Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM)

QCOM 180.64

-0.2%

2:14 PM EDT

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 PreviousNext

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (152471)	2/12/2022 8:29:03 AM
From: arun gera	2 Recommendations Recommended By Jon Koplik Lance Bredvold of 152472

<What might have been! Instead of pdQ we have megatons of iPhones and AAPL [which barely existed in 1999] is now worth nearly $3 trillion> You have to give it to Steve Jobs in design and Cook to execution. Based on the IBM PC ecosystem, it was clear there were just two victors in profits - the leading chip designer (Intel) and the leading OS designer (Microsoft). The end user device manufacturers fought in a commodity business with many disappearing/merging except Dell/HP in the US. And the original ecosystem designer IBM was probably forced by the FTC as an anti-monopoly gesture to design the IBM PC ecosystem. Thats why IBM's heart was not in it. IBM lost the battle even with an OS that was better. Remember, there was no proof then that Apple iPhone model will be that big a success. Apple had superior Macs for years and yet was only had about 10% market share, and around the time PDQ came out gross margins in the high teens. Then Steve Jobs started making the changes after his return and the rest is history. Tim Cook's supply chain management (including pressurizing Qualcomm) and the increased sophistication in capabilities at lower cost from the Taiwan/Chinese infrastructure made all the difference. Qualcomm decided to be the "Intel Inside" and "IBM" - the ecosystem builder. Microsoft took over the WinTel ecosystem responsibilities on desktops and on-premise infrastructure, and in the Cloud (No. 2 player.) Later Google decided to be the OS builder (Android). Both have made profits, with Google having a stickier relationship with end users - higher market share in eyeballs on all devices - PCs, Chromebooks, Smart Phones, and Google Home/Alexa/Echo. Lets see who wins in the car user interface. It was expected that consumer device makers such as Sony (of Walkman fame) would be able to hold back newcomers such as Apple in handheld device space. Instead, Samsung and to a lesser degree Xiaomi have stepped in that place. Rest are the also rans in terms of Premium Brands. And only Samsung probably makes good profits from the mobile phone business. LG surrendered and got out. Somewhere along the way the advantage of Moore's law has passed onto the companies that are closest to the consumer for two reasons - human attention is the goldmine, and consumers are willing to pay premium for intuitive/smooth interfaces that are easier to learn and do not require relearning. Microsoft has taken advantage of that on the Windows desktop interface, and Apple has fought off the challenge from Android even with a narrowing advantage of a more intuitive and consistent design and integration with other devices. -Arun

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 PreviousNext