19. February 2016 · Comments Off on Apple’s Stance on Privacy · Categories: AAPL, Apple, Security

Tom-CottonHere is a great rundown on iPhone security.

Here is Tim Cook’s letter to customers on the matter between Apple and the FBI.

This is a big deal, and those that criticize Apple’s attempt to protect its users are trading freedom for privacy and security. The rhetoric and pandering by Cotton and his ilk are compromising the very foundations of this country’s principles and security, just as torture did after 9/11.

I understand that many, many people have lost their lives. It is tragic. But if we are going to continue to fan the terrorists flames by banning Muslims from entering the country, or giving law enforcement the right to crack private corporations’ intellectual property and individuals privacy and security, then the terrorists are winning.

The American people deserve more from our leaders than fearmongering, hate speech and pandering.

This article on Talk Business explains this much more eloquently.


11. October 2015 · Comments Off on Comparing Thought Leadership at Tesla and Apple · Categories: AAPL, Apple, Bill Gates, Charity, Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, Tesla, TSLA

I’ve been thinking about Apple versus Tesla, and in spite of Elon Musk’s comments regarding “If you don’t make it at Tesla, you go work at Apple. I’m not kidding.” And the other comment, “But cars are very complex compared to phones or smart watches. You can’t just go to a supplier like Foxconn and say: ‘Build me a car.'”

Well, perhaps you can’t go to Foxconn and have them make a car. But, Apple knows what to outsource and what not to. Furthermore, they understand outsourcing. They understand when to outsource or when to acquire or when to do it in-house. They also understand how and when to do each.

I own stock in each, but not for the same reason. I believe that each are visionary companies, but for different reasons.

To me, Apple represents a company that has institutionalized their vision and leadership, while Tesla represents a company that is a one-man, da Vinci-esque fulfillment of vision. Without Elon Musk, I believe Tesla would flounder. Without Tim Cook, Apple may flounder, but the odds are much longer, and the company will likely self-correct. I can’t imagine Tesla self-correcting. Not today, anyway.

Frequently comparisons are made between Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Elon Musk. Make no mistake, Elon is the most forward-thinking of the three, but Bill Gates operates at a different level for different reasons – he sees things he can to in much shorter time frames that will benefit mankind, using a non-profit built upon the wealth of his Microsoft holdings. Elon Musk is betting the farm for a much longer time-frame that exists beyond his lifespan. Musk is using his relatively short lifespan to build self-sustaining profit-oriented companies to better mankind.

Apple’s timeframe is much shorter in a way. Apple may think long-term, but they are patient to only pull the trigger on new products if the timing and execution is right or close enough (Watch OS 1.0, anyone?). Their goal is to better individuals, and by extension (if you can afford it) mankind. For profit.

None are inherently morally better or worse in my humble opinion, just different.

From an investment and humanity standpoint, understanding these arguably subtle differences in philosopies is critical to understanding how to get the most bang for your buck.

I am not in anyway suggesting to readers to invest in Apple or Tesla, or donate to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation as you should seek your own path to happiness and fulfillment.

And that may be a simple as donating to Doctors Without Borders, or your favorite charity. Regardless, just make sure that your objectives match your investment.


28. August 2015 · Comments Off on Apple World’s Apple Car Desirability Math Problem · Categories: AAPL, Apple, Automobile

Apple World Today’s Weird Math:

“What’s more, according to a Nielsen and SBD survey of 14,000 recent car buyers, there’s not much interest in an Apple Car. Respondents who owned an iPhone were asked how likely they’d be to buy an Apple car, and the most popular response (47%) was “not likely at all.” Twenty percent said they were “somewhat likely,” 12% were “likely,” 10% were “very likely,” and 11% were “extremely likely.””

Isn’t that like 33% of iPhone owners are at least likely? How is that “not much interest”?

28. August 2015 · Comments Off on 2006: Palm (Who?) Ridicules Apples New Phone · Categories: AAPL, Apple, Automobile, From Owner to CEO, Lifestyle, Management, New Technology, Tesla, TSLA

Just ran across this post (from November, 2006) while reading a Daring Fireball post:

Palm CEO Ed Collegian: “We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone. PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.”

John Gruber: “I saw this [quote] last week, and it took me until today to stop laughing and try to figure out a way to write about it. It’s a simple little three-sentence quote, but I’m not sure what I like best about it.”

With the luxury of hindsight, we now know that the Palm Treo, Blackberry and even Microsoft’s phones were not “decent”. They sucked. After being burned by these first attempts, I was skeptical of the iPhone itself until I finally broke down and bought an iPhone 3.

Other than the first personal computer, Apple doesn’t invent, it perfects things. Complacent automobile manufacturers were put on notice with Tesla; they will rue the day when Apple comes into their playground.

Can’t wait until I hear this qoute: “We’ve learned and struggled for decades here figuring out how to make a decent car. PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.”

Think Different, indeed.