Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kevin Podsiadlik who wrote (166702)	3/1/2014 12:36:07 AM
From: Heywood40	1 Recommendation Recommended By Zen Dollar Round Respond to of 213172

About GOOG's stock price, I've explained to him that GOOG is a nice little 12 bagger, and people who have owned it since IPO should look forward to when it gets to $7,500, as it will then have matched what my APPL has done for me since I bought it. I don't know why he keeps thinking GOOG at 12X is such a big deal.

To: Kevin Podsiadlik who wrote (166702)	3/1/2014 1:09:05 AM
From: Ryan Bartholomew	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213172

By the basic reasoning above, Apple shouldn't bother with an iWatch because the market for that was spoiled by Samsung's lame attempt at one last year. I don't think anyone would suggest that. Apple clearly took the existing concept and improved upon it vastly, then marketed it to their much broader user base. This gave them a reason to continue asking a premium - there weren't many alternatives for people who liked that feature. The iWatch may turn out differently, as there are several competitors already out there, and the latest announcement is for a couple products that already accomplish the goal of refined presentation and functionality. Not that Apple can't improve upon it, but it's going to be much more of a challenge than it was to improve upon the Atrix. Also, any fingerprint scanner is vulnerable if the hackers get access to your fingerprints. That article was like saying a computer is vulnerable because it can be hacked if someone steals your passwords. Not exactly. There are degrees of vulnerability. I have some people looking into how feasible hacks are for various scanning technologies and devices, and the one mentioned in that article isn't a joke. To continue your analogy, there's a difference between getting access to someone's passwords for a device that can be remote-wiped, requires a secondary key, etc., and for a device that lacks additional protections.