SharonW

The Pre Will Launch Days Before a Likely iPhone Buzz Saw

On comeback kids, I can't agree with you more. People seem to forget that Apple was a comeback kid having once been given up for dead.

Frankly, both AT&T and Apple seem to be running a bit scared ahead of the Pre. I've been reading multiple articles about price drops for service and the iPhone. There was an analyst just on Fast Money that said AT&T was even considering a voice-only plan for the iPhone. How freakin' absurd is that? Why would anyone buy an iPhone only for phone calls? LOL


On May 18 05:27 PM Rg2 wrote:

> Palm needs what America, herself, needs now and going forward: A
> comeback. Both are on their knees and vulnerable currently. The only
> way either is going to resurge is to innovate its way out of their
> respective slumps.
>
> There are many who say Palm is too late to the market-relevance party,
> a once-respected originator of PDA wizardry who lost her way, lost
> her paranoia with regard to the competition, and fell victim to value
> migration. Does this sound a bit like America's story?
>
> They both lost their fear. And fear is a powerful driver of excellence.
>
>
> Steven Jobs, as great as he is, has fear in abundance. The perpetual,
> ever-evolving pace of tecnological change necessitates that technology
> companies constantly look over their shoulder while keeping a keen
> eye to market leadership. Fact is, no one or two companies should
> dominate a market (APPL, RIMM), where consumers are deprived of the
> innovation of their brethren, of competition.
>
> I love APPL products, and RIMM products, and various others, because
> the competition among them makes them all better--and we, consumers,
> the better for it. I love Palm, probably more for its story, its
> underdog position, more than anything.
>
> As an investor, I'm cautious to remove emotion from an investment
> decision; therefore, I don't want to invest in PALM based on sentiment,
> but with logical, having-researched-the-... common sense. Yet, still,
> I'm rooting for the "little tech that could" as a metaphor for America
> herself.
>
> I want GM and Chrysler to make breathtaking, emotive, roadworthy
> vehicles again (like Ford is doing with the 2010 Taurus and Fusion
> hybrid). Like PALM, many have said the door has closed on the American
> carmakers, their market relevance and American consumer trust evaporated--while
> China and India et al salivate at the prospect of ever-increasing
> world-markets share.
>
> Everyone's at liberty to be partisan consumers, to patronize a favored
> brand or company. But when some actually "root" for the demise of
> a home-grown American company such as a PALM--the many jobs and tax
> base the company represents--it's an interesting commentary, no?
>
>
> Surely, the market rewards innovators, deft managers, superior companies,
> and the market will have its say on PALM; does it have the chops
> to compete with the behemoths? Perhaps, perhaps not.
>
> For sure, it has the audacity to try.
>
> I'm pulling for PALM not simply for my inconsequential investment
> in the company (no matter what it does, I won't get rich). I'm pulling
> for it vicariously as I'm pulling for America herself.
>
> We need our companies to compete and succeed, all of them. When China
> or India become the dominant players on the world market, that's
> not good for America, no? Just as when AAPL or RIMM become the dominant
> forces . . . .
>
> PALM needs what America needs right now: A Comeback. I'm pulling
> for both.