Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Apr 3, 2013 10:33:13 GMT -8
Who's winning the mobile Web? Not Blackberry. Not Microsoft. Not Chrome. Not Symbian. No, NOT Android! Yes, breathe easier Apple followers. Safari rules the electronic roost, growing from 65.35 to 66.4% from Feb. to March at the expense of that train wreck of a platform, Android. tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/04/03/apple-android-web-share/Safari rules the world (that matters). And KHTML at that. KHTM-huh?! Wow. We knew it (WebKit), many don't. Many Android zealots probably don't! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by dreamRaj on Apr 3, 2013 10:36:23 GMT -8
During earnings time, we can only hope and wish that AAPL is above 450 and not in the 430s or even worse, 420s, because in case of a disappointment, a fall from 450s to 400s is better than a fall from 420s to 370s.
|
|
|
|
Post by applemuncher on Apr 3, 2013 11:20:33 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by sponge on Apr 3, 2013 11:28:17 GMT -8
He is right about one thing. It won't happen until next year. WE will see the 5S before we see a bigger iPHone. In the mean time our stock is about to close green for the second day in a row.  |
|
|
|
Post by sponge on Apr 3, 2013 11:29:08 GMT -8
During earnings time, we can only hope and wish that AAPL is above 450 and not in the 430s or even worse, 420s, because in case of a disappointment, a fall from 450s to 400s is better than a fall from 420s to 370s. I hope we see more like 480 by earnings with a nice jump to 525 following a very good quarter. |
|
|
|
Post by prazan on Apr 3, 2013 11:47:51 GMT -8
Agree with most of your post Gregg, but "...suitable only for making telephone calls." is an untrue statement. Yes, certainly a distortion, but it was good for a laugh, because it contains a kernel of truth, too. |
|
chinacat
Moderator 
AAPL Long since 2006
Posts: 4,438
|
Post by chinacat on Apr 3, 2013 11:50:49 GMT -8
This article quoting Toni Sacconaghi is generally positive, but repeats the same theme that I have seen several times by noting that the iPad Mini will reduce the overall margin for iPad sales, yet neglects to comment on how the addition of the Mini increases the overall sales numbers for iPads. I haven't run any numbers yet, but if the overall revenue and profit numbers increase due to the presence of the Mini, isn't that a good thing even if the margin is a bit lower? It just seems like many analysts were screaming for Apple to complete with the Kindle/Nexus products, but then downgraded their outlook when Apple did. What am I missing? blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2013/04/03/aapl-better-price-distribution-advantage-on-tablets-than-phones-says-bernstein/?mod=yahoobarrons |
|
|
|
Post by Red Shirted Ensign on Apr 3, 2013 12:10:59 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by redinaustin on Apr 3, 2013 12:14:52 GMT -8
An understanding of the game(s) they play. |
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Apr 3, 2013 14:21:43 GMT -8
Yeah, I'm not sure how happy Tim and Co. are with that strikingly original design. Facebook _itself_ may be *cough* "forked" down the road. That depends on how Googly-brained the populace is, if you get my general drift. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 14:31:02 GMT -8
Agree with most of your post Gregg, but "...suitable only for making telephone calls." is an untrue statement. OK, I'll revise the statement. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 14:36:50 GMT -8
The AppleTV (as Apple intends it) is already shipping. It has been for several years. The combination of AirPlay, an iPad/iPhone, an AppleTV and Apps will undermine traditional content delivery. Right now, we have Apps from the NBA, MLB, ESPN, NCAA March Madness, and others that deliver content via the INTERNET, streamed to your large format TV via Airplay. There will come a time when the "App" is placement on the AppleTV "home" screen, not requiring download. Instead of paying for the season (remains an option) you pay for the program/event you desire. Except for live broadcasts you watch when YOU want to, not when a program manager says you must. Let Samsung and Vizio manufacture very low margin commodities once every 5 - 7 years. Apple will sell the content on an ongoing daily basis. Time/Warner, Cox, Comcast, and a myriad of Others, will become dumb pipe providers. Comcast has already figured that out, that's why they bought NBC ( content) I know there are many who like the easy logic of assuming Apple TV hockey puck is Apple's end game. It's not. There's a LOT missing from it and although Apple could probably integrate additional features, Apple is better off starting from a clean sheet. Finally, there are a lot of people who still don't GET an Apple TV hockey puck. They will have an easier time understanding a TV that incorporates the features that reside in the current Apple TV. Apple isn't going to reinvent the living room selling a $99 part, and it certainly isn't going to move the needle on the f/s. Apple needs to control the software and hardware to reinvent the dinosaur. You don't do that by half-assing it with a dongle. The iPanel, or iTV will incorporate all of the following and more: 1. Siri 2. FaceTime 3. One box/One cord 4. Remote 5. Airplay 6. Menu interface 7. Apps 8. Gaming capable 8. Style 9. Customer support 10. iOS7 11. Content I can buy your scenario as the end result of an evolution that started with the introduction of the current AppleTV, in the same way that iPads are the end result of personal computer evolution that started in someone's garage nearly 40 years ago. |
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Apr 3, 2013 14:43:05 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by wheeles on Apr 3, 2013 14:45:22 GMT -8
iRing? iDon'tThinkSo. The idea is so fraught with reasons why that is utterly stupid. Losing it, being the primary reason. Then there are the fights between family members over who uses it. You can also imagine the lawsuits from people with fat fingers who can't get it on or off their fingers. And of course the hilarious changing of channels when you pick your nose. It's an iDud for sure. Either that or a late April Fools' joke.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 15:16:24 GMT -8
I'll admit to sticking with my iPhone 4 at present, well after my 2 year contract has expired. Unlike the USA and its massive device subsidies, I really can't be bothered signing up for another 2 year contract with a tiny subsidy and still having to pay $700 USD for the base model iPhone 5 (that's AFTER the subsidy), or alternatively NOT signing a new contract and having to pay $850 USD unsubsidised for the base model iPhone 5. The advantages of the iPhone 5 over my iPhone 4 just aren't worth it for me for the high cost - and I'm an Apple zealot. Maybe the iPhone 5S will tickle my fancy. The build quality of the iPhone 4 onwards is so good, that in the international markets low subsidy environment I can definitely see iPhone users ownership cycle extending to 3-4 years. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 15:18:30 GMT -8
However a 60" Apple HDTV I would purchase in a heartbeat, regardless of price. |
|
platon
Member
"All we can know is that we know nothing. And that's the height of human wisdom.? Tolstoy
Posts: 3,944
|
Post by platon on Apr 3, 2013 15:24:40 GMT -8
I know there are many who like the easy logic of assuming Apple TV hockey puck is Apple's end game. It's not. There's a LOT missing from it and although Apple could probably integrate additional features, Apple is better off starting from a clean sheet. Finally, there are a lot of people who still don't GET an Apple TV hockey puck. They will have an easier time understanding a TV that incorporates the features that reside in the current Apple TV. Apple isn't going to reinvent the living room selling a $99 part, and it certainly isn't going to move the needle on the f/s. Apple needs to control the software and hardware to reinvent the dinosaur. You don't do that by half-assing it with a dongle. The iPanel, or iTV will incorporate all of the following and more: 1. Siri 2. FaceTime 3. One box/One cord 4. Remote 5. Airplay 6. Menu interface 7. Apps 8. Gaming capable 8. Style 9. Customer support 10. iOS7 11. Content I can buy your scenario as the end result of an evolution that started with the introduction of the current AppleTV, in the same way that iPads are the end result of personal computer evolution that started in someone's garage nearly 40 years ago. Is the iPad the "end result" or just "one small step for computerkind?" What are our limits?  m.youtube.com/watch?v=YbT0xy_Jai0&feature=fvwrel. The fantasies of dreamers become the creations of doers and the tools of users. |
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Apr 3, 2013 15:26:01 GMT -8
I'll admit to sticking with my iPhone 4 at present, well after my 2 year contract has expired. Unlike the USA and its massive device subsidies, I really can't be bothered signing up for another 2 year contract with a tiny subsidy and still having to pay $700 USD for the base model iPhone 5 (that's AFTER the subsidy), or alternatively NOT signing a new contract and having to pay $850 USD unsubsidised for the base model iPhone 5. The advantages of the iPhone 5 over my iPhone 4 just aren't worth it for me for the high cost - and I'm an Apple zealot. Maybe the iPhone 5S will tickle my fancy. The build quality of the iPhone 4 onwards is so good, that in the international markets low subsidy environment I can definitely see iPhone users ownership cycle extending to 3-4 years. Trust me, you're not as much of an Apple zealot as you think you are. And that's OK - people have many negative things to say about such types! iPhone 5 is high-performance. It's not a necessity for everyone. But if you ARE a power user, it demolishes the iPhone 4. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 15:44:48 GMT -8
That does not make sense. Why would Apple give you a ring that could get lost and then needs to be passed between people to control the TV? Also why add another iPad to watch TV when you already have one? I still don't see an Apple TV until 2014 at the earliest. Apple needs content, as in live and the latest shows. The studios and cable companies are not ready to give them control. Next year after about 650 million users, Apple may have more leverage for deals. Apple doesn't need content at all. Its already all right there in iOS Apps. Anyone thinking apple can't launch a HDTV because of content has a very American centric viewpoint. Even if apple somehow manages to get every American network to miraculously agree to let apple stream all their shows in a nice combined centralised user interface - this means absolutely zilch to the remaining 95% of the planets population. Meanwhile TV networks all over the world have feverishly been working to build their own iOS apps that let users stream their content on iOS mobile devices. You can already stream these Apps to Apple TV set top box, and it would be a trivial update to make them compatible with a future Apple TV App Store. Recently I was talking to a developer of the iOS app for my countries biggest Tv network. They are literally begging Apple to be allowed on the current Apple TV set top box, but are still waiting. Meanwhile the network streaming App is already pre installed on every Samsung Smart TV that ships in my country, right next to YouTube and some games. And that's the big risk of Apple NOT doing its own HDTV. Eventually in the rather near future, every TV shipped will be "Smart". Those TVs primary interface will include Apps providing content, games & info, some that utilise the TVs built in audio & camera, and apps that can send you onscreen notifications while you are using a 3rd party input device (cable box, bluray player, game console, apple TV), and will be compatible with a wide variety of users mobile devices. Once we get to that stage, who is going to bother buying an Apple set top box that doesn't even work with all of the TVs other functions? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 15:51:04 GMT -8
I'll admit to sticking with my iPhone 4 at present, well after my 2 year contract has expired. Unlike the USA and its massive device subsidies, I really can't be bothered signing up for another 2 year contract with a tiny subsidy and still having to pay $700 USD for the base model iPhone 5 (that's AFTER the subsidy), or alternatively NOT signing a new contract and having to pay $850 USD unsubsidised for the base model iPhone 5. The advantages of the iPhone 5 over my iPhone 4 just aren't worth it for me for the high cost - and I'm an Apple zealot. Maybe the iPhone 5S will tickle my fancy. The build quality of the iPhone 4 onwards is so good, that in the international markets low subsidy environment I can definitely see iPhone users ownership cycle extending to 3-4 years. Trust me, you're not as much of an Apple zealot as you think you are. And that's OK - people have many negative things to say about such types! iPhone 5 is high-performance. It's not a necessity for everyone. But if you ARE a power user, it demolishes the iPhone 4. Over the past 6 years my wife and I have purchased 4 macs (currently contemplating a 5th), 3 iPads, 4 iPhones, 3 iPods, 2 Apple TVs. I do like the iPhone 5, and if I was only having to pay $199 USD subsidised to get it on a 2 year contract I would get it in a heartbeat. Even if it was $399 I would. But at $750, no thanks. I'd rather pay $499 unsubsidised and get the rumoured 4" iPhone "Cheap" with 4S innards. Also remember that one of the iPhone 5 main features (LTE) is pretty much useless in a lot of countries at present. |
|
|
|
Post by lovemyipad on Apr 3, 2013 16:24:18 GMT -8
Not AAPL, but the June E-Mini S&P 500 is about to hit Avi's target for the start of a pullback. The dude is GOOD. He had this target area in December.  |
|
|
|
Post by lovemyipad on Apr 3, 2013 16:33:53 GMT -8
Mercel is officially in irrational exuberance. You got it half right  (i.e. rationally exuberant). LOL!!! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 17:36:17 GMT -8
Yeah, I'm not sure how happy Tim and Co. are with that strikingly original design. Facebook _itself_ may be *cough* "forked" down the road. That depends on how Googly-brained the populace is, if you get my general drift. Facebook is already in decline among the early adopters. "Forked" is right. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 17:39:00 GMT -8
However a 60" Apple HDTV I would purchase in a heartbeat, regardless of price. And they're NOT going to do 4k. The prices have to come down first. Paying a premium for 60" 4K TV sitting 9 feet away is just plain dumb. If you sit 2-3 feet from your set, then maybe you'll see the better resolution. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 17:41:24 GMT -8
Agree with most of your post Gregg, but "...suitable only for making telephone calls." is an untrue statement. OK, I'll revise the statement. It's pretty clear that many, many Android users would do just fine with a feature phone. The phones are just not being marketed that way, for obvious reasons. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2013 18:15:50 GMT -8
Good article today from Daniel Eran Dilger, riffing off Toni Sacconaghi's report, including his renewed price target of $725. Apple still has a long way to go to match the # of carriers of the competition. There's growth potential just from that. The iPad's distribution on the other hand, is superior to all other tablet makers. Combined with a superior ecosystem, it helps explains Apple's dominance in tablets. appleinsider.com/articles/13/04/03/apples-ipad-pricing-distribution-stronger-than-iphone |
|
Mav
Member
[img style="max-width:100%;" alt=" " src="http://www.forumup.it/images/smiles/simo.gif"]
Posts: 10,784
|
Post by Mav on Apr 3, 2013 19:05:10 GMT -8
Sacconaghi is friend to AAPL bulls kinda by default now? Strange days.
Though in all fairness, he's been pretty even-keeled at least the last few quarters, maybe not as positive on company prospects/potential as others but he does have solid conviction.
|
|
|
|
Post by ibuyer on Apr 4, 2013 1:30:20 GMT -8
Trust me, you're not as much of an Apple zealot as you think you are. And that's OK - people have many negative things to say about such types! iPhone 5 is high-performance. It's not a necessity for everyone. But if you ARE a power user, it demolishes the iPhone 4. Over the past 6 years my wife and I have purchased 4 macs (currently contemplating a 5th), 3 iPads, 4 iPhones, 3 iPods, 2 Apple TVs. I do like the iPhone 5, and if I was only having to pay $199 USD subsidised to get it on a 2 year contract I would get it in a heartbeat. Even if it was $399 I would. But at $750, no thanks. I'd rather pay $499 unsubsidised and get the rumoured 4" iPhone "Cheap" with 4S innards. Also remember that one of the iPhone 5 main features (LTE) is pretty much useless in a lot of countries at present. The debate that goes on with Burgess had goes on in most markets which are NOT heavily subsized. |
|
(i.e. rationally exuberant).