but continued the slide from q4 '13 in total sales worldwide. at least according to kantar. mr. miller uses their numbers but leaves out the generic details to focus on the exceptions.
i will be interested to see the sales numbers, and corresponding margins, for the x-phones.
given recent cuts in prices by both google and amazon for cloud services azure may need to be even further undervalued if it can't offer some premium service for which customers will pay.
ah, you've been tracking my [attempted] discussion with the faux-subcontinental(s) i see.
my point -is- that you don't understand. (-;
thus you reassert it for me.
if/while you ponder that: sure, apple -can- sell devices at cost! X-D
posit the likelihood of that. ∅
and msft -might- reach the break even point on phones. some day. at this point they are subsidizing their losses on phones with revenue from other divisions ; even the android extortion money doesn't cover all of that deficit. losses will go up once they take over d+s, pushing the time-to-profit horizon further out.
as to making money off of the eco-systems, check this article:
"App store fees, percentages, and payouts: What developers need to know"
wphone sales were down in q4 '13 and according to kantar have continued to slide since then. combined with even poorer sales of both arm and intel tablets this doesn't make it look like the eco-system profits are going to save the day for msft in mobile any time soon. lucky they can rely on o.s. and office sales for now. oh, wait! ∑
google's app store runs on a similar basis to apple's and msft's and has more than triple the share of the device market that apple does. however msft is third. (-; it still has far fewer apps and sales than the j2me app stores, which generally get left out of such discussions. (-;
so how come only apple and msft can make money on their eco-systems?
partial/fragmentary ideas will do here, but there is no substitute for numbers.
smoke 'em if ya got 'em. ∅∑♿
dalvik is not java.
a.r.t. is coming.
android security could be better though. however it's still not as bad as w7/8. any thoughts on how w9 can improve on that?
like the fujitsu f-07c phone? (-;
full w7 phone ; dual booted symbian and w7.
more like they will sell 9 of them.
and of course the registry. a crutch so fragile that when it crumbles people frequently throw away a perfectly good computer and then buy a new one -- in order to be able to use the o.s. that has that defect.
the less charitable might ask if he speaks english.
regardless of opinions on his orthography he usually manages to get his message across and whether you judge his style to be creative or defective he is an avid contributor and would be missed.
for one thing, not every trade goes through a market maker. just trades where there is no readily available corresponding buyer/seller for the offered transaction. so attributing all the a.h. volume to them is [negative] wishful thinking at best.
for another, if market makers delay trades then they aren't making a market. so violating their charter probably won't last very long as a practice.
it seems they can't survive without it.
now if only they would pay for it.
oh, wait, that's what's coming!!! X-D
so, to recap:
you need 4 i.d.s in order to say things that are so vague as to have virtually no meaning so that when you are critiqued you can then fail to defend your lack of acumen by being insulting with each of those 4 pseudo-personalities. ☑
this is old news and has been pointed out to you several times already. ♼
about the only dissembling you haven't tried when you get caught and nailed for bloviating is the appeal to patriotism. as the saying goes, this may prove to be your last refuge. ⛢
so be sure to use that in your future non-responses. ♿
as you confuse ad hominem with debate and repetition with clarification, thus in the future i will confine myself to laying out the defects in your originations as your follow-ups are invariable not worthy of a response.
happy hand waving! (-;
it looks like the word formed by a 'w', two 'o's, a 'p' and an 's' is interpreted as a censorable word.
upon a few minutes consideration --
1: the accuracy with which one can model each of the entities as well as discovering/estimating the limits of the interactions among the group of entities would have to be modelable to a degree that could also allow the resulting effects to fall within predictable limits. so, energy minimization might fit businesses and seasoned professional individuals more closely than less constrained, i.e. emotional or otherwise impelled entities.
2: sounds like a possible method. observing the the displayed characteristics of its behaviors and performances would require very objective methods so that non-performance-related inferences don't skew the model defining process.
3: yes, as with any problem the fewer parameters the better for constructing the initial model. after that the dynamics of the interactions of the entities will determine how many parameters need to be added. occam says that a parametric explosion will most likely lead to enhanced inaccuracy. (-;
but not every set of interactions can be well described by a compactly constrained set of factors. calculus may offer good examples of how to make useful initial estimates. then the balance between limiting and expanding parameters begins.
what would out chroming chrome consist in?
if i.e. only survives as a cloud access tool than that might be a good thing as long as you have secured your connection against man-in-the-middle attacks and such like.
otherwise it should just continue its slow fade back into the ether from which it emerged. unloved and unregretted once it is finally gone.
good to hear!
i'll keep watching the chart, reading the news and offering my thoughts (and/or thought fragments) and if msft keeps doing as well for the next dozen years as it has been for the last dozen years i'll be quite surprised.
glad that you are up on your investment, especially so much on a stock that has only gone up 40% in the last few years. good work!
but making money on flawed products isn't funny. it's unethical. but as long as you like making money off of it go right ahead.
for me the bottom line isn't blathering on about taking advantage of market conditions to exploit them for money. it's about examining how things operate and what the end results are.
failing to secure a product, thus enabling criminal gangs to steal from corporations and consumers and only caring if it impacts profits is not on my list of things to support.
so not profiting from it doesn't bother me in the least. i'm getting over being a little surprised that you have been consistently unable to see this in my writings and keep imagining that i will change and take part in it because there might be some money to be made. good luck with that. (-;