abcd
-
Posts
83 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by abcd
-
-
I am referring to those people who are working for a corporate (of all sizes) who currently own some sort of an employer provided tablet, and I assume will grow in numbers over a period of time. So for those, I feel Microsoft has a better shot at making that device more productive than any other tablet maker. I understand there will be exceptions where certain people own these devices because they have to work with only iOS or Android.
Also, my assumption is that Tablets will not be exclusively used for lightweight applications for the foreseeable future. If the primary use of tablets is to browse, read email and watch videos and is likely to stay that way, this announcement by Microsoft may not mean much.
-
I agree with you, in case of an employee who is showing up at desk everyday, tablet is not a choice. But all other types of employees (work from home, 24 hour support, high level executives who are on the move) tablet will be an easy choice to make for the same reasons that tablets are being used for checking email now over laptops.
For the price of the tablet, I am getting a decent laptop now. If it is my money, I would rather buy a laptop to give my employees today rather than a tablet because I see tablet as close to useless when it comes to serious work. I feel Microsoft might narrow that gap (mainly because of their other productive software suites) with their tablet, which no other tablet maker can easily achieve.
-
Isn't it possible that Microsoft can make this a really productive gadget by making all their software (Office Suite, SQL Server tools etc...) available on this? That way won't all the big corporations have an incentive to switch from Laptops (and desktops) to Surface?
-
But the difference being one guy will never be able to preach me again and the other definitely will, on a regular basis.
-
But to justify the subject of this thread, shouldn't he get something like 2.8 million votes? Do you think it is possible?
-
According to the terms of the offer, AT&T must pay Deutsche Telekom a $3 billion breakup fee in cash, transfer radio spectrum to T-Mobile and strike a more favorable network-sharing agreement. Deutsche Telekom has valued the breakup package at as much as $7 billion.
-
"Our revenue and profits in Q4 will be lower than we had anticipated, but we'll remain profitable on a global basis. In Q1'12 we'll be launching in the UK and Ireland, as we had planned. For a few quarters starting in Q1, we expect the costs of our entry into the UK and Ireland will push us to be unprofitable on a global basis;that is domestic profits will not be large enough to both cover international investments and pay for global G&A and Technology & Development. After launching the UK and Ireland, we will pause on opening new international markets until we return to global profitability. we plan to do that by increasing our global streaming subscriber base faster than we increase our costs."
That should keep traders (like me) away from it for a while.
-
SNL had some fun at the expense of NFLX
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/extra-bits/web-exclusive-netflix-apology/
-
More speculation on why the split is happening.
<quote>
Pachter argues that the streaming service would be highly valuable to Amazon and a good complement to its existing Amazon Prime service. However, buying the DVD-by-mail portion would present a problem, because it has many warehouses around the country that send out DVDs. Amazon doesn't want to have a substantial business presence in more states, because it then has to collect sales tax on sales to those states
</quote>
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Analyst-Netflix-split-is-apf-2067704636.html?x=0&.v=1
-
It says it right in Reed's blog post:
My bad. You are right. I had, particularly, missed this line.
Similarly, if you rate or review a movie on Qwikster, it doesn’t show up on Netflix, and vice-versa.
-
And again, splitting it into 2 separate websites will worsen the user experience of their sites.
I know you were saying that all the user experience data that has been captured will be split into two. But I personally don't think it is going to happen. What is there to stop them from using the same database and allow two different sites (Netflix.com and Quikster.com) to operate out of the same database? I mean, do you see any legal implications in that, after all, they are two divisions of the same company?
I agree with Liberty, I don't like the name Quikster.com, it sounds like a reincarnation of Amway.
-
This has made us re-evaluate our Netflix subscription and the results were that we are staying with the 2-out DVD plan and streaming. No change for us. Compared to the 3-figure per month that we pay Comcast, Netflix is still a steal. I'd give up cable completely before giving up Netflix even if they were the same price. I don't watch much TV and when I do it is either a movie or TV series disk from Netflix. My wife and kids use the streaming constantly. My re-evaluation has led me to cut back on my cable channels, not my Netflix services. I cancelled HBO & Showtime, and went from "Digital Plus" to just the basic Digital cable package. Compare the value you get with Netflix vs what you get from your cable company. It isn't even close.
I'm no longer a Netflix shareholder, so the recent price drop didn't effect me. I bought NFLX years ago at $11 then sold after it ran up to what I thought was a ridiculous $68. Of course it kept going and going and going after I sold.
--Eric
Exactly. On top of it, I have never seen a more humble CEO, in recent times. He is actually trying to apologize. Has anyone paid close attention to the medical bills that you receive from your health care providers? If Reed Hastings is apologizing for this, what should the Health Care providers do for what they have done to their customers (all Canadians, you can quit giggling, now)?
-
I understand the 'Value oriented approach' that people on this board have been born with is driving a lot of feelings about this recent price increase. But if you think about the price increase (for DVD), when they increased from 2 to 8, I too have cancelled the DVD part of my subscription. But later when I realized, for the last so many months I have consistently received and watched an average of 4 DVDs per month. Now when I compare that with my other options (RED Box ...) Netflix was 50% cheaper. In fact as an investor in Netflix I was upset the price of DVD is so cheap. I am not sure what Netflix pays to USPS per packet mailed, assuming it is 30 cents, Netflix is getting 80 cents per subscriber (who have the 1 DVD out plan) per month excluding the expenses for running those facilities that mail the DVDs.
In fact, investors should be upset about how can any business survive with those kind of numbers, rather than customers getting upset they are not getting a DVD mailed to their home for 50 cents per DVD, no?
-
Don't know how accurate and prompt this info is but nasdaq site is one source.
For example,
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/shortinterests.aspx?symbol=SVU&selected=SVU
-
Atul Gawande on healthcare bill
in General Discussion
Posted
So as per the Fraser Institute's survey quoted in the Daily Caller link 46,xxx Canadians sought medical help outside their country.
And as per the other two links posted by mhdousa, 150,000 Americans traveled to Mexicali and 650, 000 Americans will travel to Mexico to Thailand for health care needs.
If we arrange these countries in the degree of "free market providing things that places with more government influence in that certain market CAN'T"
Canada -> USA -> Mexico and other countries like Thailand, India etc...
Does that sound about right?