GSlusher

Apple's App Store Numbers Continue to Amaze

Doug is technically correct, but Apple did sell games for the iPod 5.5G--and perhaps later versions, as well. I have two on my iPod 5.5G.


On Nov 07 03:06 AM Doug, Mtn. View, CA wrote:

> Uh, no. There was never an App Store until the iPhone came along,
> and even then Apple had to be prodded to do it.

Android and Apple: Smartphones Require Smart Strategy

"Anyone can make an Android handset ..."

That's a negative feature, in that every manufacturer can make a substantially different Android handset with a MODIFIED OS and with different versions of the OS that may or may not be upgradeable. On top of that, they vary in buttons, hardware features, radios, etc. That makes it had for developers to ensure that their software will work on all Android handsets. What works on a Motorola handset may not work the same on a HTC handset. (What works on one HTC handset may not even work the same on another HTC handset.)

This was the situation in the PC world until Microsoft essentially imposed standard hardware requirements--I think that it was with Windows 95. In PC gaming those many years ago, a game developer would have to worry about different video cards as well as different processors.

Daniel Eran Dilger of Roughly Drafted had written extensively about the problem with Android's fragmentation.

The iPhone's Next Carrier Is Likely T-Mobile, Not Verizon

Ah, at last, a commentator who may know something about physical reality, though you didn't specifically address it. Verizon & Sprint use CDMA. CDMA is incompatible with the current iPhone, which uses GSM. GSM is used by ATT, T-Mobile, and most cell-phone carriers in the rest of the world. That's probably why Apple decided to go with GSM & ATT--it was the most efficient way to make the iPhone marketable worldwide.

Apple would have to design & get approval for a CDMA phone. IF, as some suggest, they were going to offer a phone through Verizon next June, they would have to be in that process now.

Apple would also have to support two different technologies, then add another when LTE is rolled out. Certainly, Nokia and others do this now, but they have a built-in support base, plus they hand off a lot of tech support to the carriers.

What if Steve Jobs Hadn’t Returned to Apple in 1997?

Multi-touch, to name just one. Can you pinch to expand on any other phone, even now?

Others:
- Light sensor that shuts off the backlight when you hold the iPhone to your head.
- Accelerometer that can be used not only for automatically shifting to landscape mode, but as a game controller, as well.
- Gestures, like "inertia" for scrolling through lists
- Did the HTC have a hard glass capacitance display or the more usual Palm-like pressure-sensing display? (IOW, did you use a stylus with the HTC?)
- Did the HTC have multiple-language keyboards?

and, of course, the full iPod capability, including widescreen video.

Did you try the Mac version of MS Office? It may actually be better, according to several people who've switched to it from running the Windows version with Parallels.


On Nov 27 12:45 PM Davis Gentry wrote:

> come on - what single capability on the iPhone was unique when the
> started selling them?

Apple's AT&T Deal: Setting the Record Straight

Exactly. That's why predicting a Verizon iPhone for soon after mid-2010 is iffy, at best. When will Verizon have LTE deployed in a significant part of the US?

On Nov 25 09:36 AM Whoa Nelly wrote:

> Apple will likely join VZW with an LTE iphone since ALL wireless
> carriers will use that technology for 4G.

Trading Apple and Google: They Should Call It Winning

Why 50-day? Why not 48, 52, 39, or 118? Is there hard evidence that this works, or, like most "technical" methodologies, is it mostly urban legend?

FWIW, a few chosen (i.e., "cherry-picked") examples aren't evidence. Apply this to 1,000 stocks and 8-10 randomly-chosen periods for each stock. (That would be easy to do with a good database and cleverl software.) If it works no more than about 50% of the time, it's useless, as a coin toss would be right 50% of the time.

Apple's AT&T Deal: Setting the Record Straight

Typical financial commentary that ignores physical reality. Apple would need to design & get approval for a DIFFERENT iPhone to use on Verizon's CDMA network, then support it. Why would they, when CDMA is on the way out and is used only in the US and a smattering of other countries? It would also reduce the iPhone's functionality: the user could not access email or the web while on a call, as CDMA cannot handle voice & data simultaneously. (E.g., you can't access Google Maps data while on a call with the Droid.)

Apple's iPhone vs. RIM's BlackBerry: Who Wins on Comparison?

One simple reason: CDMA. Verizon & Sprint both use this "ancient" technology. One effect is that the networks cannot handle voice & data at the same time. You can't talk on the phone and check email or the web simultaneously. Some phones will put a call on "hold" while you access the web, it will appear as a break to the other party.

Another is that CDMA is used only in the US and a very few other places. Most of the world is GSM, like ATT. Apple would have had to design another phone, had it approved, and provide support for it, or would have had to build a dual-mode phone, which probably would be heavier and cost more.


On Nov 23 08:50 AM User 61758 wrote:

> Agree. Why Apple has not yet acknowledged AT&T's weakness and
> moved with Verizon or TMobile, is beyond me

Who Will Come Out Ahead from e-Book Success in College Classrooms?

A few obstacles remain before the Kindle & its ilk can be used for textbooks. The most expensive texts are not history, literature, language, and the like, but math, science and engineering, where texts can easily cost $120-150. Those texts depend heavily upon graphics--diagrams, drawings, photographs, charts & graphs, and equations. They make extensive use of color. The Kindle is no better for that use than, say, an etch-a-sketch. Even if they solve the color & graphics problems (which will dramatically increase the size and cost of ebooks), there will remain usage problems. Typically, a student will look at a chart/drawing/photo/di... WHILE reading the relevant section of the text. Textbook editors are usually careful to make this easy by putting the graphics on the same or facing page as the related text. Flipping a Kindle back and forth from page to page will probably be unsatisfactory. It will probably dramatically increase the time required to read technical texts.

There are many possibilities that could enhance learning--interactive charts, dynamic equations that the student can manipulate, VR-type diagrams, where you can rotate an object and zoom in and out, etc. However, the usage problems need to be solved. It might require a larger screen, roughly the size of a 15-17" laptop. In that case, one might as well use the laptop.

FWIW, I've read a lot of technical texts, both as a student at MIT (three degrees in mechanical engineering) and as an instructor in undergraduate and graduate engineering courses.

Amazon: A Kindle Under Every Tree?

Three reasons, I would suppose (though I agree with your conclusion):

1. Larger, higher-resolution display, so it shows more of a page.
2. Cell-phone connection to get books, though getting them through Amazon's web site wouldn't be too inconvenient, as long as one has Wifi available.
3. Longer battery life, as the display itself doesn't require power unless you're changing a page.

A quibble: there is no such thing as an "iTouch," despite what some lazy columnists write. Apple sells the "iPod touch." It's like calling a car a Toyrolla.

Edit: as I recall, the Kindle also plays audiobooks.


On Nov 21 08:59 AM mollytjm wrote:

> why would anyone buy the Kindle for that price when they can get
> an iTouch that does the same thing and about a zillion other things?
> And the reading experience is terrific on it. audiobooks are wonderful
> too.
> i think this article must be an ad or something.

A Worm in the Apple?

Is there any hard evidence that "Bollinger Band" analysis works, other than through self-fulfilling prophesy? (I.e., many traders use the same tool and act accordingly, which then skews the market.)

Apple to Open 50 More Stores - Let's Be Careful, Steve

@Roger Knights:
" Manhattan is probably the only location with more than one store in the US ..."

No. Check the list. There are two in Tigard, OR, a southern suburb of Portland, plus one in downtown Portland. According to Google Maps, they are 4.9 miles/7 minutes apart by car. That is not as close as the Manhattan stores in space (the time may be similar, considering traffic, etc), but it's still very close, and Portland is a lot smaller than Manhattan. Both are in very large, upscale shopping centers.

Several large urban areas have more than one Apple Store--Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Las Vegas. Palo Alto has two. Arlington, VA, has two 3.5 mi apart.

An interesting tidbit: there is no Apple Store in Cupertino. The closest are probably in San Jose and Palo Alto.

Apple to Open 50 More Stores - Let's Be Careful, Steve

Apple takes a long-range view of the stores. Each represents a significant investment and I expect that they don't make a move precipitously. The process doesn't take a couple of months but several years--planning, developing, permitting, construction all take time. (Especially if a store is not in a mall.)

They can--and do--train personnel, well in advance of opening a store. Many said that Apple couldn't staff 20 stores, much less 200. Find the article that said that the "selection rate" for the latest NYC store was lower than Harvard's admission rate--under 10%. Sounds like they won't have much trouble staffing.

They may decrease revenue/sq ft, but, if the total revenue and profit goes up, where's the problem?

While Rivals Jockey for Market Share, Apple Bathes in Profits

Since when? The iPod and iPhone were not "First to Market." What product(s) are you referring to?


On Nov 12 08:15 AM SusanGrisanti wrote:

> Apple has had 'First To Market' Advantage for decades. When a good
> product is consistent & first to market it usually has to do
> less to stay on top.

Expect Apple's December Earnings to Grow 37%

Advill, you've been told before that Apple has ALREADY sold millions of iPhones in China--indirectly, but a sale is a sale. Sounds like you're closing your eyes, covering your ears, and yelling "NaNaNaNa" to shut out the facts when they threaten your conclusions.


On Nov 10 11:39 AM Advill wrote:

> A review of your numbers based in the DISASTER that Apple is facing
> in China nowdays is important.
>
> Is incredible how they losed ground before the chinese realities,
> the China team of Apple is not getting any result.