The project starts bar chart is worth a quick look. How things have changed during one year.
-
-
Gold futures (/YG) approaching big 1,600 support! If I was a gold bug, I would be very scared if long. But then, many of them are totally oblivious, they think gold can’t do wrong. They think gold bubble is unburstable. They think so all the way from 1.900.
check out 1 year chart
-
conshmillo
gold futures under 1,600, dragging us down
-
conshmillo
Market watch front page is all over the gold drop today. You heard it FIRST at Traderhood BEFORE it happened!
-
-
in EUR/USD @1.3040 (double lot)
stops @1.3020, 1.3000-
conshmillo
Euro is in the exact same mood as dollar was in 2008. Scared shitless. Investors are totally rattled and irrational. Any bad news are magnified by factor of 10.
-
conshmillo
stopped out on half @1.3020 for loss of -20.00
-
conshmillo
Kicked out of the second lot too @1.3000 this morning for total loss of 60 pips!
-
conshmillo
in EUR/USD again @1.3000
this is about 40 minutes delayed post as website was unusable while I was working on the memory issue
-
-
Never thought of this area as Apple country.
http://gigaom.com/apple/apple-devices-winning-big-in-the-middle-east-and-north-africa/
-
Sounds like a great move providing Syria doesn’t blow it up to even the score with Jobs ‘father’.
-
Here is the simple way to get Google killed (or at least badly wounded). Return the favor. Same as Google offered almost free Android platform to undermine Apple’s business, Apple should do the same. Forget the $500,000, $400,000 or even $300,000 minimums for iAds. Don’t even charge them for clickthroughs. Allow them to advertise for bare minimum using simple auction system to grab the slots. Make ads dirt cheap compared to google pricing. If Apple truly says it isn’t interested in making money on iAds, do what I just said above. It will mortify Google.
-
Birra
That’s brilliant but a little incentive is needed for developers to make some money and they will need to replace Google maps first. Send your suggestion to tcook@apple.com. I sent one suggesting that Apple retain the legal team that’s beating them. Apparently he reads them.
-
Birra
-
-
GotWake
I agree. Apple has in such a “premium” mindset they apply it to everything. I think it’s time to rethink the iAd strategy.
-
JPWatkins
Seems to me Apple is doing fine. They do have a good share of revenues and they probably don’t have to put a great deal of effort or expense into getting them. The last thing they want to do is get into a “dirt cheap” price war with google and make the iAd brand a commodity player. The customers of iAd have fallen into 2 camps, the one’s who understand the approach, have found it useful and profitable, and love it, and the others who don’t get it, think it’s too expensive, and hate it.
Apple only wants/needs the first set (and visa versa.) And by the way, that’s the most profitable, easiest to service and please, and most suited to Apple. Let Google and the others compete for the little pieces, which is part of a huge pile, but hey, it’s a lot harder to deal with.-
Birra
After thinking which I often don’t do before I post, I don’t think making iAd dirt cheap would change much of anything. Google’s primary income is still browser ads while Apple is app ads. Google will be hurt a lot more by Apple continuing to push movement from browser usage to app usage.
-
conshmillo
If you undermine competition on price (especially on product you are claiming you do not want to make money on in the first place), you will take business from them. Ads are Googles’ bread and butter. If advertisers can advertise for cheap, they will come in droves. You can always rise the price in the future. Like when google is dead. It’s just using one of your assets to weaken the competition instead of using that asset to make money directly.
-
-
conshmillo
John, you are starting to sound like those gold bugs. You keep thinking Apple can’t do wrong. Whatever they do seems to be holy to you. I can see plenty of stupid decisions by Apple in their various products. Overall there is much more stuff that is great, but there are elements that are plain stupid, unfinished or annoying. Often times marketing doing the job to present them as some kind of miracles.
-
JPWatkins
I don’t see the gold bug similarity, but whatever.
As far as Apple doing no wrong or being holy, that’s not me. They’ve done lot’s of things I don’t like and many things I though were wrong. But on the other hand, their strategy is usually very good, and they tend to get things right with time. Frankly, people speak mostly from ignorance when citing Apple’s mistakes. Many of Apple’s mistakes have been cited in the media, and yes, even on the pages of Traderhood. But over time, it’s funny how they haven’t really turned out to be mistakes. The only thing that has bothered me lately was the reconception of Final Cut Pro. But guess what? I’ve studied it, talked to pros, looked at what Apple did, and have concluded that they’ve done it again.The pros will be fine on present tools until Apple finishes their transition, and by next year everyone will see that Apple has created the next great leap in film editing . . . again (they could have communicated this better though.)
– Let’s keep it to iAd though.
I think you guys need to go back and study what iAd is and how it is supposed to work. It’s high quality, well-produced, interactive ads on the iOS platform, that are valuable enough in information, entertainment, interaction, etc. that people want to click on them. They want to see them. They treat the user with respect, without interrupting their user experience, without annoying or insulting the user, and they also deliver a quality impression on behalf of the advertiser. Overall, an iAd is a pull marketing play (although “marketing” is really an inappropriate term for the transaction that is occurring.) This is something only for sophisticated customers that have a clear message and understand how this kind of transaction works. For them, iAd has proven to be the cheapest, most effective way to use digital media for brand messaging. It’s a creative thoughtful process that cannot be commoditized. Just the kind of thing that goes with Apple’s brand, users, and corporate culture. Just the kind of thing they are good at.
**Think of it as an interactive version of the traditional “Superbowl commercial.”**
–
Now think of the so-called “competitor’s” bread and butter advertisements— the worst kind of push marketing, forced participation, banner ads, crappy design, no creativity, no transaction, usually the best ones are just TV commercials.
–
As usual, Apple has no competitors. With iAd Apple has redefined the space with a high end, high value offering that initially only attracts a minority of customers, but is very valuable/lucrative for both Apple and those customers. Going low end would damage the user experience. Commoditising it, dumbing it down, making it like everything else out there (what you might call, “smart improvements” consh) would completely kill its power and it’s value. It would fragment the budget for each iAd, the focus and creative energy of each iAd, and the revenue.
The low hanging fruit is the sweetest, juiciest, and most profitable.Remember, “It’s not the features you include, it’s the ones you leave out that matter.” That’s why iAd is not all things to all advertisers.
-
-
GotWake
That’s the thing, if they don’t have to put a great deal of effort or expense into iAd, why not use it to cut Google deep? I can see both sides of this argument, somewhere in the middle is where Apple’s strategy needs to be. Too high and advertisers don’t bite. That’s why Apple seems to be reassessing their pricing structure.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204336104577094872512502942.html
-
-
-
-
By now I am starting to think rating agencies are on it with hedge funds. It seems to be working the same as what analysts do with individual stocks. Hit it hard with some bullshit claim and then load up (or get rid of shorts) on pullback. Knock off protective stops, freak out all the amateurs and then do opposite of whatever the bullshit claim was week later.
-
liuzinho
I totally agree. This is getting ridiculous.
-
Bunratty
A related issue: “Take LinkedIn (LNKD). The professional social network went public in May and surged 138% to $122 on its first day of trading. A month later, however, LinkedIn had fallen back to $60 a share. That brought out a series of analyst reports from J.P. Morgan (JPM), Bank of America (BAC) and Morgan Stanley, LinkedIn’s three main underwriters. Each pounded the table, calling it “viral” and “transformative.”
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/12/12/the-problem-with-linkedins-stock-price/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+fortunebrainstormtech+%28Fortune+Brainstorm+Tech%29
-
-
Thought provoking if you have that capacity.
“Because most iPad owners and prospective owners already have both mobile phones and computers, they don’t “need” an iPad. There’s almost nothing an iPad can do that can’t also be done by a device already owned by the user. It’s a pure luxury item. Yet Apple is selling millions of them every month, while some rivals are trying to figure out how to cut their losses and get out of the market.”
http://www.cultofmac.com/134542/will-ios-macs-dominate-like-ipad-does/
-
Nicu
Why do you push it, Birra? They will come up in force to prove they have it, all while showing the contrary …
-
Birra
So true …
-
-
Birra
Here’s an interesting statement by John Siracusa of Ars in his original epic review of Lion.
“Over the past decade, better technology has simply reduced the number of things that we need to care about. Lion is better technology. It marks the point where Mac OS X releases stop being defined by what’s been added. From now on, Mac OS X should be judged by what’s been removed.”
http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2011/07/mac-os-x-10-7.ars/19#recommendations
-
-
Bad for Apple or bad for Google? I say worse for Google, as it dilutes their base. They’ve been served a little bit of medicine they’ve tried to give to Apple.
-
Here’s the next development in WebOS story. The saga more twists and turns than a [fill in the blank as you wish.]
“Hewlett Packard CEO Meg Whitman finally announced the fate of operating system WebOS this morning, after the company previously announced that it was ceasing the development of all smartphones and tablets running Palm’s webOS platform. The actual software’s fate was yet to be determined. HP said today that it will be making the webOS code open source. . . . “SOURCE:
http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/09/hps-whitman-well-make-webos-powered-tablets-in-2013/-
JPWatkins
I forgot to say that open sourcing is actually is pretty nice since many geeks wanted that. They don’t appear to mention the terms of the license though. The kind of license they choose to release it under is key. Also, despite what they say, one has to wonder if about HP’s commitment to the project, too.
Other than some Linux stuff, has HP done much in the way open source projects? Is anyone familiar with HP’s record on open source software projects?
-
conshmillo 4:38 am on December 14, 2011 54 days ago Reply
That’s why I am writing an iOS game.
Nicu 7:00 am on December 14, 2011 54 days ago Reply
Why? Android is winning, didn’t you know?
JPWatkins 6:34 pm on December 14, 2011 53 days ago Reply
If I were developing on my own, iOS/OS X would be a no brainer. But depending on the nature of the project, one would definitely want to consider covering other platforms—Android/Windows etc. For many kinds of software though, exclusive development for iOS/OS X is often a very smart choice. It hits the sweet spot for quality, coverage, ease of development and maintenance, customer service and satisfaction, as well as profit.
–
For a small developer, especially one who is doing it on the side or has limited resources, each platform added (to whatever the first choice was) increases problems geometrically, especially so if the platform is “messy” in terms of HW SW differences.