jmmx

Calculating Apple's 2010 EPS

Stefan

As for typos - you really should be very careful. It looks so unprofessional - you lose credibility.

Calculating Apple's 2010 EPS

WOW - a lot of work!

Just one caveat - be careful of gross margin when they go to non-deferred accounting. I seem to remember that several items that typically come out before g.m. are pushed to operating expenses on iPhone - e.g. Advertising, etc. (That came from some early conference call.)

Why Apple's iTouch Tablet Will Become Its Flagship Product

@ jabalong

Don't forget that the iPhone already costs about $600 - it is just that the carriers subsidize them. Perhaps these will also be carrier subsidized.


"I agree, $800 is way too expensive for a portable e-reader device. If Apple wants to take over the space from Kindle, it needs to improve on it technologically, but compete in the same $200-300 range. $800 is the cost of an almost high-end laptop these days and not what consumers are going to be willing to pay for an e-reader-plus."

Why Apple's iTouch Tablet Will Become Its Flagship Product

@vloscomp
This is hilarious! The major anti-Apple argument that Windows users have been using for years is that there are 6 million programs for Windows and only 136 for the Mac (albeit most of the ones for Windows are crappy and buggy). Now you are arguing against the very same situation for the app store! What a joke!

Come on - who cares what YOU think of the apps? Clearly most people DO like the app store since 1.5 B downloads is a true phenomenon. If people don't like certain ones of the 50,000 then these apps will not get download or bought, and will fall by the wayside. SO WHAT? There still are thousands of useful and entertaining apps that people do enjoy.

I think you post silly comments like these just to see people's reaction.

On Jul 24 04:49 PM vloscomp wrote:

> I don't get the significant of the apps store: there are 50,000 crappy
> apps that i do not want, and as far as 1.5 billions download, how
> many of those are profitable or useful? This must be year 2000 again
> because traffic is king regardless of generating profit.

Why Apple's iTouch Tablet Will Become Its Flagship Product

@ LuMoS

This is not necessarily so or not necessarily to the extent you think.

Text based apps should scale without too much trouble. Other apps, if they are well designed, should already have facilities for dealing with with the issue of screen size. Programs should use global constants to determine display size that can be reset with a simple re-compile or even automatically set at startup as the program queries the device. One of the hallmarks of OSX is built in scaling.

Of course, real graphics programs might need to update the graphic base of its images to higher resolutions in order to achieve higher quality and save compute power of rescaling. But this is still not a major re-write as only the resources will be updated and the basic logic/computation part of the code will remain unchanged.

So there will be some costs, but not overwhelming.


On Jul 24 08:32 AM LuMoS wrote:

> Great article, but as far as the App-Store running on the tablet
> I believe you might be mistaken. Every app in the App-Store is currently
> developed to fit on the typical 3.5 inch touch-screen, not a 10 in.
> So in order for apps to run natively they'd have to be re-done or
> fixed to run on both versions. Which I doubt deva will have the time
> or patience to create apps for more than 1 device. Although it also
> opens up speculation as to wheather Apple will implement a Premium
> App-Store. In which case you might see those
> better more expensive App. Running natively on a 10 in screen.

Why Apple's iTouch Tablet Will Become Its Flagship Product

The big question in my mind (after "Is this real or fantasy") is this:
Will it run apps only or will it run OSX (Snow Leopard).

+ Apple "Many owners of netbooks will not be happy with their experience"
+ One of the objectives of Snow Leopard was to pare down the size as well as increase efficiency.

The next question is what chipset.
It is possible that the long delay is was to allow the development of their new in-house chipset. Couple this with a rocking GPU to make a "handset" that is almost as powerful as a MacBook (white model) and you will have a pretty incredible device.

I suppose they will start at $799. Hopefully they will go down a bit after 6 months.

The Palm Pre's Coming Out Party

Sounds cool. Good luck Palm.

I still am not betting on them.

Amazon Gaining Share on iTunes

"When the labels help Apple’s rivals go DRM free, then it uses that precedent to ditch DRM too, enabling the same music copying problems the labels vowed to prevent."

This needs to be placed into historical perspective. It seems that 6 years ago is hardly historical - but it seems no one remembers that far back.

Before the iTunes store in 2003, there was a crisis in the music industry (at least from their view). People were copying music and illegally sharing or even selling it. There were no legal online stores for most music (if any at all). Apple came into this and said "We will sell your music for you online." The studios wanted nothing to do with it, but finally conceded for 2 reasons:

1- Apple gave them DRM that "guaranteed" them some reasonable copy protection, and
2- They really had only one choice: Sell online downloads or have the public download for free.

As time went on, the studios learned that DRM was annoying to the customers, and not really protecting anything since those who wanted to rip would do it anyway.

It took a while for them to come to this realization as the industry slowly played with the idea in various venues. Now - if you are going to make a change that will possibly open you up to huge losses, and the change is going to be irreversible, then you are NOT going to start with your biggest merchant. This provides a more logical explanation as to why Apple was late coming to all DRM-free music.

Do you think Apple cares about DRM? They are now saving millions by not having to deal with it.

Rate of Consumer Spending Decline Stabilizes - Overall Outlook Remains Grim

I really hate to sound the sour note, but I think we ned to take the conclusions here cautiously.

>> "Bottom Line: The latest ChangeWave survey shows the rate of U.S. consumer spending decline stabilizing"

First - this statement is a bit hedged. "the rate of... spending decline"
a) If you are at 10% negative spending level and change to a 12% level, that 2 percentage point change represents a RATE of change of 20% (2 is 20% of 10). Yet a move from 20% to 22% - the same 2 point change is now only a 10% RATE of change.
b) Obviously, as you approach saturation (100%), and 60% is approaching that point, then you can no longer continue to increase at a steep rate.

Second - There is nothing to say that the rate will not change again. If you look at the first chart, Apr- Aug showed a leveling off of sentiment, but was followed by a very rapid rise.

I would suggest that the recent rounds of huge layoffs, and ones that are bound to follow, will create an further increase in the red line of that chart (i.e. more people who are spending less). This will continue until we see a real reversal in the unemployment rate. The Obama team is dedicated to jump-starting the economy, but it will take time for legislation to be passed, implemented, and the work projects to actually begin. My guess is that any significant improvements in the survey will have to wait until the second half of next year -- and that if we are lucky.

Legal Music Downloads Catching Up to P2P

Actually, the graphs have something interesting to say. The P2P site traffic is level, while the "sanctioned" sites are growing.

A couple of hypotheses:
1- P2P users are those who were using P2P before legal downloads (read: iTunes) began. Newer users entered the internet with the legal downloads option and so are not interested in the P2P - especially given the ease of use of the legal sites.

2- P2P appeals to young people who have more time than money to spend, but as they grow older, they drift to the legal sites.

My guess is that it is a combination of the two.

One question remains: if the price point were to go up to $1.29 would people start to drift towards the P2Ps? What about $1.59? $1.99?

Apple Investors: Fasten Your Seatbelts, Put On Helmets

Reagan

Only moron here is you.

Apple Investors: Fasten Your Seatbelts, Put On Helmets

"pussies on national security"

Squawk, Squawk, Squawk, - parrot the right-wing propaganda. Then you do not have to think. Not sure how anyone could have found terrorists over what they were thinking. We DO know that prople in FBI/CIA went to C Rice and she ignored them. But no - the dems are responsible for anything during their administration, and anything that happens AFTER their administration, and the republicans never take responsibility for anything! Like I said above they are the "It's not MY fault" party.

I think it is about time we get in a party that is responsible.

Apple Investors: Fasten Your Seatbelts, Put On Helmets

From Wikipedia - This shows how the Reagan administration was involved in helping S Hussein to produce chemical weapons.

Now taxpayers have to pay $1 Trillion to clean up that mess. Notice that Donald Rumsfeld was the special envoy to the Mideast - there is a photo of him shaking hands with Hussein himself. WOW - what a good decision that was!

"According to retired Army Colonel W. Patrick Lang, senior defense intelligence officer for the United States Defense Intelligence Agency at the time, "the use of gas on the battlefield by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern" to Reagan and his aides, because they "were desperate to make sure that Iraq did not lose."[13] Lang cautioned that the Defense Intelligence Agency "would have never accepted the use of chemical weapons against civilians, but the use against military objectives was seen as inevitable in the Iraqi struggle for survival. Despite this claim, the Reagan administration did not stop aiding Iraq after receiving reports affirming the use of poison gas on Kurdish civilians.[14][15]
"

"On 25 May 1994, The U.S. Senate Banking Committee released a report in which it was stated that "pathogenic (meaning 'disease producing'), toxigenic (meaning 'poisonous'), and other biological research materials were exported to Iraq pursuant to application and licensing by the U.S. Department of Commerce." It added: "These exported biological materials were not attenuated or weakened and were capable of reproduction."[20]

The report then detailed 70 shipments (including Bacillus anthracis) from the United States to Iraqi government agencies over three years, concluding "It was later learned that these microorganisms exported by the United States were identical to those the UN inspectors found and recovered from the Iraqi biological warfare program."[21]"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..._support_for_Iraq_duri...

Apple Investors: Fasten Your Seatbelts, Put On Helmets

Reagan

That is exactly the point. WHY should we have supported a dictator who unilaterally & unprovoked invaded another country??? THAT WAS WRONG. Not only wrong - it was IMMORAL! We should have condemned the invasion that ultimately caused the deaths of half a million people.

The Republicans continually make very bad geo-political decisions and these decisions come back later to haunt us. The Taliban were NEVEER freedom-fighters. But the Reagan administration blindly ignored common sense and supported them. Now look at the mess we have to clean up. Same with Iraq.

Like I said - republicans when faced with facts always resort to name calling. So childish!

Apple Investors: Fasten Your Seatbelts, Put On Helmets

Reagan

Did or did not S Hussein invade Iran in the 80's?
Is it true or not that the Reagan admin tacitly supported Iraq at this time? (ans: Yes they did)

These are simple facts that cannot be denied no matter how much you try to hide from them.

Was there a financial crisis in the S&L industry during the Reagan admin? YES! Did it result ini a multi billion dollar bailout by the US tax-payers? YES IT DID.

YOU may like giving BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars to corporations to bail them out of messes that they got themselves into while the Republican appointed leaders of the regulatory agencies looked the other way or the industries were irresponsibly de-regulated. But I do NOT and most Americans are not happy with this corporate welfare - this socialism for the socialites.

The response you right wingers always have to the truth is to try to denigrate the messenger. When you cannot argue against the facts, you pitifully disparage the sources, even when you do not know who the sources are. You just make up silly rationales for ignoring what other people say. This is inherently unpatriotic as you mindlessly turn over you thinking to those who are trying to manipulate you, such as Limbaugh, Savage, and Rove. In lock-step you march blindly forward repeating their mantra-du-jour while the country goes down the tubes.