Apple has innovated not just in hardware and software, but also in supply channel management, and the latter was definitely Tim Cook's doing.
If you compare the Jobs 2.0 Apple to the 1990s Apple, improved operational execution (supply channel management, demand forecasting, etc) made a huge impact on the bottom line.
This is actually a really good point. One of the things that distinguishes the Apple of today vs. the one in 1985 (which also had a dominant industry position and fantastic products) is that they're also competing on price. The iPhone 4 is available with contract at $99, the same price charged for very similar (often somewhat inferior) hardware from mass market asian manufacturers like LG or HTC. (The 3GS is actually available free with contract, though IMHO it competes poorly with the competing Android phones.)
That's pretty impressive for an R&D focused company.
This. There is a video out there where Steve jobs is describing how he built and transforms apple and manufacturing, supply chain, and retail were all part of it.
I think Tim has convinced Jobs that operation and execution is all part of the product experience.
You mean the guy that completely changed Apple by moving it out of the manufacturing business? Remember, Steve Jobs built factories, Tim Cook unbuilt them (and put Apple's profits through the roof in the process).
Assuming you're in your thirties: A man that has worked at Apple since you were a late teenager, in several leadership positions, has far more to do with what the company is today than your pithy comment.
This is my first account, I just had to create one to respond to what was probably one of the most moronic things I've ever read in my short existence on this earth.
As compared to Facebook that will index and put ads on them. There is no lesser evil here - not in principle at least. All firms seem to be in the same business of selling advertisements. Facebook might be able to do better display advertisements as compared to Google and they seem less intrusive to users - a viewpoint that I subscribe to. But other than the extent of intrusion, both Facebook and Google are using the data you provide for targeted advertisements.
And with that, I agree. Actually FB is providing some level of data movement. I was just replying to my parent comment that was indicating that data should be not be given to Google but to FB because the former will put ads on it.
do you feel smart about your comment? if you're not interested in a topic, don't click on it. why are you spending time and effort to comment on something you're not interested in?
Not exactly. He's paying some tax now, while Facebook is still private. It's just that once it's public, the value of his stake will be much more transparent and so he'll have to pay more taxes.
Only realized capital gains are taxed. The capital gain is not realized until the stock is sold. So the answer is no, he's not paying "some" taxes now on his fb shares.
He may have sold some stock to private investors but I don't think that's what you meant.
I think for Asian developers, specially in China, fragmentation is a HUGE problem. There are literally hundreds of variations of cheap Android phones out there with different screen sizes, OS versions, etc. We replace our phones regularly here in the US and have access to the latest phones from Samsung, etc. but that is not the case in most parts of Asia.
I don't think it is that simple. In Asia, which is ground zero for non-Google Android devices, fragmentation is certainly a problem, but the absence of fragmentation would have been far worse. Without fragmenting an open-source Android, manufacturers just wouldn't have been able to make and sell the cheap smartphones Asian developers are targeting.
>Diversity of hardware and software isn't an inherent boon, it's just something that brings its own benefits and drawbacks.
Absolutely. Also, fragmentation is more of an issue in Asia where there are literally hundreds of cheaper variations of the same phone with different Android versions, screen sizes, memory, etc.
