Interesting. Michael Dell famously said in 1997 that if he were Steve Jobs he would shut Apple down and give the money back to the shareholders. Dustin Curtis points out that Apple's newly announced quarterly dividend will pay out approximately equivalent of Apple's 1997 market cap every quarter.
What could they be planning tomorrow? Perhaps a dividend would be appropriate, but I think it would be wise for them to keep most of their massive $100 billion cash pile in reserve for a rainy day or a helpful major acquisition.
Rob Shmitz wrote a piece today on Mike Daisey, who has given interviews and published articles all across mass media speaking of the horrors he saw at Apple's manufacturing partner, Foxconn, in China. The trouble is, he made them all up:
“Look. I'm not going to say that I didn't take a few shortcuts in my passion to be heard. But I stand behind the work,” Daisey said. “My mistake, the mistake I truly regret, is that I had it on your show as journalism. And it's not journalism. It's theater.”
Obviously, there are human rights concerns within the Chinese manufacturing complex. But, Daisey's critiques have always come off troubling, since he has focused on exposing horrendous “truths” about a company that normally appears to be very concerned about worker conditions in China (i.e. Apple). Now the reason it is troubling has become clear: Daisey's “truths” were false. And, while he claims he was purely being theatrical, he certainly didn't indicate that in his NYT Op-Ed or any of dozens of other places he “reported.”
It seems that Microsoft had to create a special category of applications to permit third party web browsers in its new Metro user interface. The new interface, much like Apple's iOS used on iPhones and iPads, places significant restrictions on what applications can do. But, unlike iOS, these restrictions apply to the new preferred interface for Microsoft's desktop operating system. And, that makes things a whole lot more complicated than they are with a phone and tablet OS.
I'm still uncertain about Windows 8's fusion of a desktop and tablet OS. This new complication just seems like another demonstration of the roadblocks Microsoft faces in making the next Windows a viable operating system.
I was more than a bit surprised when I saw commentators start noting ways Apple's presentations were becoming less well organized post-Jobs. In particular, various folks mentioned the ambiguous “new iPad” name, the play on words used to launch the product and the colorful Apple logo at the end. Matt Thomas deals with these points very succinctly.
Incidentally, am I the only one to note that the lack of a numerical qualifier after the name iPad simply puts the iPad within the naming conventions always applied to the iPod family?
Gruber writes about the AP's suggestion that the iPad 3's specs indicate a “modest upgrade:”
I suspect this is a prelude to much of tomorrow's post-event coverage, echoing the initial tech press reaction to the iPhone 4S. But if a faster processor, more RAM, a double-the-resolution retina display, a better camera, and maybe even LTE networking make for a “modest” update, then what would it take for the iPad 3 to be deemed an immodest update? A fusion energy source? Teleportation? A camera that sees into the future?
It seems the the App Store has reached 25 billion downloads. It is hard to even recall the days long past where people questioned whether the App Store could even succeed. It may not be perfect, but I've never seen another form of application distribution that makes getting the apps everyone actually wants so easy.
The invitation seems to give it away. If anyone had any doubt, it looks like the iPad 3 will have a Retina Display. The big question is what else will be new — I'm betting on a hefty processor upgrade to help drive the significantly higher resolution display.
This looks interesting, though I can't help but wish they were announcing their support for Open webOS instead. WebOS is so good, if the FOSS community really wants to take iOS head on, that's the way to do it.
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes writes:
The report makes depressing reading. Across all platforms, mobile malware attacks are up 155 percent, with mobile malware samples increasing from 11,138 in 2010 to 28,472 in 2011. BlackBerry malware grew by 8 percent, and Java ME saw a 49 percent increase. But the platform hit hardest was Android, with malware increasing by an incredible 3,325 percent in a year. During the last six months of 2011, Android malware samples had increased from 400 to 13,302.
Conspicuously absent from the list of devices affected by malware attacks is the iPhone. You don't suppose that is because there is no malware for the iPhone, do you?