Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Picture Gallery' started by iFool, Mar 21, 2008.
I made this in The Gimp.
Yes, it will. It already has in smaller companies. Zune 3 will be touchscreen, and it's all downhill from there.
OS 11, I believe, will be almost entirely multitouch based. The second Surface OS will copy it and Microsoft will be sued by Apple for the first time since 1985 on OS-based litigations.
Apple's patenting all of the useful multitouch gestures. Microsoft will either have to steal them to use them, or will have to make their users become contortionists to get anything done.
Actually, the latter of those is what is probably going to happen, anyway.
I'd go so far to say Windows users already are.
I don't believe it will come to that, no.
Partnerships between Apple and M$ will not get to that point - Aplpe makes a superior product and has the resources to produce and market them. Why partner with M$ if you don't have to?
I think you'd much sooner see M$ and Oracle before M$ and Apple.
I think the OP was suggesting that Microsoft would completely copy the iPod, not that Apple would partner with MS. The original post is a little vague though, so maybe your interpretation is correct.
I disagree with some of the comments here though, specifically those that are implying that MS is simply copying Apple with their "surface" technology. From my understanding, MS's Surface project has been in development for many years and was not done in response to the iPhone by any means. As for the patenting of "gestures," I'm unsure how that works, especially since the MS Surface already uses some of the same gestures as the iPhone. I do know, however, that you cannot receive a patent for something that is obvious, and it would seem that certain gestures are just that. I'll try to look more into the IP legal issues regarding this.
ya'll refer to them as M$ yet you worship the company that took the remote out of the retail packaging of the MBP to save 20 bucks...
Apple and MS have partnered before, in the ninetees.
To gate effect
If Apple sells a hundred units a day, then they save ~10 bucks for each unit (at cost) = $1000 saved every day. 1 week = $7000 saved, 1 month = $32,000.
1 year = $365,000
You get the idea. If you buy 1 MacBook Pro a year (which you probably won't), it's costing you an extra $20. For Apple to include the Apple remote, it's costing them $365,000.
That's assuming they only sell 100 units a day, worldwide. It's probably much higher than that...
In addition, the remote is probably not used by many laptop buyers.
I wouldnt be surprised if it happened.
You are implying two things that I believe are misleading.
First, you imply that apple and the average consumer have similar financial standing by making a $ to $ comparison. Here are some numbers: Apple is worth about $124 billion. $365k/$124B = 0.000294% The median American family's net worth was $93,100 at the last fed survey. $20/$93,100 = 0.0215%. That is 73x as much on a percentage basis to the consumer. Even if we only look at the richest 10% of Americans (net worth averaging $831,600) it is still 8.5x more as a percentage of their net worth. So even if it does cost apple $10 per remote, the argument that it somehow has greater impact on them is invalid.
Second, they do not bear the full burden of the inclusion of an apple remote as a direct cost. There would be some incrementally higher number of sales which would generate additional revenue to offset the cost of including remotes. Further the inclusion of a remote only cuts into the potential profit margin (assuming the pricing was fixed) and thus potentially represents an opportunity cost rather than a true direct cost.
Squeezing every last dime out of consumers by removing value adding features/equipment while not reducing prices is a hallmark of successful companies like Microsoft, Apple is no different.
I never used my remote, but would use it If I was a teacher/person using slideshows