While we are being cynical and having some fun. We are discussing what market share , which in this case is 75% means in the overall scheme of things where the wearables are concerned.
You're right. Sometimes I forget that people have not kept up with basic explanations that have been made dozens of times here over the years.
It is a legal requirement that Apple has bound itself to in its SEC 10-K filings. This has been explained many times before, so you're not the first to be unaware of it.
You can search for "sales shipments sec" in the forums, or simply read this post I made on the topic a while back.
Now who's being disingenuous
If you didn't understand something that basic, then the polite thing to do is ASK, not assume and attack.
But I admire your wordmanship nonetheless, just as I can technically admire the way that Apple so often meticulously phrases things in very clever - though yes, also very deceptive - ways.
(My favorite recent example: Apple claiming its watch case is thinner than it really is, by only citing the "case thickness" and ignoring the crystal and sensor sections above and below the metal part, a measurement that other watchmakers do not fail to include.)
Actually if I recall correctly stock tends to go down when a new iPhone is announced, and I could never figure out why.
I would love to buy the $1099 space black watch but I just can't press the buy button. To me it just doesn't make good financial sense to buy any of these watches.
If you like it pal, don't give 2 hoots to what other folk think.. It doesn't effect you in the slightest..
You're not the only person I've heard express that wish. It certainly isn't unreasonable to hope and request that Apple consider adding a third size to the lineup down the road. The 38 mm is definitely as large as I can go but there are plenty of people who currently wear the 42mm who could go up another size and get additional screen real estate that they would appreciate and a better fit for their wrist.
Probably not, but people are generally unconcerned by facts or the glaringly obvious. I am surprised by the numbers of people that are able to combine letters and some words together though, even though they are mostly incomprehensible.
Females tend to be more sensible in tech purchases and don't just buy stuff because it's new. It needs to have a purpose, like actually being efficient or useful, rather than just something to waste time with or trying to justify its existence. Tech stuff for guys is like shoes or handbags for gals - irresistible and generally unnecessary. Unless it's from Apple of course.
The twenty something's seem prepared to dispose more of their income than we did as we were less likely to live our parents, waiting for them to die. Having to buy a house or pay rent tends to limit disposable income unless debt is not scary to you. As far as wearing a watch goes, I stopped wearing one after the first iPhone, even though my eyesight was still pretty good then, but I've started wearing a watch to get back in the habit in anticipation of being able to afford a Watch at some stage. Having deteriorating eyesight makes using an analogue watch less efficient though, so I'm hoping the Watch will be easier to read without glasses.
Tim Cook said more Watches were sold in the launch quarter than the first pads or phones, so that's a pretty big clue, more than I thought they were going to disclose. For the time being I'm prepared to believe Tim and agree that it's not necessary for them to give competitors information.Hmm... I thought this site had determined that analysts are clueless and just play the guessing game. But I guess since this one is Apple positive, they must suddenly know what they are talking about...
This continuing obvious stock manipulation would further suggest that illegal behaviors are not policed, hence the ability for certain people to engineer the crime of the century (so far), the so called GFC. You could of course help yourself to some cheaper Apple stock if you had money to spare. I'm still stewing about my cowardly behavior in not buying Apple stock when it was around $5, even though my wife was happy to get some then. We were in a huge amount of debt though.Of course it is but the people saying it are either Apple's competitors or people shorting Apple stock
That's what so many people are saying. As usual, Apple seems to have figured out why the others don't quite work and ship stuff that does, and are beautifully made as well.
They bought Beats for the talent and music connections, not just a gamble on an extra income stream. They are playing the long game and actually trying to revive interest and appreciation for music in general and not just for money. They say that music is in their DNA and I believe them. If they can revive the music industry, it will be for the artists, not the parasitic distributors that have lost the plot (again). It will be a win win win if they can stop the decline in music interest and appreciation.
