8 million in 9 months, with almost 3.5m for last quarter alone.
Not huge, but hardly to be sniffed at
Estimated iPad Shipments for CY10
Reply
Monthly Archives: May 2010
Boom, Indeed: Apple Passes Microsoft In Market Cap
On folly, freedom and filters
So, here’s a summary of the issues as I see them:
- there’s no serious Internet content problem to solve – you just can’t inadvertently stumble on RC or child porn on the Internet
- even if there was, few want the government to solve it this way – there are better, more effective, more workable and more societally acceptable options
- the technology presents a real risk – we’ve seen the trial results and the extensive analysis which points out the flaws
- the blacklist itself is a problem – it’s secret, unappelable, deals with material that remains legal, it’s already been leaked and will again (you’ve heard of the Streisand Effect, right?)
- the filter will not address criminal distribution of illegal material – it’s far better to ensure funding and resources for law enforcement, who are the only people equipped to deal with this problem properly
- the filter impinges on the freedom of Australians to determine for themselves – it represents a real shift in the ability for Australians to determine what is and isn’t appropriate for them to view online and significantly changes a fairly workable classification system in other media to cope with a medium that is changing rapidly
- the filter will be administered by governments ill-equipped to do so – the technology and policy are complicated and problematic. We’ve seen several policy and program stumbles lately, do we want one over this?
- there is no guarantee that future governments will not change the scope of what is filtered – the suppression of material based on moral or political grounds is anathema to what Australia is about
This is far from a simple issue.
I’d like to close with a few words from Will Briggs, an Anglican priest from my wife’s home town of Somerset, Tasmania. Will is a strong voice in the discourse on the filter. He said:
“[This issue] is best [addressed] through clear information, balanced argument, reasoned debate…[on the] multiplicity of issues… [it is] a debate which is not simply about sexual ethics but about freedom of speech, the reductionism of morality, and the role of government in society… by… simplifications in this case [we] look like simpletons.”
Click through the link above to get the full text of Stephen’s excellent Speech
Apple’s R&D Efficiency
Apple has always spent below the industry average for R&D.
Here are Apple’s trailing 9 quarters R&D as percent of sales:
3.42% 3.86% 2.59% 2.65% 3.51% 3.50% 2.93% 2.54% 3.16%
Nokia spends at least 10% of sales on R&D and Microsoft at least that much.
But these numbers are not as spectacular as the comment above that iPhone development cost was $150 million. To date, the product has generated $31.4B in sales.
As the article points out, Apple spent $4.6B on R&D over the past four years and Microsoft spent 7x that or $31 billion. Cisco and Intel spent 4x.
via blog.asymco.com
3% on R&D as a percentage of Sales? Anyone else do that?
Oil reaches Louisiana shores – The Big Picture
Link
Show me a successful relationship without Trust
When I started in University, there were these little beige boxes with a built in screen Continue reading
PCB business card
Love the way @gruber manages to get that Steve Ballmer quote in again
Post-I/O Thoughts
Saturday, 22 May 2010
Post-Google I/O, there’s not much room left to see iPhone-vs.-Android as anything other than an all-out war. What we’ve got here is a good old-fashioned epic rivalry.
…
The big loser this week, though, was Microsoft. They’re simply not even part of the game…Microsoft? They’ve got nothing. No interesting devices, weak sales, and a shrinking user base. Microsoft’s irrelevance is taken for granted.
Google’s competitive focus on the iPhone at I/O was intense and scathing. But it’s Microsoft’s lunch they’re eating…
Microsoft can’t afford for its mobile platform to account for just a sliver of the industry’s unit sales. Their licensing model is all about volume — low per-unit profits multiplied by an enormous number of units. They’re not selling $400-600 phones, they’re selling $8-15 licenses for an OS.
But Google lets carriers and handset makers license Android for free. And not only has Google cut the bottom out of the market price-wise, by the time Windows Phone 7 phones actually come to market, Android will have two complete years of momentum and market share behind it.
Three years ago, just before the original iPhone shipped, here’s what Steve Ballmer said in an interview with USA Today’s David Lieberman:
“There’s no chance that the iPhone is going to get any
significant market share. No chance. It’s a $500 subsidized
item. They may make a lot of money. But if you actually take a
look at the 1.3 billion phones that get sold, I’d prefer to have
our software in 60 percent or 70 percent or 80 percent of them,
than I would to have 2 percent or 3 percent, which is what Apple
might get.”Not only was he wrong about the iPhone, but he was even more wrong about Windows Mobile. Three years ago Ballmer was talking about 60, 70, 80 percent market share. This week, Gartner reported that Windows Mobile has dropped to 6.8 percent market share in worldwide smartphone sales, down dramatically from 10.2 percent a year ago. (The same report puts iPhone OS at 15.2 percent, and Android at 9.6.)
Microsoft can’t undercut Android on price, and it seems increasingly unlikely that they can beat Android in terms of features or experience. They didn’t warrant even a passing reference from Google at I/O. No chance, indeed.
Perhaps Steve Ballmer should take the advice I dreamt that Bill gave him the other night?
http://twitter.com/franksting/statuses/14436194149
Why Greece matters | spiked
The bailout measures have encouraged a false sense of security about the economy. These rescue programmes have only patched things back together, on the same un-sound basis that existed before the financial panic hit. If properly understood, the disruptions in Greece and the Eurozone should serve as a wake-up call, reminding us that the global economy is far from healthy or stable.
They should’ve allowed a whole load of rottenness to collapse in 2008. Yes we would’ve suffered for a while, but better a short sharp nick than a painfully drawn-out recovery.
