david levy_

The Mac vs. PC Debate Was Never Clearer

what a tired subject. this debate always regresses to the elementary school playground. "my mac is better than your pc!"..."my pc could kick your mac's butt!"..."well it's my kickball and i'm going home!"

anyone with a little forethought will see that we are (or should be) moving toward OS agnostic devices that use VMs to accomodate applications that require specific operating systems.

this debate will probably rage on, however, as it is clear, "my blackberry can kick you iphone's butt." and "my WM phone can beat up your android!"

A Look at a Few Long Positions

does the thesis for FAF still hold? I love the transactional angle, but title insurance looks like it may be in for some "governemental interferece" and scrutiny.

Forget Goldman, Start Worrying About the Government

Rather than blame the government or GSCO...maybe everyone should look in the mirror and take some responsibility for their own financial decisions and actions.

The complaining and conspiracy theorized here reminds me of the liberal antagonists in Rand's books. Maybe we should re-read Atlas Shrugged before we ask our political leaders to grab their pitchforks, step in, and level the playing field.

Bringing Kodak into Focus

very insightful. thank you.

if i understand correctly, your model assumes continued decline in film and flat revenues in the remaining businesses? what about the threat of iphone and other like devices cannibalizing the consumer camera market? I think the idea of a separate camera device (for the mainstream) is going away.

medical imaging devices was promising, but was sold to onex, i believe.

EK needs to remake itself through the application of its patent portfolio (OLED, etc.) and possibly acquisition of companies that appeal to today's/tomorrow's technology consumer. they need to use the resources and brand value they have left to make some bold moves. this has worked for other behemoths. I am sure IBM is no longer relying on the typewriter market.

How Are Soros and Paulson Trading?

ill be interested in your eval of CBG. That goes back to the "transaction" thesis you proposed for FAF and FNF. Are you still long FAF?

Why Isn't Microsoft's Strategy Working Anymore?

MikeOz:
I agree, an internal Exchange Server can be unwiedly, insecure, and expensive to manage. Hosted Exchange elimnates the internal headaches, and, with the right provider, provides ALL the functions of exchange (including those not done or not done well by Google) with best practices, reliablity, and low, predictable monthly cost. User accounts go for about $13 a month.

Jun 08 12:12 PM MikeOz wrote:

> On Jun 08 07:59 AM david levy wrote:
> "The Online/Offiline functionality of Outlook/Exchange could be enhanced
> to provide multi-device and virtual desktop (like you suggest) functionality.
> Hosted Exchange is a great, undermarketed product."
>
> .. or is it ? Our business (only 70 users) has been running its own
> exchange server for 10 years. It is expensive to manage / replicate
> / backup etc for such a small number of users.
> Google apps is $50 per user per year for an imap hosted service that
> really looks no different to our users on Outlook.
>
> It is very hard to look past Google Apps - it's a fraction of the
> upgrade costs (hardware and software) that we will have if we stick
> with Exchange.
> MS's vulnerability on email servers has flow on effects:
> - If we move to Google apps, do we really need a Windows domain.
> Our database server (currently SqlServer) is accessed only by browser
> by our users. Our file server could just as easily be linux, with
> zero licencing cost. And ...do we even need a Windows desktop etc
> etc .....

Why Isn't Microsoft's Strategy Working Anymore?

"...I have for Microsoft. The company owns a well established operating system, industry standard office software, and the most widely used internet browser. Combine those with its deep pool of development talent, and I think it has all the ingredients needed to make the most powerful virtual desktop on the market."

This idea is one that I have been spouting to all my clients and friends. The only succesful MSFT cloud-computing application is Exchange in a hosted environement. The Online/Offiline functionality of Outlook/Exchange could be enhanced to provide multi-device and virtual desktop (like you suggest) functionality. Hosted Exchange is a great, undermarketed product.

The virtual PC in the cloud, combined with other OS agnostic apps IS the future and the ultimate desktop killer as people learn that ownership of data does not mean they have to hold it on their own, personal, magnetic disks.

I could not agree with your points more. However, I am still an XP/MSFT software user...AAPL is still too arrogant and making some of the same mistakes they did in the 80s. Mistakes that have caused them to always play catchup from a less than 5% marketshare.

Great Article!

Palm Pre vs. iPhone: The Gmail Advantage

A hosted Microsoft Exchange account supports not only full push email, synchronization of ALL mail folders (Inbox subfolders, Sent Items, etc.,) but full, realtime synchronization of Contacts, Calendars, and Tasks, as well. Your truly becomes a full Outlook/Entourage client. I have personally configured for my clients and can verify hosted Exchange (Activesync) is supported flawlessly on iPhone, all windows based phones, PalmOS, Blackberry, and some other OSes from Nokia and Symbian. I have not tested support for Pre, but Palm states that it is fully supported.

Monthly cost for hosted exchange runs about $9 - $19/month. My clients are using a version that runs $14/month, with unlimited mailbox size.

Hosted Exchagne is the most efficient and comprehensive mailbox/cloud computing mailbox product on the market...imho.

Does 2009 Bear an Uncanny Resemblance to 1938?

what is amazing to me is that the financial media loves to call markets (real estate/stocks/etc.) a "new paradigm" when extending to new highs. Somehow "...it is different this time..."

but, when markets tank, the same media loves to draw everything in the light of history. the favorite, these days, is to compare the current economic environment and state of financial markest to those of the 1920's -30s. this is as ridiculous as calling a peak a "new paradigm."

the nature of industry and technology bears very little if any resemblance to that of the 1920s. even if one argues that, although the landscape is different, human behavior repeats, he/she still cannot discount the drastic change in the velocity and magnitude of information. whereas news would spread and markets would react over months and years in the early 20th century, today, what once took months and years might now take minutes, hours, or days.

drawing comparisons from a century ago in order to try and predict the future completely discounts the effect of instantaneous information which we all now enjoy.

imho
-dl

A Low Cost, Fully Diversified All ETF Portfolio

any answer on which bank offers auto investment for ETFs?

Apple's Hubris: Will All The Hype Go According to Plan?

Besides AAPL, who makes devices that can be used to play iTunes and view video from the iTunes store?