TequilaBoobs
Nov 25, 09:19 PM
i hope apple comes out with a shoe phone, something the pink panther or inspector gadget would use.
tsadi
Mar 31, 04:27 AM
I reckon Lion will be the last of cat names used for OS X.
They can't really call the next one Ocelot, for example.
Maybe they'll just call the next release Cat? Cat5? Meow? LOLcat?
Oblig LOLcat:
http://whyevolutionistrue.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/lion-lolcat.jpg
They can't really call the next one Ocelot, for example.
Maybe they'll just call the next release Cat? Cat5? Meow? LOLcat?
Oblig LOLcat:
http://whyevolutionistrue.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/lion-lolcat.jpg
SandynJosh
Apr 26, 03:21 PM
But if Apple had gotten on board with Verizon a year earlier, those numbers would probably be reversed.
That extra year that Apple sat on their ass with AT&T was the crucial year that allowed android to gain traction and mindshare.
Neither your or I know what contract details with AT&T prevented Apple from opening up Verizon earlier than they did, so claiming Apple "sat on their ass" is just your silly opinion.
Once the 'greatly anticipated' Verizon launch finally did come, it was met with a large chorus of "who cares?" from the crowd - the crowd that had gotten their droid phone 6 months earlier.
Again you make a wild-assed leap of logic. I, like many Verizon users, met the news that the iPhone was available on my favorite carrier with, "Oh dam, I'm locked into a two-year contract with a ****** Android Incredible."
Your basic point that Apple needed to open up the iPhone to more U.S. carriers to avoid market share loss is correct and generally regarded as such by most analysts. However, from the launch of the first iPhone, Apple has struggled to meet the accelerating demand for its products, so adding more U.S. carriers may have not been as smart as us outside the company might second-guess.
That extra year that Apple sat on their ass with AT&T was the crucial year that allowed android to gain traction and mindshare.
Neither your or I know what contract details with AT&T prevented Apple from opening up Verizon earlier than they did, so claiming Apple "sat on their ass" is just your silly opinion.
Once the 'greatly anticipated' Verizon launch finally did come, it was met with a large chorus of "who cares?" from the crowd - the crowd that had gotten their droid phone 6 months earlier.
Again you make a wild-assed leap of logic. I, like many Verizon users, met the news that the iPhone was available on my favorite carrier with, "Oh dam, I'm locked into a two-year contract with a ****** Android Incredible."
Your basic point that Apple needed to open up the iPhone to more U.S. carriers to avoid market share loss is correct and generally regarded as such by most analysts. However, from the launch of the first iPhone, Apple has struggled to meet the accelerating demand for its products, so adding more U.S. carriers may have not been as smart as us outside the company might second-guess.
pizzach
Apr 7, 07:58 PM
People don't seem to understand what manufacturing capacity means. Probably because a lot of the people on Mac Rumors don't know how to think with their heads. Apple secured most of the manufacuring capacity of the plants because they are having problems FILLING THEIR OWN ORDERS. This has nothing to do with monopoly cr@p and everything to do with a smart business move of a trailblazer. Only the followers are being burned by this because thy are trying to make the '3rd party iPads'. Not make their own product.
Mechcozmo
Nov 22, 01:34 AM
blah blah blah Our hardware is incredibly expensive for what you can do with it blah blah blah Our software is older than XP blah blah blah blah Our new software is more delayed than Vista blah blah blah Our products kicked the Newton's arse a decade ago blah blah blah Apple can't beat the clear market leader blah blah blah
I've been waiting for Palm OS 6 to come out for just about five years now. I'm not buying a new Palm... I'll just stick to my b0rked Tungsten|T. Programmed life expectancy, ha! But damn, that Soylent Green is tasty!
I've been waiting for Palm OS 6 to come out for just about five years now. I'm not buying a new Palm... I'll just stick to my b0rked Tungsten|T. Programmed life expectancy, ha! But damn, that Soylent Green is tasty!
mikelegacy
Apr 5, 08:55 PM
It's a terrible theme anyways. Who cares.
digitalbiker
Aug 4, 10:10 PM
OK, being an Australian, and blissfully ignorant to the ways of the American, when is Thanksgiving? Before or after Paris?
I say new iPods at Paris, and maybe some software. It would be great if all Macs were Core 2 Generation before the Paris Expo.
After Paris. Nov. 23, 2006 to be exact. Too bad you Aussies don't celebrate Thanksgiving. It is all about eating, drinking and watching football.
I say new iPods at Paris, and maybe some software. It would be great if all Macs were Core 2 Generation before the Paris Expo.
After Paris. Nov. 23, 2006 to be exact. Too bad you Aussies don't celebrate Thanksgiving. It is all about eating, drinking and watching football.
Grokgod
Aug 7, 09:16 PM
Yea the 4x512 does suck, there wasnt even an option to put 2x1 gigers.
Weird!
But I figure that I will get a 4 giger kit, slap that in and revel in my 6 gigs.
A personal best.
oh , how sad my life has become when the acquisition of ram beyond the past has replaced my once formidable tales of conquest and achievement.
I make myself sick,:D but why am i smiling?
Cause its 6 gigs man, that should scream!:p
Weird!
But I figure that I will get a 4 giger kit, slap that in and revel in my 6 gigs.
A personal best.
oh , how sad my life has become when the acquisition of ram beyond the past has replaced my once formidable tales of conquest and achievement.
I make myself sick,:D but why am i smiling?
Cause its 6 gigs man, that should scream!:p
425
Mar 27, 03:47 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
I just forked over 750 dollars for an ipad 2 and ipad 3 is coming out? Ouch!!! I already want it.
No. I wish this stupid rumor would die. I guarantee you the iPad 3 does not arrive until 2012. Most likely March
I just forked over 750 dollars for an ipad 2 and ipad 3 is coming out? Ouch!!! I already want it.
No. I wish this stupid rumor would die. I guarantee you the iPad 3 does not arrive until 2012. Most likely March
mmoosa
Mar 28, 09:43 AM
That's just getting complacent in my opinion, people like myself like changing phones yearly, no new iPhone means no return business, I'll try something else instead, bad move if true.
bella92108
Apr 5, 02:05 PM
2010 - Wrong. Mobile OS implies iOS, and all the stats ignore the iPad and iPod Touch. Apple is behind Android only in mobile phone side, and not by much when looking at a world view.
2011 - I know a number of people who are in that 10% of jailbreakers, and they would still stick with Apple even if it was closed off. They enjoy the tinkering, but understand that they are hacking into their devices via exploits that Apple has a responsibility to close from a security standpoint.
2012 - Doubtful. Windows Mobile share of the market is still dropping even with WP7. Microsoft is likely to mismanage WP7 just like their other products. WebOS? It's practically dead right now, and would take a lot for it to approach anywhere near iOS next year.
Apple is still very much focused on the consumer. Yes, they control their environment well, but your particular complaint is a no win situation for them. They could ignore jailbreaking, leaving security exploits in the OS, and people would bash them for poor security. But if they close those exploits, people complain their freedom is being taken away, or being attacked. Yes, Apple could allow more customization, and other features jailbreaking brings. But it would require engineering time, and that time is currently being spent on trying to keep the platform advancing to stay competitive. It's all about priorities, and I think we all here can agree a better notification system and other nagging iOS issues are much higher on the list then letting people skin the screen with Scion icons.
Yeah and that's what the loyalists said in the 80's, and there's less than 10% of us in the market now. You talk about security, but it's not a security threat to have a jailbroken user... oh wait, unless by security you're talking about someone picking up my phone and changing my home screen to 16 icon view instead of 12 that apple limits me too... oh the humanity. Call the pentagon, we have a breach... user is trying to put more icons on his screen than apple wants. Wake the president.
2011 - I know a number of people who are in that 10% of jailbreakers, and they would still stick with Apple even if it was closed off. They enjoy the tinkering, but understand that they are hacking into their devices via exploits that Apple has a responsibility to close from a security standpoint.
2012 - Doubtful. Windows Mobile share of the market is still dropping even with WP7. Microsoft is likely to mismanage WP7 just like their other products. WebOS? It's practically dead right now, and would take a lot for it to approach anywhere near iOS next year.
Apple is still very much focused on the consumer. Yes, they control their environment well, but your particular complaint is a no win situation for them. They could ignore jailbreaking, leaving security exploits in the OS, and people would bash them for poor security. But if they close those exploits, people complain their freedom is being taken away, or being attacked. Yes, Apple could allow more customization, and other features jailbreaking brings. But it would require engineering time, and that time is currently being spent on trying to keep the platform advancing to stay competitive. It's all about priorities, and I think we all here can agree a better notification system and other nagging iOS issues are much higher on the list then letting people skin the screen with Scion icons.
Yeah and that's what the loyalists said in the 80's, and there's less than 10% of us in the market now. You talk about security, but it's not a security threat to have a jailbroken user... oh wait, unless by security you're talking about someone picking up my phone and changing my home screen to 16 icon view instead of 12 that apple limits me too... oh the humanity. Call the pentagon, we have a breach... user is trying to put more icons on his screen than apple wants. Wake the president.
VenusianSky
Nov 3, 09:49 AM
I got mine yesterday and LOVE it. Navigon app + TomTom car kit = win.
So does the Navigon app actually uses the Tom Tom's GPS chip, or is the Tom Tom just a window mount when used with another navigation app? I would like to know this.
So does the Navigon app actually uses the Tom Tom's GPS chip, or is the Tom Tom just a window mount when used with another navigation app? I would like to know this.
wclyffe
Jan 22, 03:02 PM
Let me know how loud the volume is during a call conversation. If it is significantly louder than the TomTom, I may jump ship and get the Megellan unit.
So hear's my initial sense of the Magellan kit. I like it better than the TomTom kit for two simple reasons..first, it is rock solid when I drive around no matter how bumpy the road is. Instead of the tiny clicks on the TT, it has simple detents at 12-3-6-9 and it locks in solid. Second, is the fact that I can just put my iPhone in with the case on makes it far more convenient. I didn't think this would be such a big deal, but in fact I'm in and out of the car a lot so its a significant benefit. The speaker is loud and clear, but I don't think its louder than the TomTom...about the same.
I'll let you know more as I use it for awhile!
I just ran into this review today so I thought I'd add it in for anyone interested...
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/01/22/review-on-the-road-with-the-magellan-premium-car-kit/
So hear's my initial sense of the Magellan kit. I like it better than the TomTom kit for two simple reasons..first, it is rock solid when I drive around no matter how bumpy the road is. Instead of the tiny clicks on the TT, it has simple detents at 12-3-6-9 and it locks in solid. Second, is the fact that I can just put my iPhone in with the case on makes it far more convenient. I didn't think this would be such a big deal, but in fact I'm in and out of the car a lot so its a significant benefit. The speaker is loud and clear, but I don't think its louder than the TomTom...about the same.
I'll let you know more as I use it for awhile!
I just ran into this review today so I thought I'd add it in for anyone interested...
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/01/22/review-on-the-road-with-the-magellan-premium-car-kit/
adbe
Apr 5, 02:17 PM
Companies have a right then to make money on it and Apple cannot actively try to cut off the ability of another company to make money off the Iphone legally, its called restraint of trade, a federal law.
Yes they can. There is no protection under law for making money off the ineptitude of other companies. Apple is entitled, and expected to fix bugs. When those bugs get fixed, an avenue for jail breaking gets closed. Companies that see their revenue stream dry up are just screwed. That's life.
Jail breaking happens because Apple screwed the pooch on security. That's all.
Yes they can. There is no protection under law for making money off the ineptitude of other companies. Apple is entitled, and expected to fix bugs. When those bugs get fixed, an avenue for jail breaking gets closed. Companies that see their revenue stream dry up are just screwed. That's life.
Jail breaking happens because Apple screwed the pooch on security. That's all.
RalfTheDog
Apr 23, 05:18 PM
Wish Apple did something towards resolution independence and not make images bigger and bigger. :confused:
Resolution independence will not stop images from getting bigger. Unless you are dealing with vector art, scaling an image up will decrease quality. Resolution independence will be a function of taking the biggest image that might be used and scaling it down.
Even with vector art, you lose some image quality with scaling. You can't create new detail.
Resolution independence will not stop images from getting bigger. Unless you are dealing with vector art, scaling an image up will decrease quality. Resolution independence will be a function of taking the biggest image that might be used and scaling it down.
Even with vector art, you lose some image quality with scaling. You can't create new detail.
Elijahg
Apr 23, 06:45 PM
Instead of pixel based images that are just bigger, why not simply ship vector based icons/wallpapers ?
KDE supported SVG as a format for wallpapers and icons something like 10 years ago... That way, it doesn't matter what the display resolution is, the icon always looks sharp and non-pixelated.
I'd rather Apple work on making SVG the standard graphics format for graphics ressources than just bumping up the pixel count (and the file size!).
Heck, if they don't like SVG (which is just a bunch of XML), they could go with one of the other vector based image formats or come up with one of their own.
Translating a photo to a vector based format would be completely pointless and would end up massive. Take for example the Snow Leopard Prowl JPEG. It's 1.2MB, and converting to BMP or TIFF (both describe each pixel individually, i.e. lossless) makes it 12mb, 10 times the size. Converting it to the much less efficient SVG, makes it insanely massive; 225mb or 187.5 times bigger to be exact.
Computer generated imagery can be converted to a vector format more efficiently, as long as the source is available. The computer knows that for example, there is a gradient starting at X,Y and ending at X,Y with colour RGB at the start, and colour RGB at the end. Thus eliminating the need to keep detail about each pixel individually. This is great for things such as icons and certain web images, but for images with lots of detail, it quickly becomes much less efficient than even the highest quality JPEG. For real photos, it's pointless to vectorize. You'd just end up pixellating the image when scaled over it's original size anyway. So in other words, it's unlikely we'll see vector graphics for most icons and most certainly not for desktop backgrounds.
I agree with others about Apple needing to beef up the GPUs if they want retina displays in their Macs. They always seem to put last-generation cards into them... I'm sure it wouldn't keep them away from iOS development for [i]too[/] long to add the latest, even as BTO. Valve has really helped gaming on the Mac, bringing great new releases like Left 4 Dead 2 and Portal 2 at the same time as Windows. At least it seems Apple have had a kick up their ass from Valve pointing out the inefficiencies in OpenGL. Maybe that's what's made them hire a few gaming-type developers...? C'mon Apple!
KDE supported SVG as a format for wallpapers and icons something like 10 years ago... That way, it doesn't matter what the display resolution is, the icon always looks sharp and non-pixelated.
I'd rather Apple work on making SVG the standard graphics format for graphics ressources than just bumping up the pixel count (and the file size!).
Heck, if they don't like SVG (which is just a bunch of XML), they could go with one of the other vector based image formats or come up with one of their own.
Translating a photo to a vector based format would be completely pointless and would end up massive. Take for example the Snow Leopard Prowl JPEG. It's 1.2MB, and converting to BMP or TIFF (both describe each pixel individually, i.e. lossless) makes it 12mb, 10 times the size. Converting it to the much less efficient SVG, makes it insanely massive; 225mb or 187.5 times bigger to be exact.
Computer generated imagery can be converted to a vector format more efficiently, as long as the source is available. The computer knows that for example, there is a gradient starting at X,Y and ending at X,Y with colour RGB at the start, and colour RGB at the end. Thus eliminating the need to keep detail about each pixel individually. This is great for things such as icons and certain web images, but for images with lots of detail, it quickly becomes much less efficient than even the highest quality JPEG. For real photos, it's pointless to vectorize. You'd just end up pixellating the image when scaled over it's original size anyway. So in other words, it's unlikely we'll see vector graphics for most icons and most certainly not for desktop backgrounds.
I agree with others about Apple needing to beef up the GPUs if they want retina displays in their Macs. They always seem to put last-generation cards into them... I'm sure it wouldn't keep them away from iOS development for [i]too[/] long to add the latest, even as BTO. Valve has really helped gaming on the Mac, bringing great new releases like Left 4 Dead 2 and Portal 2 at the same time as Windows. At least it seems Apple have had a kick up their ass from Valve pointing out the inefficiencies in OpenGL. Maybe that's what's made them hire a few gaming-type developers...? C'mon Apple!
GFLPraxis
Aug 11, 10:40 AM
This is good news for future Macbook owners. I'm interested in when the iMac will get Conroe. A friend of mine is switching from Windows and wants the iMac but is waiting for Conroe in the iMac. I only hope they go with the desktop processor in the iMac and not Merom since he's not interested in the mobile processor in his desktop.
Well, hopefully the iMac will be updated sooner than the portables. Conroe is out and available in quantities now where as Merom won't be as available in quantities until the end of this month.
Same here. I want a new iMac but I don't want to miss the Get A Free iPod With a New Mac deal.
Well, hopefully the iMac will be updated sooner than the portables. Conroe is out and available in quantities now where as Merom won't be as available in quantities until the end of this month.
Same here. I want a new iMac but I don't want to miss the Get A Free iPod With a New Mac deal.
BRLawyer
Nov 25, 12:52 PM
But the funniest thing will be when Apple introduces iPhone and achieves a success similar to that of the iPod...fanboys will come in droves to say that phone X has "FM tuners" or phone Y has "GPS blabla", without understanding that it's not the feature set that makes a winner, but integration AND simplicity...on verra!
p.s.: and yep...without carrier agreements, no chance for a good story...most people get new phones WITH subscriptions that reduce such cell phone prices a lot...period.
p.s.: and yep...without carrier agreements, no chance for a good story...most people get new phones WITH subscriptions that reduce such cell phone prices a lot...period.
maclaptop
May 4, 09:30 PM
Why is everyone getting so bent out of shape so early? First off, this is hear say and not officially stated by Apple yet. If that time comes, I'm sure there will be the option of a physical disk, or some way to make a bootable install disk using disk utility. I mean this thing is already 9 pages long of people flipping out that OMG!!! ITS A DOWNLOAD!!! Guess what? Microsoft offers windows as a download, and guess what? You can burn it to a physical disk.. I can't believe so many people are already jumping the gun on a RUMOR. It's a RUMOR until Apple officially announces it...
Perhaps its people realizing that the marriage of iOS & OS X signals a degree of uncertainty, mistrust, or just plain doubt based on an unpredictable Apple. Or not.
Maybe its those in the crowd who have the technical comprehension, to cause them to question Apple's true intentions.
Then again it could be that many are sensing a new less interesting era of appliance like simplicity.
"Look ma, even grandma Evelyn can use this".
Perhaps its people realizing that the marriage of iOS & OS X signals a degree of uncertainty, mistrust, or just plain doubt based on an unpredictable Apple. Or not.
Maybe its those in the crowd who have the technical comprehension, to cause them to question Apple's true intentions.
Then again it could be that many are sensing a new less interesting era of appliance like simplicity.
"Look ma, even grandma Evelyn can use this".
bruinsrme
Apr 9, 06:20 PM
The official Mac answer is:
That's great lol
That's great lol
ezekielrage_99
Jul 23, 10:12 PM
Why not? Conroe will have availability by WWDC, IIRC, and Merom won't be far behind- they could announce a MBP with Merom, shipping in two weeks after WWDC.
MBP with Merom, iMac with Conroe, Mac Pro's with either Conroe and a Woodcrest quad or all Woodcrest, MacBook's with Merom or Yonah w/price drop, and Mac Mini price drop back to $499.
It sounds very plausible plus didn't Apple say with the introduction of Intel Processers there would be more hardware updates through the year?
Even so I'm up for the entire line update :D :cool:
MBP with Merom, iMac with Conroe, Mac Pro's with either Conroe and a Woodcrest quad or all Woodcrest, MacBook's with Merom or Yonah w/price drop, and Mac Mini price drop back to $499.
It sounds very plausible plus didn't Apple say with the introduction of Intel Processers there would be more hardware updates through the year?
Even so I'm up for the entire line update :D :cool:
mikeapple
Mar 26, 10:32 PM
Releasing iPhone 5 with iOS4 would be a total fail... If this is true, iPhone 5 could possibly be launched in the fall as well.
In my Opinion iOS5 is the most important upgrade over the hardware of the iPhone and the iPad... The software is in MUCH need for an upgrade. Nomatter how good the iPhone 5 hardware is, giving it iOS4 will make it seem outdated
In my Opinion iOS5 is the most important upgrade over the hardware of the iPhone and the iPad... The software is in MUCH need for an upgrade. Nomatter how good the iPhone 5 hardware is, giving it iOS4 will make it seem outdated
Yamcha
May 4, 03:30 PM
What I don't understand is even if it's distributed through the Mac App Store, does Apple expect us to burn it on dvd or make a bootable usb?
I don't know if every mac user will even be able to do that, this may work for those looking to upgrade, but a fresh install will require dvd/usb..
I don't know if every mac user will even be able to do that, this may work for those looking to upgrade, but a fresh install will require dvd/usb..
peharri
Nov 25, 09:06 PM
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
0 comments:
Post a Comment