[Control freak]

Steve Jobs has officially resigned as the CEO of Apple Read More

[slackline]

As the Guardian captioned it.......iResign! 

Massive companies like Apple are more than the individuals who head them, can't see this making a huge difference really.

[slackline]

Or a shed loads of money to throw at R&D (and more importantly advertising).

The iPad is just a big iPhone....

[tomtom]

The iPad is just a big iPhone....

Yeah, its insignificant, I mean its only made HP ditch making PC's...

Less sarcastically, isnt much of Apples recent success (iPod onwards) due to that English designer fella who works for them?

[tomtom]

Less sarcastically, isnt much of Apples recent success (iPod onwards) due to that English designer fella who works for them?

Undoubtedly ... Jonathan Ives ... though hiring him was one of Jobs' key decisions back in 1997, on his return as CEO, so he can take some credit for that.

Yes, wasnt trying to belittle El Jobbio..  (which I just have done ;0)

[slackline]

Yeah, its insignificant, I mean its only made HP ditch making PC's...

All this cloud computing is going to require a shed load of servers 'cause 32Gb is barely enough to fit anything on these days.

[butters]

Yeah, its insignificant, I mean its only made HP ditch making PC's...

Not just ditching PC's - they had a fire sale on the Touch Pad yesterday - £109 for the 32GB version and £69 for the 16GB version IIRC.

[Paul B]

...which amazon took a load of orders for which it couldn't fulfill it seems.

[slackline]

I think in this instance PC doesn't just mean desktop but encompases their desktops, laptops/netbooks, tablets and phones, all of which might be considered "Personal Computers" (as oppossed to servers).

[tomtom]

Yeah, its insignificant, I mean its only made HP ditch making PC's...

Not just ditching PC's - they had a fire sale on the Touch Pad yesterday - £109 for the 32GB version and £69 for the 16GB version IIRC.

Yes they are...

Forget the touchpad, thats the real news.. the 2nd largest maker of PCs in the world has announced it will stop making and selling PC's. Which means it'll do an IBM>Lenovo and sell off its still successful PC operation to someone else. The touchpad was their last fling - and it bombed - which led them to think that hardware is a mugs game.. stick to coroporate SW and systems. Maybe something to do with the former head of SAP being their new(ish) CEO.

What is incredible about the iPad (and this is not from an Apple fanboi POV) is that its seen off its best rival to date (some may argue but that seems to be a general media view) - in a month or so... market figures show theres been quite a few android tablets produced.. but the sales figures are very different. Its an iPad the punters want not anything else... PC sales down, Netbook sales down, iPad sales up.... and as far as Apple are concerned its great - no need to piss about with phone companies and tied deals etc.. they're selling as fast as they can be made...

Phones were always going to be a hard market to get into - with stacks of very well established competition. But here they've created a whole new market.. thats both risky and a genius idea...

[slackline]

They're not ditching hardware though, what they're ditching is Personal Computers (PCs) because (read from various news sources citing HP execs) the profit margin is too low on these devices.  And it won't be Apple who they are competing with on the thin profit margin area as their devices are all making a healthy profit per-unit (e.g. for components alone iPad estimates, plenty of margin for manufacturing and shipping to still make a healthy profit), it will be Dell, Acer, Asus etc. etc.

The fact they see of their rivals is in no small part thanks to the strategy of patenting the fuck out of everything and sueing the asses off anyone who dares to independently converge on the same idea, which ultimately stifles innovation.  E.g. Samsung's ban on their tablet in the EU and the recent announcment that the Galaxy SII is to be banned from sale in a few months thanks to Apple.

Kind of sucks in my opinion and thats nothing to do with a like or dislike for Apple, I have neither, I just think their hardware is over-priced and I can get the same specification for less elsewhere.

[Paul B]

some may argue but that seems to be a general media view) - in a month or so... market figures show theres been quite a few android tablets produced.. but the sales figures are very different. Its an iPad the punters want not anything else...

I'd have to agree on that apart from maybe offerings from HTC et. al. being a little more futureproof but that doesn't seem to concern the apple market too much, people readily upgrade after not all that long.

Currently, I'm really seeing the appeal of the "It just works", user experience protected offerings such as that from the white fruit company. Whilst I'm maybe quite happy to tinker with electronics on the car, media centers and various other bits of tech it does get a bit tiring having yet more devices that need conscious input for them to function or for them to be returned to proper function after a glitch. The nature of Android is one that is always destined for a fragmented experience albeit with a cheaper entry price. The fully controlled hassle free Apple experience comes with a price tag and people are going to be hard pressed to beat this 'luxury' end of the market.

With regards to patents, they're patents. All manufacturers patent the f*ck out of ideas (look how many Nikon and Canon file monthly) as it also avoids that nasty situation where others rip-off your ideas for nothing (i.e. a lot of things coming from China on ebay).

[slackline]

Yes, but you could get cheap imitation iPads from China/flea-bay within a few weeks of them being officially released so the patent didn't really have any effect there.

Software patents are particularly damaging, more so than hardware.

[moose]

From what I gather, most of these tech companies apply for rafts of patents largely to forestall action from their competitors; as a protective measure rather than to actually exercise any monopoly right of their own.  If anyone tries to sue them out of the market they issue a counter threat based on their own portfolio and usually reach a mutually convenient cross-licensing arrangement without it reaching open court. 

That said, there are some very useful 'sector killer' patents out there on software.  Supposedly Microsoft make more money from licensing a particular mobile OS patent than they do from their own software sales (I think it results in $10-15 from every android phone... though I might be confused with another patent).   Word is that some pretty obscure and near defunct survivors from the dot.com era are frantically digging up their IPR portfolios and have found some potential goldmines that might force pretty much the entire sector to seek licenses or give up.  As slack-line noted, it could really stifle any creativity as small independents wouldn't be able to enter the market.  A bit odd really as software used to be thought of as unpatentable (like a "business method").  I think the original law is still in place but developers get around it by stating that their software encodes a process that could theoretically be embodied in a piece of physical hardware (a load of little machines and switches). 

[Iesu]

transferred from CEO to chairman of the board; still will have some oversight/influence on the company. Good health to him.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/new-apple-ceo-tim-cook-im-thinking-printers,21207/

[Paul B]

edit: I'm an idiot

[jamiev]

A mate just sent me this:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/new-apple-ceo-tim-cook-im-thinking-printers,21207/

[slackline]

  @ The Onion article. 

[slackline]

Samsung counter Apple's patent by citing Kubrick's 2001 : A Space Odyssey as prior art