I read the article and I feel it's a stretch to accuse them of speculating when there is some truth to the reality of what they say. What was printed was this: "The future of that Next technology, which Apple is using for its next-generation operating system, may be in doubt. Mr. Jobs conspicuously avoided mention of Rhapsody in his speech on Wednesday. TO SOME APPLE WATCHERS, THAT WAS A SIGN THAT RHAPSODY MIGHT BE FAR OFF IN THE FUTURE, AND THAT AS PART OF ITS NEW CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH MICROSOFT, APPLE MAY LICENSE MICROSOFT'S WINDOWS NT OPERATING SYSTEM." OK, so where's the speculation? I have been a WSJ subscriber for some time. It's ludicrous to think that they have some vested interest in Apple's failure. What Apple folks don't like is when any form of reality comes crashing down on them. What the article has done is fire a well deserved warning shot over the bow by reminding people that it takes more than 150 million dollars to mend things. As they said, core problems- Continued slide in sales and market share (4% of the total new computer purchases is pitiful IMHO), Loss of its technology leadership position, defection of software developers to Windows, hemorrahage of executive and technical talent and finally More Mac or Move to Windows?
Funny thing is I have seen little from the Apple corridor that outlines any promise for the future. A gigantic leap in share price due to an injection of cash does little to insure any long term future. It's like eating Chinese food. It tastes great but it doesn't last very long before you're hungry again. |
