Bill, there is more for Apple to worry about than catching up in volume to the bulk of CPU's produced by Intel to run Windows XX. Granted 50% growth would be good for the stock, and it would certainly end the claptrap concerning Apple's eminent demise. But the fact that Apple is not attaining that lofty goal is not grounds for speculation for "locked in a downward spiral."
The encyclical onslaught of Wintels is perpetrated by an army of competitors. Apple's product offering is differentiated from the monolith package presented by them for public consumption, but not horizontally opposed to it. You cannot in all sincerity predict that a failure to gobble market share at the rate you specify will result in Apple's eventual failure, any more than you can predict that Apple's recent emaciation will continue until it vanishes. The consumer is a fickle and flighty consort. The ebb and flow of commerce is as unpredictable as it is hypnotizing, like the esoteric waves of the deep sea.
Apple would be better off with an effective licensing strategy, it's true. "The sooner the better" is another applicable axiom. Jobs effectively stopped the red ink and, like or not, has positioned Apple for a spanking good recovery. "I would have done it different" is a think we have all thunk from time to time. You are entitled to yours.
I've read many of your posts in the past. I felt that some of your views were valid... even eye opening. I even posted a link to one of your protracted philippics on Yahoo's AAPL BBS because I thought you had some relevant observations on the current state of the industry. However, I'm beginning to think that you merely have a habit of conspicuously controverting every issue. That's sad if true, because that makes you the exact opposite of a cheerleader... an incessant boo'r.
Good hunting,
HerbVic |
