M.G. Siegler:
Amazon clearly views products like the Kindle Fire as a loss-leader to keep customers happy and keep them shopping for more content. Apple’s model is the exact opposite. Content sales are a loss-leader to keep customers happy and keep them buying new hardware.
Marisa, The Lost Ogle:
Basically, weather, what I’m trying to say is this: I really like the warmth. Any winter where I can leave the house in a light jacket is great. But maybe you’re just a little too bipolar for me. I feel like this is the part in Sleeping with the Enemy where I decide to take it upon myself to leave you. But maybe it’s more like that J-Lo movie, Enough, because I’m figuratively training to beat you up. And maybe by beat you up I mean that I occasionally look for jobs in the Denver area because at least the snow there isn’t maliciously followed by tornados and heinous heat waves. Watch your back, Oklahoma weather. I’m onto you.
Hilarious!
(via: Kodi Monroe)
This site has existed for awhile in various forms, though, I never really paid much attention to it. Updates were infrequent and content was added sporadically. I just wasn’t sure what I wanted from the site, so instead I ignored it.
At the beginning of 2012, I decided to finally spend time on publishing this site. My main goal was to produce a website that I myself would visit. To reach this goal, I dedicated to writing or sharing something everyday about the topics that I find interesting. In doing so, it was my hope to expose people to viewpoints not considered and to content they might otherwise miss. Other than that, I was curious about which path the site might lead me down.
I want to share the results of my first month. In January, I successfully followed through in writing everyday, which was hard in the beginning. As time progressed, the process became habit - much like when one starts a new workout regimen. As far as traffic, well, you have to start somewhere. I have compiled statistics for January.
I honestly have no goals in regard to the amount of traffic the site receives1. I intend to focus solely on improvement every day through usability enhancements and quality of content. The edges are rough, but I am excited about the start. Thanks to everyone who has visited this past month, especially those who have offered feedback on Facebook and Twitter. The audience is well-informed, thoughtful, and engaging. I look forward to another month of sharing.
What I mean here is that I have no goals of surreptitiously increasing page views though SEO bullshit. I don’t make any money from this site. Currently, it is solely a personal hobby. I do hope that as the site improves, more people will visit, interact, and share by word-of-mouth. ↩︎
Today, Amazon released financial results for the previous quarter.
Compare that with Apple’s latest earnings report.
- Revenue was a record $46.33 billion, an increase of 73% year-over-year
- Profit was a record $13.06 billion, an increase of 118% year-over-year
- Earnings per share were $13.87, an increase of 116% year-over-year
- Cash flow was increased by $17.5 billion
- Gross margin was 44.7%
Let me put it another way. In the previous quarter, Amazon profited $177 million. Apple profited $133 million - per day.
M.G. Siegler describes why there is such a disparity:
Well, first and foremost, most of the goods they sell have low margins. But even the goods that should have high margins — hardware — have low margins.
Or worse. Take the Kindle Fire — Amazon’s most popular product (though don’t bother asking how many they actually sold) — it’s sold at a loss.
What is really perplexing is that Amazon’s stock is still much more expensive than Apple’s. The P/E ratio1 for Amazon (102.5) is far greater than Apple’s (12.9). It is beyond my understanding why a financial juggernaut like Apple is priced an order of magnitude cheaper than a company that can barely muster 1% profit. Especially, when Apple has grown at a rather sustained rate over the past six years. Deluded analysts indeed.
I realize that the companies aren’t exactly apples-to-apples (see what I did there?). However, Amazon has entered the tablet market with the support of a fully inclusive content distribution system - much like Apple. I think it is a reasonable comparison to make.
P/E = Price per Earnings. It is a representation of how expensive a stock is relative to the company’s success. ↩︎
William Patry, writing for CNN, offers a compelling case to revise U.S. copyright laws:
As we adapt to the digital age, arcane copyright laws that offer no benefit even to the current copyright holder must be reconsidered. A sensible approach would not act as an obstacle to future generations who want to create something new.
Josh Fischman, The Chronicle of Higher Education:
The company has sinned in three areas, according to the boycotters: It charges too much for its journals; it bundles subscriptions to lesser journals together with valuable ones, forcing libraries to spend money to buy things they don’t want in order to get a few things they do want; and, most recently, it has supported a proposed federal law (called the Research Works Act) that would prevent agencies like the National Institutes of Health from making all articles written by its grant recipients freely available.
The organizer of the boycott, Timothy Gowers - a mathematician at the University of Cambridge - wrote a call to action on January 21.
So I am not only going to refuse to have anything to do with Elsevier journals from now on, but I am saying so publicly. I am by no means the first person to do this, but the more of us there are, the more socially acceptable it becomes, and that is my main reason for writing this post.
This is a generation built on sharing information through the digital flow of knowledge. At what point do we all realize that publishers are largely unnecessary? We scientists strive to solve some of life’s most complex problems. Surely we can devise a system devoid of a middleman that allows us to freely share our work while still maintaining the important peer-review process.
An excellent tutorial from Matt Gemmell that teaches you how to add texture to UI elements.
Texture is an inherent part of any surface in the real world, and provides a cue to our brains that we’ll be able to grip or otherwise interact with that surface. Delicate use of noise can add a welcome note of reality to your interfaces, and make people want to use them.
You can see texture in action on a few sites that I maintain: here, here, and here.
Tim Worstall, Forbes:
Boycotting Apple for better Foxconn wages and conditions is like having sex for virginity. Entirely counter-productive and exactly the wrong thing to be doing.
A rational take on recent calls to boycott Apple.
(via: Mike Wolfinbarger)
Today, Apple updated AirPort Utility for OS X. The update features a new user interface that is reminiscent of its iOS counterpart. This has been an ongoing process since the release of Lion. Federico Viticci nicely illustrates how far iOS has infiltrated OS X.
Today’s (relatively minor) software update reminds me, however, that the iOS-ification goes far beyond simply converting graphics and updating apps from one platform to another. It is actually more a conversion of the entire Apple ecosystem to an iOS-inspired system of graphical elements, user interactions, business models, user experience paradigms, and functionalities. The iOS-ification isn’t simply visual, it’s a fundamental shift of strategy that, ultimately, I believe begins and ends with iCloud — something that I have discussed before.
My personal opinion is that a unified experience across all platforms is a great idea. Especially when iPhones and iPads are by far Apple’s introductory products to new customers, not the Mac. However, I have noted some inconsistencies that leave for a sloppy experience. We are in iCloud’s infancy so hopefully this transitional period will pass soon.
This is interesting segment from “UP w/ Chris Hayes” that discusses Apple’s recent successes and what it means about the U.S. economy. Mike Daisey, creator of the one-man show “The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs”, is a special guest. While the discussion is framed within a political undertone, the segment is largely non-partisan.
There are key points made about the decline in U.S. manufacturing jobs. Those jobs have declined in part because improved conditions and pay for workers in the U.S. have led to companies outsourcing manufacturing to countries where regulations are weaker and scalability is more flexible. Profits are subsequently increased at companies like Apple, which is celebrated as U.S. innovation and a sign of a strong economy. At the same time, celebrating that flexibility is really celebrating the oppression of foreign workers. It is a slippery slope.
Where does this get fixed? For the economy to appear strong, people need to buy things. To buy things, people want cheap products. For products to be cheap, supply chain economics dictate that jobs must be outsourced to countries where workforce rights are weak. What are people willing to give up? Cheap products? Probably not. Regulated working conditions and fair pay in the U.S.? Hell no. The guilt of knowing poor, overworked, underpaid foreigners made their product. Most likely.
I do take one issue with the segment as a whole. I understand that Apple is singled out because they are the largest PC1 and smartphone manufacturer in the world. However, they are but one piece in a larger industry. The same company that manufactures Apple products also assembles devices for Microsoft, Amazon, and others. Mike Daisey’s assertion that Apple alone can fix the problem by throwing money at the situation is laughable. To affect real change in China, it will take a concerted effort by all U.S. companies to demand strict adherence to supplier responsibility. Until then, ask yourself what you are willing to give up.
I’m including iPad. ↩︎
