Anyone over 40 knows the only thing that is a constant is change and they adapt (after they quit whining and moaning) and then discover its no big deal.
I've run stuff in the Windows 8 version from Desktop mode, I just cant get over how many folks listened to other people and never bothered to give 15 minutes to come up to speed on how to use it.
When the analysts and the media get behind something, it isnt going to take 20, years, 20 months, 20 weeks, 20 days, it could happen within hours and defy any logic that pertains to fundamental or technical analysis. The price movement could come of nowhere like a thief in the night and you would be scratching your head "What did I miss?"
Over the next 3 years due to cloud. I dont think its going to take 3 years myself, and at one time I did post that I felt that there would be a point that there would be a price parity between Microsoft and Apple. Barron posted the opinion on Microsoft doubling this morning.
Climatic changes are cyclical in nature and are as rock steady as the earth revolving around the sun, the earth rotating on its axis, and the shift in the earth's axis as to make the 4 seasons to occur. The universe and our solar system has been in existence billions of years yet on the timescale of man, man has only existed but a brief time. It is not climatic change that we need to worry about, it is the minority control by mankind over the majority of mankind is what we need to worry about. When your food supply is tainted with substances that allow for your thought patterns to be shaped at will and will make you believe lies, and to make you believe that you can misconceive common sense, well, that is the climate change that you need to be worried about. When the change from "of the people, by the people, and for the people" has changed to "of the few, by the few, and for the few", the climate changed and you were not even aware that the change occurred because it happened transparently.
So what, I banked over $17K last month and I did it on my own, why should anyone want to restrict how much they make by depending on something that is less capable than themselves?
I talked to someone that came from India on an H1B visa and he said that he could not wait until his H1B visa expired so that he could go back to India. I asked him why. He said it was because at first it seemed life a good deal, the reality was that he was locked in at a certain price in the US for the duration of his H1B visa duration and was not getting pay raises here. He said he could go back to India and easily get another job and make a lot more money. He said he was strapped with his purchasing power in the US. So therein lies the problem with H1B visas, companies should be forced to pay the going US rate for the workers for the US jobs they are being hired into. If a US worker were making a $100K per year, the company bring in an H1B visa work should be forced to pay that work $100K, pay the relocation expenses of that worker, ensure the H1B visa workers got pay raises, in essence, making it much more expensive to bring in H1B visa workers. Companies should be forced into not being able to reclassify job descriptions so they can claim it was a position that did not exist in the company before yet the H1B visa worker winds up do the same job as a US worker that was let go. Think if you made it expensive to bring in H1B visa workers, you would see these desire to bring them in evaporate.
Think it comes down to not that jobs have been outsourced, but rather the purchasing power disparity that people have in other countries. US companies may pay a significantly lower wage for an outsourced job to another country, but if the lower wage results in a significant increase in purchasing power in the foreign country, then the real issue becomes addressing the purchasing disparity on a global scale so that parity in purchasing power is addressed. Why should someone in India that both husband and wife make there, allow them to significantly improve their qualities of lives over the general population in that country, yet there has never been a reverse look at converting their purchasing power back to the US. I happen to know a couple that got jobs from a US company, they make lower salaries, yet their purchasing power on what we consider are lower wages, allows them to own a 7,000 square foot home (they bought if after they went to work for the same company), a full time maid, a full time cook, they take care of all expenses for their parents, and still have enough money to buy the stuff that increases their quality of life. If you convert that back to US purchasing power, exactly how much would it cost for US workers to afford a 7,000 square foot home, employ a full time cook, employ a full time maid, pay all expenses for their parents, and have enough money left over to buy stuff that will increase the quality of life in the US?
All smartphones regardless of which vendor all do the same tasks. The only real difference as far as what can be done has to do more with what apps are available for each device that has a different OS. Obviously you need to have an equivalent amount of CPU, memory, and storage on a given device to run the various apps, but in terms of what you can do, they are pretty much the same. There will be some folks that are die-hard iOS fans, some are die-hard Android fans, and others that are die-hard Windows fans. Associating yourself to an operating system is a bit misplaced, its not about the OS on any given device, but rather the software that you have been accustomed to running which is what if coming. The ability to run application software that was once exclusive to a Windows OS, more and more this application software is being ported to run on iOS and Android devices. That is where Microsoft is positioning itself. When is the last time you heard of Apple releasing an Apple app that will run on Android or Windows? When is the last time you hear of the vendors that produce Android phones releasing software that runs on iOS or Windows devices? Those companies that choose to have applications that run centric to its OS will find itself as a significant disadvantage going forward. It's software that connects the world on the devices over the telecommunications networks, the company that has the software that will run on any smart device on those networks is the one that is shaping the future, and that is Microsoft hands down. The other are now positioned to have to play catch up and that is not something that can be addressed overnight. The market can be saturated with physical devices, from a software perspective it is not.
I picked up another 1K shares this morning at $45.1846 at 09:32 this morning. Since I concentrating on snagging the equivalent of what Microsoft pays on the quarterly dividend, put in a limit order to sell that lot at $45.51, went and took a whiz. At 9:36, before I even got back, it was taken out. Still have the other sell limit order in on the 1K lot I bought at $45.38, the sell limit is for $45.70, looks like that might be taken out this morning too. What a dilemma, as of late having trouble staying in Microsoft. It ain't sexy, but pretty consistent.
They di, they just don't want Elizabeth Warren in the race.
How unfortunate for you that you don't know that one can choose to work from either the desktop or use the tiles under Windows 8. They are both there. If you want to use the desktop, its there, if you want to use the tiles, its there.
Sent from my Lumia 928 smartphone and I am not tied to a laptop.
Right now, the field is crowded and a lot of rhetoric can be thrown around at this point.
It will be a premium Lumia device that Microsoft will introduce that will take the wind out of Apple, there are many different configuration that it could take, Apple will be blindsighted when it occurs, look for Tim Cook to be replaced when it occurs