> Yes, it's going to be a massive wave of innovation never before seen by
> the cell industry. Never has such a large computer firm entered the cell
> space, and since the cell industry is very uncompetitive, Apple will
> wipe out much of what exists today... so it's going to fun to watch them
> fall.
Do you just sit and home and jerk yourself off to this nonsense? Yeesh, get
a clue.
Re: Can you say biggest security blunder of the 21st century to date?
In article <v0cfh35jevpt3ihk9n0icga82610rif1fm@4ax.com>, pltrgyst
<pltrgyst@spamlessxhost.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 11:17:00 -0700, "Ness Net"
> <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote:
>
> >First, the iPhone root password was broken. OK, it happens. But now it seems
> >that all applications run on the iPhone as root. Can you say biggest
> >security blunder of the 21st century to date?
>
> Wasn't W re-elected in 2004?
>
> -- Larry
> In article <Xns99CDBD0C047E2noonehomecom@208.49.80.253>,
> Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>
> > notinuse2@btinternet.com (Peter Hayes) wrote in
> > news:1i66kzq.17de1xaime2uvN%notinuse2@btinternet.c om:
> >
> > > I suspect the iPhone runs a multi-user os set up as a single-user
> > > system but not as root. To run it as root is playing with fire.
> > >
> > > -
> >
> > Isn't root access what Apple and ATT have, with a backdoor service
> > accessible over the air....and what YOU have is the one user it
> > supports, with lots of stuff locked away you cannot access because
> > you are never root?
>
> Everything on an iPhone currently runs as root. The reason you can't do
> whatever you like with this access is simply because there's no
> interface (graphical or otherwise) that lets you do it.
On Oct 17, 7:48 pm, Oxford <colalovesm...@mac.com> wrote:
> Everyone wants an iPhone
> since it's more feature packed and far easier to use than any other cell
> phone... we all know that. So once Apple moves the iPhone down the price
> scale, it will remove "most" handset makers out of the market.
Well, let's not get ahead of ourselves. The iPhone has a great touch-
screen interface and a great browser, and that's why I got one. But as
an actual phone it kinda sucks. The form factor is unwieldy and too
slippery, the earpiece is too quiet, the ring is too quiet, the
vibration setting can be barely felt, and the crippled SMS
functionality was clearly designed by someone who knows nothing about
how people actually use text messaging. It's a cool gadget, but it's
NOT a good phone.
I still got one despite all this because I wanted the big screen with
Google Maps and a full(er) browser, but it was a compromise for me.
The iPhone could be so much more than what it is.
That said, I'm excited about Apple allowing 3rd party software. Maybe
someone will fix the piss-awful SMS application that doesn't allow
sending text messages to more than one person at a time, or even
forwarding text messages, or even sending/receiving MMS.
Hmm... Now I wonder if Apple crippled the iPhone on purpose so they
could make money from 3rd-party apps. I bet that Apple will set things
up so they'll get a cut from every 3rd-party app sold.
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, lubecki@hotmail.com wrote:
> Well, let's not get ahead of ourselves. The iPhone has a great touch-
> screen interface and a great browser, and that's why I got one. But as
> an actual phone it kinda sucks.
Well, duh! What did you expect? The iPhone is a high-end iPod that is
also a phone and Internet access device. As such, it is first and
foremost an iPod. Telephony and Internet are afterthoughts.
> I still got one despite all this because I wanted the big screen with
> Google Maps and a full(er) browser, but it was a compromise for me.
It is not only not a particular good phone, it also is not a particularly
good Internet access device. The screen resolution is too tiny.
The Nokia N800 or a UMPC (such as the Sony UX series) make much better
Internet access devices. Nobody who has either a Nokia N800 or UMPC is
particularly impressed with the iPhone's Internet capability. What's
more, both are open platforms: Linux on the Nokia N800 (and you can
develop your own applications for it) and Windows on a UMPC.
> The iPhone could be so much more than what it is.
Of course, but it won't; Steve Jobs wants to make it as cheaply as
possible and sell for as much as possible.
Apple is absolutely NOT interested in having open development for the
iPhone. They made that abundantly clear.
-- Mark --
http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Peter Hayes wrote:
>>
>> Everything on an iPhone currently runs as root. The reason you can't
>> do whatever you like with this access is simply because there's no
>> interface (graphical or otherwise) that lets you do it.
>
> So the first app to write for it is Terminal...
Uh, it's been out since July.
The Chicken Littles are still confused why the world hasn't come to an end
and AT&T's "West Coast network" has not been taken down.
> Well, duh! What did you expect? The iPhone is a high-end iPod that is
> also a phone and Internet access device. As such, it is first and
> foremost an iPod. Telephony and Internet are afterthoughts.
Mark Crispin, always the clueless wonder. The iPod is the afterthought,
the phone is a marvel, best in class of any smartphone. The internet is
the "primary" focus.
> > I still got one despite all this because I wanted the big screen with
> > Google Maps and a full(er) browser, but it was a compromise for me.
>
> It is not only not a particular good phone, it also is not a particularly
> good Internet access device. The screen resolution is too tiny.
Don't you realize with a flick of two fingers you can increase the size
of any page on the web? And these are REAL pages, not crappy "phone"
sized pages... but the REAL way you see it. Plus you much better
resolution on the iPhone compared to any other smartphone. Everything is
crisp and clear.
> The Nokia N800 or a UMPC (such as the Sony UX series) make much better
> Internet access devices. Nobody who has either a Nokia N800 or UMPC is
> particularly impressed with the iPhone's Internet capability. What's
> more, both are open platforms: Linux on the Nokia N800 (and you can
> develop your own applications for it) and Windows on a UMPC.
Only if you don't have a lot of demands. The N800 is like looking at a
decade old device compared to the iPhone. And linux on a phone will
never take off, it's just not a robust enough platform for such a small
device. The graphics alone make a linux based phone unusable.
> > The iPhone could be so much more than what it is.
>
> Of course, but it won't; Steve Jobs wants to make it as cheaply as
> possible and sell for as much as possible.
As of this moment the iPhone is the best built smart phone in the world,
best batter life, thinnest, best screen, etc, etc. And it's the cheapest!
The fat openmoko has a tiny screen, poor battery life, and is going to
be $450 with less than HALF the iPhone features.
> Apple is absolutely NOT interested in having open development for the
> iPhone. They made that abundantly clear.
Apple is more concerned with making a USABLE phone by millions, so that
means developers must step up to a higher level and not try and cheat
the user like Linux and Nokia love to do.
Mark, you are clearly out of touch with what is happening. The iPhone
will be the primary phone for the next 20 years or so, so LEARN to
develop for it... it's PURE UNIX under the hood, not amateurish Linux.
lubecki@hotmail.com wrote in news:1192803855.482134.73640
@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
> I still got one despite all this because I wanted the big screen with
> Google Maps and a full(er) browser, but it was a compromise for me.
> The iPhone could be so much more than what it is.
>
>
Nokia's Linux Maemo OS2008 for the N800 and new N810 (slideout keyboard),
has a great looking map program that upgrades to Wayfinder premium service.
Click MAP to take a look.
I just bought the N800 and installed two 8GB SDHC cards in it. Fantastic
Linux box on OS2007 and I'll upgrade to OS2008 for the new toys asap....(c;
Larry
--
OS2007 comes with Opera 8 and Flash 9. The only thing missing is JAVA
support. OS2008 is switching to Firefox, whos mozilla engine I'm already
running under 2007 as a free download. Opera is slower but does some
things better because it has an optimization server Opera connects to to
optimize some webpages to the 800 pixel wide screen. Both work great.
Webpages look like webpages, not a confusing series of out-of-place stuff
you can't read. 800 pixel width is the N800's greatest browser feature.
Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote in
news:alpine.WNT.0.9999.0710190827390.3116@Shimo-Tomobiki.Panda.COM:
> The Nokia N800 or a UMPC (such as the Sony UX series) make much better
> Internet access devices. Nobody who has either a Nokia N800 or UMPC is
> particularly impressed with the iPhone's Internet capability. What's
> more, both are open platforms: Linux on the Nokia N800 (and you can
> develop your own applications for it) and Windows on a UMPC.
>
>
Nokia has posted new webpages for the new N810, with slideout keyboard
and Maemo Linux OS2008, the next generation operating system for the N800
and N810 boxes:
Looking at N810, I think I made the right choice with the $222 N800. The
N810 keyboard makes it much thicker, gotta be heavier and they took the
great speakers off the FRONT, where speakers belong.
Can't wait to see the new toys in OS2008 on the N800....(c;
Larry
--
Orb serves my videos/audios/pictures/TV card cable TV/webcam of the
living room/files to the N800 via Realmedia over EVDO or wifi fantastic! http://corp.orb.com/
Really cool to have ALL the 4.8TB in the little Linux box...(c;
Orb should run as a Quicktime server to the iPhone, too!
Alas, Orb runs under Win XP/Vista.....
> Only if you don't have a lot of demands. The N800 is like looking at a
> decade old device compared to the iPhone. And linux on a phone will
> never take off, it's just not a robust enough platform for such a small
> device. The graphics alone make a linux based phone unusable.
>
Er, ah, many phones run Linux as their OS, and have for a long time.
Nokia is quite committed to Linux. So are others.
I'm more interested in your "decade old device" comment. How so,
specifically? Because it's not a carrier-controlled Sellphone device?
Because it has a changeable battery and runs 8 hours connected if you
turn the display down to half? Because it has two 8GB SDHC memory cards
I can plug into my computer to load files for it? Because I control what
it does, not Apple and ATT bureaucrats? Because it has speakers like a
laptop in stereo? Because it has buttons to do many things without
searching and clicking? Because it upgrades from a WinXP box a whole new
operating system, IN MY HOUSE, in 7 minutes from a WinXP/Vista program
that does a whole bootloader level upgrade....even if you pull the plug
while it's upgrading and just do it over again without returning it to
Apple?
Can you run Skype? Googletalk with a webcam? Where's the webcam pop out
of, anyway. This "decade old device" has one that even rotates.
Tell me more! Ok, I can't spread my fingers and get its vagina to open
wider. I have to use a button on top...big deal...(c; Finger/stylus
scrolling works like yours. At 800 pixel browser width, that's without
reloading on the Nokias. How wide was your screen?
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.t-mobile.]
On 2007-10-19, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> Er, ah, many phones run Linux as their OS, and have for a long time.
> Nokia is quite committed to Linux. So are others.
That's right. Motorola has come out with some Linux-based phones too. I
had not heard about Linux on Nokias though; most Nokias have traditionally
run Symbian OS. If they're migrating to Linux, that's very cool.
> N810
> http://europe.nokia.com/A4568578
>
> Maemo OS2008
> http://europe.nokia.com/A4579471
>
> Looking at N810, I think I made the right choice with the $222 N800. The
> N810 keyboard makes it much thicker, gotta be heavier and they took the
> great speakers off the FRONT, where speakers belong.
>
> Can't wait to see the new toys in OS2008 on the N800....(c;
you probably won't see many "toys" for these devices, they seem quite
limited in many ways, plus you won't have the large development
community behind them like you do with the iPhone.
you probably wasted your money, but for $222, it's a throw away item
anyway. sell it on ebay in a year for $140, get an iPhone for $199 and
then get on with life.
> > Only if you don't have a lot of demands. The N800 is like looking at a
> > decade old device compared to the iPhone. And linux on a phone will
> > never take off, it's just not a robust enough platform for such a small
> > device. The graphics alone make a linux based phone unusable.
> >
>
> Er, ah, many phones run Linux as their OS, and have for a long time.
> Nokia is quite committed to Linux. So are others.
well, not "many" run linux, maybe 4%, but not more than that in the
states.
> I'm more interested in your "decade old device" comment. How so,
> specifically?
very poor build quality, no thought about "design", just slapped
together to make a buck.
> Because it's not a carrier-controlled Sellphone device?
what? it doesn't have Visual Voice mail, doesn't have an iPod built in,
doesn't have a REAL web browser, poor screen rez, etc.
> Because it has a changeable battery and runs 8 hours connected if you
> turn the display down to half?
The iPhone runs 3 times as long, so that's a weakness of the N800 right
there. You can add batteries to the iPhone, it's no different.
> Because it has two 8GB SDHC memory cards
It doesn't COME with those, it comes with 256MB, you have to pay extra
or 8GB, you don't with the iPhone.
> I can plug into my computer to load files for it?
Same with the iPhone.
> Because I control what
> it does, not Apple and ATT bureaucrats?
Not sure what you mean? I have total control over my iPhone, maybe you
don't?
> Because it has speakers like a
> laptop in stereo?
Yes, "as is" the iPhone is mono, but there are 1000's of way to make it
stereo, with the N800, not so much.
> Because it has buttons to do many things without
> searching and clicking?
Not sure what you mean, the iPhone has more buttons than the N800 by a
long shot, and they actually do what you want, not get you mired in poor
UI design like the Nokia people want you to do.
> Because it upgrades from a WinXP box a whole new
> operating system, IN MY HOUSE, in 7 minutes from a WinXP/Vista program
> that does a whole bootloader level upgrade....even if you pull the plug
> while it's upgrading and just do it over again without returning it to
> Apple?
Nobody in their right mind would still be using any Windows based OS, so
you really goofed by bringing up XP. Most modern people use OSX and
iPods or iPhones, the rest kinda have to deal with the past.
All upgrades for the iPhone happen right on your screen, no upgrade
would require sending it to Apple.
> Can you run Skype? Googletalk with a webcam? Where's the webcam pop out
> of, anyway. This "decade old device" has one that even rotates.
The camera stuff is minor, at least Apple gives you a better camera and
a better UI, and a better way to deal with the images. Nokia kinda says
"fuck off" when you get an image into your phone.
> Tell me more! Ok, I can't spread my fingers and get its vagina to open
> wider. I have to use a button on top...big deal...(c; Finger/stylus
> scrolling works like yours. At 800 pixel browser width, that's without
> reloading on the Nokias. How wide was your screen?
Someday, Larry you'll move up to an iPhone, but looks like you'll be
living about a decade behind Apple users for the next year or two.
> you won't have the large development
> community behind them like you do with the iPhone.
>
>
You're absolutely right. Nokia, one of the largest telecom
companies on the planet with 109,871 employees, worldwide, and a
mere 62.77 Billion in revenue can barely compare with such giants
of computing as Apple with 19.3 Billion in revenue and 17,787
employees.
Nokia can't possibly have the talent on board to design a
internet device to go along with their telecommunications
equipment the internet runs on....right?
Where do you guys get so brainwashed? Is there some subliminal
background program in iPods? I must agree, wholeheartedly that
Apple excells in MARKETING, if nothing else.
Larry
--
You can tell there's extremely
intelligent life in the universe
because they have never called Earth.
> you have to pay extra
> or 8GB, you don't with the iPhone.
>
You must not have taken too close a look at your MASTERCARD BILL
after being ripped off. You paid a LOT more than $68 for 8GB
locked away in that little box, bud....hee hee.
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.verizon.]
On 2007-10-19, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> You're absolutely right. Nokia, one of the largest telecom
> companies on the planet with 109,871 employees, worldwide,
Larry, allow me please?
Oxford, you idiot.
Nokia is a market leader in wireless phones and they have been for years.
They have a huge developer community. I don't recall whether they're still
the #1 largest cellphone manufacturer in the world, but if not, they're
at least #2 or #3.
YES "brainwashed" - fanatic fanboy is the term.
Gulping down the Apple Kool-Aid.
No facts, just fantasy.
And - HYPE is the word you were looking for.
"Larry" <noone@home.com> wrote in message news:Xns99CECAA864EC3noonehomecom@208.49.80.253...
>
> Where do you guys get so brainwashed? Is there some subliminal
> background program in iPods? I must agree, wholeheartedly that
> Apple excells in MARKETING, if nothing else.
"Ness_net" <richard@nomore.damn.spam.nessnet.com> wrote in
news:SICdnZxLE5Fh1YTanZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d@giganews.com :
> A couple of words / terms.
>
> YES "brainwashed" - fanatic fanboy is the term.
> Gulping down the Apple Kool-Aid.
> No facts, just fantasy.
>
> And - HYPE is the word you were looking for.
>
>
>
> "Larry" <noone@home.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns99CECAA864EC3noonehomecom@208.49.80.253...
>
>>
>> Where do you guys get so brainwashed? Is there some subliminal
>> background program in iPods? I must agree, wholeheartedly that
>> Apple excells in MARKETING, if nothing else.
>
>
>
Yep- agree with you both. They create hype for second rate products. What
we are seeing here is something akin to a teenage boy with Farrah Fawcett
posters on his wall (I think you can both relate to the analogy).
> Nokia is a market leader in wireless phones and they have been for years.
> They have a huge developer community. I don't recall whether they're still
> the #1 largest cellphone manufacturer in the world, but if not, they're
> at least #2 or #3.
as was IBM in the 1970's, the Apple ][ wiped them out. So was
Compugraphic in the 1980's, the Mac wiped them out. So was Diamond Rio,
but the iPod wiped them out.
The iPhone is far too strong for a weak company like Nokia, they simply
don't have the foundation to compete against a big player like Apple.
You'll see what I'm saying in about 5 years. Nokia among others will be
sold off for pennies on the dollar... The iPhone is advanced for them to
catch up at this point. Apple knows HARDWARE & SOFTWARE better than
anyone on the planet.
> You're absolutely right. Nokia, one of the largest telecom
> companies on the planet with 109,871 employees, worldwide, and a
> mere 62.77 Billion in revenue can barely compare with such giants
> of computing as Apple with 19.3 Billion in revenue and 17,787
> employees.
yes, and Apple has 1/5th the employees, about 1/2 the revenue, (30 but
worth 30% more. That's the value equation that Nokia can't match no
matter what they do.
I've seen all this before... and Nokia is one of the weaker firms I've
encountered once Apple enters their market.
> Nokia can't possibly have the talent on board to design a
> internet device to go along with their telecommunications
> equipment the internet runs on....right?
Correct. It's baffling why with "all those employees" they can't manage
to make a full web browser work on a phone. Apple did it with flying
colors, but all other smartphones are still 10 years behind Apple on the
internet. Why? what is the hold up?
> Where do you guys get so brainwashed? Is there some subliminal
> background program in iPods? I must agree, wholeheartedly that
> Apple excells in MARKETING, if nothing else.
I think it has a lot to do with QUALITY. Nokia and others never had that
as a goal, they just would shove out another model and never "think"
about design, how it worked, how long the battery lasted, etc. The Cell
Industry was never competitive like the PC industry so they are all weak
players.
So it puts them in a very weak position since they never have developed
the skills to compete with a company of the caliber of Apple.
Do you really think Cell Companies can match 30 years of development
such as these... Nope! It will never happen. Apple has already won...
> You must not have taken too close a look at your MASTERCARD BILL
> after being ripped off. You paid a LOT more than $68 for 8GB
> locked away in that little box, bud....hee hee.
I paid $598 for 2 4GBs, with full iPod, Internet, Mail and the Apple
ability to resell that same devices for $200 each in 2 years... that's
what you and others don't understand.
when you buy an Apple device, you get far better resale value because of
the quality involved. It's similar to buying fine cars if you think
about it.
if you buy no name brands like Nokia, you get screwed since you don't
have a sellable product in the 2 year time frame. you lose your
investment. but when you go with an Apple product, you get to use it and
get about half back in 2-3 years. no other company can provide that.
yes, you can accuse Apple users of being smart all you want, but dollar
for dollar we know how best to spend money. the iPhone is the "smart"
persons phone/ipod/mail/internet communicator.
no other smartphone even comes close to the same value.
"Oxford" <colalovesmacs@smart.com> wrote in message
news:colalovesmacs-57CF82.20222519102007@mpls-nnrp-06.inet.qwest.net...
>
> I paid $598 for 2 4GBs, with full iPod, Internet, Mail and the Apple
> ability to resell that same devices for $200 each in 2 years... that's
> what you and others don't understand.
Oxford, you are a fucking idiot. When Apple releases a 3G version, the
units you have will be basically worthless. You are a fool to think they have
any resale value. Minimal, at best.
>
> when you buy an Apple device, you get far better resale value because of
> the quality involved. It's similar to buying fine cars if you think
> about it.
Again, a foolish, deluded idiot. Drunk on the tainted Kool Aid...
>
> if you buy no name brands like Nokia, you get screwed since you don't
> have a sellable product in the 2 year time frame. you lose your
> investment. but when you go with an Apple product, you get to use it and
> get about half back in 2-3 years. no other company can provide that.
What a moron.
>
> yes, you can accuse Apple users of being smart all you want, but dollar
> for dollar we know how best to spend money. the iPhone is the "smart"
> persons phone/ipod/mail/internet communicator.
>
> no other smartphone even comes close to the same value.
>
> -
Yes, but the opposite. Many actually exceed it - I agree, the iPhone isn't even close.
It's quite a bit inferior. Any unit with EVDO for instance.
> Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>
>> You're absolutely right. Nokia, one of the largest telecom
>> companies on the planet with 109,871 employees, worldwide, and a
>> mere 62.77 Billion in revenue can barely compare with such giants
>> of computing as Apple with 19.3 Billion in revenue and 17,787
>> employees.
>
> yes, and Apple has 1/5th the employees, about 1/2 the revenue, (30 but
> worth 30% more. That's the value equation that Nokia can't match no
> matter what they do.
Not according to how you measure a company's value. At lewast now how you
were doing it last night.
Typical of the stupid- can't keep their own stories and facts straight.
In news:colalovesmacs-AF06CA.20443619102007@mpls-nnrp-06.inet.qwest.net,
Oxford <colalovesmacs@smart.com> typed:
> Bob Campbell <bob@bob.bob> wrote:
>
>>> as was IBM in the 1970's, the Apple ][ wiped them out.
>>
>> You're dreaming again. IBM is doing just fine.
>>
>> Bob Campbell
>
> sure, but its a dwarf of its former size / power... apple will be more
> valuable than IBM in less than 6 days
First you said the Apple][ wiped out IBM.
Then you said IBM is a dwarf of its former size / power.
Finally you said Apple will be more valuable than IBM in less than 6 days.
So Apple, after wiping out IBM in the 1970s, is to still not be more
valuable than IBM. lol
> > sure, but its a dwarf of its former size / power... apple will be more
> > valuable than IBM in less than 6 days
>
> First you said the Apple ][ wiped out IBM.
And it clearly did, IBM no longer has much power over the computer
space. It's a dormant dwarf of no social power like it was in the 60's
70's. Apple brought on the "personal computer" and it knocked out IBM.
> Then you said IBM is a dwarf of its former size / power.
Yes, correct, see above.
> Finally you said Apple will be more valuable than IBM in less than 6 days.
Yes, correct, see the market by next week, Apple is about 4B away from
passing IBM in market value. Apple earnings are released on MONDAY.
think about it...
> So Apple, after wiping out IBM in the 1970s, is to still not be more
> valuable than IBM. lol
Ah, you are mixing up the terms "power" and "market cap". Apple controls
most of the computing industry now, that equates to POWER. but yes,
there are still some past dormant stars out there, like Microsoft and
IBM that used to have power, but no longer have any social control or
political power over the future of their markets. Apple has taken that
away from them.
Learn how the world works IMHO, it will help you greatly!
> "IMHO IIRC" <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.NOSPAM> wrote:
>
>> > sure, but its a dwarf of its former size / power... apple will be
>> > more valuable than IBM in less than 6 days
>>
>> First you said the Apple ][ wiped out IBM.
>
> And it clearly did, IBM no longer has much power over the computer
> space. It's a dormant dwarf of no social power like it was in the 60's
> 70's. Apple brought on the "personal computer" and it knocked out IBM.
Are you that dishonestly stupid? Yes, I guess you are.
>
>> Then you said IBM is a dwarf of its former size / power.
>
> Yes, correct, see above.
>
>> Finally you said Apple will be more valuable than IBM in less than 6
>> days.
>
> Yes, correct, see the market by next week, Apple is about 4B away from
> passing IBM in market value. Apple earnings are released on MONDAY.
> think about it...
>
>> So Apple, after wiping out IBM in the 1970s, is to still not be more
>> valuable than IBM. lol
>
> Ah, you are mixing up the terms "power" and "market cap". Apple controls
> most of the computing industry now,
ahah HAH ahha hHAH AHha HAH ahahah HAH yha.
> that equates to POWER. but yes,
> there are still some past dormant stars out there, like Microsoft and
> IBM that used to have power, but no longer have any social control or
> political power over the future of their markets. Apple has taken that
> away from them.
Wow, you seriously need some drugs to bring you back to some form of
honest reality.
>
> Learn how the world works IMHO, it will help you greatly!
>
Take your own advice.
> > sure, but its a dwarf of its former size / power... apple will be more
> > valuable than IBM in less than 6 days
>
> Only in terms of market cap. Apple is *way* overvalued.
actually "market cap" is EXACT during and after market close. so while
you may personally "disagree" with Apple's value. as a "society", we
have valued Apple nearly the same as IBM. that's a RAW indisputable
fact. No opinions mater... it's what "everyone, collectively thinks"
right now, there is no undervalue or overvalue, it's just the exact
"VALUE" of those two firms on Friday.
> If today's
> crash continues next week, look for Apple to drop to more realistic
> levels.
ah, but Apple releases Leopard next week, that's a cool $200 million in
90 days, IBM has nothing like that kind of pure cash flow. Then you have
all the new iPods that Apple can't build enough of... and all the people
waiting to buy new Macs once Leopard is installed, so you have a
$200-220 stock by January, while IBM has nothing, but slowing falling
further.
> Meanwhile, IBM has $100 billion in revenue this year, Apple has what,
> $25 billion?
yes, it means IBM workers have to labor harder for less return. Apple is
about a 32B company this year, so by default Apple works 2/3rds less for
the same / or very similar "value".
> There is no comparison.
yes, there is no comparison, Apple is much stronger company than IBM.
"Oxford" <colalovesmacs@smart.com> wrote in message
news:colalovesmacs-BFA7E3.20484520102007@mpls-nnrp-03.inet.qwest.net...
> Bob Campbell <bob@bob.bob> wrote:
>
>> > sure, but its a dwarf of its former size / power... apple will be more
>> > valuable than IBM in less than 6 days
>>
>> Only in terms of market cap. Apple is *way* overvalued.
>
> actually "market cap" is EXACT during and after market close. so while
> you may personally "disagree" with Apple's value. as a "society", we
> have valued Apple nearly the same as IBM. that's a RAW indisputable
> fact. No opinions mater... it's what "everyone, collectively thinks"
> right now, there is no undervalue or overvalue, it's just the exact
> "VALUE" of those two firms on Friday.
that's one way to look at it- not the way most successful long term
investors look at it, but it's one way to look at it...
>> If today's
>> crash continues next week, look for Apple to drop to more realistic
>> levels.
>
> ah, but Apple releases Leopard next week, that's a cool $200 million in
> 90 days, IBM has nothing like that kind of pure cash flow.
ibm's cash flow is 3 times that of apple.
<snip>
>> Meanwhile, IBM has $100 billion in revenue this year, Apple has what,
>> $25 billion?
>
> yes, it means IBM workers have to labor harder for less return. Apple is
> about a 32B company this year,
no, it's not, unless it's going to have as much revenue this last quarter as
it did the last 3 combined.
Re: Apple To Allow Third Party Apps ON iPhone 
but
Linear Mode
