SI
SI
discoversearch

 Technology Stocks | Apple Tankwatch


Previous 10 | Next 10 
From: zax2/24/2012 8:42:51 AM
   of 30312
 
Apple forced to shut off push e-mail service in Germany
By Philip Elmer-DeWitt February 24, 2012: 7:15 AM ET Court, Apple

tech.fortune.cnn.com

( AAPL) late Thursday informed German iPhone customers that e-mail would no longer be "pushed" to their phones -- BlackBerry style -- through their iCloud or MobileMe services.
    Pending Apple's appeal, which could take months, iPhone users in Germany will have to retrieve their e-mail the old-fashioned way: by "pulling" it manually or by configuring their iPhones to check for new messages periodically.

    It's the first time iPhone users anywhere in the world have inconvenienced by the ongoing smartphone patent wars.

    At issue in this case is a Motorola patent dating back to the pager era -- one of 17,000 patents Google ( GOOG) picked up when it acquired Motorola Mobility ( MMI) for $12.5 billion last August. Lawyers representing Motorola claimed that Apple's push e-mail system infringed their patent and a German judge -- applying the relatively lax standards of the Mannheim court -- had to agree.

    What makes this particular technology different from most of the patents Motorola has accused Apple of infringing, FOSS Patent's Florian Mueller explains, is that it does not appear to be essential to any industry standard. Companies are required to license standards-essential patents under so-called FRAND (fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory) terms.

    Microsoft ( MSFT) this week joined Apple in lodging a formal antitrust complaint with the European Commission for what they claim is Motorola's anticompetitive use of standards-essential patents.

    Apple has been waging what Steve Jobs called "thermonuclear war" against competitors he perceived as having "stolen" proprietary -- i.e. not standards-essential -- Apple technology.

    " I don't blame Motorola for seeking the enforcement of an injunction based on a patent that is not standard-essential," writes Mueller, who has been a vocal critic of Motorola's FRAND lawsuits. "This is fair."

    "As a result of Apple's own enforcement of patents," he writes, "Android users see this happen all the time, with features either being removed or hobbled. For example, as a Samsung customer, I no longer get the overscroll bounceback feature on my device; I have to unlock my device with the inferior slide-to-unlock circle (last week, Apple won a German ruling against Motorola based on the relevant patent); and a few months ago, after I updated my firmware, I noticed that turning pages in the Android photo gallery was different (and less convenient)."

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


    To: zax who wrote (16874)2/24/2012 10:01:02 AM
    From: sylvester80
       of 30312
     
    That will demolish the iPhone user experience... wait till this goes global... people are going to be jumping off the crApple Titanic by the millions.... LMFAO... too funny...

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


    To: sylvester80 who wrote (16872)2/24/2012 10:12:23 AM
    From: zax
       of 30312
     
    Strategy Analytics: Nokia had 33% market share in smartphones in Q4

    finance.yahoo.com

    According to the latest research from Strategy Analytics, Microsoft (MSFT) global smartphone shipments grew 36% sequentially to reach 2.7 million units in the fourth quarter of 2011. Nokia (NOK) captured top position as the world’s number one Microsoft smartphone vendor for the first time ever. Alex Spektor, Associate Director at Strategy Analytics, said, “Nokia overtook HTC and others to become the world’s largest Microsoft smartphone vendor with 33% market share. Nokia’s global Microsoft smartphone shipments hit 0.9 million units, as distribution of its Lumia family expanded across numerous countries and operators.”

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


    To: zax who wrote (16876)2/24/2012 10:24:00 AM
    From: sylvester80
       of 30312
     
    NOK $8 target this year... a 60% gain... all loaded up....

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


    From: zax2/24/2012 10:33:26 AM
       of 30312
     
    Mozilla Partners Up With LG To Combat Apple and Google

    At Mobile World Congress, which begins in three days, Mozilla will finally take the wraps off the Mozilla Marketplace and allow developers to submit their open web technology (HTML5, JavaScript, CSS) apps. While the Marketplace will play an important role in keeping Firefox in step with Chrome, these apps will actually play a far more important role: Boot to Gecko (B2G), Mozilla's upcoming smartphone and tablet OS, will also use the Marketplace. For B2G to succeed it must have apps, and to create apps you need developers. That's why, at MWC, according to a source close to the matter, Mozilla will also be announcing that it has partnered up with LG to make a developer-oriented B2G-powered mobile device. Even more interestingly, Brendan Eich, Mozilla's Chief Technology Officer, says that it will unveil other partners at MWC as well — probably carriers, who are eager to use the open B2G and its Marketplace to escape the huge control that Apple and Google currently exert in the smartphone space

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


    From: Heywood402/24/2012 11:44:13 AM
       of 30312
     
    Proview Sues Apple in the US: Mass Hilarity Ensues

    Proview has decided to try and sue Apple in the US courts over the rights to the iPad name. The very basis of the case that they’re trying to make has me giggling.

    Proview accuses Apple of creating a special purpose entity — IP Application Development Ltd, or IPAD — to buy the iPad name from it, concealing Apple’s role in the matter.

    In its filing, Proview alleged lawyers for IPAD repeatedly said it would not be competing with the Chinese firm, and refused to say why they needed the trademark.

    Those representations were made “with the intent to defraud and induce the plaintiffs to enter into the agreement,” Proview said in the filing dated February 17, requesting an unspecified amount of damages.

    Well, yes, that almost certainly was the purpose of creating the special purpose vehicle. For if it were known that Apple was thinking of naming its next major product “iPad” then the rights to the name iPad would be very valuable. More than the few tens of thousands actually paid, certainly.

    But while they’ve got the motivation correct there’s a little problem with their complaint. Fooling someone in a business deal is not in fact illegal. Cheating someone certainly is, not doing what you said you would do in the agreement is, but not telling someone what you intend to do as a result of the agreement is not.

    Just to take one simple example. I myself have often signed contracts to purchase goods for my firm. I have also often signed contracts to sell those same things from my firm to other people. Imagine that I bought something at $1. Does the person I bought it from have the right to complain about the contract if I then sell it for $1.20? For $5?

    Most certainly, if they hear about the margins I’m making they can negotiate about the prices I must pay them next time. But they can’t drag me into court to complain about and thus void the contract because my margins are what they deem excessive.

    It might even be that Proview, to use an English phrase, “got done up like a kipper”. But they are adults, they did sign the contract voluntarily and that’s pretty much that.

    I can’t believe that even a Californian court would attempt to revisit this.




    forbes.com

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


    To: Heywood40 who wrote (16879)2/24/2012 11:50:15 AM
    From: sylvester80
       of 30312
     
    >>>alleged lawyers for IPAD repeatedly said it would not be competing with the Chinese firm


    If that is written in the contract, then crApple is screwed... no matter how hilarious... LMFAO... too funny...

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


    To: zax who wrote (16878)2/24/2012 12:46:34 PM
    From: Glenn Petersen
       of 30312
     
    Can the "golden theorem" take down Apple?

    A Law Apple Would Like to Break

    By JAMES B. STEWART
    New York Times
    February 24, 2012

    These days, it’s hard to find a superlative that adequately describes Apple. But maybe simplest is best: biggest.

    Measured by market capitalization, Apple is the world’s biggest company. This week it solidified its lead over Exxon Mobil, the previous titleholder, as Apple’s shares hit an all-time high of $526.29, which gave it a market capitalization of just under $500 billion. Apple becomes only the 11th company to reach the top spot since 1926, according Howard Silverblatt, a senior index analyst for Standard & Poor’s.

    Apple’s first-quarter earnings of more than $13 billion accounted for more than 6 percent of all earnings for the S.& P. 500, according to Mr. Silverblatt. Sales for the quarter ending Dec. 31 included an astonishing 37.04 million iPhones and 15.43 million iPads and totaled $46.33 billion, up 73 percent from the year before. Earnings more than doubled. Compare that with this week’s earning from the tech giants Hewlett-Packard (down 44 percent) and Dell (down 18 percent).

    Apple shares have surged 68 percent from their low point in June, and it’s not just Apple shareholders who have benefitted. Apple is now such a large part of the S.& P. 500 and the Nasdaq 100 indexes that it has buoyed millions of investors who own shares of broad index funds and mutual funds, who account for an estimated half of the American population. This week the Nasdaq Composite reached its highest level since 2000 and the S.& P. 500 hit levels not seen since before the financial crisis.

    Here is the rub: Apple is so big, it’s running up against the law of large numbers.

    Also known as the golden theorem, with a proof attributed to the 17th century Swiss mathematician Jacob Bernoulli, the law states that a variable will revert to a mean over a large sample of results. In the case of the largest companies, it suggests that high earnings growth and a rapid rise in share price will slow as those companies grow ever larger.

    If Apple’s share price grows even 20 percent a year for the next decade, which is far below its current blistering pace, its $500 billion market capitalization would be more than $3 trillion by 2022. That is bigger than the 2011 gross domestic product of France, Brazil and all but four countries.

    Put another way, to increase its revenue by 20 percent, Apple has to generate additional sales of more than $9 billion in its next fourth quarter. A company with only $1 billion in sales has to come up with just another $200 million.

    Robert Cihra, an analyst who covers Apple at Evercore Partners, told me this week that the law of large numbers as it applied to Apple had “been a concern for years now.” But, he said, “over the past couple of years, they have actually accelerated revenue growth. I don’t know that can continue indefinitely. If you extrapolate far enough out into the future, to sustain that growth Apple would have to sell an iPhone to every man, woman, child, animal and rock on the planet.”

    The law of large numbers may explain why, even at its recent lofty stock price, Apple looks like a bargain by most measures. The ratio of its share price to its earnings, a common measure of a company’s stock value, is less than 11 based on earnings projections for this year. That is well below the market’s average P/E ratio of about 13. Apple shares are even being bought by so-called value investors, who are usually confined to stodgier, low-growth but arguably undervalued companies.

    “The valuation on Apple stock right now is unjustifiably low,” Mr. Cihra said. “If it weren’t so big, the P/E multiple would be a lot higher. They almost doubled their earnings in calendar year 2011 and yet the stock is trading currently at a P/E multiple of less than 11. It’s trading way below the market average, even though it’s growing way above the market average. The multiple is being compressed simply because investors are asking how it can get bigger.”

    There may be sobering reasons for that. Other companies that have reached the top appear to have been felled by Bernoulli’s law. Cisco Systems held the top position and hit a market capitalization of $557 billion — larger than Apple’s — in March 2000, at the peak of the technology bubble. Its market capitalization today is about $100 billion, and shares are down nearly 80 percent since March 2000. In contrast with Apple, Cisco’s market value and sky-high 120 P/E ratio were inflated by investor euphoria rather than actual results. But other titleholders have met a similarly disappointing fate, although far less drastic.

    Exxon Mobil, recently displaced by Apple as the biggest company by market value, took over the top spot in 2006, seven years after the merger of Exxon and Mobil. At the end of that year, its market capitalization was $447 billion. Today it’s $35 billion lower. General Electric held the title for a number of years, most recently in 2005, when its market capitalization was $370 billion. Today, it’s just $205 billion. Microsoft was No. 1 in 2002 with a market capitalization of $276 billion. Today, it’s $262 billion. Of recent titleholders, the only one that has gained is IBM, whose market capitalization of $65 billion ranked first in 1990. Today, it’s $229 billion. Over the intervening 22 years, that is a compound rate of return of 11.2 percent including dividends — impressive but hardly the growth rate Apple shareholders have come to expect. Over the same period, an S.& P. 500 index fund returned 8.7 percent.

    Can Apple escape a similar fate?

    After never being a dominant force in personal computers, Apple surged to the top of the S.& P. 500 by transforming the cellphone into a multitasking smartphone, arguably the single most-important technological advance so far in the 21st century. It rolled over vaunted rivals like Nokia, Motorola and Research in Motion with a combination of brilliant technology, dazzling design and shrewd marketing backed by the singular vision of its late founder, Steve Jobs. “Everyone truly needs it,” Mr. Cihra said of the smartphone. “It’s the most transformative piece of technology in our lifetimes.”

    Notwithstanding Apple’s huge size, Wall Street analysts are overwhelmingly positive on the company’s prospects. Of 57 analysts who cover the company, 52 have a strong buy or buy recommendation. Only one recommends selling: Edward Zabitsky, the chief executive and founder of ACI Research in Toronto, who specializes in telecommunications and has been Apple’s reigning Cassandra for years. He’s a favorite target of the Web’s “iPhone death watch,” which features negative (and thus far wrong) projections about Apple.

    “In all my years as an analyst, I’ve never gotten the kind of attention I’ve gotten from my Apple call,” Mr. Zabitsky told me this week. “I’ve gotten get e-mails from everyone from radiologists to car repair people from all over North America telling me I’m a fool. We’re just a research operation, so we’re not trying to get any business from Apple. If we were, I doubt we’d get any.”

    “Apple has created a tremendous ecosystem where there was none,” Mr. Zabitsky acknowledges. But he thinks competition will erode Apple’s advantages as computing shifts to the cloud. “The question isn’t whether this will happen, but why and when. The company that understands this best is Microsoft. They’re betting the farm on Web apps. They’ll be competing with Apple on every product. Microsoft is big enough and motivated enough to make this happen.”

    But Mr. Zabitsky remains a solitary voice.

    “The reason Apple has been able to continue growing at a spectacular rate, even as its revenue base has surpassed $100 billion, is because it targets the world’s biggest markets,” Mr. Cihra said. He rates the stock a buy and projects revenue for calendar year 2012 at $165 billion. “The simple fact is that they still have a small share of huge markets — single digit shares in both PCs and mobile phones.” Global mobile phone subscriptions neared six billion in 2011, with Apple’s share of the handset market at 5.6 percent, according to the market intelligence firm IDC. “There’s no mathematical reason Apple can’t keep growing at a premium rate for at least several more years,” Mr. Cihra said. “At the end of the day, there’s no good reason for market cap to be a ceiling.”

    Apple fans are eagerly awaiting Apple’s next big thing. A voice-activated television that upends TV the way Apple transformed music and cellphones? Maybe. And Mr. Cihra may well be right that Apple investors have at least several years of breathing room. But history suggests that excessive enthusiasm can often precede a fall. At Cisco’s peak, every Wall Street analyst covering the company rated it a strong buy or buy. “Cisco continues to execute very well and demonstrates that it is in a class by itself,” Seth Spalding, an analyst at Epoch Partners, wrote, joining a chorus of analysts praising Cisco’s latest earnings — in November 2000.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/25/business/apple-confronts-the-law-of-large-numbers-common-sense.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


    From: Doren2/24/2012 1:23:43 PM
       of 30312
     
    iPhone Death Watch

    aaplinvestors.net

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


    To: sylvester80 who wrote (16873)2/24/2012 6:51:24 PM
    From: Sr K
       of 30312
     
    Do the restaurants realize that using this would use electric? Charging a device uses energy and energy usually costs money.

    There is no free lunch.

    Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read
    Previous 10 | Next 10 

    Copyright © 1995-2014 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.