I draw the line at the iTwinky...
----------
7!
Reminds me of Homer answering to Blowin' in the Wind...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
To Beat the Law of Large Numbers, Apple Must Expand Its Product Line
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I draw the line at the iTwinky...
----------
7!
Reminds me of Homer answering to Blowin' in the Wind...
I'm getting caught up in the detail, I'm not blaming Apple for making people poor. I'm just saying if they have $100bn and nothing to spend it on then they have a social obligation to either spend it or even better, put it into places where it's most needed.
Tabletop computers!
Two words: Tabletop computers
Yes, large touch-panel computers that can run iOS applications or Mac OS X, much larger than the iPad....something that can fit on the size of a coffee table or be mounted on a wall. Large-panel thin machines that can stream content, play music, movies, etc, and run useful applications. This is a largely unexplored realm of computing which is now possible with multi-touch technology to make this kind of technology useful. Microsoft has showcased something like this, but of course it is not running iOS or Mac OS X. These kind of panel devices would revolutionize computing in the home and office and make the way you interface with computers a different realm entirely. Multiplayer games would also be an application of a device such as this.
This is a real opportunity for Apple to innovate and create a prime item in the market for something like this. This is where computing is going. The technology is available today for this kind of thing to happen. Apple just has to seize the moment.
Two words: Tabletop computers
Yes, large touch-panel computers that can run iOS applications or Mac OS X, much larger than the iPad....something that can fit on the size of a coffee table or be mounted on a wall. Large-panel thin machines that can stream content, play music, movies, etc, and run useful applications. This is a largely unexplored realm of computing which is now possible with multi-touch technology to make this kind of technology useful. Microsoft has showcased something like this, but of course it is not running iOS or Mac OS X. These kind of panel devices would revolutionize computing in the home and office and make the way you interface with computers a different realm entirely. Multiplayer games would also be an application of a device such as this.
This is a real opportunity for Apple to innovate and create a prime item in the market for something like this. This is where computing is going. The technology is available today for this kind of thing to happen. Apple just has to seize the moment.
You spend $500 on a phone because you value it more than the $500, you are better off, the seller is better off. No one is poorer.
Again, companies don't just keep cash in a pile. It is lent out to someone else, the borrower is better off, and the lender is better off. Are you starting to see how the world's wealth can increase, and is not just shuffled around?
It's OK, you can admit that you don't really know economics.
Very interesting read. And I'm sure the brains in Cupertino saw this coming a long time ago (which should hopefully mean new product lines coming soon).
The world's wealth can't increase Jack.
as an aside I really wish you wouldn't associate Hugh Laurie with your right wing capitalist dillusions.
OK. I guess we're done here. You might want to look around, and compare to the past. Good luck.
I've been thinking this might be reason Apple have dropped Mac from OS X.
Strip the lower out of the current Mac line and do an Air style transformation to make a range of devices like your suggesting. Give this range of Semi-Network Computers it's own branding. Free up the Mac brand to concentrate on it's traditional market.
first, large companies usually dont stockpile money. money works best while its being invested. apple has an stockpile of cash a the moment but that situation is unique and rare, even then it will probably end up being used really soon.
but even if you were right that the company does put the money in the bank, the bank still invest that money, loan it, etc. In other words the money keeps circulating. As a rule of thumb, the only people that stockpiles money indefinetly are drug dealers and bank robbers, and they stockpile to avoid being detected
otherwise they would invest it as well ----------
thats true and false. while the material content of the world cannot increase, the perceived value can increase/decrease overtime. think about it, 2000 years ago, the perceived value of coal would been next to nothing, 100 years ago the perceived value of coal was substantial with the boom of steam engine. Today 400grams of plastic and 100 grams of copper might worth $10 but an iphone that is made 99.99% of those materials cost 50 times that.
the point being, if you sculpt a piece of rock with no value at all, you can end up with a David that is worth millions! the wealth can increase (or decrease)
That's right. We're no better off than when we were hunter gatherers 15 or 20 millennia ago, or mostly farmers before the industrial revolution. I'm sure that you'll volunteer go to back to that lifestyle.
they are not obligated to do nothing. again if they are saving it is because they think thats a good strategic move. They wont save it forever because they know that money in a sitting under the matress doesnt make any more money.
they are just waiting for a good opportunity. and if they find that opportunity indeed the will end up making even more money, expanding and hiring more workers, etc....
I hate this article
It is stupid and pointless. I wasn't going to comment but I felt I had to.
----------
They had 10 billion under the mattress about ten years ago. Maybe they don't know about your money making theory.
It is stupid and pointless. I wasn't going to comment but I felt I had to.
----------
They had 10 billion under the mattress about ten years ago. Maybe they don't know about your money making theory.
No ****** way! Apple's obligation is to make you and I rich (if we are shareholders) so that we can choose to put the money where we think it's needed, or where we think there's a social obligation, not where some Apple execs think it's needed. Shareholders might well want to donate money to the opposite causes from Apple execs. They don't need Apple to make them poorer, and take their potential wealth.
Apple goal is to make shareholders rich. Talk to a shareholder if you want a handout or a donation, not to Apple.
10years ago apple was near bankrupt. the cash-pile they have now is relatively recent, perhaps started 5years or so ago and got really big about a year or so. trust me they know they have to do something with that money, I didnt made "my money making theory" as you so mockingly refer to, thats economics basic. Apple just made too much money too fast and have no clue what to do with it. Shareholders expect too much from Apple and pretty much any financial decision they make has to be very carefully designed.
Pretty typical for a growth stock. And Apple certainly has done a fine job of growing its business.
Why would an investor buy Apple for its dividend, when Apple hasn't paid a cash dividend since 1995?
Sounds to me like sour grapes from fund managers would like to add Apple to their portfolio, but can't because their prospectus prohibits them from purchasing non-dividend paying stocks.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
Why the pressure to see them continue 20% annual growth. If Apple's growth slowed to 8% annual, that would still be extremely impressive and yet far more realistic.
Why the pressure to see them continue 20% annual growth. If Apple's growth slowed to 8% annual, that would still be extremely impressive and yet far more realistic.
Here's an idea
how bout re-investing some of those billions into OS X and desktop systems as they did with the PowerMac G5's and dedicated display line. Maybe rework the HFS+ into something more reasonable, saaaaay ZFS-ish (without the copyright/patent issues), maybe R.I., and pro-Apps that are, well, PRO. Might get back some of the creative enterprise industry lost/about to go with that (shameful) iMovie Pro X release (aka FC-Semi-Pro X). Movie studio's and design firms that have used Apple systems have serious bank, and are sitting on that cash due to major uncertainty re: Apple's future in their market. Does it always have to be either consumer or professional focus? Why not both? They gots da molla.
just sayin'
how bout re-investing some of those billions into OS X and desktop systems as they did with the PowerMac G5's and dedicated display line. Maybe rework the HFS+ into something more reasonable, saaaaay ZFS-ish (without the copyright/patent issues), maybe R.I., and pro-Apps that are, well, PRO. Might get back some of the creative enterprise industry lost/about to go with that (shameful) iMovie Pro X release (aka FC-Semi-Pro X). Movie studio's and design firms that have used Apple systems have serious bank, and are sitting on that cash due to major uncertainty re: Apple's future in their market. Does it always have to be either consumer or professional focus? Why not both? They gots da molla.
just sayin'
Lehman and Goldman eventually speculate on it and we end up with an almost worldwide financial melt down while at the same time weakening real production and service sectors and dipping the western world in a prolonged financial recession where young people are suffering all sorts of emotional problems due to rampant unemployment and older people lose their pensions while the mega rich become even richer, they same mega rich that merely took a hit and were subsequently bailed out by the societies they speculated upon with scarce regard for the future of other people and the damage to the planet?
Is that what you are referring to?
Oh Yeah, that one thing that happened that one time. That's how the system always works 100%. (sarcasm)
The system might not be perfect, but even with all our complaints, we got it pretty nice over here
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)
Does anyone think apple can maintain their insane margins?
To keep growing AND maintain margins seems somewhat impossible.
Does anyone think apple can maintain their insane margins?
To keep growing AND maintain margins seems somewhat impossible.
Yep. Jobs actually said "I tend not to worry about the numbers. I just focus on making a great product, and the numbers will work themselves out if we accomplish that"
Something along those lines. Hopefully they continue to do that, and focus on simply making awesome products.
all they need to do is make an iCar. Huge market there. iGlasses with terminator style hud would be sweet too. iRobot slaves would kick ass as well. "iRobot-make me dinner then do my laundry"
because if their growth slows to 8%, then the stock price will decrease, even though 8% is still impressive. the current stock price has 20% growth factored into it because people expect them to continue that rate of growth. obviously this is not sustainable and when they miss wallstreet earnings expectations, their stock price will drop.
I think this is by far the most shocking part of the article, it's based on a misinterpretation of a statistical principle! I wouldn't expect such poor journalism from a major news agency.
Seriously, the article could be used in an intro to statistics class about the abuse of statistics!
In this case, I think that's the only sensible option.