Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Apple just buy out Intel (Score 1) 100

by steve_bryan (#44418705) Attached to: Why Bob Mansfield Was Cut From Apple's Executive Team

Apple cash : 10,746,000

Intel's market cap: 115,690,000,000

I didn't post this to prove you wrong - I was sincerely interested. You wouldn't believe the crazy things I've heard on the internet that turned out to make me money!

But, I posted my results just to boost my own ego is all.

Carry on....I have a pathetic little life....

Maybe everyone else is crazy who reports it but I know I've read Apple has over $140 billion in cash. Much of it is overseas and would be subject to taxation if brought back to US but that is a whole lot more than the $10+ billion you mention. In fact it is much more than the market cap for Intel you mention but I have doubts about that since it is from the same source.

Comment: Re:This is what trademarks are for (Score 1) 263

by steve_bryan (#42921877) Attached to: Brazilians Can Now Buy an "iPhone" Loaded With Android

I don't know enough about the details of cloud computing infrastructure to have a strong opinion one way or the other but it seems like a dull but useful market with many competitors but not much potential for a meteoric success like an iPhone or iPad. If Microsoft proves unsatisfactory for some reason, then like in the case of Samsung, I would expect Apple to move to a competitor or start their own (cf Apple Store vs big box disasters like Best Buy). Regardless of the details you can rest assured that there will be an Apple for which you can predict decline and disaster.

Comment: Re:This is what trademarks are for (Score 1) 263

by steve_bryan (#42917533) Attached to: Brazilians Can Now Buy an "iPhone" Loaded With Android

Gosh, I didn't think I would have any more to add but this just begs. Bill Gates quite rationally propped up what he considered a harmless adversary to try to satisfy those who objected to his use of monopoly power to subvert the market elsewhere. But Apple was saved by Steve Jobs and built to make Microsoft relatively irrelevant to the future of computing. They (MS) still matter and probably 'always' will but this isn't the future Mr Gates had in mind when he made his very profitable investment in Apple (but they sold those shares many years ago).

Comment: Re:This is what trademarks are for (Score 1) 263

by steve_bryan (#42910917) Attached to: Brazilians Can Now Buy an "iPhone" Loaded With Android

This sort of disagreement is not one that can be settled by words. It will be settled by results which will take years to play out. The song you sing of Apple's doom has been sung many times for many decades. If one worships at the temple of market share, predictions are simple and often wrong. Please note how many Commodore computers are relevant today. On a day to day basis we see the drama of Dell and HP, marketshare champions, both dealing with 'interesting times'.

But enough of prognostication. What I was objecting to strenuously was the absurdity of how you characterized that Apple was trying to sneak their failed product, the iPhone, into Brazil using the good name and technical excellence of the locally produced legitimate 'iPhone'. The absurdity of the statement is beyond redemption. It's just absurd.

Comment: Re:This is what trademarks are for (Score 1) 263

by steve_bryan (#42901201) Attached to: Brazilians Can Now Buy an "iPhone" Loaded With Android

You really haven't bothered to look at any numbers, have you? Apple makes more money based just on the iPhone than Microsoft does on everything. Soon it is projected to be more than Microsoft and Google combined. We can differ on what we consider a good or better product but successful is rather easily numerically determined and Apple's iPhone is a monster. You are entitled to your own opinions but you are not entitled to your own facts.

Comment: Re:This is what trademarks are for (Score 1) 263

by steve_bryan (#42895749) Attached to: Brazilians Can Now Buy an "iPhone" Loaded With Android

"There was not nefarious trademark squatting"

That is exactly what is being alleged. If it were like the Cisco case where an actual product was developed and sold, then one can quite objectively expect Apple to address the issue and rectify the situation (i.e. pay up). In the Brazilian case, like the Chinese case, it appears to be a mugging of opportunity. They saw their opportunity for a payday and made the requisite minimal moves so a home court judge could put his compromised seal on the tawdry affair.

"Yes, I can say exactly that. Look at it like this: A local company creates a successful product and a huge american company with massive lawyers come in and sell an inferior product under the same name. Does the US company deserve to peddle its inferior product to consumers pretending it is the locally produced quality product?"

Successful product? Successful product? Are you blind? Apple's iPhone, whatever else could be said about it, is arguably the most successful product in the history of the world! (No, I don't own or intend to buy an Apple iPhone. I vastly prefer the iPod touch, especially in its most recent version). There is simply no way in the world that Apple intends "to peddle its inferior product" using the reputation of the local product.

"Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens."

Comment: Re:the specs will make you cream your shorts (Score 1) 82

by steve_bryan (#42444221) Attached to: Intel's Rumored TV Plans Would Compete With Apple, Google

Has the Plex app on Roku improved recently? The last time I used it the experience had a definite flimsy, underpowered feel. I find the Air Video Server and corresponding iOS app much nicer. I use AirPlay and Apple TV, of course, to view on a big screen TV. A rather peculiar feature is that Apple TV works on my home network, which is not connected to the internet, while Roku simply fails to function if it cannot connect to the internet.

Comment: Re:Just buy new hardware! (NOT) (Score 1) 417

Isn't this mainly just the dark side of Moore's Law? I'm right on the cusp now for Mountain Lion so I am not unfamiliar with the frustration that I will need a new MBP for future updates but I also know how much technology has progressed since I got my classic 15" MBP that runs so well. On the other hand Macs tend to hold their value so you should be able to sell your model to someone who doesn't need the latest update for a good price. Try that with a 5 year old Toshiba (or a 1 year old model).

Comment: Re:Disagree (Score 2) 307

by steve_bryan (#39242231) Attached to: How Steve Jobs Patent-Trolled Bill Gates

Oh please, bitch. The Mach microkernel was pioneered by Avie Tevanian and his colleagues at CMU. He left CMU to join a new company called NeXT which had as its CEO Steve Jobs after he left Apple. NeXTStep was developed but did not reach critical mass. When Jobs returned to Apple he brought Tevanian and Jon Rubenstein (previously head of hardware engineering at NeXT) to head Software and Hardware respectively at the 'new' Apple. The software for the Mac, iPhone, iPad, AppleTV, and iPod touch is all developed from the foundation of NeXTStep and the mach microkernel.

What is it with you guys? Apple introduces the first consumer friendly PC in the Apple ][, then the first mass market gui PC in the Mac (after the failed and distinctly not mass market Lisa), the first mp3 player that did not suck too much in the iPod, the first cell phone that often delights rather than inspire you to smash it: iPhone, and finally a pad format device that people actually want to use. But you aren't impressed. Wow. Mit der dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens. That's as much /. as I can take for today.

Comment: Re:Apple practically invented patent trolling (Score 1) 307

by steve_bryan (#39242075) Attached to: How Steve Jobs Patent-Trolled Bill Gates

Youngin's today have no idea how limited processing power and memory were in those days. For years when a user moved a window around the screen a ghostly outline of the boundary of the window is all you got for feedback. When you let go of the window the old one was erased and the window was redrawn in its new position. And we had to walk to school uphill and into the wind both ways, etc.

Comment: Re:Apple practically invented patent trolling (Score 4, Informative) 307

by steve_bryan (#39242007) Attached to: How Steve Jobs Patent-Trolled Bill Gates

Current value of those shares if held to the present day would be 8,000,000 x $500 = $4 Billion and still climbing (of course that would have required nerves of steel). Even Doctor Evil would be impressed. (N.B. Apple stock has split three times).

By the way anyone who accuses Apple (or any other company that actually creates and sells products based on their patents) a patent troll indicates gross ignorance on the part of the accuser. The only definition I've heard of that term is a company that has no products of its own so that cross licensing is never an option for negotiation. Patent trolls are "purely abstract" companies that game the patent system to change it from an attempt to encourage innovation to one that kills innovation (cf. Intellectual Ventures and its vile ilk).

You are in a maze of little twisting passages, all alike.

Working...