Article: Nokia and Mango Will Come Up Short

3migo

New member
Jun 21, 2011
326
1
0
Visit site
The only reason I remember is because I laughed at news report that Apple's stock went down cause they ONLY made $6 billion. Our financial system is crazy sometimes!

Wall street is a crazy game :D

Apple stock also dropped by ~5% only moments after the 4S was announced.
 

Wiccan Lagar

New member
Aug 17, 2011
214
0
0
www.mpiofny.com
Except for the fact that Apple reported losses last quarter...


Although I find it a bit unfair to claim that Windows isn't as stable as OSX. Windows is plenty stable, it's the computers that people run it on that are not. The largest problem that I've noticed occur with Pc users is that they have a hardware failure. If you are running Windows on a quality PC, you will have no issues.
QUOTE]

I see the truth in this statement. Mac only allows their software (legit at least) to run on their hardware, which does not change too much from year to year so I guess producing becames a lot easier when you only have to deal with a limited number of hardware components.

Microsoft on the othe rhand has to figure out how to make the OS run on an array of hardware and I am sure that when a company like NVidia (for example) pushed out a new graphics card they truely dont get into the nitty gritty of the OS to ensure stability. On the other side of that fence, if Microsoft were to push an update to the OS, they have to then accomodate new drivers and software versions pushed out by NVidia.

So I see where the issues can arise. I see your point here and I stand defeated and corrected.

But as you also stated. Certain things are just better at certain tasks. Like anything else, I think people should use/buy things that work for them regardless of brand.

I deter people from buying Macs all the time. Why do they need a 1500 dollar piece of hardware to watch youtube and read an email? They don't. They just hear a name and see a trend.
 

Pronk

New member
Jun 22, 2011
745
3
0
Visit site
Ah. I must have misinterpreted.

Either way, Apple isn't shipping or selling as many devices as Nokia, Samsung, or HTC.

No, (for smartphones) Apple is still likely selling as many if not more than any of them (Apple is Still the #1 Smartphone Vendor | TechPinions). Shipping and selling are two very different things. Quite a few manufacturers quote shipped numbers when all they're actually doing is inventory stuffing - making something look like a success when it isn't (see the Motorola Xoom - lots of units shipped, but very few actually sold). Apple quote sold numbers. A lot of other manufacturers don't.

As for MS getting bad press that got mentioned earlier - well, to a certain extent they only have themselves to blame. They got a reputation as a nasty big company in the 90s/early 00s by actually being a nasty big company and engaging in a lot of fairly shady business practices for a while. They also scored a lot of own goals with things like Plays for Sure which they signed up loads of partners for only to ditch in favour of Zune and their own service. Those antitrust lawsuits MS were guilty of didn't make themselves up either, you know, and Bill Gates is/was at least as much of a hardass as Steve Jobs ever was. Sure, they're not the same company now, but that image isn't going to go away overnight.

Oh, and Steve Jobs did a huge amount for charity, he just didn't publicise it greatly. If we're getting annoyed about misinformation, let's not swap misinformation about one company for misinformation about another.
 

Pronk

New member
Jun 22, 2011
745
3
0
Visit site
Well here's one example:
How Steve Jobs Got Sick, Got Better, And Decided To Save Some Lives

If he really didn't give a monkeys about anyone else, he'd be unlikely to go to the effort and expense it took to pass a stalled law to make it easier for people who didn't have his wealth to also get life-saving transplants.

There's also Apple's work with (Product) RED, where they were one of the first major supporters. RED have raised 180 million dollars to fight AIDS.

And then there are these examples of personal generosity:
http://www.quora.com/Steve-Jobs/What-are-some-great-stories-about-Steve-Jobs?q=steve+jo
(the top one, and various entries in the list such as the airline ticket and the Jaguar)

Obviously, I don't have access to his finances and therefore as he didn't make what he did public I can't magically make those records appear. However, none of the examples above fit the profile of a man who hoards his wealth and has no generosity. Just because he didn't set up a big foundation with his name on it or trumpet how much he did personally doesn't mean he didn't do anything, and it does him a disservice to suggest so based on a partially fictionalised account that only runs up to 1985 anyway.
 

threed61

New member
Jul 28, 2011
367
0
0
Visit site
Ever since Andrew Sorkin's NYT article last August questioning Job's lack of generosity, iFans have sputtered about unfair attacks while offering little to contradict the prevailing view that the man sat on his $8 billion fortune in Scrooge like fashion.
I saw a report over at Phone Arena today that Apple has reinstated the matching donations to charities that Jobs canceled in 1997. A shame that they had to wait until he was dead to do it.
 

Pronk

New member
Jun 22, 2011
745
3
0
Visit site
Right, not getting into this argument as clearly nothings short of financial records will satisfy you, so no point.
 

Curtieson

New member
Jul 26, 2011
1,363
0
0
Visit site
There's also Apple's work with (Product) RED, where they were one of the first major supporters. RED have raised 180 million dollars to fight AIDS.

I hope you aren't thinking that Apple didn't get their back scratched through all the (Red) stuff... If anything, you should find it appalling they were using AIDS to make money...

[I don't find it appalling, but I do not like when companies throw a pink ribbon on something to make it sell better...sure, it is raising awareness but also making the company money at the cost of people's lives]
 

Curtieson

New member
Jul 26, 2011
1,363
0
0
Visit site
Unfortunately for Nokia, beyond the company's brand name and Windows Phone 7, there's nothing that really sets the Lumia phones apart from other smartphones on the market or that would compel users to buy them.

This dude seriously underestimates the power of color choices, haha

The new iPhone has the Siri voice-control system. Various Android devices can tout jumbo screens, docks that let them mimic laptops and radios that let them make wireless payments, not to mention a wide range of sizes, shapes and prices.

Siri...like Apple really needs Siri to do well to sell devices...

Yea, your android can work like a slow *** laptop, for $600...awesome. The Nokia can (will be able to) control my Xbox (~55 Million+ sold)...take that! But yes, Android has its all you can eat buffet and Apple has its following. MS has a good OS, THAT is what will make it sell (that, and great commercials, haha)

By contrast, neither of the Lumias has a "killer app." Sure, they have the latest version of Windows Phone 7, but I don't think that's going to be enough.

Turn by Turn and free music...? It's something at least...
 

Pronk

New member
Jun 22, 2011
745
3
0
Visit site
I hope you aren't thinking that Apple didn't get their back scratched through all the (Red) stuff... If anything, you should find it appalling they were using AIDS to make money...

[I don't find it appalling, but I do not like when companies throw a pink ribbon on something to make it sell better...sure, it is raising awareness but also making the company money at the cost of people's lives]

They would make the money anyway - I doubt there were/are that many people who'd buy e.g. an iPod for the sole reason it was a (RED) product. At least this way some money goes to a good cause as well as opposed to none at all if the (RED) version didn't exist.

To be honest, I'd rather people gave money directly to charity - especially if they are one of the few who'd buy a product only because it gives a proportion away (and then I'd argue the issue is really with the person rather than the product). But if it's a toss-up between some money from product sales and no money from product sales, well it's a no brainer.
 

Curtieson

New member
Jul 26, 2011
1,363
0
0
Visit site
They would make the money anyway - I doubt there were/are that many people who'd buy e.g. an iPod for the sole reason it was a (RED) product. At least this way some money goes to a good cause as well as opposed to none at all if the (RED) version didn't exist.

To be honest, I'd rather people gave money directly to charity - especially if they are one of the few who'd buy a product only because it gives a proportion away (and then I'd argue the issue is really with the person rather than the product). But if it's a toss-up between some money from product sales and no money from product sales, well it's a no brainer.

I was just saying, tying your product to a cause isn't really a good will offering. It is like doing volunteer work and getting paid 95% of your typical paycheck. Kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?

Agree though...the best case is ALWAYS to donate yourself...i thought the pay $5 for a 5 cent bracelet era was a good idea though too...although it was quite self centered ("Look, I have this possession that shows I care! LOOK!")
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
323,094
Messages
2,243,247
Members
428,026
Latest member
Shreya307