EricNau
Apr 27, 06:18 PM
Moderator Note
It's been brought to our attention that the Rules for Appropriate Debate (http://guides.macrumors.com/Help:Rules_for_Appropriate_Debate) have not been followed in this thread. The level of discourse does not meet our expectations. Users need to be respectful of all other users, regardless of personal opinions.
Many users have spent a great deal of time defending their ideals, in response to posts that we'd have to remove under the rules, so we've decided to issue this reminder, leave the previous posts as they are, and ask your cooperation both in following the rules and in reporting posts that do not. Thank you.
It's been brought to our attention that the Rules for Appropriate Debate (http://guides.macrumors.com/Help:Rules_for_Appropriate_Debate) have not been followed in this thread. The level of discourse does not meet our expectations. Users need to be respectful of all other users, regardless of personal opinions.
Many users have spent a great deal of time defending their ideals, in response to posts that we'd have to remove under the rules, so we've decided to issue this reminder, leave the previous posts as they are, and ask your cooperation both in following the rules and in reporting posts that do not. Thank you.
kalsta
Apr 15, 09:57 AM
Dude,,...... you didn't get rid of the chin....
You can't mention iMac around here without someone saying.
I hope they get rid of the chin. :rolleyes::D
True enough. But if there was no chin, I may as well have drawn an iPad on a stick, and no one would be impressed by that. ;)
ps. Yes I think a touch screen mac is coming but it seriously needs to be a new product not an iMac. Also needs to be much much smaller and lighter like the iMac gets the Air Treatment with say 17 or 20inch screen. No Stand.
I'm not really sure what the point would be. If you lay a 17 or 20 inch Mac down on your lap, give it a touch screen, and modify the interface so it's more suited to the less precise input of fingers… haven't you just created a bigger iPad? (Not that a bigger iPad wouldn't have it's uses, but it wouldn't be a Mac, and I'd question whether it would warrant yet another 'marketing name'.
I suppose it's possible, as many presume, that Apple is looking to merge OS X and iOS, but it's never been that convincing of an argument to me. There are some real incompatibilities between the two in my mind. Many OS X apps demand the precision and unrestricted visibility that a keyboard and mouse give you, but once you're using a keyboard and mouse, the display has moved away from your fingers. A vertical display keeps it within reach, but humans just aren't suited to using a vertical touch screen for more than a few minutes, as Steve Jobs has himself remarked.
If the future were some kind of OS X / iOS hybrid, why did Apple invent iOS in the first place? Why not just go straight for this touchable OS X Nirvana if it exists? I suspect it doesn't exist, and Apple understood that a usable touchscreen interface has a unique set of requirements, benefits and limitations.
As for what this 'ix.Mac.MarketingName' is, I actually haven't a clue. It's somewhat intriguing though. It's kind of exciting to think that the inventive minds at Apple might be hatching some new kind of device. A little optimistic maybe, but who knows?
You can't mention iMac around here without someone saying.
I hope they get rid of the chin. :rolleyes::D
True enough. But if there was no chin, I may as well have drawn an iPad on a stick, and no one would be impressed by that. ;)
ps. Yes I think a touch screen mac is coming but it seriously needs to be a new product not an iMac. Also needs to be much much smaller and lighter like the iMac gets the Air Treatment with say 17 or 20inch screen. No Stand.
I'm not really sure what the point would be. If you lay a 17 or 20 inch Mac down on your lap, give it a touch screen, and modify the interface so it's more suited to the less precise input of fingers… haven't you just created a bigger iPad? (Not that a bigger iPad wouldn't have it's uses, but it wouldn't be a Mac, and I'd question whether it would warrant yet another 'marketing name'.
I suppose it's possible, as many presume, that Apple is looking to merge OS X and iOS, but it's never been that convincing of an argument to me. There are some real incompatibilities between the two in my mind. Many OS X apps demand the precision and unrestricted visibility that a keyboard and mouse give you, but once you're using a keyboard and mouse, the display has moved away from your fingers. A vertical display keeps it within reach, but humans just aren't suited to using a vertical touch screen for more than a few minutes, as Steve Jobs has himself remarked.
If the future were some kind of OS X / iOS hybrid, why did Apple invent iOS in the first place? Why not just go straight for this touchable OS X Nirvana if it exists? I suspect it doesn't exist, and Apple understood that a usable touchscreen interface has a unique set of requirements, benefits and limitations.
As for what this 'ix.Mac.MarketingName' is, I actually haven't a clue. It's somewhat intriguing though. It's kind of exciting to think that the inventive minds at Apple might be hatching some new kind of device. A little optimistic maybe, but who knows?
WildCowboy
Oct 18, 07:47 PM
Historical Mac shipments by quarter.
<snip>
Thanks for the chart...I always like to see stuff like this. But your 3Q and 4Q numbers for 2003 and 2004 looked a bit fishy, so I looked into it and made the corrections below for 2004. Don't know if there are any other errors.
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 876,000
4Q2004 - 836,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
4Q2006 - 1,610,000
<snip>
Thanks for the chart...I always like to see stuff like this. But your 3Q and 4Q numbers for 2003 and 2004 looked a bit fishy, so I looked into it and made the corrections below for 2004. Don't know if there are any other errors.
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 876,000
4Q2004 - 836,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
4Q2006 - 1,610,000
AppleScruff1
Apr 14, 01:23 AM
You won't be able to watch anything but paid content from Apple. But it will be magical. And it least it will be big enough so you can't hold it wrong.
bedifferent
Apr 11, 02:52 PM
if by "internal" you mean "inside the box," that seems unlikely. The main benefit of fiber optics is over distances greater than those inside a PC. Signals on PCB's travel at something like 25% of the speed of light (depending on dielectric), which may seem slow, but is very speedy compared to the long cables used to connect PCs to external peripherals.
Ah, gotcha. Guess I misread/misunderstood the info. So it's truly meant for peripheral devices and will not replace internal components. For some reason I thought it was a universal (internal/external) system. Oh well.
Still bummed there will not be a "Light Peak" PCIe for Mac Pro's.
Ah, gotcha. Guess I misread/misunderstood the info. So it's truly meant for peripheral devices and will not replace internal components. For some reason I thought it was a universal (internal/external) system. Oh well.
Still bummed there will not be a "Light Peak" PCIe for Mac Pro's.
bankshot
Nov 3, 07:10 PM
Parallels takes way too long to launch, and the GUI sucks.
Mine pops up instantly. 2.0 GHz Macbook. What's wrong with the GUI? Is it just that it's not Cocoa, the holy grail, or is there something tangible that isn't good? I've found it easy to use and unobtrusive.
Plus, do you really think a Qt C++ wrapper around Carbon is faster than direct Cocoa calls? :rolleyes:
Wouldn't surprise me a bit if it were. Many of the things that make Cocoa such a joy for programmers also slow it down at runtime. That's just a design decision that Apple made, and with faster computers always coming out, it becomes less of a drawback at runtime.
I just want a nice documented-based Cocoa app that behaves like a Mac app, with a fast virtualization at its core :)
Err, why should a virtual machine be document-based? That doesn't make any sense to me.
The whole thing that drew my attention to your original post was that comment about Cocoa. Why do you, as an end-user, care about that? Cocoa is great, but there seems to be a mentality here that anything else is inferior or a second-class citizen. I kind of understand why that mentality came to be - Cocoa came with OS X, Carbon is a bridge to the past in OS 9. Thus people automatically assumed that Cocoa = good and Carbon = bad. But Carbon is every bit as capable as Cocoa, and thus why an end-user would care one bit about either is beyond me.
Granted, Parallels is done with Qt, which looks a little bit "off" sitting next to a Carbon or Cocoa app, but does that really matter? It looks damn close, and frankly, looks mean nothing to me if the interface works intuitively. And that it does.
I'm not picking on you, just trying to understand your reasoning. ;)
Mine pops up instantly. 2.0 GHz Macbook. What's wrong with the GUI? Is it just that it's not Cocoa, the holy grail, or is there something tangible that isn't good? I've found it easy to use and unobtrusive.
Plus, do you really think a Qt C++ wrapper around Carbon is faster than direct Cocoa calls? :rolleyes:
Wouldn't surprise me a bit if it were. Many of the things that make Cocoa such a joy for programmers also slow it down at runtime. That's just a design decision that Apple made, and with faster computers always coming out, it becomes less of a drawback at runtime.
I just want a nice documented-based Cocoa app that behaves like a Mac app, with a fast virtualization at its core :)
Err, why should a virtual machine be document-based? That doesn't make any sense to me.
The whole thing that drew my attention to your original post was that comment about Cocoa. Why do you, as an end-user, care about that? Cocoa is great, but there seems to be a mentality here that anything else is inferior or a second-class citizen. I kind of understand why that mentality came to be - Cocoa came with OS X, Carbon is a bridge to the past in OS 9. Thus people automatically assumed that Cocoa = good and Carbon = bad. But Carbon is every bit as capable as Cocoa, and thus why an end-user would care one bit about either is beyond me.
Granted, Parallels is done with Qt, which looks a little bit "off" sitting next to a Carbon or Cocoa app, but does that really matter? It looks damn close, and frankly, looks mean nothing to me if the interface works intuitively. And that it does.
I'm not picking on you, just trying to understand your reasoning. ;)
Digital Skunk
May 3, 09:15 AM
It annoys me too but it works out pretty well for Apple and I'd much rather pay extra for the i7 than not have the option at all. Look at the latest MBPs compared to the previous ones, Apple bumped the GPUs up significantly but charged $200 more and yet everyone is happy.
True, but I've always had the sense that MBP owners are just used to paying a lot more for a machine than most everyone else.
I strongly suggest against a refurbished model of older revisions. It is similar to purchasing a Core 2 model. The base 21.5" Sandy Bridge once it hits refurb would be tempting at ~$999.
Agreed about the Core2 models, but I still think it would depend on the price of the refurbed. There's a 3.33GHz core 2 duo on there for $1040, and a 3.06GHz Core i3 for $930; same GPU different HDD size. The i3 would be the better choice if one weren't able to get the extra $200 or so for a new model.
This is the first worthwhile iMac solely based on the stillborn potential of Thunderbolt and the quad on the base models. It only took 5 years.
QFT. My initial post in this thread mentioned the Old Skool Apple because at the very least we've got iMacs that don't offer 80% laptop parts with a nice screen. I'd say we are at 40% laptop parts now.
True, but I've always had the sense that MBP owners are just used to paying a lot more for a machine than most everyone else.
I strongly suggest against a refurbished model of older revisions. It is similar to purchasing a Core 2 model. The base 21.5" Sandy Bridge once it hits refurb would be tempting at ~$999.
Agreed about the Core2 models, but I still think it would depend on the price of the refurbed. There's a 3.33GHz core 2 duo on there for $1040, and a 3.06GHz Core i3 for $930; same GPU different HDD size. The i3 would be the better choice if one weren't able to get the extra $200 or so for a new model.
This is the first worthwhile iMac solely based on the stillborn potential of Thunderbolt and the quad on the base models. It only took 5 years.
QFT. My initial post in this thread mentioned the Old Skool Apple because at the very least we've got iMacs that don't offer 80% laptop parts with a nice screen. I'd say we are at 40% laptop parts now.
iEvolution
Apr 26, 05:29 PM
LOL@ people that really expected this service to be free.
As if it doesn't cost apple any money to keep the server up and running and to hold your data.
Cloud services are a joke because there are so many places (at least in my area) where you cannot even get 3G speeds because the signal quality is so poor.
Furthermore, the area I work at blocks out cell reception so it would be pointless for me.
Another point is once this Cloud service is made they won't even bother updating iPod/iPhone capacities because they'll want you on the cloud service so they can get you to pay monthly fees for capacity.
Cloud storage is a terrible idea for multimedia storage.
As if it doesn't cost apple any money to keep the server up and running and to hold your data.
Cloud services are a joke because there are so many places (at least in my area) where you cannot even get 3G speeds because the signal quality is so poor.
Furthermore, the area I work at blocks out cell reception so it would be pointless for me.
Another point is once this Cloud service is made they won't even bother updating iPod/iPhone capacities because they'll want you on the cloud service so they can get you to pay monthly fees for capacity.
Cloud storage is a terrible idea for multimedia storage.
helmsc
Jul 24, 09:43 PM
I can see many first time user scratching their heads on this kind of design.
Like me...I don't have an iPod ...yet.
Like me...I don't have an iPod ...yet.
dXTC
Feb 25, 11:32 AM
They show will be on as long as the ratings are up. Maybe Sheen gets killed off when he crashes his car next season and then their long lost brother enters.
That'll be a jump-the-shark moment for sure.
And the train wreck continues....
http://blogs.forbes.com/dorothypomerantz/2011/02/25/two-and-a-half-men-canceled-after-charlie-sheens-latest-rants/
Holy crap. I do believe we're witnessing the next Mel Gibson, people.
That'll be a jump-the-shark moment for sure.
And the train wreck continues....
http://blogs.forbes.com/dorothypomerantz/2011/02/25/two-and-a-half-men-canceled-after-charlie-sheens-latest-rants/
Holy crap. I do believe we're witnessing the next Mel Gibson, people.
Snowy_River
Jul 13, 12:52 AM
Those of you who have used both versions of Pages, do you find the '06 version to be significantly quicker? Someone a few pages ago commented on its sluggish performance. I have to admit that I've had sort of a delayed reaction (in terms of the time it takes for a sentence to appear after I've finished typing it) in my limited Pages experience. (Mind you, I do have an older machine.) A performance increase alone would be a worthy upgrade in my book.
-Squire
I've used Pages from day one. I'd say that Pages 2 seems just as quick if not quicker than Pages 1. I never really thought about it, so I can't say that I did any kind of comparison, and I no longer have Pages 1 on my computer to try to do a comparison with.
Before we finish on the bookfold tangent, I found a couple of useful sites that Snowy_River might want to peruse for his "booklet" style printing. This one (http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=2005021608303265) sets up a PDF Services script. This one (http://word.mvps.org/Mac/BookletsFold.html#BookletPrograms) looks at three programs that take a pdf (printed from Pages, or for that matter Word) and print in booklet form.
Back on topic, I am a heavy user of Pages (and other tools when they suit) and will certainly welcome the Charts and WP mode. Along with general usability tweaks.
I said it already, but let me reiterate: Thank you!
I downloaded the free application CocoaBooklet, and it works great! It even adds an option under the PDF menu to "print" directly to a PDF booklet. And it only reduces pages as far as they need to be reduced. (In one of my earlier attempts I tried using the layout option to print 2 pages on a PDF page, but it reduced each page as if it was 8-1/2 x 11 even though they were 5-1/2 x 8-1/2, so things were way too small.)
So I'm now ecstatic with this solution! I may still bring just the basic PDF file to the printer, but, then again, I may hand them this. Who knows?
So, yet again, thank you!
-Squire
I've used Pages from day one. I'd say that Pages 2 seems just as quick if not quicker than Pages 1. I never really thought about it, so I can't say that I did any kind of comparison, and I no longer have Pages 1 on my computer to try to do a comparison with.
Before we finish on the bookfold tangent, I found a couple of useful sites that Snowy_River might want to peruse for his "booklet" style printing. This one (http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=2005021608303265) sets up a PDF Services script. This one (http://word.mvps.org/Mac/BookletsFold.html#BookletPrograms) looks at three programs that take a pdf (printed from Pages, or for that matter Word) and print in booklet form.
Back on topic, I am a heavy user of Pages (and other tools when they suit) and will certainly welcome the Charts and WP mode. Along with general usability tweaks.
I said it already, but let me reiterate: Thank you!
I downloaded the free application CocoaBooklet, and it works great! It even adds an option under the PDF menu to "print" directly to a PDF booklet. And it only reduces pages as far as they need to be reduced. (In one of my earlier attempts I tried using the layout option to print 2 pages on a PDF page, but it reduced each page as if it was 8-1/2 x 11 even though they were 5-1/2 x 8-1/2, so things were way too small.)
So I'm now ecstatic with this solution! I may still bring just the basic PDF file to the printer, but, then again, I may hand them this. Who knows?
So, yet again, thank you!
WildCowboy
Oct 18, 10:07 PM
Apple has had a phenomenal run. They are doing this on all fronts. They have 2 Billion CASH! That is a big deal. It keeps the R&D funded.
Actually they have over $6 billion in cash and another almost $4 billion in liquid, short term investments...so they really have $10 billion in cash, up from just over $8 billion a year ago.
Actually they have over $6 billion in cash and another almost $4 billion in liquid, short term investments...so they really have $10 billion in cash, up from just over $8 billion a year ago.
balamw
Oct 23, 04:21 PM
This is actually an incorrect report that Microsoft has tried to correct, but it keeps getting reported.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=157
I know we jump all over MS for spreading FUD... We shouldn't do the same.
Microsoft's "correction" is discussed further in the "update" on the article you linked:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=159
The bottom line is that Vista Home Basic/Premium are not licensed for use in a VM. Ulitmate and Business editions are OK.
B
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=157
I know we jump all over MS for spreading FUD... We shouldn't do the same.
Microsoft's "correction" is discussed further in the "update" on the article you linked:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=159
The bottom line is that Vista Home Basic/Premium are not licensed for use in a VM. Ulitmate and Business editions are OK.
B
yg17
Mar 8, 08:47 AM
Now, when they're talking of a replacement, are they thinking of killing Charlie's character off and Rob Lowe (or whomever) would be some new character that comes out of nowhere, it would they keep Charlie's character, swap actors, and act as if nothing happened?
I personally think they're going to kill Charlie off, Alan gets the house in the will, and then Judith kicks Herb out and Herb moves in with Alan. Herb and Judith's marriage has been rocky, I think the writers did that so they'd have a plan when Charlie Sheen inevitably went off the wagon.
I personally think they're going to kill Charlie off, Alan gets the house in the will, and then Judith kicks Herb out and Herb moves in with Alan. Herb and Judith's marriage has been rocky, I think the writers did that so they'd have a plan when Charlie Sheen inevitably went off the wagon.
kallisti
Apr 9, 06:23 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5064/5602375649_c5c0d36f4c_b.jpg
Old print I just rediscovered. Forgive the dust--it seems to have become a permanent part of the only print I have. Negatives lost in a prior move.
Left half of the shot is from a kitchen window. The right half is the reflection on the fridge.
Old print I just rediscovered. Forgive the dust--it seems to have become a permanent part of the only print I have. Negatives lost in a prior move.
Left half of the shot is from a kitchen window. The right half is the reflection on the fridge.
Eldiablojoe
Apr 30, 03:29 PM
good job everyone, including plutonius and appleguy
now it is basically one spanking new 6-villagers game, starting tonight, with one wolf, one seer and likely one hunter.
with a twist: both the seer and the hunter could also be the wolf.
everyone is suspect.
make it a short night guys, see you all tomorrowUmmm, I'm not sure this game is over yet... there's still an infected Villager out there...
now it is basically one spanking new 6-villagers game, starting tonight, with one wolf, one seer and likely one hunter.
with a twist: both the seer and the hunter could also be the wolf.
everyone is suspect.
make it a short night guys, see you all tomorrowUmmm, I'm not sure this game is over yet... there's still an infected Villager out there...
ciTiger
Apr 22, 05:04 PM
I think the iphone can still loose half of it's size lol
But I find it hard to believe it is going to suffer a redesign already...
But I find it hard to believe it is going to suffer a redesign already...
maclaptop
Apr 26, 01:55 PM
No real surprise here. Apple has been charging for MobileMe. Why not this service.
That's right.
Given the mediocre performance of MobileMe, I think if they work the bugs out of the Cloud Based Storage Service it's easily going to command around $200 per year.
A nice bump for my stock :)
That's right.
Given the mediocre performance of MobileMe, I think if they work the bugs out of the Cloud Based Storage Service it's easily going to command around $200 per year.
A nice bump for my stock :)
djsound
Apr 14, 12:03 AM
Apple has it all down to a science. They probably have algorithm's for getting the most possible money out of you.....if you don't see this your blind...Wait for something that actually makes a difference...not just a different color. As if they ever intended to release the white iphone at the same time as the black one hahahaha :rolleyes:
dXTC
Mar 1, 12:55 PM
Hot Shots: Part Deux Deux
Thread over; eawmp1 gets +1 internets.
(In other words, I must admit I snickered at this.)
Thread over; eawmp1 gets +1 internets.
(In other words, I must admit I snickered at this.)
yac_moda
Jul 26, 05:28 PM
Here we have a PDA device - virtual keyboard, gesture recognition, etc. with a strong possibility of direct connection to the internet (sans computer).
Imagine your in a cafe with friends, some one says hey have you heard this song...? you go online (itunes) right there (wifi) access the song and load it up to your device - pop it into a new play list, rate it etc.
Apple can remove a big barrier of complexity (computer) by making it all in one simple ipod-like device. So there is pobably an entire market strategy with itunes store, etc that extends from this new device. i just bet ya...
With eBooks this type of device would be awesome for corp. training and documentation access, even better for military type applications, mechanical work, and combat conditions -- a bastion for podCasters.
AND the Airport has a cheap harddrive in it that watches internet access and downloads locally the most often popular sites, and monitors them for change, to GREATLY speed access and low connection band width requirements.
I also told Apple to build this.
Of course this would have to catigorize sites to do this, so it can avoid things better kept live, and screen for porn, this would be the hard part but this IS just a better firewall :eek: :eek: :eek:
Imagine your in a cafe with friends, some one says hey have you heard this song...? you go online (itunes) right there (wifi) access the song and load it up to your device - pop it into a new play list, rate it etc.
Apple can remove a big barrier of complexity (computer) by making it all in one simple ipod-like device. So there is pobably an entire market strategy with itunes store, etc that extends from this new device. i just bet ya...
With eBooks this type of device would be awesome for corp. training and documentation access, even better for military type applications, mechanical work, and combat conditions -- a bastion for podCasters.
AND the Airport has a cheap harddrive in it that watches internet access and downloads locally the most often popular sites, and monitors them for change, to GREATLY speed access and low connection band width requirements.
I also told Apple to build this.
Of course this would have to catigorize sites to do this, so it can avoid things better kept live, and screen for porn, this would be the hard part but this IS just a better firewall :eek: :eek: :eek:
pudrums
Feb 1, 08:24 AM
@Gem�tlichkeit: Yup, it's my favorite BR album.
AlphaBob
Jan 30, 05:12 PM
I am gambling my extra money on geopolitical actions. Bottom line is I don't mind taking a chance on my research, especially with the tensions in the middle east.
Time will tell of course. But if you think about it, the run-up in the price of gold has been post 9/11 and due to tension in the middle east. For more than six plus years the theory is that the world is coming to an end. Rightly or wrongly that theory is tightly bound to the current sitting president. When George Bush is no longer in office, things may well be different. The middle east may cool off. Betting on tension to continue seems a long bet to me.
Russia is talking of backing their currency with gold because they have been in economic crisis. They see that as a last ditch effort to short up a failing system. If you see the EU or the United States do the same, then I'd be worried.
But back to the original topic about why Apple stock is dropping. I'll say it is a gift to those that don't own the stock -- a chance to buy it for less than $200 a share! :)
Time will tell of course. But if you think about it, the run-up in the price of gold has been post 9/11 and due to tension in the middle east. For more than six plus years the theory is that the world is coming to an end. Rightly or wrongly that theory is tightly bound to the current sitting president. When George Bush is no longer in office, things may well be different. The middle east may cool off. Betting on tension to continue seems a long bet to me.
Russia is talking of backing their currency with gold because they have been in economic crisis. They see that as a last ditch effort to short up a failing system. If you see the EU or the United States do the same, then I'd be worried.
But back to the original topic about why Apple stock is dropping. I'll say it is a gift to those that don't own the stock -- a chance to buy it for less than $200 a share! :)
Legion93
May 1, 11:21 PM
They also mocked us saying we would never catch him. Well we caught him and we won't stop.
Yeah, after like ten years you did. You call that potential success?
Yeah, after like ten years you did. You call that potential success?