A $150 million investment in a company that had around $5 billion cash is not a bail out.
And wasn't paid to settle the QuickTime lawsuit anyway?
Apple is not a luxury brand
31–40 of 48 posts
Re: Apple is not a luxury brand
#32I couldn't agree more with this post: I've long said the competitive advantages of iOS are the iTunes ecosystem and gaming.
Gaming is already huge and is only getting bigger. My 9 year old nephew has an iPod Touch as do all his friends. Ot a PSP, not a DS but an iPod. That should scare Sony, Nintendo and the Android handset manufacturers witless.
It's an area where hardware consistency is critical. Apparently games development on Android with different resolutions, CPUs and (perhaps most importantly) the graphics chipset is a nightmare.
What's more people seem less inclined to pay for Android apps than on iOS.
So Apple has the iPod Touch and the iPad, neither of which really has an answer yet (no the Galaxy tab doesn't quite compare wit the iPad).
Re: Apple is not a luxury brand
#33The biggest lie ever told may involve an apple ... but it's not the one in Cupertino.
Gravity is a lie?
Re: Apple is not a luxury brand
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
The iPod used to be a luxury item. It wasn't until places like Wal-Mart started the disconnect of labeling departments "iPods and MP3 Players" that it turned into just another gadget you'll probably find in a stolen laptop case.
As far as I am concerned the iPod has become completely superfluous. I am surprised that people still buy them - what for? Also I am not sure I follow the logic: because Walmart has a MP3 player section, suddenly iPods are must-have items?
As far as I am concerned the iPod has become completely superfluous. I am surprised that people still buy them - what for?
My mother (honestly). She doesn't use computers (too difficult, no interest) or smartphones (yet another subscription). But with the iPod Touch she can listen to music, call her kids from the other side of the globe with Facetime and the front facing camera, and send e-mails. The last two generations of the iPod Touch brought her from 'never used a computer', well into the 21st century, where she can manage to do stuff online that matter to her.
I bet that there are a lot of casual users, who just want an affordable device to play games, write e-mails, and listen to music, without spending $$$s extra on an iPhone, which also requires a relatively expensive subscription to provide value over the iPod Touch.
Re: Apple is not a luxury brand
#35Re: Apple is not a luxury brand
#36In India, the iPhone 4 is supposed to start selling at around Rs. 40,000+ (almost US$ 900) , that's much higher than an average middle-class person's monthly salary. So, I guess this post only applies to North America / Western Europe.
Re: Apple is not a luxury brand
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
As far as I am concerned the iPod has become completely superfluous. I am surprised that people still buy them - what for? Also I am not sure I follow the logic: because Walmart has a MP3 player section, suddenly iPods are must-have items?
As far as I am concerned the iPod has become completely superfluous. I am surprised that people still buy them - what for? My mother (honestly). She doesn't use computers (too difficult, no interest) or smartphones (yet another subscription). But with the iPod Touch she can listen to music, call her kids from the other side of the globe with Facetime and the front facing camera, and send e-mails. The last two generat…
I actually bought an iPod touch for exactly that reason. I'm really not a phone user (I spend $5/month on cell service), so buying an iPhone and spending the money on a data plan does not appeal to me. For my purposes the iPod touch is everything an iPhone does that I'd want, for $2000 less.
The only time I regret it is when I'm traveling, and I'd find it useful to be able to access the internet. But this is rather uncommon.
Honestly, I would be happy to spend extra money on an iPhone without the phone bits. The camera in the iPhone is much better, and the gps would be useful even without an always-on connection.
Re: Apple is not a luxury brand
#38Race to the bottom! ;-)
Re: Apple is not a luxury brand
#39I couldn't agree more with this post: I've long said the competitive advantages of iOS are the iTunes ecosystem and gaming. Gaming is already huge and is only getting bigger. My 9 year old nephew has an iPod Touch as do all his friends. Ot a PSP, not a DS but an iPod. That should scare Sony, Nintendo and the Android handset manufacturers witless. It's an area where hardware consistency is critical. Apparently games d…
I know this is a topic John Gruber has mentioned many times, but I think the persistent lack of an Android competitor to the iPod touch is still little-mentioned and revealing.
However, I just saw that Samsung is looking to fill this role, which will be very interesting in its effect on the Android Market. It's basically a Galaxy S, de-phoned.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2043171
I agree this is a pretty dire but little-noticed situation for Android. Everyone in middle school who is attached to the iPod touch is going to want or have an iPhone in five years.
Re: Apple is not a luxury brand
#40[deleted]