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: Moonray who wrote (190396)	5/11/2016 12:52:53 PM
From: Intelim	Respond to of 213177

Not surprised at all. I'd rather iOS stays as it is than turn into Android and flood the markets.

To: Moonray who wrote (190396)	5/11/2016 2:28:42 PM
From: yofal	Respond to of 213177

Android operating system now make up 65.5 percent of the U.S. market, up 7.3 percent from the same time a year ago Isn't 7.3% more of nothing, still nothing?

To: Moonray who wrote (190396)	5/11/2016 2:56:07 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	3 Recommendations Recommended By david1951 HerbVic JakeStraw Respond to of 213177

Many Android based smartphones with features similar to the iPhone 6 and 6s are available on world markets at much cheaper prices. This is due in part to the fact that Qualcomm and some other chip suppliers offer a combined system on chip that includes both the modem and the processor. Apple designs its own processor and relies (so far) on modem chips supplied by Qualcomm. Two separate chips are neither price competitive, nor do they use as little power as a combined system on chip. This is going to give Apple some future problems unless they start using combined chips. The alternative, of course, is to do what they've been doing and thus risk lowering their profit margins, which are already the highest in the industry. My Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge costs no more than the iPhone 6s, but it performs most tasks better. I added 64 GB flash memory in the slot provided by Samsung, at a cost of $22, giving me a phone considerably less expensive than the 6s with less built-in memory. Samsung phones aren't exactly low cost, but my point is, why would someone willing to use Android phones, some of which cost less than half the price of a 6s, want to pay more? More broadly speaking, this is an example of what I have previously called the Pierce-Arrow syndrome. Pierce-Arrow, back in the 1920s, was considered absolutely the best luxury car available anywhere. They outsold Cadillac. If you wanted a Pierce-Arrow, you paid what the dealer charged; no price negotiations. The dealers would tell you that even if you didn't like the price, you'd be back because their car was better than anyone else's. Oh, did I mention that Pierce-Arrow went out of business about 1936? Art