Hello Wolff,
Good morning to you!
> Lemon, 6 paragraphs to say NO. A personal record!
> Congrates.
Hmmm ... I'll have to re-read my post to try and determine what you are referring to. I would like to say that excessive and repetitive posting is in no way a record of mine ... you seem to be the king of repeating yourself on this thread ... ;-o
> a. Crying foul of you touchie feelings, Bloody so what,
> the merits of the facts stand for themselves. Stop
> whining to me about it and telling me you got a boo-boo.
> If you feel my style takes away from what I am
> saying....so be it. Talk facts already.
I think that it is wonderful the way that humans can interact in such a wide range of ways. I can choose to try and communicate on a professional and adult level, and you can ... well ... you can do whatever it is you do.
I guess that the important thing is that you continue to learn about this market, and this company. And I'm glad that you *are* showing signs of learning. I noticed that in this post, you have not responded to my specific questions, and you have dropped several of your arguments. I think that everyone on this thread recognizes this as your acceptance of my position ...
... but of course, you have now changed the arguments to new subjects ... so let's read and have fun! ;-)
> 1. You said that the MA4 could be had for 3200. That is
> not true. You told me this to present an arguement in
> favor of Xybernaut.
Ahhh ... so once again you seem to be doing what you asked me not to do. So this is your third "strike" ... you are now "out." All of on this thread can now fully understand that your entire behavior here is simply because of your extremely angry outlook at life because of a really stupid error of shorting the wrong stock. I'm sorry that you have got yourself into financial problems, but please don't take them out on me or this thread. Go see a good financial counselor and they might be able to help you ...
> Yet you do not retract that arguement. I think you
> should.
But I've already told you ... I don't really care what you think! ;-) I'm simply carrying on this conversation so that you might be educated slightly about what is going on in the industry ...
> The price of the MAs is cost prohibitive for as
> long as current projections allow.
And since current projections are only possible for months out, then you have once again agreed that this is potentially a very short time-frame! Thanks for agreeing with me! I guess that you are correct, and that prices could change very rapidly and cause these devices to become extremely cheap ...
> If you want a simple point to address.......How will
> Xybernaut compel early adopters (not first adopters) and
> the rest to buy this product? Again this goes to what
> need or application need to be run on it. For example the
> Palm started off as a schedule and calender.
I think that this is now the 5th or 6th time that I have seen you post this question, and with each post I have taken the time to try and answer you ... I believe that almost every other person on this thread understands the answer.
You are completely missing the point ... the "killer app" is the fact that I have *all* my standard applications, running on the OS of my choice (you name it! It's compatible hardware!) and I'm completely mobile.
I'll ask you again ... what is the "killer app" of the laptop? This is the same question that you are asking ...
I would challenge you to answer this: How many college students have a Palm or equivalent, and *NO OTHER* PC or computer? How many college students have laptops?
(We all know on this thread that you will never answer such questions, either because you are just too confused on how to research such information, or due to the fact that you know you are wrong, yet your current financial crisis is killing you.)
> 2. The Palm 7 provides more functionality and better uses
> to more people in the United States than does the MA4, it
> sells for 400-500 dollars. (499 being the most common
> price). It does what is needed and at a much better price
> level. Its available today.
> siliconinvestor.com
> our friends here even support them. Got to Yahoo search
> for Palm 7 and you get all the data you need. You can
> even trade stocks with these.
Yep ... I've got a Palm VII right here in my hand ... I use it all the time, and it makes a wonderful *companion* for my full blown PC laptop! And I am glad that we have finally agreed that in any pricing comparison we have to include the price of the PC to enable to Palm to be a viable product! You did state that in your last post ...
> 3. I don't think you are evil, Lemon, I just think you
> know better. Its a credit to you. I don't think your
> price mistake was necessary.
And it is obvious that *you* know better ... but that your current financial situation has made you very angry, and demanded that try to use this thread as a way to "get even" with the world. I'm sorry that you are so hateful, and I will gladly bear the brunt of your most hateful posts if that is what you like. As I said, feel free to continue to hate me, "yell" at me, be angry with me ... get it out ... ;-)
> 4. Scott get over yourselff, you made a big production
> when I posted prices of Palm Computing, you insisted my
> prices were discounted (they were street prices) and you
> insisted that the MA4 was discounted as well. Thats
> all.....Again I think you knew better.
Hmmm ... no, that's not what I said at all. Please go back and re-read!
I suggested that you did not provide any type of a pricing comparison which was accurate. I never stated anything about discounted prices, but tried to help and educate you that the products that you listed were not viable competitors to the market segment that Xybernaut is in. You were listing products which were "PC Companions" ... something that you yourself pointed out ... and so I tried to indicate that you need to include the price of the PC in this equation. Since that time, you have agreed with this point. Thank you.
As for the MA IV, you say that I "insisted that the MA4 was discounted as well" when in reality I was under the impression that you *inflated* the price of the product ... but we have both realized that this is not the fact. Instead, I have apologized (now several times) for reading the FoxPC web page too quickly and posting based on my interpretation of there page.
I'm glad that we are both adult enough, and have enough integrity to admit when we are wrong. Thank you for doing so.
> 5. Lemon, I am not saying a PDA is going to match the
> utility of a generic PC plateform.
Ok ... now we are continuing to make progress, and I can see that you are learning well. So we have agreed upon the following statement and do not need to repeat it:
** "A PDA is *not* going to match the utility of a generic
** PC platform"
I am so glad that you have stated this for everyone to see, and that we now agree on this point.
> I am saying that that generic platform is not needed.
So this is an interesting statement. You have a paragraph below (#6) which seems to contradict this statement. You say below that "People will still have desktops, even in a wearable future" ... so you seem to be saying that people *will* have generic platforms.
> The only Wireless application needed is a browser.
So in major software development circles this has been discussed in depth. Yes, the models of software development are changing, and there is much that you can do with a browser ... but there are things that you can not. If you really look into the entire world of browser architectures, it's tough to argue exactly what a browser is! For example, although the basic user doesn't seem to understand this, the real power of Internet Explorer is not the "browser" but the "extensions" that Microsoft provides in the form of ActiveX controls, and various libraries. So browsers are becoming the foundation of these new Internet applications ... but *true* desktop integration becomes something different. So using the word "browser" is a very fuzzy area ... I believe that you need to specify a browser and it's exact capabilities.
> the rest can be be provided via that software.
Well ... this is not the truth. You are conveniently leaving out the "server side" of the applications. You see, these web pages that "magically" pop up on your PC are actually hosted by very powerful computers, connected to large Internet connections. (I know that it might seem like magic to you ...) So again I will suggest that you need to account for these "hosted services platforms". Additionally, you are making some assumption about your wireless connectivity and pricing. So what you have described is a "remote display" device, which requires that some computer be always connected to the Internet running your applications. Is this your full blown PC? If so, then we are back to the same argument about power and size reductions in PCs, and when they match the size and power, why wouldn't you carry your PC?
> Who needs all the flexiblity, shoot you can use BE
> operating system for wearables if desired.
So this also is a great positive statement! I agree that part of the power of the wearable platform, is that since it is a full blown PC, the user is able to pick and choose the OS of their choice! You are right on target when you state this - the Xybernaut MA IV is a standard PC that can run Windows, Linux, BEOS, and any other OS that the user desired. As you say, this is something that the PDA cannot provide ... heck, even the PC Companion that you pointed out can't do this! So the platform becomes widely accepted based on it's ability to be what the user wants it to be. And the product is open to many more markets due to this fact. If the developer of applications wants to write for Linux, what products are going to meet their needs?
> 6. People will still have desktops, even in a wearable
> future.
I'm really glad that you have completely agreed that there will be a "wearable future" ... I know that this has been a tough road to travel, but I think we are making progress. I will agree that for a while, desktops will still be around and in use as wearables are adopted. But this is the same as the fact that there are still black and white TVs in use. But once the price-point and value reach a certain level ... and the "core" concept is available, then these sales will taper ... it won't make sense. But we are in agreement here also.
> 7. Newton was designed as a standalone, not a satelite
> that is all I ment by "power"
Ok ... then we can continue down this line. So the issue was that it ran some "Newton OS" and had "Newton applications". All of us who have worked in the the software industry understand that developers and applications are what drive sales. And so I will argue that what occurred were more limitations in the ability of Apple to provide the applications that people needed, and the fact that the Newton wasn't a standardized platform. So I think that we agree, in your statements of #5 and #6 above, that the best solution is one which brings the full power of the PC into a better form factor. This is what Xybernaut is leading the market with ...
> 8. Your cousin was at Applee for the biggest mistake in
> computing history of all time, not licencing and modifing
> the Mac OS to run on X86. That is the biggest screw-up of
> all, they could have been MSFT.
Wow ... sounds like you got burned by AAPL also? Gosh, you really are an angry person. Since my cousin is there still ... I guess that he has been with them through a large number of learning experiences ... have you?
> Your cousin is counter to the common perception, and
> offers not alternative. Sounds like he is not very in
> tune to me. What does he offer for the question?
Hmmm ... so already, without even knowing someone, you once again begin the hateful, angry insults and accusations. I'm sure that my cousin will forgive you, and that he also feels sorry for you and your poor financial judgement. But please ... make *me* the target of your hate and anger ... don't drag others into this. If you really want to take it out on someone, then please use me.
I have not received a reply to my mail yet ... I'll let you know when he replies ... you see, just like you I am more than willing to admit my errors. I'm glad that we can both be capable of this.
> 9. Yes cell phones are eating XYBR lunch.......not much
> use for MA4 if you got what you need on your phone. By
> the time XYBR is in consmer space with the grand PC
> design. These small faster, more application specific
> hardware will render moot the XYBR launch into consumer
> space. Too little too late.
Hmmmm ... now you seem to keep flipping back and forth. I thought that in paragraph #5 above we both agreed on our axiom:
** "A PDA is *not* going to match the utility of a generic
** PC platform"
Now, you seem to through out some sort of "fluff" comment for no reason other than to "vent" more of your anger and hatred. I can only guess that you started to realize how supportive of XYBR you really are, and then looked over at the stack of bills that you have and came back to realize the error in your ways ... ;-)
> 10. Strong encription to your DSL enable home base PC
> solution. Privacy, cheap storage, backed up. Devices are
> becoming more like termaials every day.
So we both agree that there is value in the full blown PC, and that people will be buying them. And so again, we agree that when people have the choice of a PC that has to sit on their desk, or one which can go with them, they will choose the more mobile solution.
As for "[d]evices are becoming more like termaials every day" I believe that we need to examine this and reason out *why* this is the case. It has happened over and over in this industry ... people want functionality ... the service platform is too large or costly to put anywhere ... so we "remote display" to the central system ... prices and sizes fall, and computers replace terminals. This cycle is a well known, and often repeated cycle ...
> 11. I do not believe advertising is going to enable
> mobile PC free ISPs
Oh ... so you agree then that we have to include the costs of the back-end services in our "consumer pricing" comparison! Thanks! I'll look forward to your updated list which has these costs taken into account ...
> 12. If you call sales of about 5 Million and losts of
> about 42 MILLION over THREE (3) Years successfully
> capturing the Industrial Market........well you can have
> that. Talk about a floundering business model and
> product.
I'm not sure that I've ever referred to any financial situations, or sales. You see, I'm not caught up in needing a lot of "short-term" gains or revenues. Again, as I have stated in the past - I am a LONG - you see, I have found that it is a very reliable way to make money in the long term ... bet on inevitable companies and trends which are well researched. I *know* that being a short is a very difficult task which requires a lot of time, and can be frustrating. I simply wait long and watch my money grow.
I will state again that Xybernaut is the only publicly traded company that I have located to invest in this market. I believe that they are going to be successful, or purchased for their expertise ... and as a long on the stock, I am content that I will do just fine in either case.
> Scott your vision of the future does not stand in the way
> of XYBR failed business model from destroying the
> company.
Again ... I guess that we will return to this permanent archive of posts one day, and we will not have to argue about who is wrong and who is right! I can't wait to see the eyes of our children as they read through our posts with pride ...
> They believe and auditors going (or was it growing)
> concern is nothing.
I think you are back your repetitive posts. I know that maybe you have some short-term memory loss, but you have stated this before. I'm not sure that saying it over and over will help ... we understand your concerns and intentions.
> Vaporware
Are you referring to your own posts?
A wonderful close to our discussion! I am so looking forward to your response so that we can continue our wonderful discussion of issues. I am so glad that you have started to come around, and that you have been learning so much. It makes things so much more entertaining when the two parties of a discussion can actually communicate on more equal terms.
I truly enjoy this ... and I anxiously await your reply so that we can continue. I'm sure that people here on the thread are appreciating the fact that we are both providing them with such a wealth of information and perspective. This *is* what the Internet is all about ...
Please, have a wonderful day!
Scott C. Lemon
(P.S. I wanted to suggest that Silicon Investor has a spell check feature that you might want to use. It won't help you with your gramatical problems, but it will help with the spelling problems that you are having. And as an expert at using a browser, you should be able to see that the "red" words, when previewing a post, indicate a potential spelling error. I don't actually think that this "browser-based" spelling solution is as easy to use as a standard application, but I know that you feel otherwise ... so I just can't figure out why you don't use it. Could it be that your argument about browser-based applications is flawed?) |
