed reason, here ya go:

metroxing.blogspot.com...]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/13295-microsoft-s-ipod-killer-emerges-should-apple-be-scared-you-bet-aapl-msft?source=feed#comment-52744 52744
How many more successes can MS or MS shareholders afford?

They've spent about $400 to sell each XBox & 360 - that's $8 BILLION dollars to be third ... which is where they will be in the ipod race ... BTW, third means a marlet share of about 5%.

MS has failed in EVERY consumer venture. MSN, MSN search, WebTv, watch OS, BobOS, The talking barney, the watch OS, home networking, the Ms remote control, and even the palm when the cosnumer amrlet was 40% of the PDA marketplace, etc ... other than buying the 15% of the video game market for $8 BILLION dollars, they pretty much are clueless when it comes to consumers.

It's not just Apple they can't compete against. It's EVERYONE who sells to consumers. MS is great at enterpros selling - completetly clueless when selling to cosnumers (just look at Vista - missed two holiday season and now coming out with 4 similiar sounding versions and offering stickers that say it's capable or Vista-ready? yea, real clear).

MS is done. They are the GM of technology.

Good at fleet selling - not much at anything else.]]> Mon, 10 Jul 2006 13:14:45 -0400
How many more successes can MS or MS shareholders afford?

They've spent about $400 to sell each XBox & 360 - that's $8 BILLION dollars to be third ... which is where they will be in the ipod race ... BTW, third means a marlet share of about 5%.

MS has failed in EVERY consumer venture. MSN, MSN search, WebTv, watch OS, BobOS, The talking barney, the watch OS, home networking, the Ms remote control, and even the palm when the cosnumer amrlet was 40% of the PDA marketplace, etc ... other than buying the 15% of the video game market for $8 BILLION dollars, they pretty much are clueless when it comes to consumers.

It's not just Apple they can't compete against. It's EVERYONE who sells to consumers. MS is great at enterpros selling - completetly clueless when selling to cosnumers (just look at Vista - missed two holiday season and now coming out with 4 similiar sounding versions and offering stickers that say it's capable or Vista-ready? yea, real clear).

MS is done. They are the GM of technology.

Good at fleet selling - not much at anything else.]]>