And this statement, while valid and testable under some definition of "crappy", has nothing to do with comparing hardware quality between manufacturers. This reminds me of the smear campaigns Apple used to wage against beige boxes, nevermind the sheer diversity of hardware running Windows and the homogeneity of Macs.
No it's a perfectly valid comparison. it's like saying cars made in Detroit fail more often than cars made by BMW. Android is widely considered as a low-quality OS running on low-quality hardware. Android's strength (ubiquity) is also its weakness (it runs on crap hardware).
Android phone repair costs carriers billions: study
'At the moment, Android is a bit of the Wild West,' says expert
Costly hardware failures are more common on Android devices than on Apple iPhones and Research In Motion BlackBerry phones, which have strict control over the components used in their devices
I expressed the same thought on my blog a few weeks ago:
"He managed to inspire a whole industry, while doing what he truly loved. Millions of entrepreneurs world wide have been inspired to do the same as a result of his work. This may be his greatest legacy and something that will live on in all of us long after his passing."
Bill Gates is like Joe Satriani. Satch is one of the most technically gifted guitarist of all time. Hes a master at all the complicated alternate picking and shredding. But his music absolutely sucks.
Steve Jobs is Eddie Van Halen. A tortured virtuoso artist who is not only a master at guitars and keyboards. This guy produced some of the most innovative guitar playing in the 70s and 80s. He also created some of the most kick ass rock and roll songs of all time.
Satch plays awesome guitar. EVH creates awesome music.
Your analogy is terrible. Both examples you gave refer to musicians who are technically capable, but with one being able to turn his mastery of the instrument into music that people like.
Steve Jobs did not have mastery of the instrument. He was "technically limited", but still able to create compelling products. If you wanted to keep the analogy, it would be better to say that he was Bob Dylan (coincidentally, he was one of SJ personal idols).
Anyway, I'm going to try again: can you please stop with the Apple fanboyism? Such blind worshiping and your monotonic comments are so annoying that it makes me want to dislike anything about SJ and Apple.
But hardly a "virtuoso" of computing, n'est-ce pas?
Face it, you can not have it both ways. Either Steve Jobs mastery was in taking ideas that were already there and putting it together in a way that was appealing to the common man (the "Bob Dylan"), or he was someone so ahead of its time that people could not comprehend him, pushing the state further to a level that others could not keep up - the "Satriani".
As for your childish insult... I could go on a long diatribe about how the insecurity usually lies in people that need to put others on a pedestal, but you'd need to get out of the Reality Distortion field to be able to understand it.
Quit the bullshit, troll. There is no way that you were talking about Bill Gates. He was not the one that said anything about Steve Jobs being technically limited. I did.
Steve is a great business man. He knows how to manage,manipulate and bring out the best from his designers and engineers. He didn't design and he didn't code. He didn't invent ipods or iphones or ipads. Sure he approves it and demands it.But he didn't create any of those things. He is not an inventor. He is a great CEO. Comparing him with Einstein just disgust me. I'd feel better if he was compared to Jesus.(not an inventor either but knows how to influence people)
Just a friendly reminder that after about 1-2 more of these comments that add nothing to the conversation, you're going to reach negative karma and be shadow-banned.
I agree. HP's hardware business is dragging down its stock price. this is one of the reasons why IBM sold off its PC division to Lenovo. Services and software usually provide a return on invested capital of 30 percent or more, compared to 15-20 percent for hardware.
IBM's ROIC is currently at 34.1% compared to HP's ROIC at 16.2%. After IBM sold off its PC division to Lenovo in 2005, IBM's ROIC grew from 17.75% in 2006 to 29.55% in 2010 with a 5 year average of 27.6%.In comparison HP's 5-year average ROIC is only 15.9%.
HP wanted to do the same thing IBM did 7 years ago. The big difference was that before selling off its PC division, IBM already had a strong software and services business (generating half of its revenue). they also bought PriceWaterHouseCoopers' consulting arm in 2002. HP's software and services business isn't nearly as strong, even after buying Autonomy so they got clobbered by analyst and the media.
